Mr Musk's constant changing statements on the amount of the reward,

and antagonizing me consistently as well as attempted malice in many forms.

 

Also does not makes things professional at all. Nor lack of any registeration and contracts,

let alone exploiting someone who cannot be directly observant of the channel, and blind.

 

So yes. All his actions and motives indicate everything is a personal gift.

Something that changes constantly in accordance to his will, that is unlawful and ever-changing.

 

---------

Apologies for my speculation on this relay.

It says here, with the Festus' avatar person,

"I wrote music for an attack on Titan game."

And the context reads a collaboration of sort.

 

When our dealing ended, I did not receive anything from Festus.

And that was only fair. Had I severed ties after he contributed, that would be theft.

That is the first thing. Just in case there is any mislead.

 

Second thing, I told Festus to create a variation of my presentation at his will.

But I mean that aiming at his personal investors NOT in the channel.

So IF he's created a follow up on my ideas and created a longtail from it.

With his collaboration, that is unfortunately hijacking.

And I have the right to dismantle his rights, as it is a follow up from my own work.

And also his mislead in the beginning, of which I forgive, if he was supportive in uncovering evil of Steve and Laura.

 

Now I completely apologize if I am wrong about this. I wish you well and I hope you get

investment for your own work. But not from mine. Not in this channel.

Here is the relay I saw, and commentary starts at 2:39 or so.

 

------------

It would appear my speculation is correct, judging by the relays.

Festus, i'm afraid that is exploitation.

When I said you can create a 'variation' of my presentation.  

This is as we parted ways.

And I was not in recognition of you being in the channel. I believe you weren't.

 

Now you come into the source of my investment,

and decide to present your 'variation' in replacement to my own presentation,

which is a follow up.

That is called hijacking.

 

And this is as I am in the blind, this is as we are not communicative personally at this point.

Unaware as to what you are doing with my idea.

 

And considering what you attempted before, supporting Steve.

Of which I forgive, when you changed your stance later on.

 

However, on this. I cannot accept it. This is clearly hijacking.

While I will not press charges,

if this or ANYTHING that you connected to my ideas as improvement is in existence.

 

Then I will not allow it.

Understand that we are separate.

We are clear on that, and I do not know why you gave yourself permission to do this.

 

So authorities, his collaborative efforts with others on improving or enhancing my work,

must be dismantled. He does not have the right in follow ups.

 

It is exploitation in essence.

I will *not press charges. But this is highly deceptive and improper.

 

 

However, if his deception goes as far as supporting Steve's lies,

then we have an issue, and all this attempt must be criminally charged.

But I don't think he has,

rather, he has self-reasoned himself into giving a permission for this hijacking.

Of which I do not allow.

 

It's in the emails with Festus. My separation from him.

Alongside no contribution.

And my stating he can create a variation.

But obviously this is as we parted, and I was not in awareness he is in the channel.

To create a variation of my project, as we parted,

to intercept MY investors. This is called hijacking,

so this is clearly exploitation.

 

In fact, he well knows that our dealings have severed,

yet he hijacked anyway.

This is criminal attempt. Is it not?

 

How do you exploit the my words saying you can create a variation,

to steal MY investors, in MY project?

 

Self-reasoning has its limits.

 

-------

Ok. I am sorry but, it depends on how he carried this out,

by what communication.

 

1. If he was falsely believing that we are still working together,

then I can forgive this attempt, though I will not approve of an collaboration behind my back.

By his forced will.

 

2. BUT, if this person attempted HIJACKING. As in, REPLACING my presentation with his follow-up.

THEN  I will not drop charges on this person.

Because that is attempted theft.

 

Every WORD in the presentation written is my work.

Festus only joined after at my request through Steve's introduction,

to help me with a financial projection, BASED on my presentation.

Which was already completed.

 

So this person, while recognizing that we were parting ways,
and I have not received anything from him as contribution, as the emails clearly state,

and that he was not in the channel.

 

When I stated a 'variation' he can create, this obviously DID NOT mean to HIJACK or REPLACE,

MY original work with his follow up.

That is attempted theft by hijacking.

 

He can create a variation with his OWN investors, elsewhere.

Not to hijack my credit and to replace my standing with a follow up.

That is evil. What the hell?

 

Self-rationalization, and suppressing conscience has a limit.

This isn't it. I apologize if my speculation is wrong.

But this is clearly exploitation if it happened.

 

*However, he isn't distorting the origins of the idea.

Rather misleading as if he has the right to hijack my work.

So his punishment should be more lenient than people like Steve or Laura.

 

That is as far as my mercy can go.

If he attempts to destroy me by falsely framing me supporting them.

This is contradictory and situational to his current standing.

So please dismiss.

 

I do not know Festus that well.

However, from his previous attempt to support Steve, of which he later changed stance.

I have said I will forgive on this.

 

But fair give and take, this was another attempt at affecting my life in the worst of ways.

And hence, in all fairness, I cannot forgive you for this, Festus.

 

You could have later on, always simply ask, to work with me.

And I would have obliged.

Why would you assert malice?

This is wrong.

 

 

If he has attempted diluting the origins, then that is a serious crime.

As it pertains to life and death.

If I am framing anyone, then that is attempted murder by me.

Hence he will get the same punishment with others.

 

However, I believe this is an separate incident, by his own will.

Not as serious.