Bitcoin Forum

Inquiring minds want to know.

I've talked to the admin that performed the block and I know their reason for it.

Here is the background:

A couple days ago a number of people on rbtc started posting this outrageous lie that I backdoored the firewalls of Juniper networks--  I worked for Juniper a number a years ago, and last year they discovered that someone (likely a state actor) had added backdoors to their firewall products. The compromise was traced back to about a year after I left the company.  I never worked on the firewalls and it was a long time after I left-- there isn't any reason to say I was involved (no more than the hundred thousand other juniper alums and current employees) and, of course, no one _except_ rbtc has ever thought there was a reason think I was involved.

I replied refuting this libel (as I've found that if I don't reply they repeat it as fact until it starts showing up in the press as something 'known to be true' :( )  and the ex-mod soupernerd responded skeptically and basically spreading the claim.

This was highly surprising to me because a couple months ago he contacted me lamenting the lies and personal attacks on Reddit, it just didn't sound like him.  Also, a couple months ago he offered-- unsolicited-- to sell me his moderation account on rbtc so that I could use it to clean things up.  An offer I did not accept.

So I asked him if he was the original account owner.  He insisted that I was incorrect and that he was insulted that I'd suggest that he would sell his account.  I pointed out that he did attempt to sell his account and that I had cryptographically signed emails showing it. He demanded I show it (http://archive.is/1v1OQ), so of course I did: https://0bin.net/paste/uH-GH2fgXFSQT--i#1EXsaWxQAGJXFnqnyYXo7LS9KvbLwRGrQQ0fRcTLXw0  Of course, even if I wanted or thought it was appropriate to remove the email address (which had no personal information beyond the same pseudonym as used on Reddit)-- I couldn't without invalidating the digital signature.  He continued to deny it, denied ever owning that email address, but  many other people cropped up and showed he was using that address on twitter, classic slack, domain registrations, and other places. Souprnerd was banned on rbtc.

A few months back rbtc's admins also fraudulently reported me for 'doxing' because I posted a commit message from the public Bitcoin repository to show the origin of an error message a person was accusing me of maliciously adding (the error message was added by Gavin). I was unbanned after showing the Reddit admin that Gavin himself had posted his name and info on Reddit months ago.

So after this souprnerd posting the rbtc admins reported me to the site admins asserting that I was repeatedly  guilty of doxing and in response Reddit has permanently suspended my account because of this.  

Unfortunately, I think Reddit's admins are just being unwittingly made pawns in certain parties fight against the Bitcoin project; similar to how https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5m3d4i/lets_report_bitcoinorg_for_what_it_is_unwanted/]bad actors in that subreddit have gotten Bitcoin (http://) developer sites (http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/services.html) listed on anti-malware bad site lists and Bitcoin Core listed in anti-virus software as malware.  The fact of the matter is that their untruthful claims are more effective when there isn't an expert relentlessly disagreeing with them, and if they can use reddit as a pawn to achieve their goals they think that is fair game (as Roger Ver told me specifically when I previously complained about the ethics of him attempting to pressure Reddit's CEO for control over rbitcoin).

Meanwhile, the same Reddit admin (so I am told) decided that both Myself and Theymos' personal information is fair game on the site.

Of course, Reddit is free to decide to kick users off their service-- even capriciously-- it's their site.

It is things like this that make me support Core and Segwit then later the Lightning Network as a scaling solution for Bitcoin. Roger Ver sounds like a nice guy in interviews but he likes to play dirty. That I can understand but it is not something I would want to do myself to gain an advantage. That is what dirty politicians would do.

On a lighter note, now is the time to register nullc usernames on Reddit like nullcisback or nullcbiatch and then start trolling /r/btc.

Hope to see you on reddit soon, and FWIW, thanks for the portion of 1200USD that you are responsible for.

That would have been a very bizarre way of "cleaning [your reputation] up"...



I could not fail to notice the bizarre typos -- "me" and "I" instead of "him" and "he".  As if...  ;D

Cleaning up the subreddit of defamatory postings was the apparent idea.

yea moon typos from merging together multiple messages.  LOL. or perhaps I'm just subconsciously trying to feed the conspiracy theories.

And now our friendly (ex)rbtc mod account that I was accused of 'doxing' has argued that it was intended the whole time https://twitter.com/SouperNerd/status/835015250432819200

Was unaware that all this drama was happening on Reddit. If we have people being banned for reasons similar to what's explained above and if we have direct involvement from reddit admins, well... I won't be amazed if suddenly Bitcoin and or cryptocurrency related subreddits disappear...

Reddit has an especially stupid policy on banning users. Admins go through reports by hand and biases can be very obvious. Reddit isn't open as to how many of their employed have the power to ban users but that number surely must have not grown proportionately to Reddit's growth through the years as the platform is not profitable.

Bans are not questioned and there's no appeal process. Reddit employees with ban powers can ban anyone at their will with nobody being able to question their decision. Witchunts often result unsubstantiated bans in Reddit as the lack of Reddit employees on a payroll just puts pressure on the few ones to keep the platform clean and the majority of users pleases, disregarding free speech.

Bitcoin users really need to move on another sort of forum in order to facilitate better discussions.

You go to war with the forum you have, not the forum you want.

We all knew in advance about Reddit's stupid arbitrary rules.  Their site and their liability, therefore their TOS.  DUH.

GMAX was already on double-secret probation, having been suspended for doxing/harassment/witch-hunting once before (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1704972.0).

There is an appeal process, which GMAX and Roger Ver have previously utilized for reinstatement.  But this may be one toke over the line for Greg.    :(

Please don't smear me-- I was suspended before because BitcoinXio reported me to the admins for "doxing" for posting a github commit message, which worked for a bit because Reddit staff didn't know that a commit message was not private personal information, and didn't know that Gavin's email address had already been long ago posted by himself. I was unsuspended when they figured it out, and the post in question is visible today: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5g3weu/blockstreams_creator_changes_bitcoin_network/dap9jyr/


Due to s230 they have basically no (legal) liability for material posted by their users-- even if their action were to rise to the level of recklessness, they would still have no liability.

But indeed, I know about Reddit's rules; but the rules do not prohibit posting material that the person it was about requested be posted, and the person in question had already posted a link to a page they put up with their email address previously.  (Besides, if I'd thought to remove it and done so, it would have invalidated the DKIM signature on the message).  And as I said in my post above-- it's their right to have foolish policies if they choose to. (Ultimately, I think that letting me address libelous comments by one on one refuting them is ultimately a time and trouble saver for reddit, but nothing requires that they agree).

Reddit doesn't really have an appeals process as far as I can tell: All you do within the process is provide information to the specific administrator that they made an error.

No intent to (unfairly/unduly  :D) smear you, but I haven't seen definitive proof your first suspension was for Gavin's email and not harassing Frap.doc (or both).

Fair point about s230, however Reddit still has the liability of dealing with potentially horrible PR if something bad happened IRL as a result of their posters running amok.  There's also the liability of having to go to court to clear their name under s230 ('the process is the punishment').

The 100% ludicrous Gavin email thing was clearly the rbtc turds reaching, but nevertheless they drew blood and that lesson wasn't learned.


BTW, the post at https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5g3weu/blockstreams_creator_changes_bitcoin_network/dap9jyr/ is gone, just like Every. Single. Post. linking Frap.doc's handle to his true name.

Who remembers when reddit really started to crack down on "doxxing"?  iirc, it was in defense of that /r/CreepShot reddit and some other strange kid porn subreddits, where pervs would take upskirt pics of chicks, then some news reported exposed the main mod there and doxxed his real name.  Then it became a huge "no no" to dox people.  Reddit is a bit of a joke.

http://gawker.com/5950981/unmasking-reddits-violentacrez-the-biggest-troll-on-the-web

the story is that he try to do a tech talk with a bunch of conspiracy lunatics.

Interesting...

More time for coding and more important things now?

I would preffer to hear the reddit admin view as well, you know, knowing the story from just one side is always very biased from my experience.

I dont doubt your willingness to take the fight at their ground. But, after the last ban (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1704972.0), u could be more cautious and use a separate reddit account for that.

If you post in this thread again, I'm going to make a fool of you, idiot.

Gmax, in regard to this silly battle, you once wrote me to say that this "awkward time will soon pass" (loose quote), are you willing to consider that you underestimated that division?  It's not really passing, at least I suspect no where near as fast as you believed it would...

will you consider an alternative strategy?  You clearly believe that the reddit battle is significant and specifically the block size debate and the pressure r/btc puts on to core....

Will you and the core supporters continue to use the same strategy that clearly isn't working?

~pokertravis

Also how pissed do you think I am that the r/bitcoin mods banned me.  I feel like I'm 2nd to you in defending that sub from tomfoolery. I think their mod team is either compromised or incredibly ignorant.

That sucks, don't let it get you down. Too much drama on reddit anyway. Nerd rage and misinformation are rampant there and sarcasm is often like a foreign concept in some subreddits.

Damn, this shi.. is really getting overhand... Anyone knows if we can do something against this permaban?

The strategy gmax and r/bitcoin mods, general core supporters etc., plays into the hands of the ver brigade and gives them the advantage.  When gmax and the rest face the truth of this then we can update our strategy. When they refuse to face or admit this then there is no hope for such change.

Its the 2nd time they have done this and the reddit admins clearly have problems understanding the truth.

Now we have two of the staunchest defenders of truth removed from not only r/btc, but also /rbitcoin.

Guys we need to gear up and finish the next version of Bitcointalk. Reddit, slack or whatever are private companies which can be handled by governments really well. Don't try to change them, make Bitcointalk great again and any sucker will fall behind it :)

Reddit is a giant trollbox and arguing with trolls is a waste of time. Core devs shouldn't have to deal with this. Forget Reddit even exists and focus on making progress.

Yes! The publicly owned bitcointalk will give us the freedom of speech we need. /s

 :D

Would you like me to post screenshots of the admin's comments?  (I'd prefer to to edit out their account name so no one harasses them; or only share it with you privately)

Had nothing to do with frapp, the post was harassing me by one of the zillion and one rbtc harassers. I think that one might have been go bitcoin but I'm not sure. In any case, frapp's name nor pseudonym were not mentioned there.

Do you recognize this as a protocol?

http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/Chaos-Complexity/dialogue.pdf

Has anyone dove into the likelihood that the "big financial services" that are the clients of companies reportedly gaming Reddit (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/20/reddit-is-being-manipulated-by-big-financial-services-companies) are behind most of the shill accounts making up /r/btc? They were using accounts that only had a few days/weeks of life till theymos started revealing it. I had a Reddit account years ago, but the admins deleted it after about four years of regular activity. I never got an explanation as to why, it honestly could have been for anything. I mostly provided links about governments and big banks and followed a regional subreddit and presidential candidate that I liked. I then watched a guy named "-moose-" post links similarly to how I did for a number of years in a wide range of threads till his account went mysteriously silent (https://www.reddit.com/user/-moose-) a little over a year ago.

If someone was aspiring to, I'd like to see something along the lines of what is discussed from this hackernews thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13725787). A social media site where anyone can read, anyone can post, but you have to be invited first might be a good way to fix the gaming. Holding the users themselves accountable for the actions of those they invite makes sense without compromising on relative anonymity.

I'll take your word about the admin comments.

It just seemed ambiguous as to whether your initial ban was exclusively for the singular Gavin email post or whether that was the last straw given the long history of Frap.doc controversies (he has his own filter, lawl) context.

I'm more OK with the nullc ban than I thought I'd be.  Let them stew in ignorant rage; Conde Naste doesn't deserve your free content.

The Grand Schism will be decided at the protocol and socioeconomic levels, not on the field of subreddit drama.

Now you have more time to out-develop the hell out of BU by making Core even more of a rapidly moving target.

Keep piling on great new features (esp. ones invaluable for miners) faster than BU can copy (and perhaps break) them.

https://i.imgur.com/xiAd0Qw.png

Go Core go!   8)

The problem with your sentiments is that nullc is the best judge of how to spend his time in the most valuable way, and he choose to spend time on reddit dispelling ignorance.  Also when such a high profile and well regarded dev gets treated like this it deters other talent (this effects the protocol negatively).

Its a serious issue imo.

Akasha on the Ethereum network. Check it out.

It is possible that there is vote manipulation going on at r/btc, I might even describe it as probable based on what I have seen. I would point out that the apparent vote manipulation is fairly obvious, and not a very good job is being done to cover it up.

I would be quick to point out that the people behind the vote manipulation are not necessarily people who desire to have larger blocks. It would be very well possible that those behind this vote manipulation are trying to discredit those who support large blocks by being very transparent about the vote manipulation. The only thing I can conclusively say is that voting scores are not a reliable indicator on reddit -- this includes sorting comments by "best" instead of by "top".

---

u/nullc's judgment is clearly not that great as evidenced by how easily he was gamed. It is too bad that commit keys are revoked only for political reasons and not for "legitimate business"/"legitimate security" reasons....

We've seen evidence of voting manipulation and it was generally against small blockers (generally is a generous word here). 

As I understand this is another attempt to undermine (such a good word) the system: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-February/013643.html

I might not read it well, but too me it says "consensus for change is difficult and we need to make it easier."

Hmm, I know this is your favorite topic, but can you please agree on the minor point that your original comment with gavin's email was not in the form of a commit message, even if it was only briefly in this original form before being edited?

The evidence is still here: https://ceddit.com/r/btc/comments/5g3weu/blockstreams_creator_changes_bitcoin_network/

Also since it was, for however brief a time, not in the form of a commit message, you may not want to rely on that so forcefully as somehow validating that the comment should be allowed. Sorry if I can't let that go.

To help convince you I'm acting in good faith here, look at this little discussion with BitcoinXio on the most recent suspension  where I both confronted him on his lame accusations (https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5vtgbo/whats_nullc_done_to_get_suspended_from_reddit/de52odf/) and revealed that he doesn't know that the report button on reddit comments can alert reddit admins directly. Which by the way might have been what happened. Might not have been rbtc mods, but I can't tell either way.

you troublemaker you. :o :o

Like I said, the voting manipulation is very transparent, so it is possible that blockstream is financing the vote rigging in order to discredit the message that the "big blockers" are trying to say. I am not saying this is the case, but rather it is one possibility.

I think the link you posted is an attempt to get SegWit activated without any kind of consensus 

I think you are a moron, and I am willing to continue dialogue to expose you as such.

The problem with your sentiments is that I'm the best judge of how I wish react to an event such as nullc's banning.

If you think handing the rbtc jackals ammo and a scalp by being spear-phished and goaded into a trap is a desirable outcome, that's fine.

I'd prefer gmax remain there dispelling ignorance, which the source of my criticism of the specific *subset* of his actions which resulted in the suspension.

That's not trying to micromanage "his time" it's just pointing out that the (final) trollhunting incident was an egregiously unforced error.

You weren't there for this thread, so it's understandable why the final chapter of the saga is taking you by surprise.

are you cypherdoc, cause if so, ill make a fool out of you too.

all the cool people are banned from r/btc and r/bitcoin.

Wrong.  Actual edgelords never posted there in the first place.  We'd sooner sign up for Facebook.   ;)

alright alright, re-solution, none of the cool people post on r/btc or r/bitcoin

No. No relation. I was unaware when I created my accounts that there was an infamous "cypherdoc". I would have likely chosen a different name or at least capitalized differently if I had realized that.

I'm pretty happy with this ban. Maxwell was the main person on there correcting all the bullshit, and with him gone, it'll only get worse (which I think is good). This debate needs to end, and the only way that will happen is when one side actually decides to pull the trigger and do something crazy, and I think Maxwell being banned makes it more likely that they'll start to believe their nonsense more intensely and go along with something dumb.

Probably when BU fails (just like XT & Classic), a new fork attempt will come along and just be a simple hard fork based on a certain block height (they'll market it as "the way Satoshi intended hard forks to be done!"). By that point, /r/btc will be so full of brainwashed and frustrated idiots that it'll be hard for anything to prevent them going down that road. I hope they lose all their coins.

You guys should stop visiting /r/btc, instead of wasting time correcting their nonsense, the best thing to do is just ignore them and let them get more and more extreme, until they destroy themselves.

I'm all for BU but i'd be happy with a simple hardfork increasing the blocksize.  Anything is better than the current situation.

Not really, fucking up in the process by rushing up things is worse than what we already have, and that is what BUcoin will do.

It's sad to see that nullc is still banned, I expected the situation to get corrected.

I don't care bout the /r/btc shithole but his posts were valuable in /r/bitcoin.

so you prefer the one where censorship reigns over the other.

You want users to be less informed? Strange.

This sounds a lot like how fake news spreads...

If you can't understand basic economics, what makes you think your opinion on this issue matters or is valid?

I think you are trying to imply that r/bitcoin is full of censorship and r/btc is not.  If so you might as well stop posting here now cause I'm going to make a fool out of you.  This place is different than r/btc because I am not banned here.  I'll start with highlighting your misunderstanding of what free speech is.

Apologies if I have misunderstood you.

I get this but I think its relevant to point out that Gmax felt it was some of the best use of his time, and he's prob a good judge of that.  I think the debate needs to end as well but that the way to do it is to move into dialogue: http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/Chaos-Complexity/dialogue.pdf

If a minority of idiots have to lose their coins to end this drama, then yes, I'm all for that. If anything this recent obsession with "fake news" has taught us, it's that you can't use facts and logic to make these people stop believing this stuff. For every 1 person you convince, another 2 will be drawn into /r/btc through bitcoin.com or something, and subscribe to the same repeated lies that have been debunked.


Probably he felt it was a good use of his time because he thought he was preventing himself from getting smeared, and I imagine it must be hard for him to not respond when most of the abuse is aimed at him and his company. I don't blame him for what he was doing, but all it did was delay things and drag on the debate even further. Why don't we just let them have their insane echo chamber, and let them all fall off a cliff together? Why try to help them?

that is what i have heard.

I don't know so much of you, but I am starting with the assumption you are intelligent, and since I don't really agree with you on this, I am considering the possibility that you understand it in a way I don't, and that perhaps you are correct.

Gmax can speak for their self but to me it isn't about the smearing so much (or perhaps only partially is) but rather the opportunity to use the disinformative post as a chance to clear up the misinformation.

It's a good device to be able to address popular troll posts as a way to propagate good information to the sincere people that happen to be reading the drivel. In this we learn not only the truth, but how to address the disinformation and insincere complaints.  So Gmax is also giving out weapons to defenders of truth in this way.

It's sad but I think he brought a lot of value to the community through this. 

But it could be said the time for this is up.  I know I myself have been very critical of the journalists that write stories about hearn gavin and ver because they are perpetuating a false narrative that is not grounded in any (economic) science.  Torpey and Aaron W., to me, should know better but they always seem to have something about Ver in their pieces.  I suspect its possible that Ver has control over much of the bitcoin media content that gets printed and that these two know it and pander to him to get printed.

It might be the intelligent thing to let r/btc and it's supporters cannibalize themselves, and if so then I guess it should be a concerted effort to let them do so.

You should leave before I expose that you are commenting on subjects you know nothing about.

I know what I hear, my friend.

https://medium.com/@johnblocke/a-brief-and-incomplete-history-of-censorship-in-r-bitcoin-c85a290fe43#.3uiehexmi

You and that author don't know what free speech is.  Let me ask you, what have you read in regard to how the American constitution works? Do you know what our natural rights are and what their relationship is to the difference between censorship and free speech? Also what have you read in regard to economics?

Censorship

I understand more than most...although to be fair, the average person is incredibly uninformed, so it's not saying much  :D

But why don't you stay on point.  Are you saying r/btc is also censored, or are you saying r/bitcoin is not?
Maybe I don't have the full story... go ahead, i'm listening.

I asked you questions, I want you to show that you actually have read the associated literature.  I want you to make an attempt to show that you know what you are talking about, and that your only ability isn't just creating an account and posting on a forum.

What is your ACTUAL knowledge and experience with these subjects?

I would say that the prevalence of fake news has taught us just how easy it is to spread misinformation, as well as just how much power that those that control the media have.  I would also point out that once a news organization has been exposed as being dishonest, then harm will be done to both the news organization and the agenda they are pushing (see CNN and democrats).

I would point out that people were calling u/nullc dishonest in this 4 year old thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=175996.0;all) that took place well before any block size debate was anything more than a discussion about theoretical problems in the future. To this day, many people on reddit are calling u/nullc dishonest, and just maybe when someone who is pushing for things like SegWit, and smaller blocks who is also viewed as dishonest, those that read his argument might naturally side against him, especially if they do not understand the discussion fully.

Also, no, I do not think it is a good idea to be pushing for a situation that has a high probability of many users loosing their coins/money. Nor would I be behind a situation that results in people having access to any measure of less information.

Yes, it is a users' individual responsibility to protect their own money, however that does not mean that you should advocate so that users should be put into a situation in which they will lose money just to get your own way.

Having been on forum.bitcoin.com recently, i can pretty much assure you that no one is being drawn in from there. That place is empty.
Maybe they are coming from here. We all know (surely) most old members have left here, being replaced (or driven out) by "farmed" accounts and "hacked" accounts. Or it could just be organic awareness.


Unfortunately i have to agree with some of this.
I am for increasing the blocksize, (opposite to you i conclude?) but i have also found Roger Ver's ideas of what would be a sustainable hardfork to fall short of reality.
I don't follow on r/btc, but i have had to put a stop to some idiotic idea of hardforking with less than 50% hashpower on forum.bitcoin.com

Doesn't help "our" cause for larger blocks, imo. Very disappointing.

(you could read post histories to help decide who is/is not informed here)

Your questions are irrelevant diversions. 

Censorship can be broadly defined as the suppression or prohibition of personal speech or expression.
Everyone knows what this is.  The man on the street can understand this idea.
 
Now we need to have a deep scholarly constitutional discussion before we can talk about which subreddit is censored more?  ok whatever lol   

I'll humor you though.  I've read the consitution and the decleration of independance.  I've been a libertarian for decades.  I can't say that I can recall specific book titles about the constitution itself (I'm sure I did in school) but I would agree that "we hold these truths to be self evident."   Let me guess, you're going to argue redit is a private website so its not censorship in the first place?  That would be another red herring to what we're talking about.

rizzlarolla here is the problem...I am pokertravis on reddit.  I am well known (for those that know of my accounts which are all linked to nash's idealogy of ideal money) for being a devout small blocker.  I think there is a great, fairly simple, and obvious argument for why we should not scale for utility as coffee type money.


Because after reading your post and judging your temperament, I suspect I could convince you to start contemplating the truth of what not changing the fundamental block size limit is important.

My suggestion here is that you probably haven't heard the proper counter argument to big blockers ver and r/btc.


Have you heard my argument?

I asked you if you are knowledgeable and/or experienced at all on the subjects you are speaking of, and you call this an irrelevant diversion? Sir, I still need to know whether or not you have any knowledge on the purpose of the constitution and what free speech actually entails in regard to our natural rights otherwise I cannot engage in a proper dialogue with you.  By definition these things are relevant because it is the content of the discussion. You have used the phrase "irrelevant diversion" completely backwards to its accepted definition.


No.  This is the ignorant person belief, the person that is not studied.  Free speech comes with the implication that there must be some restriction.  There cannot be a blanketed rule that allows for free speech, rather the rules that are imposed are to foster the freest speech possible.  Pointing at such rules and calling them censorship is an admission that you don't understand your own natural rights and their relationship to free speech and the American constitution.

No you've guessed wrong, again because of your ignorance on the subject. Nothing you have stated here gives anything you say credibility.  You haven't read anything, or at least you haven't given me any examples.  That you have read the constitution and the deceleration of independence does not at all speak to the possibility that you understand them.  And everything you have said so far suggests that you clearly do not.

You are nothing but an uneducated (strong) opinion.

Exactly as I thought..pseudo-intellectual diversions, trying to attack me and my "qualifications to discuss this"
instead of the very basic question/issue (which you brought up) of which board is being censored.

That's fine with me.  Not going to waste my time arguing.   My point was already made.  :) 

Again.  I am asking you if you have any specific knowledge on the content we are discussing in regard to free speech and our natural rights and also economics.  I can't really engage with you until I know your level of understanding of these things. Until we can can get an idea of this, you are simply perpetuating unstoppable conflict/debate.

What do you know about, what have you read on these subjects or are you just a loudmouthed opinion?

<crickets>

We have this platform right here. I'm not even sure how so many topics take place on reddit. But at least a fair amount of interesting topics posted there end up being here too.


It's the best we have, and has been quite good so far.


Regarding users and their coins... If things can be solved while users keep their coins, it would be the best. If some lose out, we all lose a bit too, and nobody would like to be on the wrong side of a fork. Lessons can still be learned without having to sacrifice anything.

no... you're absolutely right.   Clearly, I do not have your superior intellect and education
and it would foolish to think I'm qualified to have this conversation.

https://youtu.be/tyBUMntP6DI

Do you or do you not have any knowledge relevant to the content being debated? To be clear, I am specifically asking what literature you are familiar with. Have you read anything, what do you know?

Do you expect me to debate and engage with someone that can't at least claim to know SOMETHING?

All you have to do is acknowledge there is a clear, vast distinction between a government censoring its citizens/press and a private web site allowing moderation of its forums.

Is that so hard?  It it asking too much for you to respect the actual definitions of words and not twist them when you need to justify your endless whining and tantrums?   ???

Do you really need to steal victim status from people suffering under actual censorship just to artificially amplify your endless, futile attempts at vilifying Core/Theymos/Blockstream?

When you conflate real authoritarian censorship like North Korea's with completely justified forum moderation, we can only conclude you are indeed absolutely shameless and hysterical (regardless of intellect/education).

You lost your grip on reality years ago and show no sign of even realizing that's the case, much less a desire to find your way back into the real world.

The only reason you are trying to force some kind of issue about ZOMG SENSOR SHIPS!11!! is that you lost the technical debate over >1MB blocks.

Having failed to garner support for XT, Classic, and now Unlimite_, you fall back to a social engineering attack.  If you can't destroy Core, target Core's key supporters, right?

It's been a genuine pleasure watching you thrashing about in your self-created pit of frustrated, impotent rage (IE rbtc).  Please continue...  :D

In the US, the government has no right to pass laws limiting speech (with very few exceptions, such as hate speech, and similar). If the government did pass/enforce a law that did restrict speech, this would be censorship, although such law would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court.

On r/bitcoin and bitcointalk, theymos, as the owner of these sites, have the right to institute rules that limits/restricts speech. This is still censorship, even though he has the right to do this. Most of the rules that are instituted on bitcointalk have positives that vastly outweigh the negatives, such as rules disallowing low content posts/threads (part of the reason this is good is because just because one has the freedom of speech, does not mean that others have to listen to you, and essentially no one wants to read low content posts, especially in masse), filtering where certain types of threads will be located (this makes it easy for someone looking for a particular type of discussion of interest to find said thread) and disallowing the sale of illegal/stolen goods (fairly self-explanatory). There are other rules, however that it is not as clear that the positives (vastly) outweigh the negatives, such as how certain proposals are classified -- I understand theymos' point of view in instituting these rules, however I do not agree with it.

no you are confused an ignorant.  rules are necessary for free speech qed.

Do you, or do you not, have anything intelligent to bring to the conversation?