Bitcoin Forum

Fair enough then! Just for the record, I own ~47K XMR, and I think monero has a great future, and I'm really excited at the prospect of being able to (maybe) teleport XMR around on the BCTD privacy network. I'm very impressed with jl777's desire to try and unite the whole crypto coin community into a 'super network' that adds privacy features to ALL coins. As an investor that makes all coins more valuable, but I'm disappointed some other monero followers seem to have missed that point.

I've been around this forum since mid 2012, and teleporting coins via the BTCD privacy network is the most exciting development I've seen since bitcoin itself.

If I dont know reason fro his BAN I can not set my decision if I agree or not. He might have break any forum rule or he was baned on whim of an moderator. With not knowing anything it is waste of time for me to vote as of anyone else.

In general he was very positive for this forum. He wanted to improve any coin he noticed and study. Well at least if it was worth of improving.  He is way to technical for me to fully understand, but I am sure others did enjoy reading his post.  I do still remember his almost 3 years old posts as Anonymity about how to improve Monero.


kennyP  what was Anonymity conclusions of SuperNet?  It is just getting delisted from Poloniex. you were a huge fan

Shelby has an account and character on CryptoKingdom game so he might use that as a communication platform for his future projects.

What happened to Spoetnick, he was banned too?

He has several accounts all banned for ban evasion. It seems that the underlying offense which caused him to initially get into trouble (and often the thing which causes his alts to get noticed) is excessive multi-posting. But when he was warned and/or temporarily banned for this minor thing, he kept evading his bans. This forum cannot operate unless its few rules are followed, so ignoring the warnings and temporary bans that you receive and continuing to do the same stuff is unacceptable. People who do so are not welcome here.

His bans will not automatically expire, and any future alts we see from him will be permabanned. I may manually reconsider his ban if he promises to actually try not to break forum rules. The rules are not meant to silence anyone, but to keep the forum usable and fair. When someone multi-posts excessively, it monopolizes a thread in a way which harms everyone else's ability to communicate. Based on his posts in this thread, I think that he will just continue to break rules if unbanned, so I will not unban him at this time.

bitcointalk.org is not a normal for-profit company. Even if banning iamnotback somehow stopped all future ad revenue, he would still be banned, since his rule-breaking is disrupting the forum's mission of hosting free discussion of Bitcoin and related topics. (As explained above, "free discussion" is not "unmoderated discussion".) Similarly, I would welcome effective competition from decentralized forums, and I would be thrilled to be able to shut down bitcointalk.org in favor of a better-in-all-ways decentralized alternative. But although decentralized forums have existed for a long time (eg. Freenet's FMS is almost exactly what iamnotback keeps describing, and has existed since before Bitcoin), they have unfortunately not been widely used since the era of the semi-decentralized Usenet system, mainly due to vastly inferior usability.

I refuse to follow inane rules made by unorganized fools.

Moving this thread to the 'Other' board makes it much less visible, it should be put back in 'Alt Discussion'.

Shelby Moore has/had a significant voice in the Alt coin community, and his perma ban from bitcointalk forum is a significant topic for discussion by the Alt coin community.

I also seen Gleb Gamow banned for that too.. no one is exempt from the rules.

That policy should be respected.

But i waited my time out and followed the rules.

I applaud theymos response quoted earlier.
I would have come to a similar conclusion myself.

Shelby can not be exempt from fair rules we all abide by just because he's liked.

Personally i hope Shelby sees the error in his ways and comes back with an unban.

Although last i heard he said he had me on ignore LOL

Whether we agree on things or not i think he is an asset to crypto and i value his contributions.
I am rooting for him and hope he can get it straightened out here.
If not i wish him best of luck with things.
I think the ball is in his court..

Just want to add that Gamow was only banned for a short period of time and it happened like 6 months ago or some shit.

I can't believe you all expect staff to side step the rules for people who are "liked"
I think they get a bit of patience but eventually they need to reel it in.
I've probably had posts that would get a noob insta-banned for example.

It's about being coherent.
Shelby does not understand what is going on around him but he thinks he does.
He was already banned before for multi-posting and he simply said it was because of ETH FUD.
That tells staff here he does not get it..

theymos was was clearly being more than reasonable.
By the sounds of it his policies here are on the money.. i can't think of a better way.
His philosophy on it all is icing on the cake.. he's smart guy (as is Shelby)

If there is a better forum system then by all means guys lets do it.

I can't believe you all expect staff to side step the rules for people who are "liked"

It's about being coherent.

theymos was was clearly being more than reasonable.

And no rules ?
Come one.. gimme break.
If there was none here it would become unusable.
That is not being practical and realistic.

I expect there to be no rules, and the software be upgraded so that users can select their own moderators.

You just said..

Yes I did. Make sure you get in the last word and totally ignore my point and my non-iatrogenic¹ plans.

I am not quite sure if your problem is cognitive dissonance, obstinance, truculence, lack of reading comprehension, ego, or all of the above. Have it your way™ (at Burger King), which is precisely my point and plans.

¹ the cure is not worse than the illness; will not kill the patient

I voted "Don't care"

   Shelby Moore has been perma banned from bitcointalk.org forum, do you agree with this decision?
Yes    - 11 (20.4%)
No    - 33 (61.1%)
Don't Care    - 10 (18.5%)
   Remove Vote
Total Voters: 54

Yes I did. Make sure you get in the last word and totally ignore my point and my non-iatrogenic¹ plans.

¹ the cure is not worse than the illness; will not kill the patient

This is not correct. Iatrogenic means caused by a health care worker or medical treatment. Non-iatrogenic is not caused by a health care worker/medical treatment. The fact that your plans are not caused by the health system doesn't really have meaning.

A condition induced internally by a practitioner, not from external factors. Something which is created by ourselves, a contractor, or an internal service organization, making things worse instead of helping or making more efficient. Something that's done internally, supposedly within span of control and with a common mission, that works against a solution instead of towards it. The term is co-opted from medicine, where it means a condition induced by a physician.

The outage was iatrogenic in that it was nothing external to the company. The IT department itself caused it by not duplicating existing parameters when it replaced the firewall.

While some [7] have advocated using 'iatrogenesis' to refer to all 'events caused by the health care delivery team', whether 'positive or negative', consensus limits use of 'iatrogenesis' to adverse, or, most broadly, to unintended outcomes.

When the Treatment is Worse than the Disease

A silent plague is sweeping our health care system. A surprisingly large number of people are more unwell as a result of the treatment they receive for an illness or injury. This may be the result of practitioner incompetence, inexperience, ignorance or the side effects and complications of treatment. These problems are known in the health industry as   ‘Iatrogenic Illness or Disease’, literally meaning ‘produced by medicine’

When the cure is worse than the disease

First, most of the deaths are not excusable. They are preventable. Way back in 1993, after reviewing the statistics on iatrogenic deaths, a chief investigator in a Harvard study estimated that 78% of them were completely preventable. “Iatrogenic” is the word that’s used to refer to injuries that happen directly from the medical treatment a patient receives.

Didn't he tell us way back in 2014 he was through with the forum and would never return?

Afaik, iatrogenic has a more general meaning which is when the treatment is worse than the disease. The analogy is when the improvement is worse than the problem it intends to improve. My mother being slow to adopt new technology, quipped that upgrade is an oxymoron.

Language morphs by usage. Following definition was written in 2011 and has 46 upvotes and only 1 downvote:


The issue is that there does not appear to be another candidate word that is suitable for the desired generalized meaning, thus this word is likely to be de facto adopted for the more general meaning.

I tend to be doing things years before most other people do. Strictly speaking it is any problem or side-effect caused by the treatment, not necessarily worse than the disease:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071124151410AAt7jgk

He maybe should create his own forum, he was one of the few that posted anything of value here. Most guys are just shills for the ponzi coin they bought.

Creating your own forum is very easy now(i use prophpbb.com)