Bitcoin Forum

My jaw is still on the floor after reading this:

  http://blog.bitinstant.com/blog/2012/9/6/a-friendly-offer-for-mitt-romney.html

Have the people who run bitinstant gone completely and utterly nuts?

Never mind the fact that the threat is certainly a hoax; the hoaxers didn't bother including even the simplest proof that they actually have the goods (i.e. FY2009 page 12 line 13 is $18.99).  The average person on the street who reads the Forbes article (http://www.forbes.com/sites/abegarver/2012/09/07/bitinstant-to-romney-camp-well-convert-1000000-usd-to-bitcoin-for-free/) about your idiotic offer does not know this.  All they see is the biggest retail player in the bitcoin world offering to broker an extortion threat.  How on earth could you possibly think this would be a good thing either for bitcoin or for your business?

Congratulations, Erik Voorhees.  You are responsible for event most damaging to bitcoin's reputation thus far.  Way to go.

Maybe your next OP can be "MTGOX funding online gambling!"

TBH, it seemed a bit distasteful to me.

You appear to misunderstand the general public's relative opinion of gambling vs extortion.  Or drug use vs extortion if your next post was going to mention silk road -- let me save you the trouble of posting.

It isn't extortion.  It's a tax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion

 ;D

whats going on with the SD IPO?

There is nothing wrong with helping someone who is blackmailed come up with the money, assuming you played no role in the blackmail itself. If someone's child was kidnapped at 6PM on Christmas eve and a ransom was demanded in cash by the following evening, would there be something wrong with a bank offering to open on Christmas to allow the ransom to be paid should they choose to pay?

Its not extortion its community service  :)

This is not about some fine point of theoretical law, it is about public relations.  Show the Forbes article to your grandmother and ask for her immediate gut reaction.

I do agree that it's a cheezy way to get free publicity. But I'm not convinced people will have that kind of reaction to the Forbes article.

Besides the whole thing (taxes, hiding tax paperwork from people you expect to vote for you, pretending (or actually doing it) to steal tax paperwork) being a huge farce, lets just say someone wanted to pay a million dollars worth of bitcoins to some anonymous punk, they would probably appreciate free help from someone who can get that done.

I did, and I'm a troll.


"Hey, you want to pay the terrorists, you can use our Bitcoin services! We want to be involved in this terrorist transaction, because that's basically what bitcoin is for anyway!"

The severely mentally handicapped is the only demographic coming to mind that matters less than grandmothers here.

Aren't you a miner?  Are you sure you want to make this argument?

I don't run a blog and Forbes doesn't write articles about me, so I'm not sure I follow you here.

If you're referring to the fact that Romney accepting the offer might increase the bitcoin price and therefore increase my fiat-denominated revenues, I can do without it.  In fact I think in the long term it will damage the value of BTC more than it will boost it.

This is an important point in all of this. I am in BTC for the long term. This may help the PRICE in the short run, but it is detrimental to BTC in the long term. I pray that people do their research, and truly understand that this is an important open source project with thousands of individual developers/investors/contributors. And that NOT everyone in this community feels and/or operates in this fashion. Bitcoin is a beautiful new technology that can solve the great debt crisis that humanity currently faces itself with. It can reinvigorate old legacy markets that are worn and tired. It can give industries that may have dim futures a chance to rehash themselves in innovative ways that can only better humanity. It can open up the finance world to fresh new ideas that would have not been possible before, because of cost and/or redundancy. Point blank - It's more than just an "unregulated" online currency. It's a new technology that can free up capital, and potentially turn the world around from a great depression.

I'm not.  I'm referring to the fact that you, personally, could be responsible for relaying or hashing the actual Bitcoin transaction that goes to the actual "extortionist".  And you seem to be fine with that.  In fact, your sig is hilariously ironic:


Yet you somehow want to heap scorn upon Bitinstant for offering to do something similar, in offering their services to both sides of what is basically a political tuffle.

And the worst part, I think, is that you aren't actually the least bit concerned with the actual "extortion" itself.  You're only concerned with how it might make you, or Bitcoin, look bad.  In short, you seem to be a hypocritical dipshit.

You mean he might be helping the extortion victim to minimize the damage he suffers as a result of the extortion, right? If someone receives a ransom note and chooses to pay the ransom, there's absolutely nothing wrong with helping them do so.

We need to consider the possibility that individuals who have nothing to do with this 'community' can and will use Bitcoin for all kinds of ransoms. That's not a possibility that I like very much, but it's a fact. Bitcoin, like any type of money can be used for good or for bad. However, since it is a far superior type of money than has ever been created, the bad can be greatly magnified as well. It is a tool, like any other tool. Unfortunately, those in political office won't see it as just a tool, and they might try to shut down exchanges and Bitcoin based businesses. :(

My ultimate fear.

Innocent businesses like Alpaca Socks and many other organically successful BTC businesses having to stop excepting BTC (thus killing their businesses), because of this nonsense.

If the claimed motives were right, the offer would have been given to the family or the Republicans alone. and not to the world. If a result of this is a price rise, because of publicity, the purpose of the offer is lost.

I have a different take. It would sadden me (further) if we later learn that this supposed hoax stemmed from somewhere within this community, them(s) utilizing black-hat marketing techniques simply to advance business concerns.

The last two Bitcoin episodes, Bitfloor and Mitt, seemed to have hit the wire quicker than previous ills. It's as if shit was written prior to each event's occurrence, starting with an article placement on some lesser viewed site, then rapidly adopted by the mainstream media.

If this sounds far-fetched, color me orange.

~Bruno~

I don't think it is far fetched at all. Seems to me the plot could have been executed by someone holding a lot of BTC, hoping to cash in on a price rise from the publicity. Seems like their plot could have worked. For the cost of a few flash disks and a drive over to some political headquarters, nonetheless.

That's rather plausible Phineas.

Excellent point as usual.

At best their offer being condescending to Romney and his team.

Who the F you think you are ?

PR fail on multiple level.

I'm with Bitinstant on this one.
That's the spirit of Bitcoin - we are building a disruptive technology which will take over the world.
We aim at no less, so why be so shy about it?
Winners will write the history.

We can be disruptive without breaking any laws in the process....

Bitinstant didn't break the law.
We will write the laws too :)

Some people don't understand that you can't build the system which will challenge the status quo and ask status quo's permission to do that at the same time :)

ITT: We rage about being jealous of Erik for not taking advantage of this opportunity before him.  ::)

Not saying they did. But the "hackers" sure as hell are...

Paying ransom is a sensitive issue. The British insurers involved in paying Somali Pirate ransoms have been quite concerned they could face trouble if media made a big stink out of it, so far they've dodged that bullet. Partly by not making public statements. I'm not a believer in the any publicity is good publicity doctrine and on a personal basis this is negative mark for Bitinstant.

I largely agree, but I will point out two big differences. First, the Somali Pirates are violent and threaten to kidnap and kill people. That's in a different league from mere extortion. Second, the insurers are actually paying the ransom and not just helping others pay it. So what the insurers do is a lot worse, and they still do it. (But they don't brag about it.)

I'm not familiar with US laws regarding that, but how is it illegal ?
I understand that blackmail and ransoming is, but I don't think paying is. Neither is facilitating payment.
Anyway the decision is on the one paying the ransom, it's not like Erik said that Romney should pay.

If Romney becomes president he will have Obamas power to declare US citizens terrorists allowing him to kill people without any oversight.

Not sure id want to poke the bear lol

I think BitInstant didn't do anything so terrible. Because everyone knows there never was a real extortion threat, BitInstant doesn't look bad for offering to help out in jest.

Yeah, US has nice "laws" these days...

The US constitution does have its flaws

but it is quite a bit better than the system we live under today

Oh right, I must have been sleepwalking when I wrote an article loudly proclaiming my offer to hash Romney's transactions "without fees", then had an article written about it in Forbes, and gleefully confirmed it to the reporter, encouraging him to attribute the offer to me.

Sorry, what was your point again?  I seem to have forgotten.

This.

I've been paying pretty close attention for a little over a year now. Until recently I kinda just watched and waited while hustling a few coins to pay for my lunch. But now you have the attention of powers you cannot control. Cash out while you can is now the defacto battle cry of this community.

It's become super super fun to watch it play out.

The 70s came and went and the lucky ones cashed out while they could. The communes all failed and those "draft dodging hippies" all got with the program. It's happening here too. You started out with a grand idea. How long did it take to get robbed? A month? The robberies and the scams associated with anything of value appear to be crushing bitcoin exponentially. There has even been of banning tainted coins by major exchanges. There will be some point in the not so distant future when so few coins are being mined that all of the coins will have a taint level unacceptable for usual trading.


Oh shit, pray? dude... prey is what the main activity is around here.

Just curious: what made you change your attitude?

+1

We should be thanking them for turning something bad for Bitcoin into something that could actually help Bitcoin grow...the general public now has something to read from our perspective when they google this Romney stuff...

Yes, I think he realized that Bitcoin was being ignored in all the Romney discussion and comments. This was a way to make the story more about Bitcoin. It's pretty clear to any thinking person that Romney isn't going to be paying the ransom so it's pretty safe to offer to help him. Getting attention is what marketing is about.

The best thing would just be to act like a good politician.

"The Bitcoin community will unite, and we will put all of our strength into finding these hackers.
Make no misstake, this it the top on our agenda."

Then do...Nothing

But I really see the extortion as Bitcoins weakness. If its possible.

My understanding was that it would had been foolish to do something like this.
Because with enough resources something like this would be very very hard to pull of.

And maybe it really is.

As I earlier wrote that when a kidnapping happens, Bitcoins risc being made illegal atleast in a few countries, based simply on public opinion.
Noone will react, because they understand jack shit about money and Bitcoin.
To many of them its probably just a scam.

Although I don't think any harm will come from this particular publicity stunt, I don't think it's wise to play jokes with people who are notorious for their lack of humour and who have a monopoly on the use of force.

And, you never get a second chance to make a first impression.  Unfortunately, this episode means that we now have many people whose first exposure to the word Bitcoin is in the context of a theft/extortion scenario, further assisting the "Bitcoin as currency of crooks and perverts" narrative.

Bitcoin is young and its ecosystem is weak.  It would be much wiser for Bitcoin to lay low and out of the public eye until the technology and infrastructure is out of the beta stage, complemented by mature products and services, and widespread enough in use so as to make attacking it both politically and technically difficult.

Precisely because Bitcoin is so disruptive and dangerous to the establishment, I share the following gentleman's concern that the Bitcoin community (and high-profile service providers like BitInstant) should not, even in jest, go around deliberately kicking potential hornet's nests by linking Bitcoin to politicized events under government investigation:

Yep, kids, watch how pros expertly do PR and learn from them.

 ::)

Ya, like spamming up the general discussion forum with your bitcoin magazine advertising, not very well veiled as actual discussion. 

You and Voorhees have a lot to learn about responsible advertising and promotion imo. 

well said Holliday.

...or via gray-hat/black-hat techniques. Heroes wear white hats.

~Bruno~

With all due respect to Vladimir. (seriosly)

I can probably safely assume you're a hell of lot better at PR than most on this forum, but here's where I'm having a problem.

In early spring of this year, I was gung-ho about evangelizing Bitcoin until shit started to hit the fan, e.g., Zhou 1,2, and 3, then Pirate, then Bitfloor, now Mitt (think I'm missing one or two others). It makes it rather difficult to promote something when all the person to whom you're promoting to has to do is Google Bitcoin, then all your earnest efforts are then tossed out the window with the bath water.

I'm pretty sure there's some great white-hat marketing approaches in the works by various bitcoiners, but any gray-hat/black-hat marketing ploy will surely backfire, and that's indicative of any product or service promotion involving Bitcoin or not.

This post is in no way pointing any fingers, but come on, guys, let's be a little more forthcoming.

Peace!

~Bruno~

:) I didn't change my attitude at all. I'm still hustling a few coins to pay for my lunch. Cashing out.

The recent even is I signed up for an account on the forums. And I got a spiffy back injury so I have more time to do things like read this forum while I recover. Silent Hill is on the TV and I'm going to have to re-watch it cause the various high-level bitcoin dramas are more interesting than the horror flick.

I think I just woke up in a shitty state and felt a need to vent about history repeating.

I would rather be sailing. I'm sure you would rather I be sailing also? :)

Phinnaeus Gage, this is actually a very serious topic you are bringing up here.

Yep indeed it seems Bitcoin is riding one wave of negative news after another. I also have stats of online article popularity and I will tell you that http://bitcoinmagazine.net/bitfloor-hacked-250000-missing/ this one is the most read article we ever had (counting by hits since we've started the website). On the second place is http://bitcoinmagazine.net/the-silk-road-report/ .

Trust me, I would prefer it to have more positive news and articles. Unfortunately, it is not up to the mirror what it shows. It seems that embracing negativity and riding "there is no such thing as bad publicity" bandwagon is an obvious choice at this stage. I am not convinced that such "gray" PR necessarily will have long term negative consequences.

Edit:

just for illustration adding coundown of top 9 most popular Bitcoin Magaizne website articles, May 1st Sep 7th, (1 - most popular):
 9. Ponzi Scemes the danger of high interest savings funds
 8. Bitcoin savings trust geniune of joke
 7. Adam Kokesh on Bitcoin and free market money
 6. Silk Road armory terminated
 5. Growing decentralisation in the bitcoin economy
 4. Bitcoin gone wild
 3. Bitpay breaks daily volume record
 2. The silk Road report
 1. Bitfloor hacked, 250000$ mising.

Print version is much more diverse and positive however.

Yes!  Lets stage a fatal traffic accident as a way to promote bitcoin!  We could put bitcoin logos on the dead bodies.
That will be sure to bring a lot of positive attention and users eager to embrace this new technology that will improve
the way we do business and live our lives the way we would like.   ::)

And if anyone offers any criticism or feedback we won't be grateful for it but rather arrogantly dismiss them as children
( despite the fact that many of them are much older and have been in the world of business for much longer than us  
marketing geniuses ). Yep kids that how the pros do it these days!  

/edit  And if you go to a church bake sale maybe you might learn a little about genuine and passionate community building and involvement. 
It may be slow but it often deep and lasting... rather than a flash in the pan which comes from gimmickry and the like.

What about selling toxic cakes for BTC at church bake sales? This should get everyone on board. The compassionate guys and the "bad things = more exposure" crows.

TBC, I am of the camp that espouses any exposure to a brand, even negative, is good publicity, but wave upon wave of negativity erodes our precious beach, so to speak.

Any at rate, I don't have any issue with you, Vladimir (currently), and have promised Matthew that if any negativeness involving him comes to light during my asinine research, I will contact him first prior to publishing. I now include that promise toward anybody in his camp, save for forgetting that such-and-such is in said camp if I ever make the mistake of publishing first.

That said, keep up the excellent work you're doing over there, but please consider letting us know as much as possible as to what the heck you guys are working on. Case in point, see the last meme I published.

Later, bud.

~Bruno~

Whether you personally condone it or not is largely irrelevant.  The point, I feel, still stands. 

One can exploit, the lower and weaker aspects of, human nature... fleece the sheep... for a quick buck... instant gratification... etc.   
or one can try to encourage and inspire the more positive aspects of it.  I like to think Satoshi's dream, or vision or whatever one
would like to call it, is an example of the latter.

One is harder to do than the other but I would suggest more rewarding, for all, in the long run.     ;)

QFT

If I may butt in once again... I will anyway.   :D

Some define "heroism" not as following this or that arbitrary law or social custom ( or being lucky enough to die for ones country in a meaningless war abroad ),
but in following ones heart, despite the consequences.  And no, I don't find that contradictory to what I have already said, in case someone was going to ask me
that...  

I am glad you take it that way.   :)

I try to avoid attacking personalities and try to stick to the ideas themselves.  I apologize if I sometimes fall short of that goal, or am lacking in clarity. 

Hahahaha wow 

Okay then, let's play things your way. If charging him less for the service is bad (as you describe), then charging more must be the appropriate course of action? Instead of BitInstant offering to help Romney get the funds for 0% commission, you are suggesting we charge him 2%?   ::)

Extorting money for tax returns is distasteful/immoral/illegal. Offering to help the victim is none of these things.

It amazes me how little of a sense of humor people have, my goodness.

And yes, it is condescending to Romney and his team. That man deserves no respect whatsoever. I do not feel remorse poking fun at tyrants.

Fair enough...  but my points are made within the larger context of Bitinstant's "stunt" or "joke" or whatever one would like to call it.  
I don't think it was a justified defence against some government action, if anyone tries to claim it as such.  But if any unreasonable
action 'would' be undertaken at some point then I wouldn't cry out against any reasonable defensive action... which if it was against
the government would perhaps be illegal by definition.

I agree with much of what you have said on points like this...  it's just when it gets into preemptive activism, or sensational marketing,
and the like, where I find I am in disagreement, with the views themselves, regardless of who holds them, or not.  

Are you speaking as a professional and responsible spokesman of Bitinstant here... or as a prankster needing to vent?     ;)

Here on the forum, I'm speaking for myself.  And it was not a prank, BitInstant's offer is legitimate.

And I'm always professional and responsible... except when I'm not ;)

I think that all of you are 100% correct.

In all seriousness, we sat in our office for hours debating wether this was a good move or not.

We confided in PR experts, publicists, lawyers, the actual author of the article, our investors, and even my mom!

Many of you agree and many of you disagree with how we played it out.

However, we decided that if the Romney camp would ever contact us, we would want to be the people to introduce them to Bitcoin. We are legally and regulatory compliant on both the state and federal level, follow proper AML procedures and protocols and the poster child of a good Bitcoin business, among many other excellent ones.

We have nothing to hide, and we should all be extremely proud of Bitcoin. Look where the last year has taken us?

There have been ups and downs, but overall we are alive and kickin!

Let them try and shut us down.

...We are more than a community...WE ARE BITCOIN!

We are Bitcoin!

http://www.guardedlyoptimistic.com/uploaded_images/300-movie-400a0309-744770.jpg

Sorry! Couldn't resist.

You may find, like perhaps Matthew has, that it is a tricky tightrope to walk. 
As many disclaimers as you may have to post many may still be unable, or reluctant, to see the distinction between your personal views and your business roles.


And I have nothing against unprofessionalism and pranksterism...   it just depends on what you want to accomplish.
Agitate and provoke the establishment etc.,  or run a respectable business catering to the average person within
the established order. 

It seems one may need to choose one or the other. 

Ew.

Dont ever compare Matthew with Erik please, thats just disturbing.

What Erik says on this forum, even when speaking personally, is in line with BitInstant, unlike Matt.

I see your point though, but please use a different person next time!

I can vouch on that one.

Comparing Erik with Matthew is like comparing a BMW with a Hyundai.

A Hyundai never gambles it's gasoline away betting that the stop light will turn out to be a disco ball.

Huh? Do you even understand what you just wrote lol

Let's agree that Bruno should be the only one making metaphors here.

Lol...  but you know I am not comparing them in terms of interests in horsies or playing pirate games or... well I'll stop there...

They are both outspoken with strong personal views while also being front-men of prominent Bitcoin businesses. 

I am just saying good luck with that balancing act and be prepared for all kinds of reactions and perceptions from
a public you would probably rather have as customers than not. 

Please lets not.  That hyundai image makes more sense than most of Bruno's jokes... if they happen to be jokes and
not paranoid investigations into whether ZT is really the gunman on the grassy knoll... or who knows waht...   :-\

According to Matt's own words he is involved in every existing bitcoin company :D

If this comes as a surprise you obviously shouldn't be authorized to speak to the media on behalf of a business.

Needs citation.

Lol. Charlie, that wording was very poorly chosen. Some people might read that as him being a paid shill. I don't think you meant that  :o

"Eww", no. You're BitInstant, a for-profit corporation. Bitcoin and the community did not attempt a publicity stunt that associates it with blackmail against a Unites States government official, BitInstant did. Don't drag us into that decision by calling "us" a community. Thank you!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106497.msg1169927#msg1169927 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106497.msg1169927#msg1169927)

Not seeing it. The above claim is that I somewhere stated that "I am involved in every existing bitcoin business". Citation still needed.

I'm not sure if there are any bitcoin businesses not directly involved with me. sounds like it to me. Unless you are full of shit and dont stand behind anything you say.

Trolls will be trolls.

I saw it mentioned in this thread that it's important to stand up for what we believe in.

I agree with this, however there are cases when this can backfire severely and create unnecessary stress.

I've heard law enforcement agencies swipe with a wide brush before when trying to solve a case. FBI for instance simply don't care if they disrupt the service of a company if they're doing an investigation.

FBI aiming for one server, but takes 'tens of servers': http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/21/f-b-i-seizes-web-servers-knocking-sites-offline/

Homes raided and all electronic equipment seized for several Occupy movement members:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/07/25/18718309.php?show_comments=1


So the point I'm trying to get across is that, standing up for what you believe in is all fine and dandy, but then you also have to face the consequences if just one detective from Secret Service, FBI or whatever decides that Bitinstant is a lead, or may be affiliated with the hackers. Then they may take all the servers, and also raid the homes of the employees and take all the electronic equipment.

I've seen it happen for extremely weak reasons before. And they don't call you and ask you to come down to their offices for a nice chat, no, they go in with a force, and swipe the premises clean.

Not saying that it will happen at all, but it's a possibility once you stick your nose out in a criminal case. No matter if those affected by raids the last years were guilty or not, having something like this happening will affect the business and your personal life.

And if you think about Bradley Manning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Arrest_and_charges) he probably did what he thought was right, but I think he's in prison for life now.

All I'm saying is that standing up for what you believe in is important and good, but also be aware of the possible consequences and think about wether you're willing to face it, should the unlikely hapen to you.

Note that I have no beef with BitInstant, I think they're doing a great job in general, but I don't know if this offer was the most clever choice they've done.

jackasses!  Get a new PR company!

i don't see how this is anything other than a cute publicity stunt, or anywhere near as damaging to a business as a garish dick swinging contest

At least they never shot elephants like Bob Parsons from godaddy.

A metaphor is like a penis in an ashtray--you never know who let the bacon burn.

How did I do?  ;D

This ain't the first time you've stuck it up my ass, when all I've HONESTLY done was protect the interests of bitcoiners of which you're one. Let me repeat that a different way. I will go out of my way at my expense, never asking for a satoshi in return, to protect you, Portnoy, from nefarious activities that concern Bitcoin.

That said, the next post I want to see from you in response to this is either an apology and a sticking-it-up-my-ass-further for all the users to read.

~Bruno~

You are an metaphor hero.

I play it everyday on my x-box.


Funny you should mention that. I'm about to post over at the Neft Vodka thread on this very thing.

~Bruno~

"Established order" prints fake money to fund wars across the globe to further extend its fake financial hegemony.
Bitcoin was not created to peacefully co-exist with established order, it was designed to take it down and IT WILL.

If you are in it for a small day-to-day profit it's fine, but it's not what Bitcoin is about, you might want to re-read what Satoshi wrote in the genesis block to get the idea.

Scammers will destroy bitcoin before the establishment even notice it exists.

Got that right, and not just scammers. Tinfoil hatters need look no further than the mirror for the natural enemy.

Scammers will educate people that the new system is unlike the old one and the rules are quite a bit different.
That education process is now ongoing, and no, it won't destroy Bitcoin :)
If anything, the educated ones will move to Litecoin and won't repeat their mistakes again.
This process might need a few more iterations, but we will get there eventually.

Im not interested in funding scammers any longer. If you use bitcoin thats basically what you are doing. Pirate has 500 000 btc Im not interested in making him the new Rockefeller.

Bitcoin won't go away because of Pirate, but it can't prevent other systems from cropping up.
If majority of people consider that one person having 2.5% of coins in possession in one system is a negative thing then that system will get less weight within the set of similar systems where the distribution of coins is more fair.
Eventually the value of that particular coin will reflect that and the natural balance will be established.

Thats a good point. I feel no motivation to keep promoting bitcoin now that some of its richest people are scammers and thieving parasites.

The major problem is that most people are simply unaware of the new systems that are coming.
People using the old system don't necessarily like it, but they simply don't know what else they can do.

Bitcoin in that regard represents the idea of the new system, even though this particular implementation might not be the final solution. Once they get the idea, they'll be able to choose and decide which one of the new systems suits them best.

i don't think there is any evidence of that.

Why don't you just go sailing, then?

What I honestly see from you looks like a lot of spam, more often than not, to me, as if you have to post every little thing that comes into your mind at any given moment onto this forum.
( is that why you chose that handle? You don't have enough brain matter to hold all those thoughts and must spew them out here to keep them from slipping away?   :D )
You yourself used the term "attention whore" for yourself, if only to deny it ( hmm? ).  I didn't call you that but your posts tend to give credibility to that theory.  

Why do you feel the need to be our protector?  You don't have to answer these questions... I would probably prefer you didn't. ( for one thing it is way off-topic for us to be talking about ourselves like this... )  I am not trying to analyze you but just commenting on your posting behavior...  as a way of helping all of us on these forums of which you're one.   ;)  

And its okay that you don't protect me.  I am as old as you and have learned to take care of myself on the internet and elsewhere. One of the things I like about bitcoin is that it is about people taking responsibility for their own money and business dealings.  I don't need some self-appointed Mr. Bitcoin superhero cyber dick* keeping me safe from harm.  

*I chose that term because I am sure you know its older slang meaning and seem to like that kind of word play.
You are a bright guy but can be very annoying with your loooong posts (  ;) )  that go nowhere...  

I say all this not in anger but because you seem to like an honest and forthright manner, especially if it may help you understand yourself and others a little better ( as self-important as it may be for me to say something like that.    ;)  )

Think a little while before deciding to reply to this...  hopefully you will decide that it is not worth replying to every idiot who has an opinion on the internet and will just move on.

+1. Insightful.

I just now got to reading your reply and don't need a while to think about answering it. I'll concur with a very large percentage of what you've penned and leave it at that. I admire your forthrightfullness, and doing so with a certain amount of tact.

Later, bud.

~Bruno~

Bruno, I really admire the way you handle these situations and hold back from stepping over the troll line.

Thanks for being you (most of the time)

-Charlie

I've got to admit that I am impressed with the way he took that, even though my post was an honest reply to his post and not a troll.
This is perhaps evidence in the direction of Bruno 'not' being an attention whore... or at least one with somewhat of a handle on it.

Note Bruno that this doesn't now mean I give you carte blanche to post anything you want with impunity.  I reserve the right to be annoyed
but anything I read on these forums.   ;)