Bitcoin Forum

You are telling me anunymint was the real anonymint?

He confirms that to me via Crypto.cat, so yes.

I would have taken him more seriously if I knew. Maybe even read some of those huge essays on the wall observer. :'( I always liked that guy back in the early days.

Let's be real though. Hes probably right here right now. Probably reading this. If deleting accounts didn't stop him before it probably won't stop him this time.

The point is he shouldn't be stopped. Unless the guy committed some serious crime why is he being censored here? My guess is his criticisms of some members here made enemies. Honestly the guy can be obnoxious at times and arrogant but he clearly knows enough to demand as much respect as a Satoshi or a Vitalik IMO. Very sad some mods here are being hard asses about the rules here when this forum has become a ridiculous mess of sock puppets that are allowed to make multiple accounts and often scam people. Whatever anyone think about Shelby he has gone public and doesn't hide behind sock puppets, he is just trying to discuss higher level shit with the right people.


I personally want the Mods to explain fully why he is permanently banned here and him being rude or an asshole simply won't cut it. He should be allowed to post under this real name or this forum for me lost the last drop of credibility it has left. I'm not asking for Shelby and I'm not asking for the mods I'm asking cause I want to read his discussions I doubt he gives a shit. But why push a valued crypto developer into running around with socks like a damn criminal.


*I just noticed im actually being deleted. Wow. This forum really has turned to shit.

You would? Personally, I would not take someone that seriously if he believes that non-mining nodes are not needed for the network, and that only mining nodes matter. I would be very cynical to be frank.

But he was good to have a around for discussion's sake.


Hi anonymint. The forum oligarchy banned you.

Wouldn't you? Personally, I don't take people that serious who think mining nodes are jokes and everything is about Blockchain.info wallets.
@anunymint, Shelby is a polemic, a warrior. He goes beyond polemics by too much exaggerations and insistings on lost fronts but it is not his fault, it is ours and our prominent figures in bitcoin who have betrayed the cause, the resistance axiom, who have compromised bitcoin.

A warrior is out of options in this situation, he has to over magnify the truth, to make it distinguished from the lies and to bring it out from the shades and shadows.

As of non-mining nodes issue, it is not about underestimating them, it is about the importance of mining nodes which is being denied, intentionally and hypocritically by people who are in charge here to hide the insane situation with Bitmain with an anti-Bitmain gesture... disgusting.

I'm against banning people in such cases at least but what happened is far beyond banning, It was a slaughter.
A considerable amount of posts, including his and our posts that have quoted him has been removed.
It seems to me like our supreme leader is too busy, so he just issues an assessenation command and his bot agents remove the user and his posts and all the posts that has quoted his posts ... again, disgusting.

That's bullshit.

A warrior can learn how to present ideas clearly consisely, persuasively and even forcefully rather than employing various emotional outbursts, irrelevancies and personal attacks.  Bitcoin is powerful as fuck and powerful as fuck as a disrupter of traditional systems. If you are unwilling or unable to present your ideas amongst the disrupters (meaning core developers and those kind of technical folks), then what the fuck you doing spending a whole hell of a lot of time appealing to the masses with disjointed rants....

Anyhow, if his ideas were so meaningful and great, then perhaps even a BIP or two might be productive to bring attention to those supposed important various matters and to attempt to work with out great minds within core in weeding out the good, bad and the ugly of his ideas.  

Otherwise if he is engaged in an ongoing battle against core, then it merely appears that he is attacking bitcoin rather than attempting to be persuasively and warriorly constructive (and on the right side of the disrupters).

Seems like bullshit to put banned folks like this on a pedestal, and then to proclaim that somehow they have great, wonderful, yet censored ideas, when even while he (anunymint) was posting, he was having difficulties making his ideas clear and even staying on topic, rather than devolving into continued and ongoing ad hominen lambasts.

and yet roach can post his crap all over the place and not get banned??? yet shelby gets banned?? at least shelby is trying to help people preserve their wealth.

forum is full of double standards.

Its a pity that one person can make a decision to simply ban and wipe out a persons posts and hours of time and effort to narrate them all in one go.Even if someone disagrees with someones opinion they shouldnt have the right to be able to simply push a button and get rid of them.They should come on the thread and argue their opposing point.

Protecting the status quo or narrative through this form of censorship is no better than how the mainstream media overlook the opposing elements or use selective truth to suit their own narrative.

His posts had passionate arguments and a lot of indepth insight indicating he was extremely knowledgeable on these matters and people enjoyed reading them even if they didnt agree with some of the points made.

https://steemit.com/freedom/@anonymint/non-decentralized-forums-are-clusterfucks-of-corruption



You’re an expert troll who desires an echo chamber and intentionally obfuscates (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg42168139#msg42168139) (archived here (https://web.archive.org/web/20180714183346/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.417160#msg42168139) and here (http://archive.is/i7S24#selection-2731.0-2731.72)) that you are unwilling or unable to learn the technological details (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg42148903#msg42148903) (archived here (https://web.archive.org/web/20180714151546/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.417140#msg42148903) and here (http://archive.is/bT9l0#selection-937.0-937.72))


You’re jealous when your trolling isn’t effective at maintaining the echo chamber. But this isn’t about putting anyone on a pedastal. It's about removing the groupthink and old boys’ clubs that plunge society into clusterfucked totalitarianism.


Not really. It was @mprep and his automated scripts that caused this diversion.

Somebody is awake. Kudos.


Of course we will not know who was not wearing underwear until the tide rolls out. So all of us can claim he was full of shit, but the confirmation of who is wrong comes in the future.


True. And good point. But let’s wait to see if the reality some 4 or 6 years from now is not exactly as bad as Shelby has predicted. We can only judge in hindsight not in foresight.

I am not an administrator, and I don't know every single factor.  Sure each of see a bunch of bullshit from Roach, but has he actually violated the same rules as anunymint?  Do you know?  I doubt that there is a double standard, and there is adminstrative discretion regarding when lines are crossed.  Surely, there would be a desire not to ban folks, so it seems pretty fucking difficult to get banned in this forum, but anunymint and several of his alts (apparently) have reached (and breached) that level of nonsense.

Regarding, the supposed substantive importance of anunymint:  I would imagine if he was actually saying something that was so fucking substantively important, then it would either not be deleted or others would be ready, willing and able to say it.. in other words, we are likely not losing much if anything substantively by getting rid of peeps, such as anunymint, who rise to such high level of nonsense to actually get banned from a relatively permissive forum.

You apparently don't understand what is a troll.  You should look in the mirror or look at your fuck buddy, anunymint, as examples of what is a troll. If you spent more time providing good arguments and substance, then perhaps you could get somewhere with your various arguments, instead you and your fuck buddy, anunymint, seem to get caught up on questions of status and personalities. 

Present some good ideas about bitcoin, segwit, lightning, big blocks, security or whatever is your supposed bitcoin (and on topic) questions/concerns concisely and clearly, and perhaps, we could make some substantive progress in our discussion.  I am waiting, waiting, waiting to see it.

@JayJuanGee, @infofront suggested that we move the offtopic discussion to Meta, but I see you refuse.

I have put my reply to you (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg42165851#msg42165851) there in Meta. Please continue your further replies there.

I just responded to you in that other thread. 

Haha what the heck. Some mod did this? Well it makes sense I suppose but I feel like there are gods in the sky using me as a toy.

Either way I guess I should be thankful, I am the one that asked that my other thread not be used as an anonymint discussion thread.  :-*

Yeah, it was Anonymint (or at the very least someone pretending to be him). A statement from theymos on why Anonymint is banned from the forum:


tl;dr he refused to follow the forum's rules, got temp banned several times, ban evaded and continued breaking the rules, got permabanned and continues creating new accounts and ban evading.

For anyone still not aware of the roller coaster that is the Anonymint general discussion thread, feel free to check it out: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.0).

Who said mining nodes were a joke? All nodes and any node are important in the network, non-mining nodes or mining nodes. From the node's perspective, they are only fellow nodes and does not care or know that it is a "mining node" or not.

He doesn’t confirm anything to YOU via Crypto.cat

You are him.

Quite aggravating. A curated filter mechanism would be preferable to banning, especially when the ban is arbitrary.

Bitcoin is not a moderated system (yet) and the supporting communication channels also need to be free from authoritarian decree.

I have not been participating on this forum for some time, partially because of the excessive noise and mod actions, mostly due to the fact that Bitcoin is now a mite boring.

Good luck to all those still participating - may you spend ever more time enjoying life rather than starting at displays :)

I understand that I, Shelby Moore III (https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@anonymint/anonymint-from-bitcointalk-introducing-myself) (aka Anonymint (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.6940#msg16925985)), even while perma-banned am allowed to create a new user account strictly for posting to the Meta subforum on this anonymously managed and anonymously owned forum bitcointalk.org website which some people mistakenly think is the canonical or official website for discussions related to Bitcoin or the cryptotokens (aka blockchain) ecosystem in general.


There are two sides to every story. I explained my side of the story at the following blog:

https://steemit.com/freedom/@anonymint/non-decentralized-forums-are-clusterfucks-of-corruption

Please note the section I added to that blog just now (if you had read it before):

---

How many BTC would you like to bet (and lose!) on that?

@Traxo communicates with me regularly on Crypto.cat. I appreciate very much his support and assistance. He is a very kind and understanding person.

He oftens checks in every day with me but sometimes I am too busy to talk to him. Today he didn’t come online probably because it is Sunday and presumably because the past 2 days were exhausting for him. Even I am age 53 and still slightly ill (but significantly improved health) and he AFAIR age 20-something, he can’t keep up with me, lol. (actually he can, we just have only partially overlapping waking hours)

@Traxo is AFAIK in Croatia. I believe he’s in Croatia because he has explained to me about the life there. Whereas, I am in the Philippines. AFAIK, neither of us post from VPNs. I always post from my same PLDT Internet Service Provider unless I am traveling. I have read that @Traxo says he always posts from his Croatian ISP and not a VPN. I do use a VPN when I sign-up new accounts, because this site has banned PLDT presumably because of me (lol), which means no filipinos can sign-up for this forum using the most popular ISP in the country unless they pay a BTC fee after signing up. I avoid that fee by using a VPN to sign-up. After signing up, I switch back to using my PLDT account. Note that although the BTC is minuscule, the transaction fee for sending BTC from wallet (not an exchange) is still unreasonably high for many filipinos to pay.

---

Most of the truly wealthy such as yourself have left.

I hope you’re enjoying life on the ocean.

I am still slaving away on the computer, trying to get healthy and reach a goal.

---

You keep repeating that nonsense even through I carefully explained to you (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4416188.msg42098934#msg42098934) why it is no so and only mining nodes matter.

LOL

It must be that other big-blockers like HostFat (moderator), franky1, jonald_fyookball, etc. have no problems here just because their arguments are ineffective. But faced with your incredible expertise, we had no choice but to ban you.

Look, you're banned because you've been fundamentally unwilling to follow any forum rules. This is a centralized forum, and if you want to post here, then you have to be willing to swallow your pride a bit, conform to forum rules, and take mods seriously when they give you warnings. If you're going to ignore mods, ignore rules, generally make a nuisance of yourself, and constantly escalate when called out, then you're simply not welcome on this centralized forum: go away and stop trying to sneak back.

As I mentioned before, I am willing to reconsider your ban if you promise to follow the same rules as everyone else and try to avoid getting banned, rather than having the attitude of "you can't ban me".

I am not for big blocks. Have you entirely failed to read the 300 posts of @anunymint which your apparently corrupt mod @mprep nuked? Ah I realize you probably made that presumption because in my prior post I questioned whether bitcointalk.org is the canonical or official website for Bitcoin (so you must have thought I am shilling for bitcointalk.com, lol)

Also I think you should re-read my prior post and pay attention to the size 24 font text I inserted, which seems to imply corruption between your mod @mprep and user @stereotype who was so abusively critical of me. Click some of those links and read what was being said to me. Now in hindsight when I am not so ill, I can see they were colluding and @stereotype basically admitted it.

The bottom line is I was critical of and analyzing many flaws in the various shitcoins and so presumably the shitcoins people got together with your Altcoin Discussion mod and decided to formulate a plan to shut me off.


Why should I agree to abide by corruption? Please give me a good[sane] reason?

As if I was not following the rules ever since you told me that “multi-posting” was my crime.  ::)

No I am not for sale to the highest corrupt bidder. I have my own ethics. If you want me to agree to be corrupt, sorry I can not follow you. I hope you understand. I will not join some kiss-ass, brown-nosing boyz club.

If there is some objectivized thing you would like to adhere to, I probably will as long as it is not subject to corruption and corrupt subjectivity. I mean I was already following the rules. But the rules were never the issue of why I was hated. I was hated because I stuck my neck out and criticized the shitcoins with solid analysis in the Altcoin Discussion forum which no one else was doing. I refused to regurgitate what I was (by implication) told to speak and not speak.

Forums naturally form discord. We all know that.

Anyway, I think frankly I am not that interested to return. All the smart engineers are gone from bitcointalk.org. There’s no interesting technological discussion any more. Only when I join the threads does anything accurate get spoken these days. For example the current LN thread discussion is incorrect or incomplete (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4638321.msg42191202#msg42191202) ever since @anunymint was nuked from the thread. They do not understand the concept of a natural monopoly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly) and that the liquidity scale is the barrier-to-entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly#Definition) in LN because users always need to be where the liquidity is as exemplified by exchanges, especially in payment systems because merchants and users don’t want to be stuck and not be able to checkout the shopping cart.

The only reason I came back last month was because the Proof-of-Approval thread. I was interested in that design and @Traxo made a few posts for me there, but then it became unmanageable to discuss via @Traxo helping me out. So I created my own account to discuss in that thread. I made one post in a thread about “non-mining nodes don’t matter”, then the all the Core shills came in there to crucify me.

@theymos, you are entirely incorrect in your understanding of Core. Seriously man, you need to read my posts. Or you need to get on Skype with me and discuss. But anyway, I presume you’re not interested in the truth.

And frankly I am also tired of wasting time over here. But if you express a non-disingenuous interest, I will invest the effort to speak with you.

Fuck man, one of the threads (the 2nd page of the Wall Observer: Errors & Corrections) that @mprep nuked, I had sent in an email to the President of the Philippines and senator Manny Pacquiao, along with upper level Dept. of Finance officials. I’m hoping to go visit Manny who lives 2 hours from me to congratulate him on his victory yesterday where he regained a title belt at age 39. He and I are both athletes. I’ve been his fan since he was only a local fighter here in Mindanao when I was age 33 before I was blinded in my right eye (I’ve been living here in Mindanao since 1994).

For over a month I was posting as @anunymint with no major problems (other than the usual disbelief by n00bs such as yourself @theymos about the realities of technologies they don’t understand) and then I made my first post in the Altcoin Discussion and instantly @mprep was alerted and he nuked everything in a scorched earth policy.

@theymos I read that apparently you have a degree in computer science. So you’re not entirely a n00b but I also observed your analysis of altcoins (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2095328.0), that you really do not have a deep understanding about this technology. Presumably because you are busy doing other activities. They are many nuances and besides a very deep comprehension requires more than just computer science. It also requires game theory, economics, sociology, and human psychology (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.420#msg18155310).

If I am so unworthy, then why did Matthew Laine with 180 IQ follow me on Quora? Why did another Omar Bessa from Quora with a 170 IQ also converse with me in email? And also Thomas West who claims to be 3 sigma was conversing with me there on Quora.




Censorship is so failure directed. I had answered a question on StackExchange about what to invest in with a $30K inheritance as of March 2017. I explained why they should (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.420#msg18231213) invest some in Bitcoin. The answered was deleted by the mods!



What rules? You wrote “multi-posting”. I stopped consecutive posting after someone told me that is not allowed. But seems you were also accusing me of copy+pasting my points in multiple threads. But I was not the creator of those duplicate threads. If you moderators allow users to create duplicate threads on the same topic, then why can’t I reply to all of them?

Your rules seems highly ambiguous, subjective, and arbitrary. Thus potentially subject to abuse and corruption.


What rule was I violating that “keep the forum usable and fair”  ???

The reason I was pissed at you and your moderators is because your rules were not “keeping the forum usable and fair”!!!

How can you expect me to agree to something which is ill-defined. I would be a dishonest person if I agreed to that which is ill-defined and does not accomplish any goal that makes any sense.

*deleted since you were ban evading and were never supposed post here in the first place.

I was also the director for the fake moon landing and orchestrated the global distribution of laughing gas via chemtrails. /sarcasm

Let me be clear: I have no clue as to who user "stereotype" is and AFAIK did not have dinner with him. Considering that in his profile he marked his location as the UK, I think he might be referring to a british moderator, rather than me.

Your self-importance is laughable. I ban your ban evading alts - that's it. I didn't (nor was I able to or requested to) even issue the original bans that got you booted off the forum.

If you think Bitcointalk's rules (which are put in place to facilitate constructive discussion) are "corruption", you are free to leave. You coming back (after swearing to never come back, twice) to a forum you deem horrible in both structure (centralized) and staff just seems like a pathetic attempt at garnering attention and sympathy.

Once you get permanently banned from the forum, you have to appeal your ban before you can go back to participating on it. If you get banned from entering a store after repeatedly screaming at the employees, you don't get to just go back and say "yeah, I'm not screaming anymore, I can be here". You contact the owners and ask them to let you back in.

And you are free to do so. By never coming back. Like you've already promised. Twice:


There's plenty of Bitcointalk users who could be defined as "hated" by the community or most staff. Yet they continue to participate on the forum because they adhere to the rules. You didn't - no matter how much you keep saying otherwise.

Yup, that's why they have moderators.

Cool. You've said it three times now.

So your word (the 2 promises of never returning to Bitcointalk) means nothing? You lecture about ethics and corruption but can't keep your own word.

Humblebragging and fishing for sympathy. Keeping it classy, anonymint.

Funnily enough, I stumbled upon your newest alt from an unrelated report of one of your non-altcoin threads.

Neither I nor (AFAIK) theymos is saying you're unworthy. We're saying you have to abide by the rules everyone else has to abide by. You do not get a free pass for being famous / intelligent / rich / etc. Also, bragging about high IQ on an internet forum is literally a meme.

How do you prove that? I provided a link where he claims to have gone to lunch with a member of the Staff. And then we have you deleting some of my words in my posts (as evident by your red colored moderator notices in my posts) and so we know you were reading his attacks where is was attacking my children and sorts of insane accusations and you did no moderation whatsoever to attempt to maintain the civility of the discussion. You allowed him to do that. You could plausibly even be @stereotype!

And your replies above look very similar to @stereotype’s style of venom such as quoted below:


And quoted as follows you are clearly lying because you did not notice @anunymint for a month and then within hours of my post in the Bitcoin Killer thread in Altcoin Discussion, you nuked everything:


You perhaps have hoodwinked @theymos. I am beginning to wonder if maybe @theymos is the one being fooled by you.

I have contemplated that maybe @theymos is fooled by Core and all those who have infiltrated his organization.

A huge corruption. Which must be stopped.

There are many, many wealthy people who are not going to let you get away with this.

I think it is probably time for million BTC hodler Mircea Popescu and I to speak.

I will await @theymos’ reply.


You are lying. You ranted over several posts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg18824147#msg18824147) about how unworthy I am.

Yes, because I'm sure people like Duterte and Pacquiao have absolutely nothing better to do with their time than to correspond with you regarding your doomsday scenarios about Bitcoin.  Just like I've got The Queen and Tyson Fury on speed dial and converse with them frequently about Minecraft.    :D

But if we play along and pretend this isn't all a figment of your imagination, how do you last more than five minutes without telling them the sky is falling and the world is going to end?  



You're hated because you derail just about every thread you've ever posted in.  You commandeer every single topic to talk at us about whichever one of your crackpot theories at the time is making you genuinely believe that you're the only one smart enough to save us mere mortals from ourselves.  And then absolutely nothing happens, so you move on to the next apocalypse that only you and your ego can supposedly prevent.  It's literally all you do.  Blather, rinse, repeat.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law)) (note: vague statements, correlations and your gut feeling isn't proof). tl;dr I don't have to "prove" jack shit till you actually present direct and actual evidence of this imaginary "collusion" against you.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm). Popular form of expression. Quite a lot of it seems similar, especially for users in the same community.

While I'm flattered, I think you're giving me too much credit. That and you seem to ignore the fact that I'm enforcing one of the few most clear cut rules (ban evasion) while having absolutely no hand in your original account's (AnonyMint) ban.

Funny. Unlike you, just because I think someone has a shit personality, doesn't mean I think they're "unworthy".

Incorrect. This is not criminal case. The burden of proof is on you to convince we the users that your anonymous Staff is not corrupt when in fact you allowed @stereotype to attack my children (one of which was still a minor at the time) and all sorts of other insane accusations and only deleted words from my posts.

The circumstantial evidence is compelling in my opinion and I think also will be compelling in the opinion of others who matter (who bother to actually go click the links and read the evidence).


Is insane attacks on my children an allowable form of sarcasm on this forum? You failed to moderate it even though there is evidence that you were reading it.

You allowed the incivility to escalate to extremes. I was never attacking anyone’s children and other forms of insanely abusive forms of warfare that you allow to transpire on this forum. @miscreanity is correct that there is no sane moderation on this forum.


Nobody banned the @Anonymint account (it may have been banned later if someone was able to get access to it, I remember some of my past accounts later got hacked (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.6940#msg16925985)). I requested @theymos to permanently disable it. He graciously granted my request. I should have just scrambled the password so I didn’t have to bother him. I realized that later.

I was becoming more and more ill during 2014/15 and the strife between @Anonymint and Monero shills was rising, so I decided I should try to quit the forum. But I wasn’t able to quit because I became sort of dependent on it as the only thing I was capable of doing when I was so ill. I couldn’t sleep and I couldn’t stay awake, so all I could do was type like a zombie (not capable of coding).

Your presumption when you come up with a theory is that you're right and that anyone who opposes you should prove you wrong. Which is awfully similar to the Argument from ignorance fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance)). Since you don't mind repeating yourself, I'll repeat what I've said: I don't have to disprove your conspiracy theories, especially the ones that are completely based on timing and your personal dislike for me. I delete hundreds to thousands of posts, ban tens to sometimes hundreds of users a day and go through ten to hundred fold of non-offending content every day. If you think that me moderating an active thread is viable proof, I don't have much to say to you.

As for the "accusations", see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0):

Unless they were threats of bodily harm, see quotes above.

... are you kidding me? Why did you not, I dunno, said that was the case. While I'm not fully aware of why your first accounts got banned (maybe your first one got disabled and later ones got banned for actual offenses), if all of this stemmed from a single account being willingly disabled then mistook for a ban (thus prompting mods who handled later situations (the last of who AFAIK is me) to interpret your participation on the forum as a ban), you should immediately PM theymos to have it resolved and your bans absolved. Hell, CC me in the PM and I'll forward it.

Fact is you allowed @stereotype make insane accusations about my minor children and other insane accusations, while you deleted words from my posts that were responding to his posts.

So clearly you were aware of the insane incivility and clearly you allowed it to escalate. Then you blame me (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg18824147#msg18824147) when I fight back because you didn’t do your job well as a moderator.

How is that a fallacy? It is a fact.

(and it will do you no good to attempt to hide your tracks now, as I have archived everything already)

Again you seem to not understand my point. This is not a criminal court. This is a market and if the market loses confidence in you, then you lose.

And you already know you are losing because all of the engineers and wealthy have left bitcointalk.org.

Because you allow insanity to reign.


If that is the only form of moderation you are going to do, then you will have a clusterfuck of insane incivility. So why are you pissed off at me (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg18824147#msg18824147) for being uncivil when you foster such an environment? i was just responding to the venom that you failed to moderate.

Now you are contradicting yourself. You claim that I am banned for being disruptive and now you state that you do not moderate anything but threats of bodily harm. So which is it? You can not have it both ways.

This is why I am planning to create a decentralized moderation forum, because it is very difficult to have both freedom and civility. The only way I can see to achieve it is with decentralized moderation. Yet you ridiculed my idea (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg18844676#msg18844676).


I am not a liar. Ask @theymos. Hopefully he remembers.


I can hardly remember what happened in 2015, 2016, and 2017. I was so delirious fighting that illness. I really do not know what happened.

I was fighting for my life. I was in a fight-or-flight cortisol mode trying to stay alive.





I really do not want to come back and fight all the trolling. If the moderation policy is somehow improved, maybe I might want to come back.

I can code now, so I really do not need to be here. I have something else I can do, now that I am not so sick as I was. But I wish there was a place to have “no trolling allowed” discussion about crypto.

I wish you would create a new subforum that has a very strict policy of moderation. No sarcasm allowed!

Actually I still think the decentralized moderation is the only way to make it work so each of us can choose our own moderators. The moderated thread idea sort of works but the problem is for example I did not start the Bitcoin Killer thread which is about me. Also people do not like to participate in moderated threads because it gives too much power to one person. I would prefer that each of us be able to select a moderator of our individual choosing for each thread.

P.S. I have just now linked from my blog to this the 2nd page of this thread. I am for 100% transparency.

If you're referring to your iamnotback account, I was merging your consecutively posted posts into a single one, editing in notes to every deleted post that informed the user of said posts being merged. Didn't really require me to read the discussion. You can check (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=851556;sa=showPosts) which posts were merged since I used the [hr] tag (line) to separate the content.

It was that or deleting quoted reposts.

You were banned for ban evading and, if theymos isn't wrong, repeated multi-posting. The only bans I personally issued (last 2? 3? not sure) were for ban evasion on a few of your latest alts.

As for your idea, I did not ridicule it. I criticized your idea and ridiculed you for IMO your absolutely awful character traits. One of which is your continued claims that your idea will (not might) replace centralized discussion forums while nothing of the sort seems to be happening. If decentralized forums take off, great, seems like something really interesting. It's just that I'm generally disillusioned with the general public's ability to sacrifice even a bit of convenience.


Pinged theymos about it via PM.

I think you are greatly overestimating as to what info I have access to and what I can actually do. Only admins can create new boards.

Disagree. There is red text in some of my replies in the vicinity of @stereotype’s post which (afair) state you “removed veiled threat of bodily harm”. Go to the links in my first post in this thread to find those.

So I presume you were also reading his posts also, else how could you have read mine.

And frankly how do you expect me react when someone attacks my children and my parenting. Also given I was using this forum as a means of keeping myself from getting entirely depressed about my horrible situation, that is absolute torture what @stereotype was doing to me and he knew it also. He was trying to break me. Okay so you were adhering to the moderation policy (which I never bothered to read, analogous to I never read the fine print of software licences).

And so now you see the result of bitcointalk.org’s moderation policy: an insane asylum

Everyone is leaving because of the insanity of trolls. And my incivility is because others do not debate me, they troll me. Never will you see them make actual technological debate with me ever since @smooth left the building (few exceptions being for example the few remaining engineers such as @aklan, @shunsaitakahashi, @monsterer2, @Ix, and several others who are still in the Development & Technical Discussion subforum). They few times they try, they are quickly refuted by me. For example, @Carlton Banks recently tried and was refuted (go read the technological argument I made if you do not believe me). Then when the for example Core shills have nothing of substance to debate me with, they resorted to pure trolling my reputation as you see @DooMAD continuing up-thread here.

That is why the engineers leave. And before we had @gmaxwel and his band of Core devs ridiculing anyone who tried to post in Development & Technical Discussion subforum. That is why I rarely posted there before although that is probably where I should have been posting instead of Altcoin Discussion. Since Gregory is apparently gone, that subforum appears to be much more civil (at least during the 1 month I was posting there).

It is possible I misjudged you @mprep. But then again, you misjudged me too. I was just fighting back in the insane asylum that the moderation policy creates.


As I said, I do not know what to do about the trolling other than we need the ability to form groupings of people we can get along with when discussing. So that is why I want the degrees-of-freedom to choose my grouping, i.e. to chose my moderator and be grouped with those who also choose that moderator. Because I personally would rather just not read any trolling from the Core shills. If they have some cogent arguments, I would like to read them. They are entitled to their beliefs. I do not want to waste time battling them. The future outcome will reward those who were correct and take talents from those who were not correct. I just want to be able have reasonably civil technology discussions.

I am a feisty rebel. And athletic, high testosterone (when I am not sick or actually even when I was in delirium I could still push myself sometimes but I would crash hard for days). But even for me, one thing that happens as we age, it just isn’t worth expending all my energy on all the drama.

If it wasn't deleted and I edited out a "thinly veiled threat of bodily harm", someone probably reported your post. When it comes to singular posts (not threads), I usually act on reports (especially now, after I became global mod) rather notice them while reading around the forum.

As for trolling, it's hard to balance the fine line between moderating trolls and silencing people who have genuine concerns they express in a strongly sarcastic manner. As such, the forum policy airs on the side of caution and only moderates incredibly blatant (even to an outsider) trolling. That and the altcoin section is pretty toxic due to the much higher stakes involved when it comes to what coins they're holding. If you don't want to read any of what you consider as trolling, there's always the "ignore" feature for users. It ain't perfect (you see the "this user is ignored" or something like that instead of their post) but it works.

Honestly, if the entire thing arose from an account lock being mistaken for a ban, this would probably take the cake for the biggest misunderstanding in Bitcointalk moderation history.

I can’t exactly remember. Seems like the first time I got perma-banned might have been 2016 when I was posting rather aggressively with my negative opinion of Ethereum mainly w.r.t. to the scaling plans (which I have been vindicated on by now). But I may be mistaken. I am 100% certain the @Anonymint account was never banned. @theymos closed it for me at my request (and again I wish I would have instead realized to scramble the password so as to not have bothered him with that request).

I remember one of the reasons I wanted to quit was because I was disappointed also in myself that some scammer @BitcoinEXpress had tried to use me to pretend he could attack Monero. So I surmised I was too ill and not thinking clearly enough. Sort of like my technological mind can continue to run on autopilot even though my awareness of other things was like a zombie.

I know I was not in a good state of mind or health. I was very depressed about my health but trying to remain productive and sustain some hope. I am more upbeat now that my health is not so intractable (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.msg36504599#msg36504599).

EDIT: after eating brunch, I now have a moment to try to remember. Looking back at some of my multiple accounts history (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.6940#msg16925985), I remember I voluntarily tried to quit multiple times because I was discouraged by all the trolling and arguments I was becoming mired in. I quit the @AnonyMint account. Then created but quit @TheFascistMind. So neither of those two accounts were banned. I’m almost certain that the first account of mine that was banned was @TPTB_need_war. I think that is correct, because I vaguely remember that I also created the account @HONCHO (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=842914;sa=showPosts) at that time.



Well many of us find discussion valuable enough to invest our time in it, yet we also dislike the strife. So surely we are willing to spend a little bit of money or effort to have less trolling and more high quality discussion.

The real issue is whether decentralized moderation would actually work and lower the level of stress that people endure in discussions.

I know there are at least a dozen or more members here on this site who I can have very civil discussions with. If I had them in my moderator set, such that any post they flag as trolling is not seen by me, I think my life would be much less stressful.

For example I would trust @miscreanity as a moderator to flag posts that I probably should not read. He would know what would cause me to get angry and waste time.

Before I got ill, I would basically spend my life coding, talking a little bit with others about coding and engineering issues, doing sports, and then social life off the computer. I basically need discussions to network with those who have knowledge I need to discuss and to form groups for projects. Given that is a very significant component of the economics of what I do with my career, I think it has value and should not be entrusted to a moderation policy and system that devolves into so much time wasted on strife.

As for the general population, you may be correct although I think we can probably find some features from decentralization that would entice them. The masses also like new things. Even a small market these days is still a 100 million users.




EDIT#2: I am now reading what you quoted about moderation policy which says trolling and repeated false accusations are not allowed, but then you said insults are allowed. This is a clusterfucked policy. Clearly @stereotype was making false accusations about myself endangering my children several times in more than one thread. So clearly that was repeated false accusations and not merely insults. In fact, I think I even told him that my kids were in the USA, not with me. So he damn well knew they could not be getting Tuberculosis from me or other filipinos. But damn-it their mother is a filipina and they also come back to the Philippines as adults (not children anymore) without my permission, so it is not like we can stop filipinos from exposing themselves to Tuberculosis even though it is endemic here. How many times I warned my adult (19 at that time) son not to kiss girls from the poverty area where his mother originates from but he refused and preferred to live in that squatter area than live in my house in the gated subdivision (or maybe he didn’t want to live with my gf who is not his mother?). So it is absolutely insane torture what @stereotype was writing. Even now when I think back on it, I still feel it is torture. There is no way I can participate in a forum that subjects me to that torture and not end up freaking out. He knows if he stepped one foot in the Philippines and made a comment like that to anyone here (not just me), he would not be alive very much longer. They would slice him up with a bolo knife and make kinilaw a la Brit. Seriously. I just asked the filipinas here in my household what would happen to @stereotype if he made that sort of statement to their parents or any parents in this country, and they did not hesitate and responded immediately that he will die immediately.

But the more salient point is that there is no policy you can make which is not going to be subjective. That is why instead of a moderation policy, I prefer that we can each choose our own moderators, so that we can just squelch from our display those things which we do not like. Because there is no such thing as a fair moderation policy. Because the subjectivity is too ambiguous. Can’t exist. Waste of time to attempt one.

I got a PM (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=pm#msg8708248) from mprep saying that a post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=pm#msg8708238) of mine was deleted because it was a reply to someone who  was evading their ban, who upon investigation is Anunymint.

I haven't read the bickering between mprep and Anunymint, and I have no financial reason to care about my post count. I found the small number of posts I interacted with/read to be insightful and interesting, which unfortunately is a rarity around here.

Having rules about what you can and cannot do is not unusual in society. This is exactly the role of governments, and without these rules, people would be harming people and extorting people without regard for others.

If you don't agree with a particular rule, or a group of rules, you should make an argument to have the rules changed, not ignore the rules. The exception to this would be if the rules/laws were reprehensibly immoral (such as killing people for arbitrary reasons), which is not the case with forum rules.

I think Anunymint should agree to not excessively create successive posts in threads, and to not otherwise break forum rules. Upon Anunymint agreeing to this, theymos should unban his accounts. I cannot make the argument that someone who is likely to continue breaking and ignoring the rules should be able to participate in the forum.   

If I could make a friendly suggestion to read this page of this thread. Appears we are not bickering. You might be surprised by what you read above your post here.


The rules haven’t protected me from torture and massive abuse on this forum. Thus I do not think the rules are working very well.

I am all for rules that accomplish some benefit. I am not for rules that accomplish nothing.

Disallowing consecutive posting is an acceptable rule. Prevents us from bumping the thread more than once without waiting for someone else to post. Does not prevent us from adding to our existing post.

Some of the other allegations @theymos makes against me seem entirely arbitrary (c.f. below) and there is no such hard rule which is not subjectively ambiguous.


I did not knowingly ignore any rule. I just refused to agree to @theymos’ subjective summary of what I did wrong because there was no well defined, well publicized rules that I broke.


I was perma-banned for that?

Of course I have no problem with not doing that and have not been doing that since I realized that was a rule.

But the other crap @theymos lists is purely subjective nonsense.

But I am not wanting to come back anyway. I think the forum is clusterfucked with trolling as it currently is. As explained in the up-thread discussion. It is not a long thread. Maybe take a read if you have time.





The amount of personalized (ad hominem) trolling on this forum is juvenile and looks like an insane asylum to outsiders. I am sick of it. Who needs this crap in their life? We waste so much effort on these bitcointalk.org forums defending ourselves against reputation trolling:

I would find it very unlikely anything that has happened on the forum has caused anything close to what can be reasonably argued to be "torture", although I would be willing to change my mind if I see verified evidence of such.

Also, if someone has harmed you in a way that is not against the rules, there may be a case for an additional rule and/or policy. If you think an additional rule or policy is needed, you can, and should make the argument for as much.


According to theymos' account, you were temp banned several times because of this, however the bans escalated because of ban evasion, that is, you were allegedly using alt accounts to post from when one (or more) of your other accounts were temp banned for the above.   

Do you have native ancestry and culture? Were you as ill as I was? You can not accurately judge what tortures another person in the situation they were in. My inability to kill[confront] him was torture for me (or let’s say the inability to get justice).

We simply do not allow people to live when they talk to us that way in this culture. When someone makes that sort of statement here, then it is every member of the families’ responsibility to take revenge on that person and we are in torture until we can restore honor to our tribe.

Also you do not understand that mental state I was in because you can not until you have suffered the health that I described in my blog. If you have not read that section of my blog, then you do not know what I am talking about.

And if you are pure (northern, manoralism culture (https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead-part-2)) European ancestry then you will not understand anyway because you defeated tribalism in order to prosper in the Agricultural and Industrial revolutions. (Even I have European ancestry, I am also locked inside of a Cherokee body to a great extent as Nietzsche correctly surmised (https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead))

I don’t think some of these pussies around here understand that they simply do not talk that way to real men on the street. Just like you wouldn’t say anything like that to the 6'5" defensive lineman from Arizona State University football team who I got into a fight with when I was 19 years old. And I do not have any exception just because this is the Internet. I would not react any differently whether you are online or in front of my face. If someone talks that way to me, it is war. They get away with it because there are no repercussions primarily because of the anonymity.

If you need a visual explanation, note that Nate Robinson has filipino ancestry. Watch him in this video becoming pissed off:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G28HcqIlTuM
https://youtu.be/I9UHAh72QhU?t=268

I explained in my first post in this thread that @stereotype was talking shit about my kids. Here is what Lebron James has to say about that:

---

There no possible rule other than to stop allowing anonymity. So then we can prosecute under the law for laws in place against abuse over the Internet. I am confident there are such laws in the UK where apparently @stereotype is located. And if I ever determine who he is, then I will make sure either the law does what it is supposed to do, or I must fulfill the honor to my culture in any way that I can.

EDIT: I just posted negative trust on @stereotype’s profile (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=85794) for violating the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_from_Harassment_Act_1997): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking#Europe

But I also recognize that honor killing is primitive. And that is why I would prefer that my grouping of like-minded friends can discuss in a decentralized moderation wherein we can filter out such inflammatory trolls (by choosing our common moderator), so that we might try to avoid those primitive outcomes, if at all possible. Even I mostly reject tribalism, but in terms of honor I do not, because it is also heavy ingrained into me from being raised in the Old South.

That is why I am proposing decentralized moderation as a possible alternative. Because I really can’t think of another good way of handling the problem that makes this forum such an insane asylum.

Does anyone have a better idea?


I was apparently temp-banned not for consecutive posting but for copy+paste posting in multiple threads (or at least it seems like I had some reason to think that but I can not remember if someone wrote that or why I think that). But afair, I was never told why I was temp-banned so therefor I refused to follow it because it seemed to be some form of politicized corruption. The timing of the ban was very suspect and I think some of the people in the Monero community got me banned the first time because they did not like what I was writing. They were pissed off that I had claimed to have invented Zero Knowledge Transactions (in the summer of 2015 when I dropped down to 50 kg!) before they published RingCT. I remember that now after viewing the very few posts of the @HONCO (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=842914;sa=showPosts) account.

I would follow rules if they are clearly explained and make sense. But I will never follow corruption.

However, if @theymos creates a sane thing, I will act sane. If he creates an insane thing, then do not expect me to act insane just for him.


And no @theymos you can never ban me. I can come back anytime I want primarily because you want to allow anonymity.  :P (that does not mean I will, or that I want to, just to remind you of the limitations of your authority)

I am not proposing to eliminate anonymity. That is not a complete solution to the problems of discord, although it would probably help. That is why I instead am contemplating decentralized moderation as a possible improvement.

@theymos would be advised to be more mutually respectful and stop acting like a totalitarian asshole, if he wants my mutual respect. Now it may be that he just really isn’t aware of what is going on. I am not privy the necessary information to know what goes on behind the scenes at his business.

Again I am more than willing to cooperate with a sane system.

If you create a system that provides no way for sanity to prevail over insanity then is that my fault as the user of the system?

I have created million user software and I did not blame my users for features being difficult to use. I improved the features!

If @theymos would consider that there is no way that sane people want to continue using a forum with so many anonymous trolls!

And we also do not want to use a system where one group can get another member banned from the entire forum just because they do not like what he is posting. They make up some BS story to sell to the mods about that user doing some “multi-posting” or what ever.

That is why we need decentralized moderation with all the data stored on a blockchain so that nobody can censor anything. But each of us can choose to filter out what we do not want to see. And do it groupwise, not just an individual Ignore feature. The moderated thread is somewhat close to what we want but I already explained up-thread why it is not sufficient.



Also I am not going to continue posting to a centralized database. I want all of my work to be open source. So that no corrupt party has control over the data.

It is ridiculous that anybody has to power to delete the data created by others! Hell no! Fuck no! That must stop!




Let me make it very clear that I am not demanding any changes to bitcointalk.org. I just came here to explain my side of the story. And to explain what sort of forum system I would like to experiment with someday if possible.

Nor was I demanding to be reinstated.

I just think it is quite indicative of the insanity of this clusterfuck that @theymos is trolling me, lol. If he stops trolling me, then I will stop being a defiant rebel to him. He should admit his forum sucks in the area of civility (it does not suck in every way, some aspects are good). But the incivility and arbitrary politicized banning crap makes it so stressful and painful that most important people just don’t. They leave or rarely visit.

Don’t tell me to have a thick skin. Nobody needs that level of stress and abuse in their life. I realize that some guys on this forum are mental cyber-warfare assassins. They live and breath the warfare of this insanity. But some of us prefer to have peaceful and productive lives actually doing some vocation other than forum warfare. We do not have time and energy for all this crap.



Btw, the following is by far one of the least abusive posts that @stereotype made against me:


But it still exemplifies that he (who abusively claims to know psychology (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.720#msg18529002)) feigns that he had no awareness that I was using the forum as a way of surviving my illness (actually he knows damn well that he was trying to break me psychologically because he could see I was so weakened by my illness):





And I told him and everyone many times that the doctors in the Philippines did not diagnose Tuberculosis. I went to the doctors and they never suspected nor suggested testing for it. And I did not know that latent TB is endemic here. I did not have enough money to travel until January 2017 (when someone I met on this forum loaned me some money to go get medical care in Singapore). I had exhausted all of my funds because I had not been able to work since 2012 because of the illness. Also because after I was hospitalized for the perforated ulcer in 2012, I lost $70,000 on some scammer then I had to continue making $1500 a month payments to the USA for my ex and kids. My 18000 oz of silver had been stored in a vault in Manila but they defrauded me out of about half of it, and only returned that half to me when silver had dropped to low $20s (even I had publicly predicted the year before in 2010 it would rise to $45 (http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23786.html)). So by 2015 I had depleted all my funds. I already showed my medical records. The doctors only thought I had NAFLD (non alcoholic) fatty liver disease. So then when I dropped from 85 to 50 kg in July/August 2015, I was both extremely ill and also lacking funds. And also I thought there was nothing any doctors could do to help me because I already went to the doctors. Also I didn’t have any health insurance in the USA and none of my family was willing to help me. So I was dying and no one cared. But luckily someone did help me and I got diagnosed in January 2017 in Singapore (they suggested checking for gut TB which I had never heard of and certainly @CoinCube who is a doctor never suggested TB to me over the years he knew of my symptoms since 2013!). Then I had to take these very liver toxic antibiotics for 6 months which further fucked up my liver. I was so far gone by that point that my body did not recover well from the TB. It is only by now some 1 year later, that I am starting to get some stability back to my health.

Actually I still do not think Tuberculosis was the only infection I had. I know my ex in the USA infected me with HPV in 2006 and that had started the decline in my health. And also in 2012 the doctors found antibodies in my blood indicating that I had been infected with dengue fever in the past (maybe more than once) and I never knew it. That exemplifies how strong I was it. It required multiple infections to finally bring me down. Multiple dengue infections oftens causes lifetime auto-immunity and bad health.

So @stereotype is simply incorrect about almost everything about me.


He was actually very reasonable and mostly correct on this point. By far much less worse than the other highly abusive posts of his that I linked from my first post in this thread where I quoted my blog.


Lol. There was no one in that thread who was capable of helping me. That is his huge inkblot ego.


His inkblot ego thinks the way I interact with trolls like him is the way I interact with my peers such as engineers who are capable like @keean (https://github.com/keean/zenscript/issues/38).


There he goes again flying off into the troll asylum like a psycho loon, but at least he did not mention my kids again.

Be grateful you were not tagged left and right, inventor of game theory lol. you would like others to filter the content for you so that you could easily skip the trolling? good luck with that.
I must admit this thread is one of the best topics I have ever seen since a year now, @theymos please don't ban people because of their opinions, if this dude is in opposition of Bitcoin core, let them discuss, we need to hear everybody and their sides of arguments, his posts is better than usual sig campaign garbage posters. just promise that you are not going to break the rules man, we are also human beings and participate here and we are also following the same rules, asking you to respect these rules is the most civil request IMO.

Be grateful for what? Are you accepting that you are a freakin’ slave? Would you just accept abuse as normal? (I find your statement to be so unpalatable to the point of utter disgust that you would think that way)

Is this a cultural difference between us?

Please clarify your point?

I will never be grateful for strife ridden places. They are anti-productive. To be avoided by those who want to successful. Mark Cuban says the secret to becoming a $billionaire is surround yourself with people who remove stress.

I am not going to endure trolling. Too old for that. Life is too short. Waste of life.


I am not the inventor of game theory nor did I ever claim to be. What are you saying?

No I am not proposing that I want to be lazy and have others filter for me. I am proposing that I would be allowed to filter for them when they will trust my judgments because they chose me as a moderator. I was not forced on them. And ditto I might also choose to trust them when they hit the Ignore button, but I would prefer both an ignore post and ignore user (so we can give the trolls a few chances before we banish them entirely from our grouping).

I am not being lazy when I trust[am forced to accept] the self-moderated thread owner to filter for me. I am just proposing that each of us be allowed to choose who we want to be our moderators separately from each of the choices of others as to whom they trust to be their moderators. So then nothing is ever truly deleted from the database.

So for example I am reading a thread and I see some trolling so I press "delete", then everybody who trusts me as a moderator will also not see that post if they later read after I did. And ditto vice versa if I also trust them. It is a groupwise effort. If someone who trusts me as moderator decides to view what I deleted, they have the option to do so.

Please man, you are not making any sense.


Please read my prior message. What rules?

Unfortunately I grow very weary of people like you who can’t even (take the time to) comprehend what I already wrote in this thread. Did you not read what I wrote in my prior post?

As I implied, I would like to shrink the circle of people I interact with to those who do not waste my time like this forcing me to recapitulate so much.

I would propose to have two levels for decentralized moderation: strict and lenient

In strict mode I would have deleted your post as trolling because you did not put enough effort in expressing yourself coherently and reading the thread entirely before you posted. So those following me in strict mode would not see your post. And I probably would have not replied to it. Those following me in lenient mode would see your post but it will be flagged as deleted by me in strict mode. For the worst trolling I would also delete it in lenient mode.

I am an idea machine. I create new s/w feature ideas at a rate of several per day. If ever get back to coding the way I did before I was ill, watch out! (@stereotype would accuse me being narcissistic)







I truly believe that with the decentralized moderation, there would be much less insanity and people would become incentivized and motivated to produce quality constructive discussion instead of this insanity of strife, trolling, and destructive mayhem that is bitcointalk.org.

The forum staff's time would be better spent elsewhere rather than discussing obviously-valid-bans with try-hard trolls. Just ban him and roach whenever they pop up and let's move on.

I have stated my objection against banning anonymint,  I'm not here to discuss the details, just received a pm that his latest account @Shelby_Moore_III is banned again?
I thought posting in Meta is a norm for people to discuss their situation when they get banned. Shelby broke some other rule here? What rule? I'm really concerned about this whole story, Are we in danger?

I'm not good with Core, I don't believe in their agenda and don't think they are super-genius, and worse, I am used to calling them junior hackers, kids, ... Should I be worried about being humiliated and banned? And then sentenced to death or something?

And after my death, my posts will be removed permanently and my ghost won't be allowed to come here (like being summoned) to tell the truth about how I've been assassinated.

It is so terrifying, dudes, what should I do? Bending knees? Noways!

Read rule #25 and then you can see why I assume that account was banned (No I did not ban it).

Dude if you read and follow the rules you can say almost ANYFUCKINGTHING here on this forum.  I have yet to see a user following the rules receive a ban for just a controversial opinion.

Although the forum is absolutely centralized you will find very few medium that allows you as much freedom as here.  Just don't break the very few, very simple rules and you will be 100% fine!

While I haven't been closely following Anonymint's newest alt's posts after my last response to him, looking at his post history, he, as Flying Hellfish said, probably got banned for starting to get into discussions that weren't about his ban (as per the explanation of rule 25 in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0); suggestions for skipping junk posts, opinion on LN, talking about his decentralized forum in unrelated threads). If I'm not mistaken, that's what got his the_end_is_near account banned as well.

so Shelby is banned again.

im not here to argue reasons or whatnot, but anyone who is interested in his take on this can read it here:

https://steemit.com/freedom/@anonymint/re-codypanama-re-anonymint-non-decentralized-forums-are-clusterfucks-of-corruption-20180717t021144860z

Shelby (aka @AnonyMint) claimed the opposite up-thread.
He claims his @TPTB_need_war was banned originally in 2016 (none his accounts prior to that were banned) because he wrote critically about Monero and Ethereum and because he was insulting (those who were also insulting Shelby) influential anonymous members such as @gmaxwell¹, @Foxpup, @stereotype, @Lauda, @iCEBREAKER, etc..
Shelby claims that the original “multi-posting” allegation (which he entirely stopped doing a long-time ago) is something everyone does (look here is a link to (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4638321.msg42330370#msg42330370) (archived here (http://archive.is/xFlgd#selection-22785.0-22785.39)) @aliashraf doing it yesterday) and was a fabricated reason to silence him because he is the one who speaks with the most critical technological rigor on the entire forum.





He was not evading his ban. The LN reply (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg42310784#msg42310784) (archived here (http://archive.is/JhH3I#selection-781.0-789.31)) was a reply to discussions that others made in the Meta threads about his ban!

He was discussing the topic you and he were discussing in this thread about the entirely arbitrary concept of moderation that @theymos alleges he violated.
You guys are just inventing arbitrary fucking technicalities to justify your insane totalitarianism because Core can’t withstand his powerful logic.


¹ _{Obviously Gregory Maxwell, so an exception to anonymous}

---

I told Shelby he should lessen the toxicity of the following message he sent me and he replied “no they will never stop the toxicity and idiocy, the only solution is decentralized moderation, please post my truth”:

so basically Shelby has been banned from discussing his ban, in a forum meant for such a discussion.   ::)

I based my statement off my observation of the forum over the last 5+ years here.

I read what both sides claim and we all have to choose which side they feel is right.  Based on my personal experience here in the forums and the information I've read so far I am inclined to believe his constant breaking of rules is the reason for his ban and not the conspiracy theory side. (I don't generally buy into a lot of conspiracy theories, but that's me).

Shelby has been here for 5 years also. I bet he was online in the forum more than you. Why are you so special?

FTFY


Nobody has answered his repeated up-thread “What rules?”

Bottom line is you totalitarians think he is incorrigible and you want to control him but you do not apply the same control to all users of the forum (as he has documented up-thread).

And you are unwilling to submit to decentralized moderation stored on a decentralized ledger. And thus bitcointalk.org must be disintermediated, because as you can see (as Shelby warned you last year) the spam is getting worse and the users are growing weary of the “junk posts” (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4688594.0).

The forum is dying. Volume of new spam accounts is not an indicator of growth. Observe what happens.


You mean you allow yourself to be manipulated by those who control the propaganda. Quite objective of you. Kudos. I should learn to be a fully-docile, unobtrusive sheep like you so I will not be banned by the gatekeepers!

The tall poppy syndrome (https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/political-corruption-china-fires-900-bureaucrats/).

I don't doubt he was online more than me, that stat is also irrelevant.  I actually never indicated that I thought I was special.  If you think I'm special well thanks that's nice of you!  I am however a user just like you and Shelby, thus my opinion is as valid as your's or his!  Incidentally one of the difference's (and it doesn't make me special, thousands of users managed this!) between his 5 years and mine is that I've been able to follow the rules and not get banned.

If that's how you read what I wrote then there is little to say on that.  Advocating to follow very few, very simple rules is simply not trying to chose for everyone and frankly it's a ridiculous transition.



Of course they have, try to look at the responses again.  Constantly evading your ban, ie sneaking back when banned is breaking the rules, is this that difficult to actually understand?


The argument that just because other users aren't caught and punished therefore when I am caught and punished it is a conspiracy is so fucking tired and old, especially around here, it's like calling everyone Nazis, give us a break.


Mod policy has little to with me but I am will to submit to the current forum rules.  I can hear it now the whole bunny in the wood chipper, ya ya I know, I'm a happy little bunny!



I agree the forum has a SERIOUS signal to noise ratio problem but it really doesn't seem like an easy fix (or it would have happened already).  I am still hopeful a solution can be found!

You make no sense. If that stat is irrelevant, then why do you cite your 5 years here as justification of your righteousness?

I repeat: “What rules?”


We are talking about the original justification for the ban.

If it can’t be explained what egregious violation of rules he did to justify the original PERMANENT ban, then all the shit that follows it is also unjustified.
Because Shelby refused to bend down on his knees and kiss @theymos’ feet when @theymos demanded that he submit to the allegation that he had broken rules which he thinks was a farce?


How do you justify perma-banning because of failure to not “multi-post” when in fact he stopped “multi-posting”?

Why do @theymos and @mprep accuse him of being uncivil to other users when he has documented in fact that for example @stereotype was much more uncivil even making repeated written verbal abuse attacks related to Shelby’s children.
Besides, @mprep has stated up-thread that incivility is not a reason to ban someone and only threats of bodily harm are not allowed.

You construct some mirage of your own choosing to justify totalitarian corruption.


I repeat: “What rules?”

Indeed.

And when that solution is precisely what Shelby has proposed and there is no other solution, then you will still continue to think he should be banned?

Insane.

I give you win!  I'm not gonna re-hash what's been said there is no value in that for anyone!

Good day sir!

Well, at least you have not destroyed the value by not re-hashing it (unlike some who drop nukes e.g. @mprep).
It's unfortunate that we were involved in strife. I wish it was not the case.


You are correct about one thing at least, you the users just want something that works without all the strife. And Shelby does too.

Users are sick of all the trolling, spam, and strife. That is why they adamantly support “the rules”.
But “the rules” are not working.


Good day to you Sir. I hope we can move on amicably.

Deal!  It was not my intention to show any animosity to you!  8)

Back to shelby issue:

I think there are things both sides can do about it:

Shelby has not to plea guilty or something, imo, he can just re-state his commitment to the forum rules.

Mods should remove his ban.

We can help in contributing privately or publicly by recommending to him better practices when appropriate and showing more tolerance.

I would just like to point out that in 2011 the account "etlase" was squelched (not banned, but unable to post) and had roughly 30 posts deleted for being overly opinionated and anti-bitcoin. You can see in the posting history here (http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18118;sa=showPosts), where the account was accused of being a professional troll by a global moderator, although there is a distinct lack of context available. Apparently russians later hacked the account after posting privileges had been restored.

My point is in addition to the seemingly valid claim that the rules can be arbitrarily enforced. That is of course at the discretion of the moderators, but keeping this up as an appearance of a technicality of breaking rules seems deceptive. I agree that anonymint goes too far on subjects that don't seem to have much merit, but there are many, many other situations where he has keen insight and those posts vastly outweigh the negatives in intellectual merit. He can be a loud, obnoxious, and negative voice so he gets the ban grease while 75% of the forum fills up with copypasta post spam (a rule violation) for signature campaigns.

I don't know what warnings he has received or what was the real original reason for his ban, but if subsequent bans are merely because of "ban evasion" maybe it's time to just drop it and let him post? If he is really mucking up individual threads, maybe allow the thread creators to turn them into moderated threads and moderate the discussion themselves?

Ok so one time 7 years ago a poster "apparently" had his rights to post revoked and then re-instated.  Could be a mistake was made, who know's.  IF you're correct 1 time in 7 years over almost 2 million users, sounds like a good record to me!


Or you know he could just follow the rules like the rest of us, hell I don't really know why that is a foreign concept to people around here?  Is this fucking bizzaro land or something...

I just responded to you in that other thread  :)

The forum staff’s time would be better spent playing with tinker toys or bunny rabbits so they can satiate their fantasies concerning the relevance of bureaucracy.

---

We already had this discussion. What fucking rules? It is all arbitrary shit.
You just keep pointing at “the rules” which are obviously a bizzaro clusterfuck. Yet you come back for sloppy seconds on more of the same.
Just keep your clusterfuck Core-shill controlled echo chamber designed to take all your n00bs’ real Bitcoins as SegWit donations some years from now.
Shelby isn’t coming back to receive more abuse. So that you n00bs can’t shift the blame for all your bizzaro clusterfucks on him.

A scapegoat is what the MOB always wants. That is why the elite create a war when the economy is collapsing.

Shelby already wrote up-thread that he will only want to come back if the fucking forum is changed in someway such that it’s not an insane asylum.


Now I see the Core-brigade is attempting to get @aliashraf banned. They are building their case by labeling him a troll (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4638321.msg42378554#msg42378554).


2 million spambot accounts you mean. Of those real humans who joined in 2013 or before which include Shelby as @AnonyMint and @Ix as @Etlase and who still remain on this forum, I bet that is less than 1000.


An example of non-arbitrary rules is Nakamoto proof-of-work.
If you don’t obey the rules and instead follow some n00b MOB-rule consensus nonsense, you lose all your Bitcoins.
It is non-arbitrary because it does not depend on the insanity and mass delusions of the masses (such as your equating of 2 million sockpuppet spambots with actual real users of merit):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

As usual I expect this post to be completely incomprehensible to n00bs like @theymos.






But “trolling” is ill-defined as that quoted thread points out. The rule is a subjective clusterfuck which can be abused by moderators.
And does not actually protect anyone against highly abusive trolling as Shelby pointed out by example in his first post on the page 1 of this thread.

---

 
Shelby received an email response from the Dept. of Finance:

I actually like to read both anonymints posts and lauda's.

One does not have to agree with or like them personally to gain a lot from reading good posts from those that present very useful content.

Both seem okay to me anyway. of course strong characters will butt heads that is part of the creative/evolutionary process.... it is healthy.

The forum is poorer for banning anonymint ...there can be no sensible rebuttal to this.

The forum would be poorer for banning Lauda too. His posts are interesting and he has even got the kind of personality that can admit when he was wrong about something ... although in the past we have had many arguments before he was a mod.

Theymos has offered a fig leaf in saying he will allow AM back ...because I secretly think he knows this is the case that AM does bring a lot to this board and many other members can appreciate that too. I know the argument about board resources is valid and sure the rules should be followed. However the rules really are not working that well for this board right now. I would say 90% of this boards resources are being used and 0 useful content is being added. I say 0 but really most content being added to the main boards is negative to the board since all the junk drowns out and smothers the odd gems of useful discussion. ICO shilling and spamming is rife.

I actually see the main boards becoming unusable lately. I did post an idea to reduce it in meta I hope it or something similar can be implemented before the board is too difficult to use.

The solution is simple I feel from here.

Anonymint makes an agreement directly with Theymos to reactivate one of his legendary accounts ... maybe the anonymint original or which ever AM wants on the basis he WILL follow the rules as they are.

Then in future ONLY Theymos can ban him, but then if banned will not return.

This may seem like special treatment for AM but then sometimes if someone has put in exceptional effort for the board then they can have a bit of special consideration from the board owner.

Let's face it would there be this fuss over ANY other member here being banned??

If Theymos will give AM the opportunity to have one of his old accounts reactivated and AM agrees to not break the rules it should be fine. I think though because all rules have some small element of subjectivity only Theymos who made the rules himself should decide if they have been broken in special cases like this. It also nulls any bad feeling any of the mods may or may not have toward him.

 Of course even anonymint will acknowledge he can have outbursts (probably due to poor health and people goading him) that can make him temporarily hard to communicate with unless you can immediately comprehend what he is trying to explain and agree. You see that is not the fault of anonymint or the person that does not agree really... they to the best of their ability believe they are correct but it is usually because they don't understand it to a deep enough level. Frustrating to both sides.

I don't understand most of what he says but do rely on the conclusions he often comes to. When I see sys dev, dinofelis  smooth and so many other obviously smart people engaging him over and over and even asking his opinion then it is all a "normal" person can do to form an opinion his level of expertise. The very best bit about anonymint was.... that no other members that had the skillset would evaluate a design then publish their opinion with an explanation of every point made 100% FOR FREE for everyone to see. Most that were able to evaluate new designs keep this secret for their own benefit only.

. That is just part of anonymint and if someone is contributing  A LOT for 90% of their time here and 10% blows of some frustration and steam I think the onus is on others to just accept this or not engage him at all. It is their choice not really an issue for mods unless what he says breaks the forum rules. Mostly it is just harsh criticism (that may be true but not expressed within the usual confines of forum etiquette) on the other hand some members have said some really nasty evil stuff to him over the years.

The mods are just doing their job as they thought best so not being critical of those mods either.

I am not commenting on the past now this is just going forward.

Seems fair from all sides then.

Sometimes extremely focused people have personalities that may seem extreme to "normal" folks. However, if you want to benefit from their extreme focus you have to take a little rough with the smooth as they say.

This board is the best place on the net imho and that is in part to the free speech and lack of moderation. Theymos is operating a great board here and I like his style he has a good balance and seems quite fair. Sometimes delegation of tasks works great and has to. Then again sometimes direct intervention is the most economical and fruitful way.

I would think a nice resolution here could work out well going forward for everyone.

A clear indicator that he is a delusional troll. If you believe that he has made anything more than a couple *decent* technological remarks, then you are equally delusional. All he does is post walls of technical gibberish which require too much valuable time to address given their size and repetitiveness (ad naseum).

---

Fact is, he broke rules for which others also get warned/temp. banned (perm. banned for continuity and/or ban evading).

Completely disagreed. For the super majority of people we wouldn't even consider bending the rules this much. The forum needs to dedicate its resources to combating the issue with spam and not debating whether the banned troll should be unbanned temporarily (and given their behavior, they'd get themselves banned again relatively soon).

That is your opinion Lauda and you are entitled to it and you could be correct that he would be banned again.

Then this is the acid test. Give anonymint back his primary legend account and if Theymos has to ban him again then you were right that he would simply get banned again.

Let's be frank this forum could reduce 90% of spam and bots with several simple solutions. One of which I have suggested already. Wasting time with manual reporting and moderation is never going to work.

You have to accept many persons here (and actually lots of the most proven talented and smartest here do not wish to see him banned). His effort in posting here has earned him such respect with those people and this to me does warrant special treatment above and beyond what you would be willing to bend for others who have not invested even 1% of the effort he has into this board.

Surely this is how life should work ... you put more effort in and you will get more in return right?

I think it's quite clear that if a person has put in extreme time and effort above and beyond 99% of this board then they will be seen by the majority here to warrant another chance from this point on. I mean he was not a scammer, or some serious actions that caused harm to many here. Multi posting (yes uses board resources) but if it is useful to cross post things for other readers who may have missed that post on another thread ...there is argument for wondering if this is even comparable to the 90% shilling and spam filling endless threads all over the main board wasting far far more resources..

But yeah fair enough if Theymos says NO then we have to accept that he makes the rules and sure we stick by it or banned. However it is at his discretion to give another chance if he thinks its a good idea.

I think in this case Theymos should give him his primary account back and see how we go. That is just my opinion on it of course I am just one person but I can see many others think the same.

Many think people support AM because he is way smarter than them but I think it is because he is also quite interesting and in some ways quite a vulnerable person who gets targeted sometimes to get a rise out of him. He also comes across as very honest and open talking about his life and past. On a psychological level people sense this and like to read his stuff.

If Theymos bans him again himself after deciding himself it is a warranted ban.... then fair enough.

I just noticed that AnonyMint was banned again, sadly as a result of him posting under a new sock account.

I believe that, as much as any single person could possibly be, AnonyMint (and the forum's historical failure to get him under control) is responsible for a significant fraction of the technically competent people becoming largely inactive.

AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble.  His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.  He relentlessly floods threads with his trademark nonsense and switches to slanderous personal attacks whenever someone disagrees with him.   If that were all there was to it the ignore button would be sufficient, but his multi-posting derails basically any thread he targets because if even a few people fail to ignore him they'll respond (usually disagreeing, sometimes just trying to figure out what the heck he means) and make it nearly impossible for productive discussion to continue. Worse, AnonyMint's abusive but "technical sounding" approach is moderately effective at mobilizing throngs of well meaning but ignorant people to his defense (especially ones who are interested in pumping altcoins and find Anonymit to be sufficient 'proof' for whatever they already wanted to believe). When mobilizing an ignorant mob fails he resorts to the use of copious alt accounts.

People who are really savvy with the technology have valuable time (as is the case for anyone with valuable skills).  It's a waste of that time to spend it in a place where there are decent odds of their efforts being buried under a mountain of abusive nonsense.   Even those few who don't find his dishonest practices extremely annoying are forced to admit that it's just a waste of time to be in the same venue as someone like that.

AnonyMint is not the only example of this sort of abusive ignorance that shows up on the forum, -- it's not uncommon for newbies who are used to being the smartest guy in whatever little pond they came from to show up and say they're going to "fix bitcoin" while calling everyone else an idiot for the couple months it takes for them to realize how little they actually know...  but most of these people are just ignorant and can be educated and they aren't especially relentless.  By comparison, AnonyMint's consistent conduct year after year is especially demoralizing. With some angry newbie there is a least the hope that you'll get through to them or that ignoring them will be sufficient.  With AnonyMint from the moment he takes interest in a thread the outcome is clear in advance-- he's going to post and rant until everyone gives up or flames out and it's never going to change.

I think the people concerned about AnonyMint's "free speech" in this thread are being duped into being pawns in AnonyMint's efforts to shut down the freedom of others to communicate and associate. AnonyMint is clearly free to post whatever he wants on his own site (and any other site that can stand him). You're free to discuss his "ideas" with him there, if they interest you.   But when the forum invites AnonyMint to post without restriction, other people aren't practically able to have the discussions they want to have-- he drowns them out and buries them under toxic stink. If a community can't choose topics and participants then anyone who wants can shut down a communities ability to communicate.

If this isn't obvious to you yet, consider a silly analogy:  I think we can all mostly agree that people generally ought to be able to operate their own bodies as they see fit, without other people restricting how they use them. But then we have a public pool that the community likes to use and since it's a public pool we all agree everyone ought to have equal access to it.  But then comes AnonyMint and for whatever reason he insists on using his autonomy over his bodily functions to deficate in the pool and refuses to cut it out.  Some people can't smell it and aren't worried about pathogens and don't mind. But a lot of people do mind and won't get in the crapped up water. So his "freedom" to use the pool without restriction on his conduct ultimately denies others the free use of the pool that they ought to be able to use. If the pool operator won't keep the crapper out, then people will go off to use other shit free pools... and leave the original one for people who like shitting in the pool and the few who don't mind it.

Reasonable people can usually disagree about exactly _where_ the line should be drawn. But the principle that sometimes you've got to set and enforce limits to create a space that people can actually enjoy should be something we all agree on.  In AnonyMint's case, I think almost everyone would agree his conduct has been consistently far over the line, but I think his abusive conspiracy theorizing rants strike a resonance in some people and blind them to how intolerable the guy actually is...

@gmaxwell

I know you are one of the most recognised/respected people in crypto although I have not actually ever seen a thread with you in before on here.

That would probably be for one reason.

You are primarily in threads that are purely for those with a deep understanding in the field or as you would say those threads that are beyond the comprehension of the tech ignorant masses that are just your usual every day people. Mostly other developers and such.

You are busy as you say and simply don't have the time to engage with the board on things that are not important or directly for advancement of this technology. This is understandable and for sure works best like that.

Anonymint has often spent days discussing and trying to breakdown designs for others to get a brief understanding of the inner workings of these new designs.

I would say I have never seen him or his posts being used by others to pump alts. Actually he is usually one for finding issues with designs and has actually saved me personally from falling for some very exciting sounding designs (because to those that are tech ignorant all kinds of things can sound plausible and exciting) that later turned out to be as he put it "word salad" that sounded very workable but then  had no substance.  

Your pool analogy is a good one and I liked it but I feel it is a little too simplistic to truly represent the scenario here. Also a pool for the most part (well a public one) is kind of solitary place you may speak to your family or partner or kids but a forum is for interaction between all members as much as possible.

You see a pool can be a boring place for the broad spectrum if there is no interaction. I don't just come to a forum to talk to those I already know. Most are only able to bob up and down and are not very talkative or outgoing perhaps don't have much to say and just like to listen. Other small groups are very talkative but about things the majority do not understand. Then you get a character like AM comes in and is quite intriguing/interesting and different to most people he gets them all talking/sometimes arguing but gets a lot of interaction going ..some from that selective group (that don't usually talk to the masses)  will then come and talk to the others in threads in conversations that would not have even started if not for AM. A lot of fun and interest is had by many and perhaps now and then AM may kick off and splash a few people, dunk a few people and now and again take a shit in the pool. ( i mean a shit can cause actual physical harm so maybe spashing or dunking etc would be the best analogy)

So if you took the consensus of the entire pool I would say if you want people to keep coming to this pool he could be more of an attraction than you are allowing for in your analogy even with the odd outburst of what some would deem unacceptable behaviour. I found the forum boring without him when he was gone and I noticed many of those that seem to get into discussions with him (sys dev, dinofelis, smooth, cfb, jl777 and many other smart and in their own way very interesting characters) never posted on the main boards half as much when he was not around. I don't really visit any sub boards like Ivory tower etc

I can not deny or confirm that in a highly technical discussion he may be derailing without making sense to high level designers and coders like yourself because I would not have the capacity to confirm or deny this.

However I only doubt this to be the case very often simply due to my reasoning that surely these other high level developers would always get discussing and debating things with him and often they are very complimentary to him and his ideas.

It's strange in someways because I just clicked on your post history to see if you were still a regular poster...which you are (most of what you say 99% is over my head of course ) but in a way your posting style has some small similarity to Anonymint... I mean this one I think the most recent https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4687032.msg42577799#msg42577799 ... that tone is a tone I often see that is exasperation and frustration at people not seeing things as you do (or as they really are) even after a long discussion. I did not read any other part of that thread but just from that I really could have believed anonymint could have be the author. It was a touch condescending and arrogant born from frustration and exasperation. Having said that if you are high functioning and you have a right to be arrogant then I would say that is understandable under certain conditions. Like I said I really think ego becomes a huge huge thing the more you concentrate brilliant minds. I don't think that is a bad thing either. It is a driving force and motivator.

The board is a lot of different things to a lot of different people.
You are not here for the chit chat and other social elements perhaps due to the nature of your work/interests/spare time so will perhaps see things differently to others.

I appreciate your pov and of course we need all the super smart characters we can get so we certainly don't want to see you driven from this community at all. I think though his initial ban was for a small thing compared to scamming or something very nasty. Subsequent bans were related to that first ban so..... Let's let Theymos give him his original account back and see what happens.

To be fair the pool has been filled with 1000's of ico sharks and bots lately so the pathogens from an occasional Anonymint turd (emotional outburst) seem to be the least of the problems for the pool inhabitants.

This is only my point of view of course but I am quite certain many others would like to see him given another go... the first ban reason really was not super super serious although for sure that's up to Theymos to decide.

When I read a few the high level devs comments about each others designs including VB, larimer and others they do get into the odd spat over things. I think egos at this level of intelligence are going to be big and you will get these spats but I know there is limit to the level that things can be allowed to get to and thats what the board rules are for. Let's just see how we go from here on. We should take into account that sometimes he is seriously ill and not fully himself also. That to me is quite a factor.

Anyway this is not going to be a widely read thread by most (here in meta) but I see some mods, lauda and now you are here so a lot of big players who make the decisions so I guess what will be will be. I see most mods are against a reinstatement so Theymos may not do it but he did say he may consider if If AM will not multi post in future.

Guess we wait and see.

All seem interesting characters indeed. Loved the pool analogy very amusing. This is what I mean smart people are not just useful for making great technology they are also very funny and capable of being interesting at many levels accessible by the average person. Let's all try to get along.

I think Anunymint has agreed to not break the 'multi-posting' rule, along with other rules. He also says he believes the specific reason for his ban was that he was posting the same post in multiple threads, which he also has agreed to do, and in practice has actually stopped this practice, as in my interactions with him, he would "url reference" previous points he has made instead of actually copying the point again. For example:

I have almost 5000 posts on the forum, in many different subforums and subjects.  But only something like 13 posts in 2018, most in February. Like me, many other technical parties have stopped using the forum entirely or almost entirely. I don't think it's reasonable to that that I am active.  Usually I only post now when a journalist sees something on BCT and asks me to comment,  instead of comment to the journalist I prefer to just go reply to the the thread.

Your example is one of those in fact, the poster in question was running around with incorrect claims of vulnerabilities in Bitcoin.  I got asked.  I'm ashamed that my post looked anything like anonymint's to you but I'm also not surprised: As you note, you don't currently have the background to evaluate the technical content. So you're reading for tone.   If I write in a less than kind tone even when addressing someone who is themselves unkind, it's a mistake on my part which I regret.  But I hope-- and have reason to believe from the results-- that the good I contribute eclipses the crime of having a bit of humanity here and there. :)  Unfortunately, to you-- and you are not alone-- someone who does interesting technical work that makes a real difference and someone who strings together terms and disrupts discussions can look pretty similar.  It seems that many draw an equivalence among all people who say things that they don't understand,  and in doing so they do everyone including themselves a great disservice; you can probably understand more than you give yourself credit for, when you don't understand at least some of it is a failure on the speaker's part to make themselves understandable. Sometimes that failure is because they don't understand what they're saying themselves.

To some in shoes like yours, the constant and unrelenting anger in anonymint's posts make him feel even more credible.  Arguably, other more competent posters could win those people over by matching tone.  But most of us don't want to live like that,  we don't want to be king of the crapped up pool. We'd rather just go away, and-- in large-- we have.

Sometimes it's a question of venue-- if I'm writing in the technical subforum I'm usually not trying to address a particularly general audience... but if I'm not comprehensible to the audience I'm addressing it's because I'm making a mistake or because I don't fully understand what I'm talking about myself and so I can't (yet) explain it clearly (it happens from time to time...).  Please feel free to ask me to expand on any of my posts if one interests you but sounds like opaque jargon.


Just as a point of order, sub-forum mods on BCT don't really have much in the way of authority.  Mostly we have the technical ability to zot spammers and move around threads,  but forum norms and policies generally frown on using those tools in an especially editorial way. (Moreover, even if a subforum moderator can get away with it, it doesn't help much without the support of global mods and theymos to do things like ban users).  Generally, subforum mods have about the same clout they'd have as a similar non-mod long time community member.   I wouldn't be surprised if a respected technical contributor like me standing up and saying that anonymint's posting drives him off the forum had some impact-- otherwise I wouldn't have commented-- but thats about it, after all I've been telling people to hit [ignore] on anonymint for years, and he's still been here all this time. We don't, for example, have the ability to ban accounts from particular subforums.  If that had been up to me I would have done that with the tech subforum and anonymint years ago-- the people who find him disruptive are mostly in there and the people who don't are mostly elsewhere...

It can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between someone who is blowing smoke and someone who simply knows some things that you do not know. But, I have always valued your opinion quite highly so, for me, this is case settled on the AnonyMint question. Thanks for taking time to weigh in. Good luck and god speed in your work.

I received the following rebuttal verbatim from Shelby (aka AnonyMint) via Crypto.cat.

My gosh I take 2 or 3 days break from BCT to get some real work done and I see that the Core shills have sent Gregory Maxwell to spread lies about me.

Let’s make two things very clear:

1. I am not interested in posting on this forum in its current state without a decentralized form of moderation. Because as I already explained, I would want to mute the trolls from my circle, without any danger of anyone’s (including my) posts being actually removed and inaccessible entirely. So removal of the ban is irrelevant. Preferably all the data should be on a transparent decentralized block chain ledger instead of a centralized, opaque database.

2. Gregory you’re trolling firstly because you know damn well I have caught you making technological errors more than once. Secondly I will challenge you below on your claims about my technological expertise. On the first point for example in your CoinJoin thread wherein you proposed a blacklist as a solution to jamming which made no sense whatsover as I (AnonyMint) pointed out in 2013. You were mighty offended. Or the Ogg discussion in Meta which I recently documented (https://archive.is/i9hOK#selection-2493.2-2493.190) in my censored posts. You have also caught me making errors, e.g. when I was first learning about Winternitz and my posts in the Compact Confidential Transactions thread. The difference being that I readily admitted my errors (https://gist.github.com/karlgluck/8412807#gistcomment-1258511) (archived here (https://web.archive.org/web/20180723061607/https://gist.github.com/karlgluck/8412807#gistcomment-1258457) and here (http://archive.is/uvrLN#selection-4537.1-4541.11)) and thanked Gregory (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=679743.msg7720311#msg7720311) for his assistance even after he had gone about in a dictatorial and intentionly demeaning manner (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=679743.msg7707586#msg7707586); whereas, he never reciprocates when he is in error in my interactions with him and he trolls me with lies. I have never claimed to be an expert in cryptography specifically. But if you want to discuss programming language design, the design of garbage collectors, type theory, parallelism, concurrency, and various other technologies in computer science then my knowledge is more on the high end. For example, can Gregory point out a flaw in my Github post today (https://github.com/keean/zenscript/issues/41#issuecomment-406995325) pointing out an error in a research paper on the scaling of cache coherency to multi-core? Since Gregory erroneously claims everything technological I write even in the blockchain and crypto arena is an error, I would like for him to refute the solution I recently devised for jam-resistent atomic cross-chain exchange:

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/scaling-decentralization-security-of-distributed-ledgers

Don’t be shy now Mr. Ego.
Remember I was the one who pointed out to @TierNolan that his cut-and-choose protocol was still not jam resistant. I have now solved that open problem and published my solution openly for anyone to implement.

Also please refute this technical explanation I made that “Actually HTLCs can be done on the Satoshi’s Bitcoin without the Core cruft added (with the SegWit improvements unncessary when only a small number of large Mt. Box hubs will be relevant because Lightning Networks naturally centralizes due to liquidity pressure)” (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4638321.msg42110420#msg42110420).

Anytime you would like to attempt to prove your claim about technological superiority by engaging in a debate with me about SegWit, Lightning Networks, Side-chains etc. then I am willing, but it must be done on a neutral forum where neither of us can control the moderation. That will be very illuminating for sure. And I expect you will not do it, because you know you are going to be widely seen as much more fallible after that.

I am also contented to continue my work, be free from all the stress of the BCT trolls including the Core shill trolls, and leave this just die here as it is dying. The ball is in your court.




Lol, you try to blame your forum inactivity on me. As if I am responsible for the 2 million sockpuppet troll accounts that make BCT such a pita now.

Fact is that you already achieved the coup d’etat of Satoshi’s protocol, so you are no longer burdened with the necessity of censoring and railroading the community discussion to prevent disagreement with Core’s propaganda. That is until I come back to the board, then y’all need to scamper back into “r0ach motel” censorship mode. You bring out your “big guns” now to try to discredit my truths. Lol.

I like how you tried to obfuscate your trolling as victimization. You’re always playing the social consensus politics. As Mircea Popescu correctly stated, you’re a conniving, manipulative, dishonest, and duplicitous individual. Rather I am frank and straightforward.


Which is exactly what Core hath done, as explained with detail in my censored posts.



IOW, you do not like the truths I have been relentlessly explaining, such as the corruption that is Core’s hijack of Bitcoin. My censored posts contain all that information. Of course you will try to attack my reputation. Who would expect anything less when you’re more of a political hack than an accomplished technological expert. If we really dig into debate about what you claim to have accomplished, the gleam is going to come off of it. Mostly you’ve been pushing a social consensus hijack of Satoshi’s protocol in order to move the people on to the Core altcoin and/or off-chain onto to what must become fractional reserves.


Obviously you still can’t discern the difference. And you believe what you want to believe. So enjoy the outcome when I am entirely correct in the end. Make sure you hodl your Bitcoins in SegWit addresses so you can thank Gregory Maxwell when you lose all your real Bitcoin.



On the topic of interpersonal skills, I wrote (https://www.quora.com/A-super-talented-new-graduate-developer-always-criticise-senior-developers-code-and-make-fun-of-them-his-programming-skill-is-even-better-than-senior-developers-but-no-one-like-him-due-to-his-personality-as-the-CTO/answer/Dan-Shappir-1/comment/68372006) the following today on Quora:


And so let’s quote from one of those cited sources as it applies directly to why decentralized moderation is going to win:


Or in less words, successful order increases external disorder, so that it is on trend with inexorable universal maximization of entropy.

It’s interesting to tie that in with another quote so we understand why the global elite try to destroy us with disorder:


And if you don’t comprehend those quotes Gregory, then you can’t blame it on me, because I didn’t write it. You might just come to realize that you don't know everything, or stated another way, you’re not as smart as you think you are.
 

EDIT: frankly I think this entire drama is childish. Anyone looking at this from the outside would think they were observing 5 years throwing sand in the sandbox. Maybe we should all grow up.

If this is true, it would be trivial for someone with similar or greater technical knowledge than him to publicly prove him wrong and/or defeat him in a debate.

I didn't follow many of Anonymint's older posts. I've been paying more attention for the last couple months or so. I'm willing to entertain the notion that Anonymint may be a sophisticated troll. If this is the case, however, I would personally require more evidence to convince me. So far, across multiple threads, most of the arguments against him that I've read have consisted of some variation of, "He's a troll, and "His ideas are dangerous." I have not seen anyone with similar or greater technical knowledge disprove many (any?) of his ideas.

I understand a lot. Everything short of the deeper math and cutting edge proposals. Honestly, I still never read any of your ridiculously verbose (and presumably the technical) posts. I decided a little while back, when I found out that you were the real anonymint (someone I have positive impressions of from the early days of bitcoin talk for reasons I no longer remember), that if I saw another one I would actually read it this time but I haven't seen one since and I haven't felt inclined to go searching through the thousands of wall observer pages to dig one up.

And there's a very good reason for that.  He always argues that some terrible event is going to occur at some unspecified time in the future.  You can't empirically prove anything one way or the other until it doesn't happen.  And it never does.  But by the time it was supposed to have happened, Anonymint has already moved on to "imminent" catastrophe #573853 and everyone has already forgotten about whatever alarmist flailing he was doing before.  Complete and utter headcase. 

He clearly likes the attention and the odd occasions some person gets the mistaken impression that he's actually smart.  When, in truth, it's just an overactive imagination, a strong vocabulary and a flair for the dramatic.  Don't be taken in by it.

God forgive me, but this Greg dude is really a troll. I mean it. He seriously trolls in this forum and everywhere else.
Any chance to have him beheaded instead of Shelby?  ;D

Greg Maxwell's comments about Anunymint should be condemned in the strongest way possible. It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

The comments made by Maxwell only give credibility to those claiming censorship on bitcointalk and r/bitcoin (Greg Maxwell is a moderator of both). The same is true for the absence of a strong condemnation of Maxwell's statement.

Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this. 

Anonymint didn't get banned because people don't like him, though.  He got banned for ban-evasion and disrupting unrelated threads with his doomsday prognostications.  He derails and dominates every thread he posts in.  As he's proven time and again, he's perfectly capable of registering new accounts totally undetected.  If he were to do that and just post like a normal human being, he'd probably never get caught.  But every time, he has to broadcast to the world that he's Anonymint and he's here to tell us everything is broken yet again, even though it isn't.  Apparently posting here just doesn't stroke his ego enough unless his small number of fans know for sure that it's him.  So they ban him for ban-evasion for the Nth time because he openly flouts it.  He says he's never going to post here again but, much like every other claim he's ever made, I'll believe it when I see it.

Nice strawman. Please give the actual quote word for word where he said that, instead of just saying that he said it.



Okay... So what did he change on wikipedia that was "vandalism"?

@Quickseller, @aliashraf, @Ix, @Traxo, @miscreanity et al, I appreciate that you’re awake to the evils of centralized databases on the Internet. Don’t expect altcoin shills to have any conscience, astute ethics, vision for future, or ability to foresee their own self-destruction. For example, the Core shills vision for the future is off-chain, fractional reserves, but they’re too blinded by their ignorance, fantasies, and/or vested interests to observe reality. There’s no solution that can brought forth within such a corrupt paradigm. The only solution is to move the Internet forward to “Web 3.0” on decentralized ledgers. So let’s just stop fighting the corruption from inside the corruption and get the necessary work done to disintermediate the corruption. You will get no where feeding the trolls and arguing with those who will vehemently shill for their altcoin (which is mostly the Core altcoin shills in this thread).

@cryptohunter my reaction to both your public and private comments, is I don’t want to return. Because I agree with what you noted, that you and virtually all (99%) the other guys here on this forum aren’t able to discern the technological arguments.

Thus attempting to explain such technological, game theory, economics, sociology, is a mostly fruitless (or let’s say insignificant ROI) misallocation of precious time. For example, after all the careful and patient effort I put into holding @Wind_FURY's (and to a lesser extent @Anon136’s) hand(s) recently and explaining everything to him very carefully in numerous threads and posts (which were censored), they both for example continue to make clueless and ignorantly boastful, erroneous statements (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4638321.msg42710069#msg42710069) in the Lightning Networks discussion thread. The shills for altcoins such as Core (and all the others such Ethereum, etc) are analogous to violent soccer fans. It’s always “my team is better than you team” with hands over ears and eyes, yelling “na, na, na, na, I can’t hear you nor see you” and employing whatever sort of trolling is necessary to support their team and show their allegiance to either vested interests and/or inaccurate fantasies.

It’s like baboons who are cheering on the blue vs. red team which they religiously believe in while the blue team is leading to a failure which they can’t comprehend. It’s both sad and hilarious. This is the unfortunate reason the masses are and will always be fodder. Unlike scammers and manipulators who only want to use their ignorance or who don’t care, I really tried to explain and help them but all I get in return in their ire (and ridiculously boastful ignorance) even when I patiently tried to teach them. So there’s nothing to be gained from me posting here where I can’t form my own decentralized circles and kick off the riff-raff. And worse, since the content is not stored on a decentralized, open database, I risk my effort being nuked as it has been so many times.

It’s a wiser allocation of my resources and much more productive for me to focus on my work. And no I am not frustrated at all that others don’t understand my work. They don’t really understand Bitcoin either yet they appreciate it. My work can be similarly appreciated at the correct juncture if I am able to complete it, which is mostly dependent on my health and my ability to not waste time.

Here is an example of what I am referring to and I must post here in Meta instead of in the LN thread where the discussion is:


I addressed this twice near the end of this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4675898.msg42755278#msg42755278) in Meta.

Also when y’all admit Core is an altcoin, then it can receive the same critical analysis that the other altcoins receive from myself. I don’t discriminate against Core.

I had also stated (in the posts that were nuked from the LN thread) that I’m not against the LN experiment. I stated very clearly the reasons I think it will become entirely centralized, run by the banksters, and be a fractional reserve system, that also donates all the real Bitcoin to the powers-that-be. In the future, we’ll observe if I am correct in my analysis and expectation.

Yet you all go on and on thinking that your errors in the LN thread will change that outcome. It won’t. And y’all do not understand why, even though I tried to explain it to you. So there isn’t anything more that needs to be said. Carry on to your destiny.

Even Gregory Maxwell admitted the LN is not what you retards[n00bs] think it is:

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-curious-case-of-gregory-maxwell-and-the-lightning-network/

---

Oh Gregory surely can dig up something where I have been wrong (and probably where I even admitted my error) in order to obfuscate that Gregory will be unable to address the specific technological challenges that I presented in my prior post.

Note in the prior post made by @Traxo on my behalf, I have provided two examples where in a debate with Gregory he was shown to be incorrect and he refused (even until this day) to admit he was incorrect.

---

No you do not understand much in any holistic sense. Compounded on top of your lack of holistic understanding is your bunny rabbit fantasy confirmation bias, i.e. you really want to believe that proof-of-work can have some form of off-chain instant transactions and transaction volume scaling that won’t be centralized and won’t be fractional reserves. This fantasy bias causes you to reject becoming holistically astute, yet I also doubt that you have the ability to assimilate all the necessary information because of the extreme level of discipline and effort that is required.

By analogy, females-at-large (and note there’s always exceptions) can be awarded engineering degrees (by corrupted SJW holiness cesspools they name universities), but then can’t produce (https://blog.jim.com/war/technological-decline-3/) tritium or complete the Obamacare website. Not even because they’re not smart enough (as James Donald astutely points out females more typically excel as first lieutenants (https://blog.jim.com/economics/the-disastrous-effects-of-females-in-power/) although of course there can be exceptions), but because as Jordan Petersen explains, most of them aren’t willing to work 100 hours a week (https://youtu.be/eieVE-xFXuo?t=228) like I do grinding away at assimilating all the “boring” engineering details (https://www.quora.com/I-want-to-be-a-civil-engineer-but-also-an-architect-What-job-is-right-for-me/answer/Leah-Alissa-Bayer). Similarly, you may understand (but as you admit at lower level of understanding) paradigmatically in the way the computer science student thinks he understands how to program and then gets into the real world of needing to holistically integrate programming, economics, game theory, sociology, etc. and falls flat on his face. Which BTW, is also one of Gregory Maxwell’s failure modes to some degree (although he’s expert in cryptography and encodings and various other computer science disciplines). Yet Gregory also suffers the SJW victimization holiness psychosis (http://trilema.com/2018/the-common-psychosis/) which he probably learned as most Millennials do these days from these cesspools of academia.

Your Dunning-Kruger overconfidence can be best explained by a woman on Quora who has a 160 IQ. She is smarter than me. Read how she explains it (https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-when-your-Quora-answer-unexpectedly-goes-viral/answer/Leah-Alissa-Bayer). @WIND_Fury you should also read that and take heed about what I had explained to you in the nuked posts, that if you’re 1 to 2 SD below in IQ or equivalently in detailed expertise, then you don’t understand anything at all and are just making errors pretty much every time you write anything. Leah also wrote more about (https://www.quora.com/Would-you-rather-have-everyone-like-you-with-an-IQ-of-145-or-have-an-IQ-of-160+-and-be-hated-by-everyone/answer/Leah-Alissa-Bayer) the hateful, ignorance you trolls spew.


The 160 IQ Eric S. Raymond wrote about the destiny that awaits you n00bs: The return of the servant problem (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8085)

I wrote on Quora (https://www.quora.com/What-are-millennials-doing-wrong-when-it-comes-to-their-careers/answer/Leah-Alissa-Bayer/comment/68877725):

Leah, you put into words the thought I’ve had that Millennials don’t appreciate their elders enough to apprentice under our expertise. I’m 53 and in the computer science field. I had the desire to work with the youth and build something together but the chasm between our respective attitudes seems so great. For example, I reject the SJWs mayonnaise spread on everything. For example recently I contributed to a question on Stackoverflow Meta (https://web.archive.org/web/20180727131901/https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/371347/what-if-they-could-google-their-question-in-5-seconds/371569#371569) about how to address the spam problem of low quality questions that could be easily answered with a Google search. I suggested the simple economic solution to charge for asking a question more than the opportunity cost of doing a Google search. I pointed out that attempting to give away for free what is not free is impossible. Thus the insoluble problem they have and until they address the root cause they’ll just dig deeper into a clusterfuck of for example enabling arbitrary censorship. The Millennials downvoted my answer relentlessly because in their logic this would disincentivize participation (and I’m noting that uniform anything is negentropic (https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/re-anonymint-geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead-part-2-20180728t051641777z)). The irony is their votes cost them nothing so they had nothing at stake of than their ideology (and could potentially be sockpuppet accounts harvested for free). My point is they’re losing the participation of those with high opportunity cost who value quality, for which the negligible cost for posting questions would be far outweighed by the gain in relevancy. The cost charged could be reputation instead of money, if identities are not free. Actually that is only a simplistic summary, as I have a more complex design in mind for a decentralized ledger. Anyway, my point is that they’re not experienced or open-minded enough to consider the holistic integration of economics. That is just one of many example interactions that indicate to me that they prioritize SJW egalitarianism mayonnaise on everything. I’m probably oversimplifying and missing some other facets of this generational phenomenon. Maybe I’m coming into contact with too many INTJs who lack interpersonal skills and an appreciation for hardwork, because I did stumble on this counter-example today:

SOLD EVERYTHING | GOOD-BYE USA | Jake Mace - Living in Portugal, pt. 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbTf1yK-Gag)

Also it’s not surprising that Millennials don’t value their elders, because Millennials are being thrown under the bus by the Boomers who filled their heads with political nonsense and have supported a politics that has saddled the country with debt servitude. I wrote on Medium:

“If you want the country to be less polarized then stop writing, talking, and thinking about…” (https://medium.com/@shelby_78386/if-you-want-the-country-to-be-less-polarized-then-stop-writing-talking-and-thinking-about-b3dcd33c11f1)



That nonsense is a perfect example of your bunny rabbit fantasy and lack of holistic understanding of the world you live in. Rights don’t exist without the power to defend them. That’s why you bunny rabbits huddle together in a collective in order to try to assert some power to defend some rights. But a collective is a power vacuum that (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984) demands that the bunny rabbits be manipulated by the most ruthless. Core is another bunny rabbit collectivized clusterfuck. So the answer to your question is power and the power vacuum of collective rights. In that light, your question reveals how blissfully ignorant you are. Yet you claim you understand much. No you don’t.


If you want only soundbites, then you will never understand anything holistically at a level capable of not making a fool of yourself as you continue to do in the Lightning Networks (LN) thread you started recently.

How silly that you blame me for the complexity of the confluence of technology, economics, game theory, sociology, etc.. That exemplifies the ridiculousness of your claim of understanding a lot. Come on man stop jerking yourself off and get in touch with reality. Or don’t. Stay in your bunny rabbit fantasy and be played by disorder as it should be (see the tail end of the prior post from @Traxo about order and disorder which I am confident is entirely incomprehensible to you).


You claim, “I understand a lot.” But you’re unable or unwilling to do a Google search:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=36639732#User:Gmaxwell
https://twitter.com/sayurichick/status/954381661885538304
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/74se80/wikipedia_admins_gregory_maxwell_of_blockstream/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45ail1/wikipedians_on_greg_maxwell_in_2006_now_cto_of/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/459iyw/gmaxwell_in_2006_during_his_wikipedia_vandalism/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/457y0k/greg_maxwells_wikipedia_war_or_he_how_learned_to/

---

Oh like I called the BTC triple bottom in late June and early July before the rest of the Speculation forum caught up to the concept. And I emphatically stated (which is in the nuked posts that @mprep refuses to assist (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1887077.msg42369908#msg42369908) in sending me a copy of) that BTC would bounce from $6100 up to $8000+. That’s both not terrible and quite empirical.

I could go through a laundry list of examples like this such as my correct public prediction in 2010 that silver would rise from $25 to $45 by Q2 2011 then crash (http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23786.html) (which is exactly what it did), but you’re just here to troll and write lies. So it would be a waste of my time, because you’re not interested in being non-disingenuous. Or never mind that I screamed all over these forums multi-posting in numerous threads in early 2017 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1663070.msg18730862#msg18730862) to buy LTC at $6 days before it blasted off and proceeded to over $350 in 2017. As I said, I could go on and on. But you trolls will try to make up some lies about my record by citing something out-of-context or based on your incorrect vague memory. And I don’t have enough time to continuously correct all your lies and errors. Because there’s a lot of more of you Core shills than myself. One against a horde of trolls is certainly a recipe for misallocation of scarce resources.

Did you also forget my “Speculation Rule: buy when others are IRRATIONALLY pessimistic/cautious” (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1663070.0) (c.f. also my blog of the same titl (https://steemit.com/money/@anonymint/speculation-rule-buy-when-others-are-irrationally-pessimistic-cautious)e) on October 25, 2016 when Bitcoin was in the low $600s right before (https://www.deepdotweb.com/2016/10/25/bitcoin-price-analysis-25-october-2016/) it started to blast off.


Where’s your empirical proof? No, I would actually like to mute you from the circle of people I want to discuss with, so I never see your useless slobbering.

Readers be very clear that every person spreading lies about me on this thread is a Core shill. They are offended about the truths I have explained.



Ah yes, we must remain technically accurate while obfuscating the reality of the situation. The Jews weren’t exterminated as cockroaches because they were Jews, but because they didn’t have the correct papers indicating they were not Jews.

Your point is analogous to “Slick Willy” Bill Clinton arguing in the court what the definition of ‘is’ is (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp3TQf2xDc8).

I explained up-thread that I felt that people who didn’t like my dissenting information were asking mods to temp-ban me for spreading that information. They used technicalities to single me out for the activities that others were also doing and not being temp-banned for. The response here has been just because other people get away with it, doesn’t absolve me from responsibility to adhere to “the rules”. And I have pointed out that “the rules” aren’t even working to prevent trolling and spamming, so basically those rules exist so that shills (presumably who buy off the mods and @theymos behind the curtain, yeah where is the audit of the finances of these individuals?) have the means to be arbitrary against your critics. @QuickSeller and others (including myself) have correctly pointed out such a paradigm of censorship is the antithesis of our decentralization movement.

I’m not arguing with you because I want to come back to your centralized clusterfuck. I’m making sure that others who read this in the future (and we are archiving everything in case you realize I’m winning the argument and devolve to censoring in Meta as Stackoverflow does (https://web.archive.org/web/20180727131901/https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/371347/what-if-they-could-google-their-question-in-5-seconds/371569#371569)), will understand the importance of the decentralized replacement I will create to disintermediate your corrupt shit.


Core shills want to dominate bitcointalk.org and r/Bitcoin with their propaganda and censor any dissenting information especially when a dissenting person is quite successful at attracting attention to that dissenting information.

So you Core shills want to have a monopoly on truth. But the fact is (https://github.com/keean/zenscript/issues/39#issuecomment-408549654) that we could not even exist (time would not be irreversible and thermodynamic processes would not move forward irreversibly) if anyone had a monopoly on information.

Shelby, is such a dedicated author, just look at the above post of him.  :o

I'm so sorry for his situation with btctalk and I feel responsible about the brutal act that they committed against him and his posts. I lost a great part of my motives when they banned @anunymint and slaughtered his posts.

Although it is an old and disgusting story with centralized forums, I become frustrated whenever it happens.  :(

I was talking about the Bitcoin protocol... ::)

*edit* Yea I don't know. I've been fiddling around with the links for a while now and I still can't figure out the answer to my question. The reason I'm not impressed that his "peers at wikipedia" rebuked him is that I know wikipedia is full of left wing culture warriors. It's so bad that they libel people they don't like as "white supremacists". The way I see it is, if you are interacting with those people on a regular basis and somehow haven't managed to become embroiled in conflict with them than that is probably because you are one of them.

Anyway, it's difficult enough that I think the burden of proof rests on someone who wants to use this as an attack against him, not just assumed that he did something wrong and anyone who wants to dispute it must dig through ancient archives.

"To see the farm is to leave it"

Leave it and start your own forum with your own rules if you are not happy.I liked reading anonymint's posts myself even if I didn't agree with some of his opinions and am sad to see such censorship instead of opposing arguments.Certainly a tradgedy of the commons can happen when peoples viewpoints propogate and multiply but freedom is freedom like truth is truth and selective truths are no better than lies etc etc etc.We could argue all day about what is and what is not but I will admit some his posts were entertaining and didn't coerce me to think differently.Only the feeble minded allow this to happen and its up to the individual to take responsibility as to how the aggregate and correolate or interpret information etc.

Ditto his slanderous and incorrect characterization of my technological worth. Right there he demonstrated he is a sleazy troll. You will not see him debate me about SegWit (on a neutral forum) because he knows damn well I am correct and he will be unmasked in the debate.

IOW, Gregory shouldn’t throw stones in his glass house.


How can you claim you understand Satoshi’s protocol and then have such ignorance about Core being an altcoin as defined by the protocol and its associated game theory. Again this is not a matter of opinion for those who really know the protocol and the game theory which gives Bitcoin its value and security.

If you want to assert that Core has been consensus voted to be popularly known as the new Bitcoin, then okay but first recognize that any change to the protocol which modifies its security and game theory, thus constitutes an altcoin. Then I will accept that the n00bs voted to rename the Core altcoin “Bitcoin” and fool themselves into donating all their real BTC to the miners who have no choice but to restore the security by accepting those donations (and my nuked posts explained in great detail the mechanism by which that massive n00bs donation will come about eventually).

(for readers new to this thread, I am not a BCH shill)

P.S. I refer you again to some additional thoughts (https://leahalissa.com/blog/architalks-experience) from Leah on how much we don’t know until we dig in deep into STEM fields:


That last paragraph indicates to me that she and I followed an analogous path in life and explains our conscientious “rebel spirit”. The preference to tinker and dabble in so many interesting tangents, experienced being a leader at a very early age (actually age 5 in my case¹) and to become even isolated from the real world at times, and then feeling out-of-sync with the mainstream, yet also coming back into it via entrepreneurialism. Note again though, her IQ is higher than mine.

¹ _{When I was 5 years old, my father was preparing to build a platform in the back of his VW bus to support a bed with storage underneath. I was unaware this was the camper he was to use to leave our family and go to Belize with the N.American lady who became his second wife. He seemed to be having some pause formulating the design he would employ (and note my attorney father seems to have a higher IQ than mine especially in logic and the literary arts, but I may have greater visual math skills than him). So I instantly visualized and explained the design I would use. I also instinctively became the leader in our neighborhood football games and relished my daily bloody nose at age 5. No exaggeration!}

Stop evading your bans and appeal for your ban like everybody else. you are not better than anybody, you are a man like several billion men living on earth.

You can read the rest of his quote and see he clearly does not like Anunymint.

See this (http://archive.is/RnVVu#selection-11749.0-11752.0) and read for yourself.

---

---

As previously mentioned, Anunymint seems to have agreed to abide by the forum rules, which appears to have met the condition of unbanning him imposed by theymos.

Sorry but not all men are created equal (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8085). Yours is the SJW egalitarianism mayonnaise which I wrote about in my post on the prior page of this thread. Westerners are stuck in that ideological shit which is going to drag them back down to a third world clusterfuck (https://blog.jim.com/economics/socialism/) if someone doesn’t press the abort switch. And Bitcoin was precisely created to destroy egalitarianism, politics, and promote meritocracy instead. I work a 100 hours a week (although not or not productively while I had been ill with Tuberculosis for 5 – 6 years and the recovery from treatment in 2017). I have done that for significant stretches of my 40 years as a programmer. I have specialized applicable skills, knowledge, and experience. Presumably many of you don’t have those skills and/or don’t work with that same level of intensity.

You seem to not have comprehended the part where I conveyed that I presumed I have been singled-out for temp-banning because you shills wanted to silence me.

And no, I am not going to beg for you or @theymos to undo what his corrupt shit should never have done in the first place. Hell no. I am going to destroy and replace your corrupt shit. Competition is more fun (and more productive) than begging. Corruption can presumably be subtle where the purveyor of corruption doesn’t even think they’re doing corruption. I presume for example that Bill Gates thought all of his monopolistic business practices were the reality of free market competition. And I might even be swayed that was the case if I had time to study all the details of that case. This is a privately owned website and they’re certainly able to do whatever they want to do with their business. And we’re free to compete with them and try to make something we think would serve the market better.

Also I’m not going to endorse a corrupt or dysfunction bureaucratic mechanism which wastes my time. It’s akin to the masochism of choosing to remain as a tourist in a country that wastes our time in bureaucratic crap. Smart people leverage jurisdictional arbitrage, which is what for example the Internet and now Bitcoin facilitate.

I explained clearly up-thread starting from the first post by my prior account (which was banned for posting in Meta!) why I thought the temp-bans were corrupt from the start, which is why I never respected them (even though I have hence inhibited myself from consecutive posting and multi-posting because I didn’t see any significant reason not to). I also clearly explained that “the rules” aren’t working as most of the software engineers are leaving or do not visit as often ostensibly because of the trolling and lower quality discussions. I also argued that “the rules” seem to exist as an arbtrary, subjective construct to enable corrupt collusion between moderators and shills who can presumably buyoff @theymos and the mods. Or maybe it’s is just or also involves an ego battle between those who don’t like me to stick my head too high above the poppies (which btw is an Asian cultural thing now ostensibly being adopted in the West).

Clearly humans want a forum which is gamified. There’s so much political gamesmenship ongoing. So I want to give them what they want in a leveled playing field, in way that will also enable those who want serious, sober discussion to form their own circles. Life is also a game.

And what ever happened to those $100s of millions of BTC (current valuation) that @theymos raised to improve the forum and ostensibly never did.

Also your tactics are nakedly obvious to me. You want me to submit to a corrupted construct so then you can use that construct to temp-ban me when ever you do not like the information I am successfully bringing to the attention of readers. By employing corrupted temp-bans as a means of inducing me to evade the corruption and then perma-ban me because I evaded the useless, corrupted construct.

Nah man. It’s an opaque, centralized, subjective, politicized clusterfuck that needs to be replaced with a decentralized, trustless, transparent, objectivized algorithmic construct.

Politics and social consensus are the antithesis of Satoshi’s Bitcoin. And you Core bunny rabbits are going to learn this the hard way by living out your retirement years in trailer parks instead of collecting Lambos (that is if you HODL all your wealth in SegWit addresses instead of legacy addresses).

The Magnitsky Act Behind the Scenes video has been banned by the powers-that-be from the U.S.A.. They do not want you the people to know the truth.


Here follows the details of the manipulation of Russia and Russian year 2000 elections by bribing and entraping Yeltsin with a $7 billion IMF loan (to remodel the Kremlin), then threatening to expose Yeltsin if he didn’t resign and endorse a certain person for the presidency. Yeltsin was forced to turn to former KGB Putin for assistance. Tangentially the IMF was allegedly (https://youtu.be/UuZRMpt_Tas?t=873) also involved in 9/11.

https://i.imgur.com/L3FSdBm.jpg
(click for image & discussion about destruction of court documents on 9/11/2001 at WTC7 demolition) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.1060#msg12636066)



The Club & Why the Majority Must be Always Wrong (https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/training-tools/the-club-why-the-majority-must-be-always-wrong/)

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/cnn-confirmed-money-was-stolen-from-imf/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/so-who-really-tried-to-blackmail-yeltsin-takeover-russia-nsa-cia-or-investment-bankers/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/the-media-complete-ignores-putins-request-to-interrogate-us-officials-about-interfering-in-russia/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/magnitsky-act-the-strange-backdrop/

https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/agent-william-f-browder-smoking-gun/ri13858

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/why-is-former-ambassador-refusing-to-be-questioned-by-russians/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/interview-on-the-magnitsky-film/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/magnitsky-act-is-back/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/magnitsky-affair-the-murder-of-edmond-safra-in-monaco/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/the-3rd-film-on-the-magnitsky-affair/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong-in-the-media/the-forecaster/gag-orders-cover-ups/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/russiagate-the-slow-drip-of-the-coup-to-take-over-russia/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/russia-starts-criminal-investigation-of-browder-while-us-deep-state-protects-him/

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/dominick-dunn-death-in-monaco/


EDIT (Sept 10, 2018): https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/deep-state-using-discredit-strategy-to-drive-trump-from-office-to-what-end/

EDIT (Sept 12, 2018):


EDIT (Sept 13, 2018):


EDIT (Sept 21, 2018):


EDIT (Feb 20, 2019):

This is a consecutive posting, but I’ve waited days for someone to reply to the thread before posting again.

My contrarian thoughts on the Singularity thesis (and empathetically humanity at-large) I think ties in with my stance about my ban and my points about corruption which applies to my reasoning for not seeking reinstatement here:

https://www.quora.com/Do-advances-in-AI-mean-that-before-long-we-won-t-need-computer-programmers-as-we-ll-be-able-to-just-ask-a-computer-to-write-me-some-code-that-does-the-following/answer/Shelby-Moore-III

(archived here: http://archive.is/C5xrA)

If there are no further arguments raised in this thread, I suppose this will be my last post on bitcointalk.org. Hopefully.


EDIT: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/07/the-instagram-forums-where-teens-go-to-debate-big-issues/566153/

I dont doubt Core has world class coders. The problem is, bitcoin is much more than that. Does Core have world class game theory and high finance thinkers too? has gmaxwell debated MP and anonymint on the game theory involving segwit long term? or he just points at how "the code is great"?

Why should I even entertain the risk (no matter how small) when I can just keep the cold storage on legacy addresses?

Hi Shelby,
Come on dude. Just create a new id and join the discussions man. You can simply put less efforts here but believe me, you would find it useful, occasionally tho.

https://theoryofself.com/nuance-in-the-case-for-bitcoin-maximalism-5c4adb064a21



What do you think of this idea of "ideal money may not be an absolute truth"?

edit: I just saw he has abandoned the forum.

I was also banned from the Go Github (https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-don-t-falsely-accuse-me-of-being-a-misogynist-20180807t233938327z). My antagonists here will probably idiotically mistake that as some validation of their stance. Click the link for some explanation.

Btw, Medium is also presumably nuking very important information about potential false flags corruption (https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/re-anonymint-israel-s-mossad-did-9-11-20180215t144806663z).



I came back over to add some additional information to “Corruption” portion of my up-thread post. I noticed your post and it’s an interesting and very important question which deserves my response, because it drives right into whether I should continue to work on yet another shitcoin. Which perhaps relates to whether I should seek an appeal of my perma-ban (although I think others can act liaisons on this forum for any decentralized ledger project I might be involved with).

Note in a prior blog of his, he pointed out why the real Bitcoin is more valuable in the long-run than the extra features of the Core altcoin:



So I’m in agreement with all the points he made in the above blog, so let’s consider the second blog he wrote:



He is actually arguing above against utility tokens because he makes it clear they have insufficient network effects and allegiance. I also had written before against the viability of utility tokens both from the standpoint of having no network effects (https://medium.com/@shelby_78386/please-address-the-conflict-over-the-token-name-cred-here-and-or-at-your-upcoming-ama-on-reddit-5783649a9c9) and because utility tokens aren’t a cogent exemption from securities regulation (https://steemit.com/regulation/@anonymint/a-utility-token-is-a-unicorn).

But he’s not arguing in the second quoted blog above against altcoins which have sufficient network effects. He instead made that argument for Bitcoin maximalism (and thus implicitly against altcoins) in the first quoted blog above. But then in the third blog which you have cited, he has backed off a bit on his claim that it’s impossible for an altcoin to establish a network effect.

Here are my thoughts on his third blog:


I’ve been making this argument for the past few years. Bitcoin as onchain transacted Ideal Money (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_money) is ultimately for the community of $billionaires and $trillionaires as an international reserve currency which all other nation-state and highly fungible currencies float against. We will all be kicked off of the real Bitcoin eventually because the transaction fees will rise to $50,000 eventually (of course Bitcoin will be worth north of $250,000 then also though so it depends how many BTC you’re hodling). Security, proven reliability, and immutability are the most important features of the real Bitcoin which becomes the new world reserve currency. It will be the most fungible and liquid asset on the planet by 2032.

But the real Bitcoin will not be a transaction token for the masses. For transactions, we have many competing technologies in play. For example, the Lightning Networks on the Core altcoin is one of the possible altcoins being developed to meet such need.

Lightning Networks will have certain unique attributes:

• denominated in BTC
• Mt. Box fractional reserves (users will sometimes lose everything such as was the case for Mt. Gox)
• inability to transact to every other users on the blockchain
• inability to seamlessly integrate spending with others actions (e.g. posting a blog post a la Steem) recorded on a blockchain

So there will be other altcoins that attempt to compete with Lightning Networks that improve on some of those unique weakness but they will not be denominated in BTC.

Lightning Networks can’t really remake the Web 3.0. It’s more targeted only on spending without onchain integration required for decentralizing all the centralized databases on the Internet. So I do think some altcoin is going to end up being a major player and eventually in the long-term be more important than Bitcoin as the fungible monetary system fades and the knowledge age Internet system rises. LN is roughly Banking 2.0. Another altcoin could potentially be Internet 2.0.

But most of you will be incapable of analyzing which altcoin that is. You will invariably fall prey to hyped scammy ICOs along the way. And I’m not going to be around here trying to help analyze for the members here. I’ve been shown the door.

As usual, I have some surprises up my sleeve…



It’s not necessary to extract rent from apps, although I think this will also be possible. Rather it’s only necessary to establish a token which has network efforts because of the unique decentralized ledger technology and market features. Others won’t be able to successfully copy that technology because they won’t have the first-mover advantage networks effects that are already established (as is the case for Bitcoin). Steem was open source from the start, yet it established network effects inertia that is hard to overcome. The problem for Steem is they screwed up the technology and the model (https://steemit.com/dlive/@anonymint/re-jerrybanfield-3ffc3520-426a-11e8-836a-b9befc1a6029-20180420t060218449z), which leaves the door wide open still for a competitor.

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: You forgot Bitcoin, as it also broke up above downtrend after July 12
From:    "Shelby Moore"
Date:    Wed, August 8, 2018 9:42 am
To:      Martin Armstrong <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/ecm-the-cycle-inversion/

You forgot Bitcoin. Bitcoin has also broken above the downtrend line same
as for the US dollar and Canadian dollar.

This is yet another confirmation for you that Bitcoin is becoming a world
reserve currency.

Continue to ignore this Martin at your peril.

Alex Jones was recently banned from major media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, the Apple Store, and others. These were instituted at nearly the same time. The bans handed down by Facebook and YouTube are in relation to alleged violations of "ban evasion" rules on their respective platforms.

Many in the core of the left wing MSM have championed this corporate censorship as they do not like what Alex Jones has to say, and do not like his ideology.

I do not subscribe to the conspiracy theories pushed by Alex Jones, and strongly condemn him both personally and his extremist views. However many people actively choose to listen to what he has to say, and he should have the ability to speak and publish his message.

It should be noted that it has been alleged that a certain member of the left wing media has put in particular effort into getting Alex Jones banned by various platforms, in part by giving particular scrutiny to each of his posts, and reporting each one accordingly.

It is indisputable these platforms have the right to to ban anyone they choose they do not want to participate in their platforms, however the question remains if doing so is the right thing to do. I think the answer to this question is "no".....

I was going to merit this above but it looks like I have none to give  :-[

Well I agree about the problems of censorship and even the famously accurate technological prognosticator George Gilder in his talk about his book Life After Google explains that (https://youtu.be/Oho5xh9t1Ak?t=341) that centralization of the Internet backfires on the behemoth fiefdoms and thus isn’t sustainable.

But unfortunately you guys really need to understand that false-flags are staged. I have studied the evidence in great detail (I mean weeks of effort over a period of years). You should really look at the facts more intensely and read my analyses:

Plane Flyover; Explosives Planted Inside The Pentagon (https://gist.github.com/shelby3/de2c8371beb8b871fa3de0cc72f46afe)

https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/succinct-absolute-truth-about-9-11-and-las-vegas-massacre

https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-israel-s-mossad-did-9-11-20180806t173225425z

https://steemit.com/psychology/@anonymint/you-can-t-handle-the-truth

https://steemit.com/freedom/@anonymint/in-t-h-e-f-t-a-n-d-m-a-s-s-a-c-r-e-s-we-trust

For example review my detailed analyses that proves that the airplane flew over the Pentagon. No missle. It was a bomb that was planted. The evidence is overwhelming when you analyse it in detail as I did.

I agree Alex Jones is obnoxious.


P.S. Traxo apparently continues to link in his posts on bitcointalk.org to some of my Steemit posts. It’s impossible to ban information. Defies the laws of thermodynamics (c.f. the bottom of this recent post (https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/re-heavyd-re-anonymint-re-anonymint-bitcoin-to-usd15k-in-march-usd8-5k-by-june-then-usd30-k-by-q1-2019-20180819t141422240z) for more on that point).




EDIT: Tangentially I studied the 9-11 incident in great exhaustive detail. Compare that to for example the EU’s GDPR which I have never read nor thought about for more than about 15 minutes. I have for example written a blog analysing in great detail the facts of the Pentagon venue on that day. And facts that most people are not aware of and are drowned out by the noise of nonsense such a missile attack, etc.. It is quite easy to show that the plane flew over the building and that all other possible explanations are impossible. There was construction ongoing in that section of the Pentagon. It is very simple. A bomb was planted. And I guarantee you that if you review my detailed explanation of the evidence you come to realize that you cannot respect institutions. There is a DEEP STATE of corruption within our institutions. I know this sounds crazy but facts and evidence do not lie. You will be surprised the evidence that is actually available that most people never hear about.

He can still publish on his own website. I don't see how this impedes his ability to reach his followers. It might impede his ability to gain new followers so basically Twitbook and Facetube decided to not promote him anymore. Although I'm guessing that individual users of those sites can still post his links/videos.

Those platforms ban people all the time, including violations more benign than Alex Jones. Applying rules regardless of some "celebrity" status is the right thing to do.

You don’t seem to understand that those sites suddenly started doing that because they have to protect themselves due requirements in the recent EU GDPR legislation requiring centrally controlled Internet websites to protect users from hate speech. And that sort of totalitarian legislation might also be coming to the USA when the Democrats get back in power. That is why we absolutely must decentralize all databases and websites via the blockchain.

Please pay attention to the Youtube from George Gilder that I linked in my prior post. He explains how the fiefdoms aren’t sustainable. What we see underway is the coming collapse of Western Civilization before 2033 (https://steemit.com/money/@anonymint/countries-vulnerable-to-economic-devastation-soon) as the Millennials favor ideology and thus drive the tech sector to leave for greener pastures in Asia:

https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/why-social-media-software-sucks

(above blog links to details on all my above assertions)

All of you should read everything I ever wrote on Steemit on my blog and comment timelines. There is a wealth of information in there that you won’t be getting on bitcointalk.org.

https://steemit.com/@anonymint
https://steemit.com/@anonymint/comments

Especially this!

https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/most-important-bitcoin-chart-ever


If you expect everything to be a soundbite, then you will always be ignorant. You must actually read in detail and click every link I provide in order to understand my communications. Millennials have the attention span of a gnat. Which is another reason Western Civilization will collapse within a decade.

GDPR is about privacy and data protection (literally "General Data Protection Regulation"). It does not address hate speech.

Do you have a link to your decentralized blockchain-based website?

As I predicted, you can only refute a soundbite and not dig into the links to actually correct your ignorance.

You can’t see beyond the the tip of your nose:


You’re so naive. The data protection issue is a ruse or Trojan horse that can be use to fine companies on technicalities when they don’t prevent the free speech that the politicians and Deep State don’t like:


They’re using this ruse to pressure the Internet behemoths into censoring the sort of truth that they don’t want the people to know as the Western Civilization collapses and they try to redirect blame on for example Putin so they can start a war to misdirect the negative feelings about the coming economic devastation towards a fake hostility that they construct (this is the Hegelian dialectic principle of governing the sheep like you):



Fuck, I can’t hardly tolerate wasting my time anymore on these “know-it-all” Millennial bunny rabbits. Just let them crash and burn:

http://trilema.com/2013/the-story-of-pointless-and-witless/
https://steemit.com/psychology/@anonymint/social-courtesies-the-witless-and-pointless-example

---

As if by analogy of the weakness of your reasoning, U.S. passports don’t address child support payments and tax collection? Maybe you better get an education:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/the-irs-can-deny-you-a-passport/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/economics/divorce-collapse-of-socialism/
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/legal-matters/child-support.html
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/eastern_europe/russia-you-cannot-leave-if-you-owe-money/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/australians-looking-at-restriction-on-travel/


Some unrelated lulz:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/americas-current-economy/canada-to-fingerprint-anyone-who-owes-them-money/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/police-given-dui-tickets-when-on-a-raft-in-australia/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/australia-is-hunting-for-people-who-use-business-cars-to-go-to-sports-games/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/australia-creates-domestic-violence-tax/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/australia-oceania/australia-tracking-parents-accounts-by-following-children/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/is-australian-government-crossing-the-line-into-a-totalitarian-state/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/australia-oceania/australias-new-pm-ex-ceo-of-goldman-sachs/

There is no reason to dig into your conspiracy theories. You were not be able to quote the part of GDPR that addresses hate speech and/or caused the ban of Alex Jones / Infowars. If you're having a problem with some other law or regulation you need to articulate yourself better lest you sound like a witless oaf.

My dad could beat up your dad though.


Facebook, Youtube, etc had hate speech bans long before GDPR. They just chose to ignore their own rules while making money off Alex Jones.

You don't like the law, I get it. I'm not a fan of it either. Still kinda important to know what's in it. Ask your dad.

suchmo[r]on, not if the EU decides to fine him on some technicality of the GDPR. The law can basically force censorship. I guess you didn’t bother to read my quotes that exemplify the law is chock full of ambiguities and forced liabilities.

Those additional liabilities along with other developments in the same genre of totalitarianism that is sweeping over the West is what is causing the censorship to accelerate. It’s all connected. You can try to pick your ass about some differentiation between the crap laws, but it’s all the same shit.

Alex Jones “I’m Ready to Die” - Exclusive Interview After Being Banned (https://youtu.be/xvqdhphHrh0?t=1879)
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/12/17849868/eu-internet-copyright-reform-article-11-13-approved
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/eu-considering-requiring-a-broadcaster-license-to-have-youtube-channel/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/europes-current-economy/gdpr-creates-an-overwhelming-bureaucratic-nightmare-in-europe/
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/trump-maintains-google-is-rigged-warns-other-internet-giants-to-be-careful
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8120#comment-2031856


And you didn’t know what it is “in it”, as explained above.

Are you going to come back for more sloppy retard replies suchmo[r]on?

Only if you promise to reply with huge walls of text from conspiracy sites of home-schooled "lawyers", Mr. Mooreon (did I do this right?).

Appeal to authority is not an argument. It’s a trolling tactic that attempts to obfuscate that you really don’t want to respond to the logic presented.

You got your moronic ass whipped and ran away from the arguments.

---

So Techdirt.com is a conspiracy site when they are citing Stanford's Center for Internet and Society (http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2015/10/gdpr%E2%80%99s-notice-and-takedown-rules-bad-news-free-expression-not-beyond-repair)?


Are you not capable of comprehending how the above requirement of the GDPR law could cause a large company to decide it’s easier to just ban hate speech from their websites rather risk some loose canons dragging them into complex domino effect liability outcomes of the requirements of the law.

The large companies’ legal departments see the writing on the wall and have decided to favor caution over free speech.

You're the one making the claim that certain websites banned Alex Jones due to GDPR but failed to show any proof of that so there is nothing else to respond to. And I should probably stop helping you to evade your ban by using this thread as your soapbox. Let me know the address of your decentralized website and let's continue there.

Apparently you’re incapable of simultaneously executing your moronic Millennial grandstanding and strawmen, while also opening your fucking eyes. The link was provided on the prior page of this thread.

https://steemit.com/blockchain/@anonymint/jesus-bitcoin-is-somewhat-sovereign-democracy-not


You are incapable of discerning lipstick and a pig, so how would you know? You also stated (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4675898.msg44422465#msg44422465) that you didn’t read my posts.

Is this what you do for a “career”? Do you feel accomplishment today?

Suggestion: go hump a cow, smoke some weed, or take Xanax so you can feel better about your low self-esteem.



Are you so deluded as to think:

• You’re helping me do something that I have proven I am perfectly capable of doing without you anytime I want to.
• That posting in Meta in the thread about my perma-ban is evading a ban, when it is specifically allowed and thus not evading the ban.

Habitually lying to yourself to give yourself dopamine hits of false accomplishment is a pathology of crab-bucket insanity.

---

EDIT: My grandparents’ generation had great respect for institutions including the government. I think the boomers also still have that to a significant degree. My X generation is quite skeptical and pragmatic because we were the first kids of the boomers who were too busy getting divorced to actually raise us in a system that we could respect. The Millennials are the late batch of kids from boomers and my generation’s kids. There is an excellent Quora Q&A (https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations) that characterizes that generation well in my opinion. Of course on an individual level people are unique and stereotypes don't entirely hold.

Some answers I have selected:

https://www.quora.com/Are-millennials-more-narcissistic-than-older-generations/answer/Angie-Neik
(that answer above explains what I was saying about my generation)

https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Matthew-Laine-1
(Matthew Laine has a 180 IQ)

https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Gustin-Fox-Smith
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/David-Haldorsen
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Faith-Paul-2
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Chris-Everett
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Grant-Schmutte
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Ej-Gravis
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Torie-J-Patterson
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Lance-LaSalle
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Nikolite
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Michael-Brescia-2
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Henriikka-Keskinen
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Charles-Stone-6
https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/William-Beteet-1

And reading those answers further strengthens my resolve to provide decentralization technology to help these Millennials economically.  Compare the negativity of the answers to the positivism of the answers from Asians:

https://www.quora.com/Do-millennials-feel-more-entitled-than-previous-generations/answer/Xiaobei-Jia

That IMO reflects the decadence of the West.

I don't see what relevance that has to anonymint being a disruptive schizophrenic who kept registering new accounts and generally being a nuisance.  If you want to discuss forum donations, start a new topic (assuming you aren't yet another attempt to ban evade by anonymint).

^^ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=49247  ???

Yep. That was me. My last post that was under my control of that account was on July 31, 2017, 04:02:47 PM (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=49247;sa=showPosts). After that, my account got hacked and the recovery email changed, and the controller went on a spam/scam spree (posts most of which are now deleted)

See user tysat's feedback that he left for me by my request, "This account has been hacked and is not controlled by the original owner anymore"



Can't you mute people? "Nuisance" is a totally subjective term. This is a public internet forum for the exchange ideas. Did AnonyMint ever go out and doxx people, harassing them outside of words on this forum?  I, for one, appreciated his voice. The loss of people like him was why I had no real interest of recovering my account. I bring up that bit because it says a lot about the nature of those running the place. Crypto sites for the discussion of crypto are supposed to be a more or less free community. The same type of people that would pocket forum donations would ban someone with inconvenient opinions/voices like AnonyMint.

Rules, however, are far less subjective.  The rules say that registering new accounts after you get banned means that those accounts get banned too.  



As has been reiterated numerous times, it's not the opinions that got him banned, but how he chose to express them:

Quote from: theymos on May 04, 2017, 03:27:36 AM 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. Quote from: gmaxwell on July 22, 2018, 01:22:55 AM I think the people concerned about AnonyMint's "free speech" in this thread are being duped into being pawns in AnonyMint's efforts to shut down the freedom of others to communicate and associate. AnonyMint is clearly free to post whatever he wants on his own site (and any other site that can stand him). You're free to discuss his "ideas" with him there, if they interest you.   But when the forum invites AnonyMint to post without restriction, other people aren't practically able to have the discussions they want to have-- he drowns them out and buries them under toxic stink. If a community can't choose topics and participants then anyone who wants can shut down a communities ability to communicate. If this isn't obvious to you yet, consider a silly analogy:  I think we can all mostly agree that people generally ought to be able to operate their own bodies as they see fit, without other people restricting how they use them. But then we have a public pool that the community likes to use and since it's a public pool we all agree everyone ought to have equal access to it.  But then comes AnonyMint and for whatever reason he insists on using his autonomy over his bodily functions to deficate in the pool and refuses to cut it out.  Some people can't smell it and aren't worried about pathogens and don't mind. But a lot of people do mind and won't get in the crapped up water. So his "freedom" to use the pool without restriction on his conduct ultimately denies others the free use of the pool that they ought to be able to use. If the pool operator won't keep the crapper out, then people will go off to use other shit free pools... and leave the original one for people who like shitting in the pool and the few who don't mind it. Reasonable people can usually disagree about exactly _where_ the line should be drawn. But the principle that sometimes you've got to set and enforce limits to create a space that people can actually enjoy should be something we all agree on.  In AnonyMint's case, I think almost everyone would agree his conduct has been consistently far over the line, but I think his abusive conspiracy theorizing rants strike a resonance in some people and blind them to how intolerable the guy actually is...

In short, his ban makes free and open discussion far easier to attain.

I asked earlier, isn't there a mute button? I don't want for central mgmt. to decide for me what they think is noise and what isn't.

LOL


To whom it may concern: How was my deleted comment (https://imgur.com/gallery/KUIDD29) off topic? It discussed why Mgmt. would have incentive to ban inconvenient voices such as that of AnonyMint, namely because he may have exposed or at least asked about possible  conflicts of interest that are not being disclosed.


Was  it off topic because I posted these easily Googlable links?????? Well sir, I BEG TO DIFFER
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7cvnxy/6900_btc_in_donations_6_years_in_development/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6w6t5c/utheymos_has_taken_in_over_9000_bitcoin_donations/

Likely because someone (not me, BTW) reported your post because they don't accept your premise that forum donations are in any way related to the topic of Anonymint being banned.  It's also likely a mod agreed because it's a tenuous link at best.  The reasons for the ban have been explained.  It had nothing whatsoever to do with donations, ergo donations are off-topic in this thread.  

Again, start a new topic if you want to pursue the specific discussion around donations.  But in all honesty, I don't see you having much success in getting his ban overturned.

I don't really care about getting his ban overturned. I do care about having a fair forum. I know it's not my forum, and I'm not really attached to BCT either. It's just a little silly.

======

---------


"Excessive autoposting"? ufkm? If you have ideas that you're writing on the fly, and in the breadth that is discussed, why shouldn't you be able to use multiple messages to organize thoughts? Knowing him, probably more like not kissing the ass an admin and his rules (that aren't evenly enforced). I've met at least one admin like that before. I got banned quick after debating an issue with him.  

What about people's threads where they make multiple posts the first posts? Did AnonyMint continually re-enter and post in individuals' moderated topics after being asked to leave? IIRC, that's a bannable offense. IMHO, this should be as free and public a forum as possible.

I think it is ironic that the presumption that multi-posting drowns out others' voices is reason to censor and ban AnonyMint. I'd have to see what sort of multi-posts were being made. If there was meritorious discussion, there is no reason to censor the length of a message. He always writes about the technical. Allow the space. If the accusation is spam, that is subjective, and I'd like to see the case.   Arguing is different than shilling. Why can't you post the same thing in another relevant thread, when the audience is composed of a different pool of individuals? That is simply how you plant seeds.

All "he" needs to do is use the "Edit" button. Much easier than typing a 3-paragraph essay about this uber-smart user who for some inexplicable reason is unable to grasp simple rules.

That can be true. Personally, I understand why multiple posts are generally not allowed, especially when they're short messages, but the purpose of OPs who reserve the first few messages is usually due to them posting lots of information. The guy writes a lot and I would think it'd be easier to have stuff organized in multiple messages.

Same reason why we appreciate line breaks in between paragraphs.