Bitcoin Forum

The first thread on this subject (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5216961) is kind of a dumpster fire so I thought I'd open a new one to present more compelling evidence. While I haven't found any blockchain evidence linking Quickseller (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=358020) to PrimeNumber7 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2561166) (didn't look into it much TBH), they do share a number of linguistic similarities, most notably of which are quirks in their writing style, spelling habits, and usage of relatively uncommon phrases.

Here are a few examples of unique misspellings shared by both accounts:

- "passphraise"



- "immidiately"



- "boarder"



- "Rodger Ver"



- "monitory"



Here's some uncommon words/phrases being used by both accounts, many of which are used by QS on more than one occasion:

- "underlying root cause"



- "sow discord"



- "maximum benefit of the doubt"



- Odd use of the word "transparently"



It's true that just one of these examples on its own isn't really evidence or proof of anything, as it's quite possible other users engage in the same habits. However, the chances of 2 random users sharing all of these quirks and traits is exceedingly slim and can only mean that PN7 and QS are the same people. There are likely to be several more similarities that weren't pointed out above.

In addition to these examples, other similarities between QS and PN7 include:

- their political stance (both hard right Republicans)
- they tend to frequent the same sections (Meta, Reputation, Politics & Society)
- they both care a lot about signature campaigns
- they both are highly knowledgeable about the inner-workings of the forum, and
- they both mention or interact with theymos relatively often.

As a matter of fact, PN7's very first post was about theymos:


What kind of a newbie mentions theymos and copper membership statistics in their first post??

He also really knows how to work merits out of people, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing as it means he is contributing at least something to some people under that moniker. He seems quite pleased with himself, as he wanted to nominate himself as "Newbie of the Year" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215097.msg53530906#msg53530906) recently, and is really looking forward to becoming a Hero Member (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218966.msg53649642#msg53649642).

Short of attempting to escrow for himself again, I think this is enough evidence to reasonably ascertain that they are indeed the same person. If you're not a native English speaker (and an American one at that), then it may be more difficult to judge just how uncommon certain words, phrases and misspellings are, and equally how unlikely it is that they would all be shared by 2 random people.

Disclaimers: no need to bring up the obvious that this is not absolute, stone-cold proof of anything, as I know that already. You're of course allowed to come to your own conclusion, but please spare the "unjustly tried and convicted" mantra I can already feel coming. This is not a court of law and we are not judges; just observers on a forum.

Also, this is not all my own work, as some of this evidence was provided to me by various sources who wish to remain unaccredited for the time being.

Have a scroll back through some of my previous trust/feedback wall posts.  I've compared word use in the past and been slapped with "crazy ideas" labels.

Nice to see someone else using the same principal.

That quotation with word "transparently" is quite interesting:





According to PrimeNumber7, no evidence is evidence.

I neutral-tagged him as a "fake newbie" shortly thereafter, later revised to the more apt "likely alt of a scammer" as more evidence emerged.

There are some other peculiarities:

• Quickseller and PrimeNumber7 are clearly interested and fluent in the same topics but never quoted or replied to each other.
• Quickseller never sent merits to PrimeNumber7 and vice versa.

Interesting spelling mistakes, I always thought QuickSeller was a native English speaker.

So, if you want to hide your alt: set your spelling checker to a different language (Australian English for instance).
And if you want to pretend to be someone else: add a few incorrect words from said person to your auto-replace list.

A quick search on Google shows how frequent certain spellings are used.

If they're alts, at least they uphold some standards :)

Forensic linguistics never fail.

paging tspacepilot..... where are you???

i dunno, the evidence seems really flimsy to me.

take the misspelling of "immidiately". there are are 766,000 google results for that misspelling. how is that conclusive of anything? why is it even included on this list?

"boarder" could easily be a typo written by anyone, particularly since it's a real word that won't be picked up by spell check.

"Rodger Ver"---i've written this typo myself and so have many others. it was even a notable hashtag for a time on twitter.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/RodgerVer?src=hash
https://twitter.com/VerRodger
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/69oxoa/rodger_ver_admits_unlimited_block_size_could/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7w259j/i_found_a_chink_in_rodger_vers_armour_what_are/

"monitory" suffers from the same problem as "boarder". this is an easy typo to make that won't be picked up by spell check.

"underlying root cause" is actually a common expression, probably because "underlying" is part of the definition of "root cause".
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22underlying+root+cause%22

"to sow discord" is also a common english expression:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22sow+discord%22

there are tens of thousands of examples of people on news sites, twitter, etc saying "maximum benefit of the doubt":
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22maximum+benefit+of+the+doubt%22

i also disagree with the characterization of PrimeNumber7/Quickseller's usage of the word "transparently" as "odd". i believe they both used the word correctly.

there is only one interesting word/phrase set on this list. "passphraise" is an uncommon misspelling, with only some hundreds of results showing up on google. however, two things of note here:
-"phraise" is apparently not so uncommon of a misspelling, with 28,600 results on google, so the possibility of a common typo is there. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=phraise
-quickseller also uses the correct spelling of "passphrase" at various times.

all in all, i think you guys are reaching really hard with this list. the hatred some of you have for Quickseller is causing the standards of evidence to be set really low.

the PrimeNumber7 account seems harmless. i too suspect he might be Quickseller but tbh, who gives a shit? what behavior has PrimeNumber7 engaged in that warrants this witch hunt behavior? maybe just leave the guy alone.....

And here we go, an excuse for every misspelling.

That's pretty much the point, taken individually none of these quirks is a proof of anything. But how likely is it that two random users would have so many things in common.

Keep them pretzels coming though, I'm low on sodium.

SM, if the accused person was someone else, will you still have the same opinion? more importantly, if the accused person was someone you trust.


The above is the perfect explanation of how things have actually become, if this topic contains a remotely close evidence of the accusation, then framing anyone would be fairly easy.

1-Go to www.google.com.

2-Use

3-Spend some time to match spelling mistakes.

4-Accuse.

---

PrimeNumber7 seems like a decent poster, he has more merit than activity which is not very usual, he seems to contribute a good amount to the forum,and if there is the slightest chance that he is not Quickseller - accusing him of being so "If he is not" is a severe injustice given Quickseller's terrible reputation.

Not really possible for me to answer that honestly because there is no chance in hell I would have trusted someone like PrimeNumber7. I have excluded him very early on. But I can tell you this - I have no doubt it's the same person for a number of reasons, and the spelling similarities merely confirm my opinion, not create my opinion.


Nah, I think it fits perfectly. Do you honestly believe I'm retaliating because I'm secretly selling KYC accounts? Because that's what the non-Quickseller came up with (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5216961.msg53658332#msg53658332). I expect more nonsense like that in the days to come. Quickseller's signature move.

i also showed the "uncommon phrases" and "odd uses of words" are actually common. half the linguistic "evidence" goes out the window off the bat, which suggests to me bad faith on the part of the OP.


so many things? over the course of 3 years, we have one example each of 4 common misspellings and 1 uncommon one. is that an accurate summary of this "forensic linguistics" analysis? (i put that term in quotes because this occurs to me as completely unscientific)

i bet if you parse through years of my posts, you'll find a few misspellings i've shared in common with probably a bunch of other forum accounts. i really don't find that conclusive at all.

to answer your question, "somewhat likely".

for reference: suchmoon was the first user who tagged PN7 for suspecting him of being "a fake newbie".. Whereas the poor me was thinking that he might be theymos (just think of how hard I was chocked when he applied for his first sig campaign).

I have edited that, but you were way too fast  ;D.


Don't you believe that it takes more than just "I think" to accuse someone of being an alt of what many think of as the "WORST" member of all time?


I am sure you are not selling KYC accounts ( I will be mad if you did and haven't sent me an offer  ;D ),I also know very well that you are not retaliating, I just want to make sure that your thoughts are not biased because of the lack of trust / personal preferences for the parties involved in the subject.

I have no problem with you accusing PrimeNumber7 for being Quickseller, the problem is taking the information in the OP to "merely confirm" your opinion, because these information are really meaningless at their best, I don't know how can you give them any value, maybe because of the low sodium ? get some salt  :-* :-*


"A fake newbie" and "Quickseller's alt" are completely different levels of accusations, I am willing to bet he was "a fake newbie", I am also not willing to bet 2 cents on him NOT being Quickseller, and despite the fact I may tend to believe the accusation is valid, I don't agree to the "low standards" many members use to "prove" something.

PrimeNumber7 registered in March 2019.


How likely is "somewhat likely"? 1 in a million? 1 in a thousand? Bonus points if you can find another user who matches all findings in the OP and is not Quicksy's alt.

If anyone can do that I'll replace my neutral on PN7's account with a positive rating containing an apology. Posts created or edited after January 1 2020 don't count for obvious reasons.


I'm not red-trusting or flagging the account. I do believe my neutral is fully justified though and I disagree that the OP info is meaningless.

On the other hand, if I'm so dumb that I could be so gravely mistaken then I don't deserve to be in DT anyway so if anyone thinks so feel free to exclude me. (this was edited down from a larger paragraph so it sounds a bit abrupt but that's pretty much the essence of my position on the matter so no need for too many words).

Nice try getting me killed with salt overdose :)

Well no.

I updated my trust/feedback post a couple of weeks ago along with my other posts concerning Quickseller. My previous posts I deleted.

I also made a comment concerning PN7's posts resembling QS's a few weeks back. (Which is why I left neutral feedback )

See also: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg53506439#msg53506439

Well, it needs to be a bit more encouraging than just that, probably 1 BTC will get the job done  ;) ;).

It's of course highly unlikely to find the "exact" words, the proper challenge should be finding the same number of spelling mistakes between any two accounts.


I do agree.

It does, I blame the sodium.

I wouldn't exclude you (not that my exclusion matters anyway) for such a thing, you make a lot more valid accusations than not, even in this one, and after having dug in a little deeper, I am almost certain that your thoughts are valid, both accounts seem very similar, there is no denial in that, but non of what you, I or anyone else thinks is a good enough evidence IMO.



 :-[

Negative Feedback :  Mikeywith tried to murder Suchmoon
Reference: "get some salt"

If we don't start "fixing" the standards around here, pretty soon the above sarcasm will be normal around here.

Don't know if you used that spelling of principal ironically, but it made me chuckle.  Anyway, I don't know if anyone was slamming you for trying to connect accounts via writing styles, but that method is unscientific at best.  Sometimes there are little word quirks that seem to give people away (like mdayonliner, for example) but you can't really prove anything--at least not like you could with blockchain evidence.

At this point I'm wondering why Quickseller would even start up a new account.  It's very hard to rank up from scratch, and I don't even think QS feels the need for an account with clean feedback.  I'm not saying Primenumber7 isn't his alt, but it does make me wonder what his motivation would be if it is his account.

Australian typo?

:) The

I'll up the stakes eventually if there are no takers but it sounded to me that some people in this thread were very confident in this being a likely occurrence.


No, that's not quite the same. Two accounts that are horrible at spelling or misuse words wouldn't mean anything. Two accounts who misspell the same words the same way and use the same rare phrases is what makes this case so rare.

Edit: after re-reading this I'm thinking we're saying the same thing, so never mind.

I'm now genuinely curious how good we are at gauging probabilities of extremely rare coincidences. Our wealth literally depends on it, this being a somewhat-crypto-related forum.


Alright, I'm off to find a jar of pickles. I don't think that'll change my mind though.


Of course he does, for signature campaigns: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127540.msg50523936#msg50523936

I have been on the boarder of this subject immidiately after seeing the first accusations but their was absolutely no evidence at all presented transparently and surely wasn't 100% convinced past the maximum benefit of the doubt, but the evidence presented in the OP of this thread, while still circumstantial, does further convince me that PN7 is likely QS..

I think the underlying root cause of QS starting this fresh account would be for monitory reasons (like Rodger Ver's "real Bitcoin") as others have stated to earn from a signature campaign, rather than to further sow discord..
Atleast he didn't just buy an account passphraise and created it on his own from scratch..

the OP went as far back as march 2017 to find examples of common misspellings. that's what i was referring to.


i think my references to the word "common" sum it up. these examples are "occurring, found, or done often; prevalent." it's tough to put a number on it exactly. you implied the likelihood is extremely low so i'm interested to hear the odds you'd put on it.

parsing through forum accounts to find generic similarities sounds super rewarding and worthy of my time, but i'll pass. :)


i think neutral feedback and the "likely" characterization are perhaps reasonable---at least not worthy of arguing over. that's different than acting like there is actual proof here. or red tagging PrimeNumber7 for a "likely" but unproven connection.


well played. :D

A+ for the effort, D for reading comprehension:


Now... if you're implying that PrimeNumber7 is trying to frame Quickseller - this would be a very interesting twist.


Thought so.

I guess the acceptance of this kind of evidence depends on who is being accused, however it could also be a case of the OP not agreeing with:
I will say up front that Suchmoon has been making innuendoes of the underlying connection for months. I also have good reason to believe he has been trying to get some people who are active in handing out tags to notice this connection "on their own". This leads me to believe the evidence is not strong (see OP), or has the potential to reflect poorly on Suchmoon for some reason.

Some of the examples in the OP reflect proper English usage, and as figmentofmyass (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53659746#msg53659746) mentioned, indicate bad faith by the OP (or maybe Suchmoon, I don't know).

I like to read the forum from my phone, and will sometimes post from my phone. When I post, I will often accept predictive text that my phone suggests. I have noticed that many forum users go to extremes to 'secure' their forum accounts, including not using their phones, so maybe the chances of two forum users making the specific mistakes are small, but this question would be invalid because the population of forum users includes a small population users who post from their smart phones that may have caused the mistakes in the OP (when they are actually mistakes). A scientifically valid experiment would need to control for input device if the input device (aka keyboard, or phone) may play a role in the errors. Further, there may be other small groups of distinct forum users who make other specific spelling errors.

I would ask the OP if he (or Suchmoon) can cite any scientific research that validates the use of common spelling errors to identify common authorship? If so, the research would be, at best, mixed on the subject.

Your bullshit about two phones being broken the same way is approaching the infinite monkey theorem.

Your attempts to discredit me are heartwarmingly familiar.

I am reviewing this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg17460286#msg17460286) as the search patterns suggested by others in this (and part 1 thread) yield a wider number of posts than the ones I found, hence the findings I made did not take into consideration other avenues of inquiry which would result in a far different conclusion.

I won't be able to examine this in full today, but it is the only thing I am currently working on.

---

Just as a side question for others, why was tspacepilot's research on Master-p widely accepted, but phrase usage being cited here isn't?

what’s that? No? Crickets.. No? Anything?

LOL.. I know right? That whole post screams Quickseller to me, that exactly what I would have expected, he's given up now, so he doesn't care again and will just try... try... again.. Like a failure he is. :Joy:

Remember kidz.... This motherfucker half doxxed me for no reason whatsoever afaict. :P

Come on out Quicksy - Let's go a round like the old days, eh? :D   Bump my dox thread by your alts? No? Okay, well find something, you are fucking boring my ass you stupid scamming piece of shit trump-trash... ::)

I'm sorry that you can't hear me laughing at your demands for scientific research after you said natural language processing is "junk science".

Rats.. You caught that edit?
I noticed at the last minute while comparing myself to the "both hard right Republicans" checklist bit, therefore the edit..


Frame him for what purpose? To ruin the QS account reputation? lol
Maybe try to frame him as a ban evader or actually scam to frame him as an actual scammer other than the self-escrow gig?

iirc not too long ago QS denied being an alt of another account on the basis that he did not want to be liable for the actions of the other account, and it was generally believed that his denial was true.. (Not digging for it)
A denial from the QS account in this case would likely actually put more doubt in my mind that PN7 is QS and this refusal to answer is just technicalities..

Not denying here is more evidence he is QS to me, similar to, and as is, the discreditation of SM referenced and seen above..


All we have so far is one red tag from lauda, which I doubt will stop PN7 from being paid for a signature..
Is the goal here to stop PN7/QS from being paid for a signature? Or just to make sure QS is being watched for something actually serious?

As I have alluded to previously (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127540.msg50488750#msg50488750) I think one of the only dangers of QS is in his mastermind if he did actually put effort into trying to pull off a big scam..
But I don't see where QS has ever tried pulling off any big scam, and as time goes on, it becomes only less likely in my mind..
Heck, if PN7 is indeed QS he didn't really put much effort into obfuscating his posts to not be caught now did he? Maybe it is even an experiment of his to see if he will be allowed to post cleanly under a new account..

I think QS signature posting under a relatively cleaner account is quite harmless, and now it is well known and will be well watched..
I understand to most here that QS is absolutely unredeemable in their eyes, so I won't even ask what the requirements of such would be, but I guess that I will dangerously admit that I myself do see some value in users like QS and TOAA, in the fact that they keep everyone on their toes, and force them to toe the straight-and-narrow line, because others are jumping at the opportunity to expose wrongdoing of rivals.. (Is "wrongdoin" a QS or TOAA word?)
It has some good in the big picture from my perspective..

Actually related to my last post on the concept of the....
The false accusations don't fly do they? The free market works..

Another interesting dynamic I see happening is that it used to be that every sock was QS, and then lately every sock was CH, now is it going back to every sock is QS again?

I think it is probably QS but what are you all going to do about it? And what do you think should be done about it?
Maybe that should be the title of a thread.. "What should be done about PN7 probably being an alt of QS?"..
Lit up red or just plenty of neutrals?

Yes, he is, and that's the point: if you're not an American English native speaker its a bit harder to judge what phrases and misspellings are common versus uncommon.


But will you find all of those shared with QS/PN7? Would you even find more than 3 of the 9 examples provided? There's a big difference in odds between guessing 3 correct numbers in a lottery and 4.

There's a pool of users for each individual phrase/word/mistake. The odds of a user residing in a pool with another user go down considerably when filtered by subsequent pools. The pools vary in size from containing liberally 1/8th of all forum users (probably closer to 1/20th, hence they are all "uncommon") to 1/50th, 1/100th or even lower.

Let's just say all pools contain 1/8th of all active forum members for the sake of argument: by the 5th example, you're down to 1 in 32,768 members. And if you cross-reference this with the sections they post in and their total number of posts, it further narrows down the remaining list of members by a considerable degree (perhaps less than a handful).

This Venn diagram example isn't perfect as it would require 3-dimensions and circles of unequal sizes to more accurately portray the overlap of users and words, but it demonstrates the decreasing amount of chance users have with residing in areas of large amounts of overlapping circles.

http://www.clipartbest.com/cliparts/jTx/ar6/jTxar6jqc.jpg

Quickseller resides in the very center of this diagram. The number of users who fall into all 8 circles (share the same 8 phrase/misspelling similarities) is extremely small. As a matter of fact, I would contend that he only shares it with PrimeNumber7, but I'm welcome to be proven wrong.

Why does it all matter?

I would absolutely find a similar analysis yielding similar results to be valid comparing any two forum members, regardless of their reputation. However, I would only consider it worth publishing on the forum if one of them had a multi-year reputation of being deceitful, dishonest and harmful to other members.

You should only trust PN7 as much as you would trust QS.

As I've said before, to me the issue here is the thoroughly deceptive way Quickseller is trying to sockpuppet his way into whatever it is that he wants to achieve - to earn from sig campaigns, or to regain his DT "powers", or to prove that account farming is cool... who knows.


I can't speak for nutildah but I personally don't particularly care for any specific outcome other than perhaps not wanting to have QS/PN7/etc in DT. Unfortunately with the DT1 inflation and random selection it's almost inevitable that he'll get in at some point.

How everyone else interprets the presented information is up to them.

---

Some totally unscientific numbers to complement the nice rainbow diagram above:

-                           |passphrais|immidiatel|boarder|rodger ver|monitory|underlying root cause|sow discord|maximum benefit of the doubt|
----------------------------|----------|----------|-------|----------|--------|---------------------|-----------|----------------------------|
passphrais                  |-         |2         |3      |3         |2       |2                    |2          |2                           |
immidiatel                  |2         |-         |11     |2         |3       |2                    |2          |2                           |
boarder                     |3         |11        |-      |5         |6       |2                    |2          |2                           |
rodger ver                  |3         |2         |5      |-         |2       |2                    |2          |2                           |
monitory                    |2         |3         |6      |2         |-       |2                    |3          |2                           |
underlying root cause       |2         |2         |2      |2         |2       |-                    |2          |2                           |
sow discord                 |2         |2         |2      |2         |3       |2                    |-          |2                           |
maximum benefit of the doubt|2         |2         |2      |2         |2       |2                    |2          |-                           |

Each number shows how many different users used each pair of words/phrases. 2 means it's just Quickseller and PrimeNumber7. So out of 28 possible combinations 21 are unique to those two accounts. I couldn't find a quick and easy way to make a 3-dimensional one but there is only one triple combination that has more than those two users. Beyond that (4 or more out of 8) it's only QS and PN7.

I think I know the potential rebuttal to that. Those words and phrases could have been picked in such a way that only those accounts are matched. But since I know for a fact that's not what happened this is sufficiently convincing for me. Others are free to do their own research although aside from some verbal gymnastics there doesn't seem to be much interest in that.

"transparently" was excluded as it's too context-sensitive.

I am sure there are plenty of other unique word combinations that, when paired together, are used by exactly two distinct forum members. Further, you appear to be padding your numbers with word combinations being used correctly.

Further, with the near admission of puppetry used in this thread, I would question your claim of lack of involvement in this thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5216961.0), and this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5216871.0) one...

Isn't it though more relevant that all this new evidence , is on top of the previous claims submitted ?   And actually no , this amount of unique word combinations when compared to 2 distinct forum members the odds of them matching are extremely low! if none whatsoever. ( add that to the previous claims and what are the chances of it being simply a coincidence ? )
And honestly this is simply my input as someone who has never dealt with most likely any of you participating in this thread . So there's 0 interest of me taking anyone's side on this matter .
Simply my input after analyzing the claims OP has made , and yeah , I agree with OP 100 %.

Let's dissect a couple of these assertions as I think its inaccurate to say I am presenting evidence in "bad faith."


First of all, we're talking about "common expression" as in common on the forum; not what is yielded as a Google search result. On the forum, there's exactly 8 instances of "maximum benefit of the doubt" that can be found, 4 belong to QS and 1 belongs to PN7. Not exactly a "common expression."


Yet on the forum, there's only 13 accounts that have ever used that phrase, and 2 of them are QS/PN7. 13 users out of thousands.

None of the examples provided are "common", though some are more common than others.

can you qualify that data? if there are 5 word combinations on bitcointalk that only 2 people share, does that somehow prove they are alts? how do you account for coincidences? what are the actual scientific standards for this kinda shit (if they exist)?


yes, i believe that's true. i'm glad you're willing to concede that. i can't really verify the data either, so i'll have to take your word for it.


that's a point of contention for me. if some combination of expressions is more common in general internet usage but less common on bitcointalk in relative terms, anomalies will appear more severe in your data than they should and the likelihood of coincidence increases.

take this extreme example: two red blooded murrrican hicks from north carolina (go panthers!) join an internet forum mostly comprised of brits/euros. these two share several linguistic similarities/phrases and worldviews in common because of their southern hick upbringing. to the rest of the forum, they both stick out like a sore thumb. are they the same person?

this is the logic of your claim: "so few people on the forum use these terms that anyone who does use them must be the same person". you see how that's fallacious/circular reasoning, right? it's not self-evident.


common general usage makes it difficult to rule out coincidences in your narrow data set. see above.

expressions/idioms are also tricky because you should be capturing all forms, otherwise you're not truly representing their prevalence. eg for "sow discord" you should be including users like:


etc etc

anyway, good luck PrimeNumber7. some people around here are obviously itching to burn you at the stake.....

These threads are great and all, but in spite of you all L.A.R.P.ing as Nazi hunters or something do these kind of threads serve any purpose? Have you considered getting a life?

Are you still claiming that your phone suggested "passphraise" and "maximum benefit of the doubt" or have you moved to some other straw man argument? I never claimed that all words/phrases listed in the OP are incorrect. Nor did nutildah as far as I can see. Some are clearly misspelled, some are just rare.


Near admission... what does that even mean? Don't go full Quicksy on us, speak in full sentences.

---

"passphrase" is about as Bitcoin-ish as it gets. The correct spelling has been used by ~7000 users on this forum. Don't start arguing now that this being a commonly used word the chance of it being accidentally misspelled the same way by two different users is greater. ;)

You asked for numbers, I gave you numbers, you're still refusing to show any numbers of your own, so it's becoming a bit of a one-sided argument.

---

(emphasis mine)

I feel like this is a trick question. You said they were "two red blooded murrrican hicks", so obviously they aren't the same person.


Not at all. I'm saying that nobody uses all of those terms except for them.


How are you deciding what is common versus what is uncommon? Because a big number appears next to the number of Google search results? Thats even less scientific than what me and suchmoon are doing.


That's not the phrase used by Quickseller, so why would I care about that? "All forms" aren't relevant, only those used by Quickseller. I feel like you are failing to grasp what I am doing at a fundamental level.

Are you Suchmoon?

No.

Why would you think we are the same person?

Well sure, there are lots of similarities in the way people use language and words and phrases, but the odds of someone using the same very unique phrases or spelling errors is astronomical and the more similarities we see the more likely it becomes that one and the other are the same and I've spotted a lot of alts like this. Basically, we all know that you're QS but there's obviously no smoking gun so you're going to try hide behind that. It's like knowing someone committed a crime because it has all the hallmarks of that person and they were spotted at the scene of the crime and have the motive, but there's no DNA evidence to seal the case and certainly not enough to stand up in court so they go free on a technicality.

BTW, I always had an inkling you two were one and the same as you just start to see these things when you spend so much time on the board, but it was all but confirmed for me when I noticed both you and QS reporting posts with the exact same phrasing. The odds of that happening between two random people is very rare and obviously not something someone else can mimic. QS also does a certain thing on all of his accounts as do you which I'm not going to give away because it's an easy habit to change but it's always the first thing I look for when I see one account that has all the hallmarks of QS. I honestly don't know whether you just see this board as too lucrative to leave it alone and do your best to try rank up an account to maximise earning potential here from whatever avenues you can, or there's something more sinister going on and you've always been trying to build up to a long con or something. I'm sure many others here wouldn't have given a shit about any other accounts you had and you could have easy rebuilt your reputation over time but the way you behaved and tried to take anyone and everyone down just because they had someone you didn't like on their trust list turned a lot of people against you and makes me not trust you at all and that's why most people here are unforgiving of you.


Most people have words they get wrong frequently even if they're native English speakers, and especially just turn of phrases and mannerisms that you pick up over time. It's actually hard for people to register themselves but others often notice it and over time things start to stick out even more.


It's really not just the words though, it's the overall behaviour amongst other things. Users who sign up here and head straight to Meta and and get involved in forum politics always stand out as likely being alts and often people blatantly having knowledge of things that you would only know from being here a while sets alarm bells off. The words and phrases are just another piece of strong evidence, but yes, one or two similarities wouldn't mean much but when you put it all together it becomes pretty compelling. I wasn't even aware of the things that have just been presented in this thread but I always suspected they were the same just from other things I observed. Sure, probably technically not enough to condemn someone over but I'd bet a bollock they're the same.


Well it's pretty obvious. Money and probably trust. It's also not that hard to rank up if you know what to do and where to fish for merits, much like mday was doing, and PN7 is doing pretty well in the merit and rank stakes. Sure, it takes a bit of time and effort but the outcome can be very rewarding, especially if you can get on a high-paying campaign and I'm sure he has his eyes set on the holy grail that is Chipmixer.


The people who he's attacked seemingly give a shit. I don't really care either either and let him have that account for all I care, but I don't blame them for attacking him any chance they get either because that's exactly what QS did and he launched a pretty merciless attack on anyone who he felt wronged him and they're seemingly returning the favour and unwilling to let it go like he did.

I would just say move on to both sides but I don't think either will be wiling to do so so this sort of tit-for-tat will likely continue on for ever.

https://pics.me.me/re-going-revenge-dig-two-graves-chinese-proverb-23131643.png

Well let’s be clear that you are not doing this and this isn’t any of your research.

Believe it or not I don't really have much skin in the game. PN7 said nobody had any evidence to present, so I presented it.


I'm not doing it? Who's doing it then? Most of it is my research, but not all. Suchmoon and now hilarious have chimed in with stuff I didn't think of or couldn't have thought of.

Regardless of who did what, it doesn't change the fact that you are Quickseller.

Give it up, it's really pathetic what you're doing here. You're not as good at masking your tracks as you think you are. Anybody who's paying attention can see the clues.

If anyone cares, nutildah has done most of the work. I contributed 2 or 3 of the 9 items in the OP. There is at least one other contributor.

I have to admit that the information in the OP once presented this way make a lot more sense than their original representation, also these "statistics" coming from a trusted person like you save us a whole lot of time confirming their integrity.

But this does not negate the fact that many members will still set the bar too low when it comes to "evidences" against users they have an issue with, and on the contrary, the bar "can" be set too high when it's about someone they "like".

In other words, I highly doubt that the same effort would have been invested if it was not Quickseller in question, I have not been here long enough but I can easily guess that Quickseller did a lot of "terrible" things to many of you, therefore, I can't blame anyone who will use everything at their disposal to "win" something against Quickseller. This should serve as a lesson to everyone, that sometimes when you make a mistake, it doesn't matter how far away you try to run, it will always hunt you down.

Again, it's hard to argue with a hypothetical but I think you're overestimating the effort it takes to notice a sockpuppet of a cancerous trolling scammer like Quickseller. It's really no more than just reading a post, seeing a weird word or phrase, and copying it into a search box, and that last part is mostly optional when you've been around for a few years. Most people just wouldn't care enough and that's fine. I kinda had to care since Quickseller had some grudge against me for something, tried to dox me, etc, so I prefer to be aware of sockpuppets of such individuals.

Not trying to "win" anything here. There's nothing to gain for me.

If it is found that QS is PM7 then he is replying to himself.

It's clearly a parody since he's using the words/phrases from the OP. Not a bad attempt at humor albeit somewhat lame after eddie13 had already done it earlier in this thread.

Its too bad I never doxed nor tried to dox you. I only wrote things that you have written in various old posts. You are upset that you don’t get special privileges and special rules to not say things that you have said.

Based on this thread, it looks like you are very petty and vindictive. I am curious if this is why you decided to start spying on every forum member.

BTW, all this proves is that I have posted in small number of similar threads as PN7. The words in question would only be written in a small number of topics that are not common.

Is that a threat?

Are you still stalking me and my spouse on social media? Let us know when our baby is supposed to be due because we are a bit confused about that.

What kind of nonsense is it to ask if that statement is a threat.

It’s too bad I couldn’t care less about your social media, nor do I have any interest in your social media. I was told about the baby by someone else. Perhaps you should be less decisive and less people will dislike you. I doubt you will take that advice because you seem to have a need to be in the middle of everything and to be in the middle of drama. It’s like you are trying to be the popular girl in high school.

For me, posts like these are just as incriminating as any of the evidence presented here. These read exactly like someone who has had a grudge against suchmoon for a long time (i.e. QS), and not at all like a relative newbie. Why not rally against nutildah, or The-Devil, who started the threads? Why not against Lauda, who has left red trust? Instead he chooses to rally on suchmoon and even make completely unrelated and unsubstantiated claims about selling accounts?

In its only other possible interpretation it's an obviously false statement because you posted my dox so many times. I apologize for assuming that you wouldn't lie so blatantly.


Let me guess again, PrimeNumber7 was your imaginary source?

I could totally see your lack of interest in how desperately you tried to publish any little tidbit you got from it. What a pathetic waste of bandwidth, you can't even man up to admit it. ::)

I think this thread serves as a pretty good reason as to not reveal my source. Or do anything to help you for that matter.

You have a habit of picking on people who are weaker than you. That’s not a good quality and I hope other people take notice. Based on this thread, you apparently also pick on people through proxies, which is just childish. 

You're right on one part, I use Tor via socks proxy.

Good to see you revert to your main account for the conspiracy bullshit. Using your totally-not-an-alt for that was cringy.

That can give false positive result, someone ask you for advice and you say "report it to moderator, write this in comments: (insert comment)". So they just c/p that and report post or use very very similar words. It is nothing unusual I guess. How many similarities are you talking about, if it is not secret?

---

Everything here and in other thread is circumstantial evidence, there is no rock solid proof of connection, even PrimeNumber7 attacking only suchmoon (as o_e_l_e_o pointed) is circumstantial evidence. Having that said, there is probably nothing which will convince me that PM7 and QS are not alt accounts.

This sounds like a mdayonliner-style "mentoring" excuse ;D

According to Occam, the probability of a "fake newbie" (born knowing everything about forum's inner workings) asking a seasoned scammer for advice on reporting posts would be similar to the probability of said scammer having a confidential source for all this shit that he comes up with.

Not if you receive PM asking you "what to do, do you know how to report this?" and then you say "when reporting, write this in comments". I only say it can give false positive, not that it is giving. I have bunch of those PM's deleted so I can't really give you example.

Yes, that's why I said

We could go down the path of comparing all contributors to this thread with each-other and cite examples such as hilariousetc and Quickseller using the expression


But most of those suppositions could be deamed to be FUD...


Quickseller is certainly known for having talked to himself in the past, but I think a fresh approach needs to be made.

---

Without making an admission of a connection between the Quickseller and PrimeNumber7 UID's the Quickseller account could *voluntarily* agree to be permanently closed via banning by theymos with all posts/feedback etc remaining in place. There would always be doubt over a connection but the more agreesive members of BCT would just have to move on.

Without an admission by QS of a connection, PN7 could petition to have the red/negative feedback removed on the basis it is retaliatory which theymos wants a stop put to. If QS doesn't agree then I have no doubt others will continue to hammer his account with more of the same such as these two threads contain.

I can't see a clear connection hence my *neutral* cautionary note on PN7's feedback wall. At best others could also place "I suspect" style messages on PN7's wall without them being deamed "retaliatory" by theymos.

and what does that prove?


you're the one making a claim, not me. it's incumbent on you to state what your claim is, to present your evidence, and---since it's not clear what your evidence proves---to qualify it.

i asked you to qualify your numbers. what exactly do they prove? you keep implying they prove that PrimeNumber7 = Quickseller, but that isn't clear.

i'm at a loss for what "numbers" i could provide since i am not making any claim. expecting people to "prove the negative" here is very unreasonable. the burden is on you and nutildah to prove this connection beyond a doubt.


that's the point. you apparently can't imagine a plausible situation where PrimeNumber7 and Quickseller aren't the same person. and yet, you can't articulate why they must be the same person.


and from there, you conclude that they must be the same person. if you are not trying to make that claim, i suggest changing the thread title. ::)

....and it's definitely 100% circular logic.


for you to say that Quickseller and PrimeNumber7 are the same physical person using linguistic analysis is an extraordinary claim. that means they are the only person in the world who exhibits these (supposedly definitive) linguistic patterns. the existence of 2 forum accounts fitting that criteria doesn't prove that. it merely proves that 2 forum accounts share a number of linguistic similarities.


you're literally including idiomatic expressions in your data but excluding correct usage of those expressions where they don't suit your claim. you are just showcasing how this is an exercise in cherry picking.


suchmoon tagged PrimeNumber7 a long time ago as an alt of QS. he's obviously also contributing data to this analysis in an effort to make the link stick.

doesn't that explain the grudge?


this basically sums my thoughts up.

i just feel like people ITT are trying way too hard to claim/imply there is proof of a connection. there just isn't. we all have the same suspicions, but that's not good enough. red tagging based on this seems abusive/retaliatory.

Blah blah blah. It's a QS account, alright? Wtf else is it? It wouldn't be defending itself as it's doing, just as QS would without reason.

He's fucking with you all. Just lock the thread and tag PN7. ::)

It disproves your statement about expressions common in general usage and less common on bitcointalk. I mean literally the paragraph I replied to.


You made the claim that it's "likely" (or "somewhat likely" or whatever it was) for the usage of those words/phrases to be a coincidence. I take it you no longer claim that. On the flip side, neither myself nor nutildah ever aimed to prove something "beyond a doubt". You're welcome to have any doubts you want.

I think you're getting hung up on semantics, or maybe not hung up on semantics enough?  I can't tell yet.  Nutildah and suchmoon have provided an overwhelming body of circumstantial evidence.  

Now I know this isn't a court room, no prosecuters are seeking the death ban penalty, and no one is going to jail for any "crime."  Nonetheless, I think it's fair to allow the same standards of prosecution that are acceptable in the US criminal courts.  Circumstantial evidence is often allowed in court proceedings, and is often enough to make a connection to criminal acts, and will result in a conviction.

If this were a court room, we would have to leave it up to the jury to decide if the circumstantial evidence constitutes "proof."  If you and I were on the jury together, I would find it odd that you insist on focusing on the "circumstantial" aspects of each individual piece of evidence rather than see how all of the pieces of circumstantial evidence tie together beyond what can reasonably be considered "coincidental."

Suchmoon has provided statistically significant circumstantial evidence.  If you wish to play defense attorney, use the same parameters provided by nutildah and suchmoon to show how the evidence is overly coincidental.  But continuing to point to each piece of evidence and insisting that it exist independent of each other piece of evidence is disingenuous, and not very convincing.

:manz-spinning:

Originally I wanted to talk about A->B vs. A<->B connections but as I'd continued the dialogue in my head I found fleeting relevance given that QS has the reputation that they do and that PN7 would have no reason—except perhaps as a bit of a laugh—to emulate [or rather, imitate] Quickseller's typing style.

I do want to state that incessant obsession thereof is neither conducive to sanity nor is the pinnacle of productive efficiency. It is quite the shard of coincidence were a regular user to argue this case, never mind the user in question... yet I beckon towards a more apt use of your time.

Arguments derived from this scenario are based from a trite situation and I see no point in continuing thereof.

As the kids say, "peace out, dude"

Sitting on that fence seems uncomfortable, get off it and tell us if you think PrimeNumber7 is Quickseller's alt or not. I promise to throw only a medium-sized tantrum if you disagree with me.

Ah, but for you see, the fence is merely an illusion. The truth is: there is no fence.

Balance of probabilities, I would align with the common sentiment in this thread.
Beyond a reasonable doubt? It is doubtful.

---

Fences don't exist: it's a gradient, like gender. :)

Personally speaking, this is correct. Having been on the forum for as long as I have, understanding the dynamics of certain personalities and being able to recognize forum-specific linguistic patterns leads me to believe they are absolutely the same person.


No, because admittedly I did not deliver absolute proof of anything. It is simply evidence which I believe any rationally-minded person could use to conclude that in all likelihood they are the same person.


I don't understand the point you're trying to make here. There's a big difference between what you think I said and what I actually said. I made a hypothesis ("PN7 is Quickseller") and am backing it with evidence.


Again, I'm only talking about people on the forum. Don't know why you keep conflating it to mean the entire world.


Correct -- again, I'm not talking about absolute proof. I said that in the OP.


The entire basis of the analysis is based on words used by Quickseller. Including those not used by Quickseller makes no sense. Again, I don't think you understand what I am doing at a fundamental level.

Like I said in the OP, you're free to come to your own conclusions. But if you continue to misinterpret my analysis I will continue to correct your misunderstandings.

People are giving what they believing to be proof of a connection and it's pretty damning evidence to me when you count it all up, but yes, the smoking gun is missing. To compare hypothetically, if somebody took QS to court over this he'd likely get away free, but so did OJ. Sometimes all you need is a little doubt to walk away in the eyes of the law but in the court of public opinion we all know OJ is guilty even if there wasn't enough to convict in the eyes of the law (or you just have a really good lawyer who can talk a good talk and sew enough seeds of doubt). I wouldn't tag QS negative but I never tagged him originally anyway, but I think a neutral based on the evidence we have would be fine if that's what people want to do. I am however waiting for the day that everyone can move on from this though as it will just carry on forever otherwise and QS will probably always be here on one alt or another and this game of cat and mouse will likely continue on.


Well sure it can, but so can everything else that has been presented, but it all adds up and it to be a mere coincidence or all false positives would be ludicrous to me. I can't tell you how many similarities there was on the reporting because I didn't keep count and reports are expunged after a month or so, but it was something I noticed over time and was finally like, where have I seen that report before. I copied and pasted a couple and there were direct hits on both QS and PN7. Most people probably keep their reports saved in their browser like I do, so you just use the drop down menu and choose the appropriate one and I'm guessing that's where he slipped up. Or he could have just typed them out again as much like the similarities that can be found in the phrases and language used of people posting publicly the same happens for the report queue. Some people report so many posts you become accustomed to them and you don't even need to look at their name to know who it was that reported it.


Well you could, but that's why you're a moron and nobody takes half of your deductions seriously. BTW, both me and QS/PN7 both use periods at the end of our sentences. Coincidence? Possibly.

I'm not sure how much I like staff using backend information, or arguably confidential/PM information, against users like that...

Who knows... The next thing I know staff could be blabbering about my email account(s) used on the forum and have any users pissed off at me brought very close to my family's home...

How much exactly should staff-only information be expected to remain private?

When should one expect even the IP log to be leaked?

You basically have my dox, so how safe is it in your hands??

I'd like to think I could trust Bitcointalk against anything but legal subpoenas within proper jurisdiction, but maybe not?  

Maybe I should ditch this compromised account and go full anon..

BadBear set a precedence.

You'd be very crazy or naive to do so. You should work under the assumption that everything and anything that BTCT has could leak anytime, especially since the expansion of the "account recovery team".

From About privacy (https://bitcointalk.org/privacy.php):

You are 100% correct..
That whole spiel about trusting 3rd parties and such..
Maybe I've been too far into the "I didn't do anything wrong so don't have anything to hide" camp...

Seems PN7 being QS is worthy of breaking into the qualification of "very rare" circumstances..

Seems BCT has turned into argument city recently.  
But if someone has alt accounts they should be banned.

It's been like that for as long as I can remember.

Bye guys, it was nice knowing you O0

you asked me a question and i gave my opinion. i wouldn't call that "making a claim". it's certainly not like making a thread called "PrimeNumber7 is an alt of Quickseller". :P

i would consider it unlikely at this point, although i'm still frustrated that nobody in the thread could really articulate anything about the statistical significance of the data. everything boils down to "that looks compelling". so that's where i stand.


i appreciate that, though by comparison i'd say that tspacepilot was significantly more humble about the limits of his "experimental" model despite seeming much more well versed in forensic linguistics and statistics.

back then, basically everyone acknowledged it was not proof either. the only reason quickseller was officially "caught" was that he had a meltdown in the thread and eventually just admitted it in some bizarre attempt at rationalization.

i was a bit perturbed that people seemed to be accepting the OP as proof ("Forensic linguistics never fail." etc etc) and probably took out some of that out on you and nutildah, apologies.

@nutildah almost everything in my last post went right over your head. :-\ let's agree to disagree.


i agree with all that. like i said from the start, i have the same suspicions as everyone else. but i strongly believe this falls under "circumstantial evidence" and is therefore undeserving of red trust. i think anything else would be bad precedent and would encourage more lynch mob behavior.

in fact just to be clear---i don't give a shit about quickseller. what i'm obviously bothered about is this lynch mob culture, and the tendency to throw spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. the OP admitted he lacked proof but wanted to make the accusation anyway, just to see if it would develop into the downfall of PrimeNumber7. and truthfully we all know: you don't need proof if you get the right people on your side. the danger of mob mentality is ever present....

Irony:


Sit down, no-one was talking to you.

Aside from Admins, staff have access to very little information. I couldn't leak your info such as IPs and emails or anything else even if I wanted to and there's a huge difference between commenting on words/phrases being used and actual private information.

Theymos also won't give out your info unless with a subpoena. I believe he's ignored many legal requests before if they're not legally required. For instance, if the police merely asked him to give yours or my information out I don't believe he would. However, if it was court ordered then I'm sure he will comply in most cases unless he believed he didn't have to (for instance, I'm not sure how valid say a Chinese or UK warrant would apply to a US-based website). I think theymos has even commented on these requests before where he's refused to hand things over because he didn't believe they would be just or helpful to their case (though don't quote me on that but maybe someone can find the times he's talked about this sort of stuff).


Alt accounts are allowed as per forum rules. If someone has alts that have already been banned then that's a different story.


Well unfortunately that's just something that happens around here and most of us probably get dragged into at some point. A lot of people will hold grudges when they feel like they've been wronged by someone or they've lost money or earning opportunities because of others and this sort of tit for tat to try take the other down will be infinite until one person finally goes over. I definitely think there are certain cases that should have truces called upon, but it's easy to say when I'm not the one in it.

Its not just me. Apparently you went over everybody's heads.


Not at all. Its because I want people to be aware that evidence of the connection exists. If I wanted to actively contribute to his downfall I would have neg tagged him.

The accusation was floating around for a long time and PN7 got red tagged before this thread even existed. As you can see it didn't change many opinions, which is pretty much what I would have expected. Most people simply don't care but for those that do (e.g. people attacked by Quickseller) it's good to know which users they should avoid dealing with.

I have seen Suchmoon insinuate this connection for months and have tried to bring this to the attention of people who are frequently tagging people. I have been paying attention and all this ultimately can be traced to what Suchmoon has posted.  The OPs role is puppet, the-devil is a suspicious merit farmer who abandoned his account as soon as he created another thread about me. The-devil has no real reason to highlight the connection because QS who created a flag on him has no power to harm his account and he cited literally nothing as proof. Lauda is not acting fairly in my opinion and I think he should remove the tag if he can’t articulate evidence. Another suspicious new user made an attempt at getting Lauda to look at merit he sent me months ago. I have seen Lauda get attacked a lot but I am willing to bet that wasn’t the last time he accidentally quoted his own post.

I think you bring up this detail is akin to pettifogging.

I have reported many posts, without the expectation of any kind of recognition or reward (unlike some other people who brag about their report count),  and for no reason other than to make the forum better and cleaner. I however will no longer be reporting posts as this has been ‘rewarded’ with information from this activity being used in a witch hunt. I would recommend others do the same if the official stance on disclosing this information is too bad, we have the right to disclose it when we wish. I don’t think many other people would feel this kind of disclosure is appropriate.

I have seen you making shit up for years so I'm not going to ask for proof of any of the above. Sad to see that your new-found friendship with Lauda didn't last.

The accusation was floating around? Like just in the ether? The beginnings of those accusations couldn't have been you couldn't it and you are simply laundering your own past accusations as if they were just "floating around" as if materializing out of the ether and from no one in particular? The really dumb thing about all of this is, even if you are right, who gives a fuck? Quickseller is a huge pain in the ass and has a history of making false accusations, along with a relatively minor impropriety were the damage was minimal if anything. What exactly are you protecting the community from here? I wouldn't trust Quickseller but I don't consider him a threat. All of this is self serving mobbing over nothing.

I have suspected it for a long time, that's not exactly a secret given my neutral trust rating but as far as I can remember the first public mention of this link didn't come from me or from anyone I may have told about it. If I'm wrong about it I'm sure you'll prove it with solid evidence.

I also never said anything about "protecting the community". As far as being a threat, people casually doxed by Quickseller might disagree with you but it's up to everyone's individual choice if they want to share personal info with PrimeNumber7 or include him in their trust lists.

Why would I waste my time disproving a premise you have the burden of proof on? This is a pattern of behavior among several "scambusters" here on the forum. They make accusations and just repeat them until people forget where it even came from and just act as it is now accepted fact. This is also known as operant conditioning, a primary technique used in propaganda and marketing. If you are so concerned about doxing, why is it you still have Vod on your trust list? Like I said before, you have a habit of picking a target then arranging facts around them to manipulate a certain narrative rather than following the facts themselves. The primary purpose of the trust system is to protect the community. Your use of it is an implicit claim of doing so with your action.

I was talking about YOUR claim of laundering accusations and whatnot. I don't have a burden of proof for that, you do.


So you're protecting the community by including PrimeNumber7 in your trust list?

I feel safer already, thanks.

They post lies and just repeat them until people forget they are liars and start believing in their lies. This technique is often used by scammers so accusations have to be repeated so people won't forget that they are potentially lying.

Shit, I didn't move out of scam accusation board to listen all this crap again I usually listened from people accused to run scam ICO's, so fuck off TECSHARE.

Of course you are, and in the process just skipping the part where you prove your prerequisite claim:


Seeing a lot of this going on too:

https://i.imgur.com/6g39sr3.jpg

that's probably because nobody in the thread actually knows dick about forensic linguistics or statistical rigor despite the armchair expertise intended to show otherwise.


it's much safer for you to achieve consensus first. that precludes any risk of having feedback countered or trust line exclusion or general drama around your judgment. group consensus is essential for mob mentality, which was the apparent object here since (as you acknowledge) proof was never on the table.

it's very transparent what was really happening here. i'm glad someone---TECSHARE---is willing to call it out for what it is.

some people are trying to act as if quickseller was such a huge scammer who scammed so many people out of so much money (::)), that it's vitally important that his alts be outed even absent any direct evidence. people who were active during quickseller's heyday can instantly see through that transparent posturing.

if quickseller had ever stolen money or actually achieved a long con, these low standards for evidence might be acceptable. in truth, people are only taking that line because quickseller showed himself to be an unhinged, sociopathic pain in the fucking ass (which is the true reason he fell from grace, not "forensic linguistics" or "self-escrow")---not because there is truly any moral justification. they are transparently just lynch mobbing because they hate quickseller. as TECSHARE notes, "scambusting" is the perfect veneer to engage in such behavior:


quickseller is known for his ridiculous logical contortions and unproven accusations against other people. why reduce ourselves to that level?

Sorry, I thought you can read dates. Lauda's tag precedes this thread. Do you need help figuring that out?

Prior accusations:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215097.msg53538429#msg53538429
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5195337.msg52912409#msg52912409

There is a lot more if you care to look for it, which I'm guessing you don't and you'll deflect into something else now.

are there prior accusations from before you tagged PrimeNumber7 in july 2019?


while PrimeNumber7 doesn't presently have particularly valuable feedback or trust list, i'm beginning to see the value in including users from both sides of any "forum drama", if not generally issuing counter feedback. or at least tempering my trust list to account for how DT is actually used.

it's obvious that trust feedback (including DT) is generally used to facilitate personal vendettas and forum politics, not to mention that proof is optional. as TECSHARE pointed out, there are doxxers and plenty of legally/morally questionable behavior whichever side of the divide (DT and its detractors) you look at, so DT itself is not an accurate gauge for what is acceptable behavior on this forum. those who were around during quickseller's heyday know that he likely could have easily redeemed himself and retained his DT status in 2015 had he simply kneeled at the time instead of doubling down on his scoundrel behavior and digging himself deeper and deeper. (as we know quickseller tends to do)

i think all of this is fairly obvious to anyone who knows the facts and has a brain. very few people are willing to call it out or accept their role in perpetuating it though. props to TECSHARE and mikeywith for having the balls not to toe the party line. some other people ITT just depress the fuck outta me. :-\

I don't know. How is that relevant?


Whatever floats your boat. I don't see how that explains trusting and distrusting the same person at the same time but it doesn't really matter to me.

i think it's pretty clear from the following conversation:


TECSHARE asserted the accusation against PrimeNumber7 originated with you (and insinuated this thread is part of a personal ongoing effort to smear him). you denied that assertion, but AFAICT the earliest public accusation does appear to come from you. please correct me if i'm wrong.

that's why it seemed relevant---it was literally the subject of discussion for several vitriolic posts back and forth.


perhaps that should boil down to the individual feedback and trust lists since they are two different accounts.

i think of trust in terms of "whose feedback (including counter feedback) do i want to see to assess trader reputability", not "is there circumstantial evidence of an alt account? i better change my trust ratings based on that!!1!!1!"

i would add PrimeNumber7 to my trust list too if i thought his feedback and trust list were actually valuable to me. they aren't.

Why did you omit your own post from the fake quote pyramid? It originated with you claiming (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53672921#msg53672921) that this thread made the PN7 == QS accusation but that's clearly false. I didn't make that accusation either - my neutral rating was worded the way it was (and made neutral to begin with) for a good reason.

So why don't you dispense with the pretzels and state exactly what it is you're trying to pin on me. Posting a neutral rating based on a suspicion? Guilty as charged. Anything else?

Yeah the part where you start the accusations, then refer to them later as if some one else started them. You then claim that prior accusations exist, you swear it, except you can't produce them. Like I said before:



You are clearly demonstrating this pattern of behavior regardless if it was a neutral or not. You started the accusations, then a bunch of people who have disputes with Quickseller repeated them, you pretend like the accusations just popped out of nowhere and are just accepted fact. This is what is called information laundering and the media does it all the time to push bullshit stories. Oh, Joe Bob tweeted it, we can report it as he stated it. All it is is a thin legal protection from being culpable for spreading malicious lies. In your case a thin pretext for taking responsibility for claiming some one else made the claims and referencing back to them as justification for your current accusations.

I said that public accusations (yes, started by someone else) existed prior to this thread. I did produce examples. Which part of this are you disputing?

It seems to me like you're purposefully overlooking the obvious (that PN7 is the same person as QS) in order to play lawyer and cast a shadow of a doubt. That's fine, and I do appreciate dissenting opinions, but as I said in the beginning this isn't a court of law. We're not convicting anybody of anything here, and no sentences are being handed out. Therefore, I don't need to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. If you continue to insist they are not the same person, feel free to leave him a neutral or positive feedback or whatever you need to do to let other forum members know that I am wrong.

I stand by my initial assertion:

Each piece of evidence on its own does not mean anything, but when all are taken together as a whole (everything, not just the linguistic comparisons), anybody should be able to reasonably conclude that QS and PN7 are the same person.

If you disagree, that's fine, and I can live with that.

Both of which occurred AFTER your July 2nd 2019 accusation. As I said previously, you were the source of the accusation, a bunch of people who also hold grudges against Quickseller repeat it, you reference your own accusations as if they came from no where and are just accepted fact. This is basic "information laundering".

of course not. it's a kangaroo court:

i don't give a shit about quickseller. i'm concerned about the next person brought before this kangaroo court and the next one after that. my problem is with this general process of trumping up unproven accusations and encouraging mob justice.


i didn't misquote or misorder anything, so the characterization as "fake" seems pretty dishonest. my post came before your entire exchange with TECSHARE and had nothing to do it. why would i include it, to confuse people? here is the full quote for context:



just......no. why are you trying to project weird false shit onto me?

i suggested here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53676687#msg53676687) that the first publicly known accusation against PrimeNumber7 was your trust feedback posted in july 2019. i understand now that you are trying to paint that as "not an accusation" but it's what i (and i assume TECSHARE) were referring to. "Likely a well-known scammer evading red trust" is definitely an accusation, and i think it's insulting to everyone's intelligence to act like you weren't talking about quickseller.


tbh, i'm really only here at this point because you made some obvious mischaracterizations about things i said/did, so i felt compelled to respond.

but since you asked: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53678431#msg53678431

at first i dismissed the idea but AFAICT it's true: you were the first to publicly accuse PrimeNumber7, and now you are here perpetuating that accusation. that makes it difficult to dismiss what TECSHARE is saying.


that's a blatant straw man. the argument was never about whether public accusations existed prior to this thread (which was created 3 days ago ::)). the point of contention was always this:


anyway, i need to bow out of this discussion. 100% not worth it. i've not seen so much intellectual dishonesty in one place in a very, very long time. from deflection to fallacy to mischaracterization, etc rinse repeat---it is exhausting. i feel dirty just participating. the reputation board is a cesspool.

keep fighting the good fight, TECSHARE. i honestly don't know how you keep it up around here.

later guys. i hope i didn't fuck up your witch burning. i'll stay out of the next one....

It's not even that. What "crime" are we "trying" him for?


You keep insisting we are trying him for a crime when we are not. That's not intellectually dishonest?

You came in here mischaracterizing what I was doing from the get go and then continued to focus on trivial aspects instead of attempting to visualize the bigger picture. I never said what I was doing was scientific or amounted to "linguistic forensics", but then you criticized me for not satisfying your standards for that field, which is also intellectually dishonest. It's as if I painted a picture of an iguana and you told me that it was a terrible cat. I thought maybe your misunderstanding was born out of confusion, but you insist that its not, so indeed there's not much left to be said at this point.


It's not for everybody, that's for certain.


You're always welcome to participate in the discussions here.

My neutral rating literally says "Likely a well-known scammer evading red trust." If you want to think that I masterminded some scheme with this Jedi mind trick by saying "scammer" and everyone thinking "Quickseller" - I can't stop you. Your penchant for conspiracy theories is well know as is your inability to be wrong. You might want to continue this in a reeeeeeeeeeeeee thread since this one is getting off rails.

If anyone else feels that me saying "The accusation was floating around for a long time and PN7 got red tagged before this thread even existed" was deceptive - I'm sorry. That was not my intent.


Your post said that nutildah made the accusation (of PN7 being QS, unless you mean some other accusation? that'd be quite weird though). I responded that the accusation existed before this thread. Which part confuses you?

Great fucking question. What is the point of all this again even if you are right?


Even if this was planned carefully, this is hardly a mastermind plan. No, just plain old deceit and spite, it doesn't even require planning, just being really butthurt and deluded. Thanks by highlighting the fact I got you here by bringing up conspiracy theories as a last ditch effort to make these accusations seem unrealistic and over the top, very elucidating regarding how you operate. Can't argue the facts? Attack the source.

Which will undoubtedly start with “..rant rave blah blah ...nutilduhhhhhhhhhhh...show me the man l’ll show you the crime.... blah blah ...etc, etc....”

Isn't that what you and figment have been trying to do for the last couple of pages? Not a lot of discussion as to whether PN7 is an alt of QS, mostly just complaints about how those suspicions came up.

I don't mind that (preferably in a separate thread) but let's be real as to what you're after. You don't care or you don't want to admit you misjudged PN7 and you need a scapegoat. Well, I'm your man (or woman if you trust PN7), find me some crimes I'm guilty of.

No, that is only a response to your most recent last ditch attempt at distracting from you pretending these accusations just appeared out of the ether and didn't come from you to begin with.

Believe it or not (I have a feeling you won't) but there were other people who suspected that PN7 is QS without my help. If I'm not mistaken nutildah himself figured it out on his own.

But if the Jedi theory makes it easier for you to cope - stick to it.

I too suspected that PrimeNumber7 was an alt of an active member almost immediately after noticing him.  In fact I sent suchmoon a PM on June 20, 2019 expressing my suspicion that it was Quckseller.  At the time I had noticed a few newbie accounts that raised my suspicions, including some that were registered in prior years who had only recently woken up.



Is this the Jedi Mind Trick's equivalent of revers psychology?

That's why you're on TECSHARE's shitlist too - you think too much.


That's way above my pay grade, I'm a beginner Jedi with simple tricks. I say "scammer", you think "Quickseller".

I was waiting for him to suggest that I may have planted the seed, and be elevated to Jedi status.  No such luck?  Oh well.  I suspect I might be on his "ignore" list as well, since he hasn't responded to me in weeks.

See what I mean? A bunch of pals just sit around and reaffirm each others suspicions then just pretend it is fact without ever substantiating anything. Have enough people repeat it, then you can just pretend it is accepted truth. This is a tactic called "manufacturing consensus (https://cognitive-liberty.online/manufacturing-consensus/)", and it is a well known methodology for managing narratives such as done in propaganda, marketing, and public relations.

It's really hard to see what you mean when you keep jumping around like a rabbit on cocaine. So first it was my trust rating from July last year that you had a problem with. Is DireWolfM14's independently arisen suspicion from June last year also a problem?

If you had done your due diligence when you added PN7 and if you had asked me about that feedback, you could have had your tantrum months ago and possibly avoided the embarrassment today.

The only one jumping around is you in a desperate attempt to topic slide and hope people will be distracted from what I am bringing attention to, that you are so far the first one documented to have made the accusation as you pretend it originated elsewhere. More NO U eh?

Why is it so important to identify who was the first documented accuser?  So far at least five members have come forward and claimed to have independently arrived at the same conclusions, all around the same time.  Why is that so hard to accept?

I've said it before; the evidence is all circumstantial, but in combination an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence can be compelling.  If you disagree, debunk the evidence.  Don't attempt to deflect, and levy an accusation on the person(s) presenting the evidence.  I know you've had long running disputes with both nutildah and suchmoon, but it is possible for them to right from time to time, even if you think they are wrong most of the time.

Why is it so important to tie these two accounts together? What crimes exactly is this preventing? This is about nothing but petty interpersonal disputes, and the fact that Suchmoon can't document any earlier claims after trying to pretend it wasn't them just solidifies this fact. I like the touch of "NO U" you added as well. Very slick.

It appears that someone is especially petty and vindictive today.

I’m curious how many other reputations you have damaged via proxies as you did in this case.

False. Your reputation is being damaged by your sleazy sockpuppeting but the good news is that there are some people who don't care and will be happy to trust you regardless. So carry on.

Lately Quickseller has been acting more reasonably than you. Think on that for a few minutes. I still haven't got anyone to answer me on why exactly this needs to be made into a federal case. What exactly is Quickseller up to that needs to be exposed so imminently?

We don't need the thread to spin into a new direction, again, TECSHARE. ::)

The thread ("PrimeNumber7 is an alt of Quickseller") seems to be ending, as most are in agreement that it is highly likely to be Quickseller's alt, and many would say it is his alt. If you want to start debating whether Quickseller and his new alt are trustworthy or not, why not start a new thread?

Now since you brought it up, let's think about this for a few minutes... what behaviors got QuickSeller into trouble in the first place? and now, what behaviors is he exhibiting right now?

.. hint: it's the same: lying, being deceitful, dishonesty, and then harassing other members (something you always claim you are so against, but you are OK with Quickseller doing it -- hypocrisy).

One does not get a second chance by acting the same way he did back then. He just wants to be on DT and saw an opportunity with the latest trust changes, got caught, and is trying to weasel his way out of it.. and failing miserably.

IMO, DT is no place for someone like Quickseller who is still exhibiting his dishonest and greedy nature, and I believe that was the goal with this alt, to make it on DT. ::)

Sadly, he hasn't learned.

I thought about it. I still wouldn't trust him at all as there are many shitty things he's done to numerous people, so while I'm sure Lauda appreciates the apology it doesn't make Quickseller "reasonable" by any means.

It's not really a federal case so maybe that's why you're not getting an answer.

Funny you should ask that.

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5102296.0).


Apply a Groucho Marx mask, and:

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5102296.0).


If someone whom I explicitly distrust disguised himself and tricked me into trusting him, I would want to know.  I would also admit my mistake, rectify it, and move on with life.  I wouldn't deflect blame for my error onto those who exposed the disguise.  Not even if those messengers were people with whom I've had a history of disagreements.

I don't think anyone has claimed it as a fact, but numerous people independently came to the conclusion that they were very likely the same which says a lot and is a pretty big coincidence. I guess we could all be suffering from mass delusion and seeing something that isn't there or just some huge coincidences but I doubt it. It's not a fact that he's QS, but it is very likely. People probably shouldn't be leaving negative over it, but at the same time the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming and I would say they are almost certainly the same person so maybe that's a good enough reason for others if they've already left QS negative. A neutral warning however is more appropriate in my opinion.


This is a petty dispute, but it's one that has been propagated by both sides and will likely continue unless they call a truce, but these tit-for-tat exposes aren't uncommon here and there have been plenty of times where grudges have caused users to try take each other down in anyway they can. I guess if you're of the opinion that QS is shady/dishonest or a scammer then I guess it is important to those people to call it out just like alts of other scammers are tagged as such.


Again, I guess it all depends on what your opinion of QS is. If you think he's a scammer or shady then that's probably why they feel the need to warn others. If PN7 is trying to build that account up to get it into a position of trust or start things like escrowing again then to some people that is probably a cause for alarm, but of course a lot of this will be fuelled by their dislike of him and which I don't blame them for either and I believe it was QS rubbing people the wrong way that started all this in the first place, and then of course there was all the attacking he did on that account and with alts that certainly pissed a lot of people off. I don't particularly trust Quickseller, especially after his behaviour in attacking anyone associated in some minuscule way to the users he doesn't like, and I'm not entirely sure what his motivations are here; honest or potentially nefarious, but I wouldn't out and out call him a scammer or a bad person either. His intentions could have always been just to build accounts up to honestly earn a living, which I wouldn't blame him for, or to get an account into a position of trust to do something bad with it. I guess we'll probably never know, but unless people are willing to forget about things that happened in the past and call a truce then I think this sort of tit for tat behaviour is going to continue forever.

In addition to ibminer's words, this is a great reason, and there exists others as well which I am more or less reluctant to share at the moment for the sake of the people affected by it.


I am also of this opinion, and perhaps the lack of leaving a negative is a good incentive for him to try to turn a corner. On the other hand, there's no escaping the fact that this is his alt (whoops, guess I called it a "fact"), and every time I see PN7 post I just think to myself, "why not just post this under your Quickseller account?" Whenever he replies to me in other threads, its just kind of insulting to my intelligence that he expects me to just continue pretending they're not the same person when (IMO) they so obviously are.

He's been so fundamentally dishonest with malicious intent (like the blatant lies he makes up about other people, one of which he apologized for recently, a few hundred to go) that it would be prudent to be aware of his alts as much as reasonably possible on this forum.

I think I've said earlier in this thread (or the other one, can't keep up with this shit) that if he had genuinely turned the corner 4 years ago he could have a decent reputation by now but he kept digging his hole - complete with sockpuppeting and all the other nonsense that got him into trouble to begin with - to the point where I don't think I can believe anymore that he has the capacity of true remorse and reform.

This might be petty, I don't know, it's up to others to decide.

No one tricked me into doing shit. You are mistaken. I simply do not give a fuck or consider Quickseller enough of a threat to take 30 seconds to change my inclusions even if it is him. This is just more "NO U" tactics designed to try to cast blame on me because I dare have a different opinion than you. No one was talking about this until I started pointing out how these accusations are based 100% on petty bullshit and manufactured by all the same people with disputes with him. He has been a dishonest troll. So fucking what? I consider several of you going after Quickseller here to be dishonest trolls as well. Is he stealing from people? No? Then leave it the fuck out of the trust system.

This is all just a campaign targeted at a person who has been a pain in the ass to all the people targeting him, and it is extremely transparent. This is all very selfish self serving drama that is destructive to the community to make this kind of behavior a precedent. You are going around in the name of making the forum a better place and using that authority as a cudgel to attack people with whom you have long standing personal disputes. I find this bullshit you are whipping EXACTLY as destructive as anything Quickseller has ever done, because really it is the same bullshit, just going the other direction, and I spoke out about it then too when he was perpetrating it.


As I explained before, there is no path to redemption with you people no matter what he does anyway. Thus, you literally give him zero incentive to change his behavior. You are all Quickseller.

That's a good point. What would you like to see done as an incentive for him to change his behavior?

Well for a start perhaps this mobilization of the "get Quickseller at all costs" mob could be called off. So what if he has an alt. Leave a neutral on the suspect accounts and call it a day. What the fuck are we even doing here? This is counterproductive in many ways and sets a very bad precedent.

Ok, mobsters, back off.

As for what we're doing here - you tell me. I thought this was settled on page 2 or 3 before you decided to fan the flames because of a neutral feedback I left months ago.

Yeah, you're right. I am the one who started multiple threads over this. The fact that I posted, in them, clearly that is the problem. You skipped the "call it a day" part.

You make it sound like we're a posse hellbent on a lynching, but you are misrepresenting the situation quite dramatically.  First, you're neglecting the fact that many of this so-called mob has had these suspicions for well over six months.  Not one of the mob members went looking to tarnish PN7's account, and a neutral review by suchmoon was sufficient for most of us.

So, who spurred this latest bout of drama?  I would suggest the majority of the blame should rest squarely on PrimeNumber7 himself for nominating himself for the "newbie of the year" contest.  None of this would be an issue if he would have been content to build his account remain below the radar.

Even after the drama started to unfold, in the first post I made on the subject I said the following:


So, please stop trying to make this sound like some witch hunt by a bunch blood-thirsty Quickseller hunters.  The facts don't support your hyperbole.

on the contrary, if you had left things at that (neutral feedback months ago), we wouldn't be having this discussion.

you said yourself, your true motive here is to keep him out of signature campaigns, etc---petty personal disputes. that is what you are doing here:


you've transparently stated your intentions. your role in this "investigation"/thread is to prevent someone from gaining "whatever it is that he wants to achieve". through that lens, the veil of "scam busting" really falls apart---you're just trumping up unproven accusations and making a public spectacle to hurt your apparent enemy.

i don't understand how these unproven witch hunts against the people you dislike are in the interest of the forum. it seems like a slippery slope towards outright abuse of the default trust system, if it couldn't already be considered that.

if it wasn't clear, that is what TECSHARE is talking about. next time maybe just leave a neutral tag and actually call it a day?


i feel the same way, i mean, who the fuck cares?

but apparently you and suchmoon are polar opposites in this respect.....

That is exactly what this is. That is exactly what Quickseller is guilty of himself. You all just want to have it both ways where it is excusable for you but not for him. Oh wow, they were making accusations for over 6 months! Clearly that makes the claims more useful and valid because they repeated it over and over.

Not really. You're welcome to express your opinion like everyone else.


I don't mind calling it a day unless you have any more concerns on the topic, which I'd be happy to answer.


Thank you for trying to explain my motives to me but you might want to re-read my post, particularly the bolded part.

I wouldn't mind Quickseller working towards his goals in an honest and transparent way, as I've mentioned more than once already.

nail on the head. people around here are engaging in the exact sort of things quickseller is so hated for---endless unproven accusations and grudges, absurd rationalizations for their unsavory behavior, etc. why do they expect be looked upon with favor after this?

default trust members should be mature and reasonable adults. they aren't supposed to act like fucking quickseller at his worst!


your opinion that quickseller is supposedly being deceptive doesn't address the "engaging in unproven witch hunts" aspect.


you're willing to call it a day after the witch hunt is over. that's comforting. ::)

I'm just correcting your almost 180-degree misinterpretation of my intent, again. Seeing how your "witch hunt" argument originates from that misinterpretation there is nothing I can add to it. If you think that I did something wrong with the PN7 == QS suspicion then you should probably exclude me from your trust list.

again, that doesn't address the fact that you engage in unproven witch hunts against other people. that you think quickseller is deceptive doesn't "prove" anything and it doesn't make this thread any less of a "witch hunt".


just......no. your grasp of logic is flat out puzzling.

what you wrote was extremely transparent. i believe people in this thread are capable of seeing through this attempt at rationalization.

anyway, this whole culture is super embarrassing for the forum IMO. why can't we just have a normal reputation system with minimal drama? "is there a scam happening? no? move on".......that's how things should work.

you know, pretty much the opposite of how things work now: "there's an unproven accusation about an alt connection 'floating around'? let's put on a show trial and see if we can nail this guy!"

there are people around here who have the power to change things. it starts with taking the high road and not turning every little past disagreement into a perpetually overblown petty drama that you subject the rest of the forum to. what you and nutildah did here saved precisely zero people from being scammed. it was purely vindictive and that's obvious on its face. i still fail to see any justifiable reason to engage in this kind of behavior.

anyway, you're gonna keep rationalizing your witch hunts and it's not gonna convince me, so i believe we're at an impasse. i'll steer clear of your next witch hunt since obviously nothing is gonna change. just wanted to make my opinion known for all the other people out there who are naturally looking at the current trust/reputation system in disgust.

But that was my point in my previous post; i.e. Suchmoon did leave a neutral and call it a day, months ago.  He didn't start this thread, Nutildah did.  He didn't start the previous thread, some butthurt newbie did.  He didn't start this drama, PrimeNumber7 did when he nominated himself.

And Suchmoon certainly doesn't need me defending him, he's quite capable.

---

I don't know where you get the notion that Suchmoon and I need to agree on everything.  Suchmoon and I do share the concern of PN7 marching his way towards DT.  That would be detrimental, in my opinion.  But, if he earns a few sats on a signature campaign, that doesn't trigger my concern.

However, Quickseller isn't stalking me.  He hasn't spend the better part of two years trying to dox me.  So, understandably, I don't have the same emotional reaction that Suchmoon may have towards his continued deceitful methods.

Right. Shit you make up is a fact and you know me better than I do ;D

I would suggest that you start a new thread to expose my dirty deeds but you're such an anti-witch-hunter and high-road-rider that you'd rather derail this one.

My Friday beverage beckons so I must go without responding to your latest batch of fallacies, please don't take it personally.

I have however been a target of Quickseller over a span of years, yet some how that doesn't count does it?

I wonder if chipmixer feels they are getting their $6 per post worth out of bickering posts such as this:


(Can you see where I'm going with this people?)

I'm quite certain I'll have 100+ posts this week so this costs them $0. And DarkStar_ if free to not pay for any posts he doesn't like or kick me out of the campaign altogether... I think it would be far worse if I tried changing the way I post to appease the campaign.

Thanks for your concern though.

Oh I didn't say anything about the campaign manager.... I said the paymaster. In this case Chipmixer themselves.

Funny these ratings always appear on my trust page when I am critical of their friends.

"owlcatz   2020-01-24   Reference (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53694271#msg53694271)   Whiny little meta guy who makes EVERYTHING about himself at some point. QS doxxed me too bro, so wtf? Let it go man.... ??? "

The whole point is I let it go. What is your excuse?

No, I'm just posting my observations about your behaviour, not mine. ::)

Cheers and good bye all this thread is dead to me now. :P

TimeLord* -- why exactly are you not pointing out the other paid posts in this thread.. like the ones by PrimeNumber7 (Quickseller), TECSHARE, figmentofmyass, etc.?  .. stop derailing, deflecting, or whatever you want to call it.


The forum generally sees a person as a person, not an account. Sure, alts are "allowed", but when a person is banned, do they just ignore their alts because the alts didn't do anything? NO! The alts also get banned.

Why should it be left out of the trust system when he is clearly an alt of Quickseller? -- a person who has been identified in the trust system as an escrow scammer, a person who publicly went after many other members in the past for pointing out his dishonest behaviors, and even recently.

He should be elated that he hasn't been banned for his "dishonest trolling" and has only received neutral ratings and can still get a paid signature!

Nobody is muzzling him, he can still talk and be a "dishonest troll" all he wants, his current feedback ratings & exclusions in the trust system don't hinder that at all, so WTF are you all whining about? QuickSeller, and all of you defending him, only appear mad right now because he can no longer make it to a position of trust.

The people defending Quickseller just look like a bunch of corrupted defense lawyers who've had one too many mimosas. -- that's right, mimosas! :D

Good luck with the arguing, I really don't have the time for it.

Fixed that for you.



Yeah, shame on us for "derailing" this mobbing that is happening for reasons no one can seem to justify. The point is this devalues the trust system, perpetuates unnecessary drama, and sets a bad precedent for its use, and for what? So a handful of you with grudges can sooth your own butthurt by pursuing personal vendettas? These series of threads are a great demonstration how everyone pushing them is only interested in serving themselves at the expense of the community.

At this rate, this thread will surely make it to 15-20 pages or so..

None of the above.  See my trust/feedback page for my posts concerning Quickseller (all posted *before* these two threads were started). My feelings on QS are well known.

---

As to suchmoon - is he the one behind the seemingly ponzi website suchmoon.com and/or the twitter feed promoting that scam that also bares his user name: twitter.com/suchmoon Archive [A1 (https://archive.ph/SWDon)], [A2 (https://web.archive.org/web/20200125055604/https://twitter.com/suchmoon/status/427865949979422721)], [B1 (https://archive.ph/FPe7l)], [B2 (https://web.archive.org/web/20200125055706/https://twitter.com/suchmoon/status/424256347597570048)]

---

Think it's FUD?

The twitter name suchmoon predates the BitCoinTalk name by a month.

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blob10524ab33bb4c2a0.jpeg

---

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blob5621cbb3ec3970de.jpeg

---

As does the domain name:

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blob6435a9ad9dd2c4fa.jpeg

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/05/16/blobe126caaff419f6b8.jpeg

---

...and who starts a reputation thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=512894.0) just 40 days after they first register?  ::)

Now that you explained all that numerous times in a completely drama-free way, can we get back on topic or do you have other grievances that absolutely need to be in this thread?


It must be because of my charming personality.


I don't use Twitter or whatever the fuck that is and seriously - if you found my reputation thread then why are you derailing this one?

*Cough* - doesn't know what twitter is...  ::)


How am I derailing this thread?

Did any of you good people on DT come to my rescue when hilarious made a sweeping statement about me that has no basis in truth?

Did any of you good people on DT come to my rescue when eddie13 criticised my previous post?

---

You good people on DT want to attack others and stand back when one of your own does the attacking, then scratch your heads when anyone wants to question your actions?

Really?

Stay on topic then and don't give lip-service...

I did?

I think I tend not to criticize your posts, because . . well . . it's unnecessary..

and then he collaborated with nutildah to produce the evidence in this thread. read the OP to the end, this post, (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53661360#msg53661360) etc.


but you're gonna defend him anyway, right? got it. :)

FYI my issue is also with you, nutildah, and anyone else defending the practice of using threads like this (full of unproven accusations) to publicly disgrace people. my concern is this forum's embarrassing and fucked up brand of mob justice, not suchmoon specifically. (although i will say his self-righteousness and intellectual dishonesty are infuriating)


i was merely implying that your and my opinion on this subject was reasonable. as opposed to some other people....


suchmoon does indeed seem super emotional around quickseller.


typical.

1. omit my entire post so you are free to mischaracterize every word i said. (which you did)
2. fail to address a single point that i made.
3. claim that i'm lying without proving it
4. toss in a completely unproven reference to "fallacies" because why not?

do you seriously wanna go tit for tat on intellectual dishonesty? pretty much everything you say at this point is an obvious deflection, mischaracterization, fallacy, or outright lie. the irony of you accusing anyone else of dishonest behavior at this point is fucking mind blowing.

you are truly lucky that people around here haven't studied logic, otherwise they'd see right through your bullshit.

---

i wouldn't start a thread about you because i'm not petty and vindictive. i also have zero interest in "exposing you" (wtf? ???). unlike you, my mind doesn't work like that---publicly smearing people is not a hobby of mine.

my sole interest is trying to get you (and nutildah etc) to stop publicly mobbing people like this. that is all.

For the sake of having an honest conversation, can we please try to cut back on all the hyperbole?


We're comfortable with you feeling the accusation is "unproven," however, we're not attempting to "publicly disgrace" anybody. You seem intent on mischaracterizing the nature of this thread.


Again, you keep conflating administration of "justice" with anything that we're doing here.


We're not "publicly mobbing" people. We're simply presenting information requested by others. We're not a kangaroo court or a lynch mob. We're also not the Gestapo, a team of secret/thought police, reputation assassins or whatever similar analogy comes to mind.

Back to the topic at hand: do you personally believe PN7 is an alt of Quickseller, or not?

I'd be appreciative if you could just answer the question without engaging in some sort of deflection or castigation.

Whatever butthurt you might have against someone else should also be moved to the appropriate thread(s).

This is about PN7 == QS. Some random Twitter account has nothing to do with it. I can't prevent you from posting that weird shit but have some dignity and move where it belongs. It's just fucking pathetic how you're grasping at straws.


LOL, you sure have fooled me.

Love how the accusers are all of a sudden pretending to be the voices of reason so they can project their own behavior on to everyone calling them out. This is of course as they have their proxies attack via trust ratings and spamming false accusations in other threads. How long is everyone going to put up with this kind of behavior?

So what if they collaborated?  Is it only a valid accusation if no collaboration took place?



I see, your issue isn't with the "unproven accusations" but rather with the people presenting them.  Got it, you don't like nutildah, suchmoon, or me.  Now that we've got that cleared up, debunk the the evidence, please?



I don't know what gave you the impression that I can't be reasonable, or that our's that is the "reasonable" opinion, for that matter.  It's just an opinion, after all, which is subjective.  But I must ask; how reasonable is it to attack the messenger, and not the underlying issue?

---

If you take a gander at the last couple of pages you'll see; this isn't about defending Quickseller, it's not about what's right or wrong, it's not about protecting the forum from proven scammers making their way to DT.  It's about attacking the accusers, because of who the accusers happen to be in this case.

Look at these arguments; they're all over the place, jumping from one inane comment to another, none of which really address the root of the issue.  They only focus on the individuals involved, not the evidence.  The longer this thread goes the more it will devolve into bickering and meaningless interpersonal squabbles.

https://i.imgur.com/iWm3rob.png
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=156113

And who that "well known member" will be?

@TECHARE all your other "opinions" are very well documented here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214377.msg53534115#msg53534115.

---

---

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5220741.msg53707294#msg53707294

Since the mods seem to think this post is on topic for some reason...

What does this rating have to do with the mobbing behavior regarding Quickseller? Am I creating several threads looking for Koshgel's alts and casting more accusations like is being done here? Do I have a years long vendetta with Koshgel, like the one that is being demonstrated here? Also, several of your pals tagged Koshgel before I even tagged him. These two things are no where near comparable. This is just more "NO U!" tactics designed to distract from criticisms of your friends you don't want to be too carefully considered.

There is no basis in fact to support my doing any of this to suchmoon. Suchmoon is just upset that I would not apply special rules to her (not him) with regards to posting information that she herself posted, and could be found in her post history. It is not my fault she posted something and later came to regret it. It is also not my fault she is so divisive that she creates enemies from other people. I am also not the one searching for what is alleged to be her alt accounts.


Further there is no basis for saying anything I have recently done in years is "continued deceitful methods".

I would say accusing a signature campaign manager of theft with one account while sneaking into one of his campaigns with another is pretty deceitful.

What do you call it?

I mean really, who in their right mind does that kind of thing? People who care about money more than anything else in the world, I suppose.

I would suggest that you look up the definition of the word “deceitful” and come back. Or at the least, wait to be told what to say.

OK, so I did just that.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deceitful


The behavior described above fits this definition perfectly.

Well, "likely alt of well known member" happened in 2019 and "probably alt of quickseller" happened in 2015:

https://i.imgur.com/JYAgVgK.png
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=557356

"not saying that you are mobbing quickseller since 2015. or anyone else here", just help me to understand, newtons1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557356) registered account on 25. September 2015. and wrote 27 posts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=557356;sa=showPosts;start=80) till 27. September 2015., which is the time you "accused" them of being Quickseller's alt account. Sorry, "probably" QS's account.

Based on what have you made those 2 connections?



 :-\

Let me know if you find anything good while you are digging through my shit looking for peanuts. I look forward to your future attempts at false equivalence, and whatever else you can come up with to "get me" in retribution for being critical of your friends.

At least we finally figured out who's the real Jedi here, hunting Quickseller's alts since 2015.

Nevermind. I shouldn't have said that.

Lol, aren't you one narcissistic prick? I didn't even found this on your trust page!

It still doesn't address my question, how did you connect accounts? First I thought it was because of that "keyword", but I couldn't find where quickseller used it before that date, so it has to be something else.

Let me know when you finish your udemy course on Psychiatry.  Then maybe you can provide this community an excuse for almost a decade of trust abuse, including the Administrator concluding you have no place where your trust abuse shows by default.

Seek therapy.

Was that a joke meant for me (http://loyce.club/archive/posts/5374/53741152.html)? Well played!

Figured I'd get a few people in a thread like this  ;D

This is just funny, Mr. Fakecoin Isnotscam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5220208.msg53694173#msg53694173) tried to teach me (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3617512.msg36888918#msg36888918) how to use trust system and previously tried to produce some sort of humor:


Seems that "you must be a sock puppet humor" turned out to be "you are sock puppet":

https://i.imgur.com/YseD3Or.png

So basically, whatever they said in this thread (and they made some laud posts about whole PN7 - QS), I just can't agree with. <-- edited and rephrased


Anyway, PM7 said something:
PM7 "saw" that quickseller merited that thread, and it is really stupid situation, I should now take this as "PM7 saw quickseller did something" and say "OK, you saw QS did something"  ???
Well, no, PM7 didn't really address accusation post from page number 3:


I have found only this reply on page number 5:
Reply deflects question, so:

@PM7, please explain how you and quickseller used exactly the same words to report posts?

Maybe some excuses can be borrowed from here:

https://meem.link/i/a/dDbbEoK.jpg
Edited 2020-11-30 to fix a broken image

FTFY

So much for giving Quickseller a break. This is why you never bend the knee to tyrants. They never stop until you destroy them.

marlboroza, your intellectual dishonesty is overwhelming.

all i did was make an innocent joke about the reputation board's culture of accusing everyone else of being alts/sockpuppets. i made absolutely no claim as to whether Astargath was an alt account, and that is obvious from reading the actual posts.

so please explain: i told a joke in may 2018 making fun of the entire reputation board. how does yahoo62278 tagging Astargath in september 2019 as an alt account (with no proof/reference at that) prove anything about my judgment?

i told an innocent joke 2 years ago and you believe this justifies claiming that everything i say is "extremely likely opposite the truth"?

you're making yourself look incredibly petty and vindictive. i criticized you one fucking time (which you obviously felt the need to bring up here) and now you are digging up years old posts trying to discredit me? is this really how you spend your time? you must be very proud of yourself.

Show me the man, I will find you the crime. That is the default trust way comrade.

it is so exhausting trying to fight against this sort of blatantly deceitful behavior. they can't disprove what you're saying today, so they attack your words from years ago, hoping to distract and confuse everyone in the process.

And that is exactly the point. They hope to acheive their goals via attrition rather than a logical argument. It also has a bonus side effect of putting a chill effect on anyone even bothering to try.

So you are saying that primenumber7 and quickseller are alt accounts?

If you read my post again, you will see that my question is directed to PM7, not quickseller, but thanks for your criticism anyway  :)
Ok, I'll bite. I don't remember "unearthing posts of yours from 2015." if you can remind me and how is it related to this thread? I am sorry, I edited post, it was actually about that "monitory" if you can read post again. I am not sure how you exposing scammer can discredit you  :-\ Wth?
I know you didn't, you tried to make fun of something, that's why I mentioned it.

---

Why are you two now trying to hide my question (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002)?

It doesn't matter. You think he is. You are pathetic little people who need to push everyone else around to feel better about yourselves.

i suspect you unearthed this post while investigating my account, particularly because you posted it long after the discussion was over. it's curious why you felt the need to include my nested quote ITT when it was 100% irrelevant to the point you were making. it's almost as if you wanted to imply some connection between quickseller and i:


my suspicion is based on the fact that you regularly engage in this behavior, and also because you specifically targeted me here. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002) however, since i can't substantiate that suspicion, i won't push the issue further.

the Astargath example alone should suffice to show you are being petty and vindictive towards me. remember, only one of us is digging through the others' post history to try and publicly malign him. i believe the way you misconstrued an "innocent joke" for "dishonesty" suffices to show deceitful behavior on your part too.


how does your premise---"figmentofmyass made a joke 2 years ago"---establish your conclusion that "whatever [figmentofmyass] said in this thread...the truth is extremely likely opposite"?

the claim is so fucking absurd that it really casts doubt on your motives.


um, i directly responded to you and quoted that post. that's the opposite of hiding anything. ::)

According to who? You?

WTF? No one is investigating your account, stop being such paranoid prick.

Cherrypicking quotes? How the hell is pointing that account posted "monitory" and quoting it together with nutildah's finding and TECSHARE's tagging (sorry, neutral rating) == implying that you are quickseller?

You are not making any sense.

Not really, I pointed your mocking, your flawed judgement in case of fake coin and your response in this thread.

Quoting half of my post leaving out PM7 - QS parts, talking about random things IS trying to bury question:


Anything else?

lol, says the guy who literally just pulled up years-old posts of mine in a specific effort to publicly discredit me. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002

why are you using my posts from 2018 as the basis to publicly attack me? perhaps you could answer that before calling me paranoid.


and what have you proven? absolutely nothing, except that you are extremely petty and vindictive. you publicly attack people who disagree with you, and you do so with extremely weak arguments.

i suggest you pick on someone else who can't shit on every fucking argument you make.

and sorry, but you haven't begun to prove anything about "flawed judgment". it's cute how you threw that in there though.


wtf? you leveled public accusations at me! how is responding to them "random"? ::)

this is yet another dishonest insinuation on your part.

HAHAHA... That is effin' hilarious. What's even funnier is that TS is so indignant and afraid of appearing wrong that he will now never remove PrimeNumber7 from his trust inclusions, even though he still has Quickseller distrusted.

https://i.imgur.com/4Hxhdon.png

You are wrong, and you will never admit it. I can prove it.

Oh, you are removing him then? OK, well, I stand corrected.

He was gone from my list before you even made your shitflinging post about it. Now, here is where you admit you were wrong. You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

Nice of you to admit you were wrong, even if your opponent doesn't have the ability to recognize it.  :)

Techy says he has proof you will never do this.   Do you think he will apologize now, or provide the proof?  lol

I have the ability to recognize a disingenuous snide remark intended as bait, not as an admission of being wrong. Speaking of being wrong, don't you have some more people to accuse of pedophilia or some abusive trust ratings to hand out Vod?

Do you have the ability to admit when you were wrong?  Your opponent did...

Good for you for coming around. You must have made the change in the last 30 hours or so, but still, I'm genuinely surprised and somewhat glad.

You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

If you really did remove PrimeNumber7 from your trust inclusions, then yes, as I said a couple hours ago (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53856803#msg53856803), I was wrong.

In this instance I'm happy to be wrong as it means you are finally coming to your senses.

I'd be thrilled if figmentofmyass could also weigh in with his opinion on the issue, I asked him 3 weeks ago and he never responded:


He seems to be the one person here still not sold on the idea.

Great. Time to get to work digging up more stuff to make baseless accusations over. I know you don't bother checking to see if you accusations are supported before making them, but that is usually a critical part of making them. Maybe next time check first before you desperately grasp at anything to attack me over.

Keep in mind, while you, I, OG, etc, do business here on the forum and will be accountable for what we write, Techy is just a troll and no vested interest here other than to disrupt it.   :(  He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

You said you provided substantiation for your ratings against me. Please do quote. That shouldn't be too hard right? It is not like you are just claiming to have done so to avoid having to support your claims that wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny now is it?

Surprise. As you do every time I ask you to substantiate your ratings you just pretend like you have already done it. You know very well your accusations wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny, so you will avoid having a critical discussion about them at all costs.

I cannot make the reference link any easier to click on.  :/

Funny, all I see is you repeating the claim you already said it. Interesting no one can seem to find substantiation to your claims anywhere, even you.

Last time Techy...

Very good, you can repeat your claims without substantiating anything.

I'm bumping this thread because it was recently referenced in Meta, and as ninjastic.space has been invented since its creation, I thought I'd use it to statistically hone in on some claims made four and a half years ago now (my how time flies).

The following are peculiar misspellings of words or unique phrases, uncommonly found in the English language, that I suspected were only used by Quickseller and PrimeNumber7, or for the most part only used by him. Just want to add data from ninjastic.space (https://ninjastic.space/search?after_date=2014-07-22T14%3A56%3A44&before_date=2020-01-19T14%3A57%3A03&content=passphraise) for the top posters of each example written between July 2014 (date Quickseller account was created) and January 2019, the day before this thread was created.

I'm not doing this for the purpose of wanting PN7 to get more tags (he probably shouldn't) so much as to satisfy my curiosity and lend credence to my original assertions, which sparked much debate at the time. I inadvertently identified (what are likely) additional alts of Quickseller in the process.


Top results via ninjastic.space, along with # of instances per account, possible alts are underlined, accounts quoting QS/PN7 or possible alts are strikethrough:

1. PrimeNumber7 [6]
2. Quickseller [5]
3. fonenumba [2]
4. BTCmoons [1]
5. Coding Enthusiast [1]
6. Kakmakr [1]
7. MineForeman.com [1]
8. Soros Shorts [1]
9. bitmarket.io [1]
10. blumangroup [1]
...
20. thriftshopping [1]



Top results:

1. Quickseller [55]
2. ApehaFan777 [16]
3. DIXItip4ik [16]
4. antropogen0009 [15]
5. nofork_man [15]
6. Akaiito_Official [13]
7. aragon4ikSS [12]
8. semiwylson [12]
9. ricardovaldossa [11]
10. surtur001s [9]
...
89. PrimeNumber7 [2]



Top results:

1. johnyj [10]
2. Spazzer [9]
3. popcorn1 [9]
4. Spendulus [8]
5. Tyrantt [6]
6. cryptonit [6]
7. pimpjuice [6]
8. pooya87 [6]
9. criptix [5]
10. deodivine1 [5]
11. Quickseller [4]
...
42. PrimeNumber7 [2]



1. Alohadance [11]
2. Quickseller [7]
3. LTU_btc [6]
4. gembitz [6]
5. Lauda [3]
6. bitkilo [3]
7. cryptohunter [3]
8. PrimeNumber7 [2]
9. Rosewater Foundation [2]
10. cryptorTUX [2]



1. iCEBREAKER [23]
2. arielbit [11]
3. Quickseller [7]
4. AdamWhite [4]
5. Gleb Gamow [3]
6. Hyperjacked [3]
7. bobbywin [3]
8. CryptoBry [2]
9. JayJuanGee [2]
10. Sithara007 [2]
...
42. PrimeNumber7 [1]


Here's some uncommon words/phrases being used by both accounts, many of which are used by QS on more than one occasion:


Top results:

1. provenceday [6]
2. InvexCoin [5]
3. Quickseller [3]
4. immakingacoin [3]
5. HostFat [2]
6. af_newbie [2]
7. coins4commies [2]
8. protokol [2]
9. BADecker [1]
10. BitcoinJustin [1]
...
20. PrimeNumber7 [1]



Top results:

1. TECSHARE [4]
2. Wind_FURY [3]
3. jonald_fyookball [3]
4. PrimeNumber7 [2]
5. Spendulus [2]
6. iCEBREAKER [2]
7. korvas128 [2]
8. yurez83 [2]
9. AGD [1]
10. Alone055 [1]
...
18. Quickseller [1]



Top results:

1. Drachmae [4]
2. Quickseller [4]
3. eddietheboss [4]
4. frankieShtain [4]
5. Probonau [3]
6. 3r197 [2]
7. GameOfCoins [2]
8. PrimeNumber7 [2]
9. jamespastagueule [2]
10. suchmoon [2]


Of this selection, the least common words/phrases used by both QS and PN7 are:

"passphraise"
"Rodger Ver"
"maximum benefit of the doubt"

Looking at some other accounts that wrote "passphraise", we find some interesting trust ratings:

fonenumba (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357340)

thriftshopping (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357577)

I'm sure there's others that could be found but this post is long enough for now.

Not sure if this further solidifies the connection or not, but at least there's some statistical backing for my original claims now.

For me to accept your studies of the use of misspelled words you would have to retroactively agree to accept my "proof" of connections based (in part) on matching misspelled words.

Do you accept that notion?

I have not dug into this enough to really comment on it, but and this is just me, certain misspellings may be from copy - paste - accept in browser spell check when you see the underlines.

Not saying yes or no about anything here specifically just that I am in the been there done that part of life with this. Not in the crypto world but in real life work.
Added asomething to auto correct that was not correct and then it kept correcting it to the wrong thing.
Admittedly not one of my finer moments, but still worth pointing out that it may be unintentional with some users.

That is unless everyone gets together and starts using processers instead of processors. Good thing someone caught it, but I can at least kind of relate.
Using the example above I think we can all agree that Lauda is not an alt but still used "Rodger Ver"

-Dave

I have always been under the impression that Quickseller was a somewhat intelligent person and cannot see them doing copy/paste. I'm not sure if they have spellcheck enabled or not, but seif they keep seems like that would be a no if they keep misspelling certain words.

Admittedly, I am even hesitant to connect accounts based on spelling mistakes or certain phrases unless if there is something else connecting the accounts whereby the misspellings are just additional pieces of evidence.
Some innocent users may end up being potential collateral damage, like in this case Several Accounts Misspelling Manchester City Footballer "Kelvin De Bruyne" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5353281.msg57648070#msg57648070)  ;D

The Quickseller unending drama is older than my existence here, so I will leave it to those who know him more to judge.

I'm not saying a copy / paste and entire post. Just some text from A to B. Then when spellcheck gives it a red underline they instead of correcting it they accidentally add it to the dictionary and then it just persists. I have done it, as have countless others.

If there are OTHER indicators that 2 accounts may be linked then it's another data point. But, by itself or only with very nebulous connections I would not use it to link accounts.

Either way, I wish I had more time to dig into it, but I don't so I'll just back out of this conversation.

-Dave

 

What have the overall reactions been from QS and PN7?

Haven't kept up with everything, just looking for a general "ignore, deny, get cagey and defensive", feels like each has to be one of those three.

As far as I know, they haven't responded to the accusation. Which makes me think they're probably alts, but don't want to admit it and don't want to lie about it either.
If someone would accuse me of being QS' alt, I'd simply deny it.

PN7 lashed out at me with typical QS nonsense (made up accusations of scamming, of sockpuppeting nutildah, etc) so as far as I'm concerned this is further proof that they're alts. Also gave some absurd excuses that phone spell checker was the reason for common language patterns.

---

There is an interesting twist to this that was not publicly known at the time thread was started. You'll notice that in a couple of threads on this topic one of the most active defenders of PN7/QS is figmentofmyass, who was already being suspected to have a nice little sockpuppet farm of his own... eventually exposed by nutildah via CM campaign payouts and other blockchain evidence (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=531363). Why is that significant? nutildah suspected these alts based on language patterns (like the ones this thread is based on) and I was 100% sure that figmentofmyass/squatter/extasie were alts when I ran CM campaign user list through the same NLP methods that I used on Quicksy's alts. Methods originally used by tspacepilot to expose quicksy's alts back in the day (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059).

There was another pair of alts in the CM campaign but given the community's attitude towards language analysis and lack of blockchain evidence it was never posted publicly (at least not that I recall).

I think there is a great deal of irony here given the current anxiety over AI, but that's a whole other story.

I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about but if you enlighten me I'd be open to consider it.


Back then, QS did respond somewhat cleverly, by using a lot of the shared terms I mentioned in his post. Apparently it wasn't in this thread though because I can't find it here.

It's also worth mentioning that the connection made back then didn't solely rely on linguistical analysis, it also was based on plenty of other similarities between the two accounts (most of which are explained in the OP). It would have to be some pretty rock-solid, tspacepilot-type stuff to be purely based on linguistics.

Not everybody would like to respond to accusations such as this, some tend to keep cool and like it slide.
And it may seem to be that they are clean of these accusations, come to think of it, why not use something different to get to this user instead of using pattern of writing posting or spelling. To me is some how not in line to get this accusation right.
I know you guys at the top see these alt as a crime (lemme use that) or offence, that's having an alt account is an offence but what if this guy just felt like starting afresh? I know some might just grow a new account then sell it (which is not cool to me). The user might get tired of the old account and start up a new one for no negative reason, you know? Something like that might be.

What's amusing in all of this is the very same DT users who would suggest my connections - with proof mind you - are not to be trusted, but their own "hunches" - without proof - are somehow more trustworthy.  Not connection has been made between the two, just a whole lot of screaming and shouting ^{(as if that's all the "proof" you need)  ::).}

---

---

I see suchmoon is back from a stint of maternity leave - congratulations.  Hopefully you are refreshed and can see the world in a new light.  ^{(I have your posts on ignore, so I haven't followed if you have reverted to form or are a new woman - hopefully it's the latter).}

I don't think that's how "maternity leave" works but it's not like complete detachment from reality has ever stopped you from derailing threads.

If you don't like the presented evidence you could just "~" instead of trying to make it about you. It's not about you. Move on. Get a life or two.

Maybe....but given that QS has a reputation for having had a posse of alt accounts at the ready when he needed them to support whatever argument he was making, I'm inclined to go with the evidence nutildah presented here. 

However, "underlying root cause" and "maximum benefit of the doubt" could just be phrases that were trendy at the time of posting (or at least had been used and picked up and used again by multiple members).  I've probably written the former one a few times in my life, even though "root cause" or "underlying cause" would be a more efficient use of words.  The rest of those misspellings are definitely not ones that most people who can speak and write fluent English would make, except perhaps for the "Rodger Ver" boo boo.

"Sow discord" is the correct way to spell that though, correct?  It's certainly not a common expression, but I know it isn't "sew".

Some of your connections have been on the money, and I daresay many of them have over the years.  Don't know how or why you turned this into an attack against you, but if the cause for the hunches is the same you ought not have a problem with any of this aside from your bruised ego, right?

@Timelord2067 I really don't know where all these are going but to me it seems you have something you have to air out. Or is it that you have an issue with @Suchmoon?
Well if the DT are having a different view on your connection to this with theirs to be in the right direction without any evidence as you have then is best you just let it be.
Or is best you keep convincing them with more of your proof instead of waging a war against @Suchmoon, no need for all these, why not you guys face the issue at hand and let's know who's on the right track.

Please take your petty personal grievances elsewhere. I offered to engage with you in my last post but you ignored that in favor of pursuing off-topic nonsense. You should start your own thread called 'Timelord vs. the forum' where you air out all the beef you have with people who have wronged you over the years.

As a matter of fact, I don't think any further good can come from leaving this thread open so I'm locking it. If you have something relevant to the discussion to add, you can PM me about it and I'll re-open it for you.