Let me just tag you right now! I've added a Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2673
Link: OP's posts archived for reference.

I'll update this post. I've seen far too many scammers posing as a mixer, and this ticks off far too many red flags.

That means OP is lying. A mixer should never lie, their image is all they have. One lie is enough to never trust them again.

I've seen this before too, and no surprise, it turned out to be a scam.

If OP emails me a signed message proving ownership of even 2% of that amount, I'll confirm ownership here without revealing the address. Use Protonmail to send me an email with end-to-end encryption: LoyceVswitzerland@protonmail.com.

https://cryptobtcmixer.SCAM.com/ is an exact copy of https://bitcoinmixer.SCAM.to/. The older domain name does contain "Bitcoin", so what you said is a lie. Or you just copied the other website, which makes you unreliable too. Take your pick, I don't trust you either way.
The .to domain has a scam accusation. There are probably more, I won't even bother searching. This looks familiar though:
Post snipped, see LeGaulois' full post for more details.

What kind of mumbo jumbo is this? Did you use a text spinner to come up with this?

Have you considered stand-up comedy for scammers?

You have no name, unless you count all your previous names, in that case you have many names as a scammer.

I'll use the Duck test on you: "If it looks like a duck scammer, swims like a duck scammer, and quacks like a duck scammer, then it probably is a duck scammer."

"Please give me 5000 Bitcoin so I can prove to you I won't steal them." How about NO!

Nice try.

Are you encouraging people to break the law?

That means a "1" is worse than a "0". It doubles the chance to send more than intended.
I've accidentally sent 40 sMerit twice so far: I never remove the 0, I just leave it as a leading zero. And once every few thousand transactions I messed up.

The easy solution is sending no less than 6 sMerit. That can only be "06". Unless it becomes "16".

Long story short: remove the 0, make it empty by default!

I wouldn't do it. I would use neutral to counter a negative tag if I think it isn't warranted.

The loan-case gave me the same feeling, but as long as shasan is okay with it, why would anyone else care?

I have to agree with you here: if YOSHIE hasn't repaid the loan for more than a year, a (neutral) tag from shasan about the open loan would be good to prevent other lenders from stacking more loans. If I would lend someone money, I would like to know if he owes others money too.

Great! I consider this sorted now.

@marlboroza: since all negative feedback on OP has been removed, you should probably remove your positive feedback too.

I don't think that deserves negative feedback, see:

I gave up reading franky1's posts after I read this:
It means franky1 isn't using Bitcoin for payments. That's totally fine, but please just let me be when I actually want to use Bitcoin for what it's designed to be: p2p electronic cash!

Fees follow pretty much the standard market mechanisms for a scarce good. Banks also reject users who don't want to pay their fees, but a better example could be a parcel business: if you pay less, your packages takes longer to reach their destination.

So you're saying I can't retire on my avatar when Bitcoin reaches a million dollars?

If this happens, it probably means my account is compromised.

It was about time I added Foxpup. Done

---

---

I haven't left much positive feedback in recent years, and used my (then) non-DT-account instead to give it less weight.
There are some people I would trust though.

Thanks again for your flawless timing My timing still needs work.
My wife is occupying my work-from-home-desk tonight, so I'll be quiet for the rest of the evening.

In Rodrigue's "phases of a bubble" chart, that puts us only at the beginning:

This transaction was confirmed last night. Fees have been slowly dropping for 4.5 days now:

Don't underestimate the current mempool size though: there's 13 vMB to clear before confirming transactions under 6 sat/byte, and 61 vMB for transactions under 4 sat/byte.

The few times I've had a LN-transaction that failed, my wallet tells me I have to wait. That's the annoying part, I can't just try again instantly, the transaction is in limbo. That also means I can't just try another wallet to try another route.

I'd say less than 10% fails nowadays.

You're missing the bigger picture here. Satoshi created Bitcoin just over 11 years ago. With about 1 million Bitcoins, he's around #20 on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. (Hey Bloomberg, why isn't Satoshi Nakamoto on your list?)
Now imagine how rich Satoshi would be if he had created Bitcoin a few years earlier. He probably didn't have time to wait 11 or more years, and solved that by creating Bitcoin in the past.
It makes sense OP asks for "cheap time travel" if it's his first time. Experienced time travellers clearly have enough money to pay very high rates.

Just give it time
(pun intended)

I take the fact that you believe cash can't be double-spent in the past as strong evidence you don't own a working time machine.

I go forward in time all the time, at a rate of one second per second.

Or, much easier, if you're looking for a HD wallet that allows to create all possible address type from one seed phrase: use Mycelium!
Right under the QR-code it shows: "Tap for P2PKH / Tap for P2SH / Tap for Bech32".

Mycelium has some drawbacks to consider though: it's not open source, only for mobile, and it can't send to multiple addresses at once. I use it as a mobile wallet, but only for small amounts, and I don't need "send to many" from mobile.

I already show them:
If you want to exclude them, just do a grep -v

My guess is those users were removed a long time ago, I don't expect any archives to exist from that time.

That makes sense, will you report the bug?

That's not true when using the same number of sats/(v)byte.

Sometimes using a funny address is just worth the extra transaction fees.

I used Electrum 4.0.9.

The address is publicly known already.

Isn't it just because the signature part makes the transaction larger?

I have a slightly different approach: I know the people I fully trust would never ask me for money. It's also a lot easier to be trustworthy if you don't need money, than when you need money because your kids are hungry.
And I'm pretty sure that works the same here: except for mobile emergencies, I don't expect to ever ask for a loan.

I really don't get why some people would often ask for a small loan, pay interest, and do the same again later. Just make sure you always have some money, save yourself the interest, and enjoy the fact that you don't owe someone money.

Considering how well Bitcoin is able to handle itself, and how carefully the halvings are planned up to the year 2140, I wouldn't be surprised if Satoshi is indeed a time traveller. So he went back to 2009, created Bitcoin, mined about a million of them for himself, and went back to his own time. The big question now is when that is! It could be years or even centuries from now that his old Bitcoins start moving to new addresses.

/end of speculation

Yes. In fact, that's how I left most of my negative feedback. I actually prefer not to get scammed first, but just leave the red tag as a warning.

Don't mix friends (or family) and money. It can only end badly.
And even if you really want to help someone by donating money, they'll probably come back for more.

Source: life experience.

You mean like trading, say, Poland for, say, Italy? I wouldn't trust him.

You can also "donate" anything from 1 sat to at least 2 online casinos. Or feed some chickens Last time I did that they charged 1000 sat, now it's 50 sat.