Why don't you explain how if Burt had traded say a million dollars worth of Bitcoin would make him a money launder. After you do that why don't you explain why Burt trading say $25,000 over several years would not make him a money launderer.

Anything that he says will be used against him. It doesn't matter if/that his response would show his innocence/guilt, it is most likely a disputed fact in his case and should not be discussed.

Not only that but even if the prosecution was not trying to bend the law in order to get a headline conviction it is none of anyone's business how much business he has done in the past.

right. I think it is somewhat of an unrealistic expectation for everyone to backup their wallets in multiple locations and mediums as this level of security is foreign to most people, especially with the advent of cloud storage that allows their documents to be automatically backed up to their cloud service. I am not saying that I engage in this lack of security environment or that it is a valid excuse however it is unfortunately a reality for a lot of people.

It looks to be useful for someone who is trying to secure their coinbase account (for example) or their bitcointalk account, but not so much for a wallet that does not use any kind of central location to keep track of your passwords. For example you could simply enter your email/password on coinbase from a secure computer and change your password to secure that account. However when dealing with an encrypted file (wallet) then you would somehow need to transfer that file from a malware infected computer onto a "clean" computer and potentially risk that you infect the "clean" computer in the process.

LOL, her avatar might as well be a badge or a prison or someone that is clearly wearing a wire.

This is why it is generally advisable not to speak publicly about your case prior to it being resolved as everything you say can and will be used against you. (I am sure everything he talks about is cleared with his attorney ahead of time though)

A paper wallet is physically much smaller, and as a result is easier to hide. Also in the event that you are physically robbed (potentially unrelated to bitcoin) then the attacker is more likely to go after your airgaped computer then a paper wallet. Also by human nature, a computer that is air gaped, is more likely to have a weak password securing it's encryption if any at all. So someone may steal your computer hoping to have something to sell for drug money to fuel their addiction and may end up stumbling upon your massive amounts of bitcoin while never coming across your paper wallet (or even seeing it and ignoring it).

One avenue that a paper wallet is probably more secure is when you are needing to spend your bitcoin and know in advance that your computer has malware. With an encrypted wallet, it is going to be more difficult to get your encrypted wallet to a non-malware infected computer without also potentially bringing the malware with you. With a paper wallet on the other hand, all you need to do is simply find a computer that is secure and not infected with malware.

Another point that you might want to add is the fact that when someone is told they should encrypt their private key with a strong password, they are much more likely to use a weak password when using a paper wallet because they will think that the chances of someone ever getting access to the paper wallet to even try the password are slim

Participants need to pay monthly (and other) fees after they receive the card correct?

I have never heard of people having to pay to participate in a signature deal 

Well the people who do buy rarely ask, and I think they don't ask because of ignorance. There have been a number of cases of people buying an account that later had someone come back claiming it was hacked recently so the question is far from unimportant......since the recent rise in these claims there has been only a very slight increase in the number of people asking for signed messages when they buy accounts so IMO the inquiry is necessary and when they respond to the negative the warning that the account may be hacked is appropriate

You are probably going to have to send Vod a PM. I doubt he is keeping close tabs on this thread

well considering that the trust system is not moderated and that any scammer/troll can write whatever they want means that untrusted feedback does not mean anything. I don't think his feedback has affected my business. I am somewhat surprised that no one has negg'ed him though because what he was doing is essentially blackmail.

I am not sure what you are talking about in saying that my own account had negative trust.

Business was extremely busy not long after I started this, sometimes not being able to hold onto an account for more then a day. The market obviously crashed after the PD campaign closed. It has since picked back up somewhat but for some reason it has been somewhat difficult to get my last account sold, I am not sure why though.

If theymos has made it so it was not possible to tell what someone's uploaded avatar was without being logged into their account then it probably would have gone on for a lot longer.

I think a lot of people are just spamming who are confused as they clearly have not read this thread and it has been explained several times that this is a very clever April fools joke.

lol yea. Mine is a favorite of the troll avatars because it is something that most people on here would probably never say nor believe in.

i don't think there was ever that large of a preimum for accounts with avatars, maybe 10% at the most and less for higher ranked accounts. It has also been known for a while that avatars were going to come in the new forum so the preimum has been shrinking towards almost nothing.

well in the majority of cases, someone can use faucets to "earn" their way out of a proxyban in a pretty short period of time. This is probably one of the *only* good things about faucets

What are you talking about I obviously keep the identities of my accounts secret so they have no reason to get negative trust.

The units of evil system was only implemented relatively recently as spam became more of a problem. It is designed to make it difficult for someone to create a lot of accounts that end up getting banned. If you only want to create one (or a very small number of) account to remain anon on then the cost will be negligible.

That is not true. The cost depends on how many units of evil the IP address that was used to register has. Most of the time it is well under .0001 BTC, however the IP addresses (IP ranges) with the most units of evil sometimes will cost well over .01 BTC

no not right now. Sorry.

I am not sure whose trust list cooldgamer was on, however I know that escrow.ms cleaned up his trust list today - I know that devthedev and cronicsky were both removed from his list today (possibly among others).

Now how exactly is a newbie suppose to know who he can and cannot trust to give proper trust ratings? I think it is safe to say that you are giving very bad advice

Newbie jail is before my time, however my understanding is that you could only post in off topic and beginners/help until you had at least 4 posts and were online for 4 hours. I don't think that is the best solution to the problem of newbies posting nonsense.

I do think that our current setup that brand new members can post whatever garbage they want anywhere is probably not ideal either.

I might propose that brand new members need to be online for a shorter period of time (maybe 30 minutes or an hour) and only need to make one or two posts until they can post outside of restricted sections (maybe the sections can be expanded as well). This would stop farmers from posting absolute garbage in sections that are popular, would stop spammers from junking up "important" sections while it would not prevent legit new users from actually voicing their opinions and concerns.