Based on the amount of bitcoin missing/unaccounted for, the escrow “fee” is in the millions of dollars and nears 1,000 btc, and exceeds 60% of what is being disbursed.

Still no response beyond “I didn’t see the scam accusation thread because I don’t frequent that section”? Nothing about the underlying concerns?

The English sections should only contain English. If a post is posted in Russian in one of the English sections it would be off topic and should be reported

I understand the Venezuela coin was largely a failure. Most exchanges prohibited its use on its platform as well as by their employees. I don’t think they were really able to raise much money this way. I would anticipate Iran’s coin similarly fail.

In both cases, if their government is overthrown the new government would likely not honor these obligations.

I don’t think this is about merit. I think it is more likely this is trying to create a false narrative about the situation.

I am not sure why you say this. None of the escrow agents have even acknowledged where the bitcoin is being held (it can be reasonably inferred based on the Blockchain). There appears to be about 1,000 btc unaccounted for which is worth nearly 7 million dollars.

I think there might be an issue with how merit is being counted. My profile (highlighted) says I have 1142 merit, however per my profile, I currently have 1137.

I received merit on a fairly old post today that already had merit from someone else, so that might be what is causing the issue.

Some of these are "legit" symbols in various languages, correct? For example Russian and I believe Hebrew use different symbols than English does.

Maybe someone can compile a list of symbols used in each language in the local section (along with English), and those symbols can be all that is allowed to be used.

Edit : 🔑

I was referring to LoyceV's statement (that has a strikethrough):
Which implies a presumption of guilt when deciding if someone should be banned. I would much prefer a presumption of innocence. It would be much preferable to allow a few shitposters to continue to post (a while longer) so that some people who maybe struggle with english, but have a strong interest in learning about and discussing Bitcoin can continue to participate, over banning everyone and their sister who shows even small signs of putting little effort into their posts, excluding many who have a legitimate interest in the community and of Bitcoin. 

Lol, this guy is going to make so many posts acting confused about what to do with that picture that the shoes will pay for themselves

On a positive note, at least we know OP is actually shipping out the shoes as promised

The etherum alone is worth 265BTC,  at current depressed prices. There isn’t any reason to transfer the ETH to an exchange if the intent was not to immediately sell for bitcoin. However with the current value of the raised eth plus the bitcoin, the total amount exceeds 1400, it is 1434 btc.

One you add in the value of the ltc (66 btc), the total is 1500 btc and is no longer “~1400”

Have any of the escrows publicly stated the amount of recovery that will be refunded?

When in doubt, ban??

That sounds like a policy proposal that would be condemned by most who care about freedom. In general, negative actions should not be taken against users unless the administration is certain that a ban is appropriate and is only given out as a last resort.

That is unlikely. His opinions were highly valued throughout Capital Hill, however even when he was active in the Senate, every issue was hyper-politicalized. 

Trump doesn't appear to have the votes to hire a replacement AG. If he fires Sessions and Rosenstein, he will be left with someone who is not a political appointee running the DOJ, which is not ideal because this person is less likely to pursue the Trump Administration's agenda on things other than the Mueller investigation.

This is less clear than you claim.

Do you have any quotes or statements from any of the escrows (or anyone else involved in the project) that are discussing the locked exchange account? If coins were sent to an exchange and are now not accessible, this is entirely the fault of the escrow agent who sent the coins to the exchange, and he needs to cover these losses out of his personal funds.

You are wrong. Any law that prohibits or regulates any constitutionally given right or duty is unconstitutional, see Marbuy v. Madison (1803).

Further, both motive and intent are likely protected under executive privilege

How many people would Trump need to fire until Loretta Lynch or Eric Holder would be AG? They are pretty malleable

While those are legitimate concerns, I reviewed the 1st page of the posts of randall_boss, Luis_Gray, and Merritt_Baldric, and if they are the same person, they are not making consecutive posts in the same thread (or even in the same threads at all), so I don't think multiposting is an issue currently. He may very well have a history of farming accounts, however if this is true, he would likely have banned accounts because he was shitposting. However these accounts are not shitposting, and I don't see why he would farm accounts with shit posts, get banned, then try again with fairly decent posts.

I can't support farmers who post what is effectively gibberish and other nonsense, however I have no issue with him as long as he is contributing constructively. I would leave him along unless and until he does something that is hurting someone (or there is evidence he is preparing to hurt someone). 

Politicians allow for a democratic republic, that is, the people elect representatives who in turn vote on various measures. Without politicians, we would have a direct democracy, which is very close to mob rule.

Many politicians are subject to pressure from special interest groups. Special interest groups (effectively) contribute to politicians campaigns on an ongoing basis, and politicians want this support to continue. Also, many politicians move on to be lobbyists after leaving office, and they want to stay in the good graces of those they want to eventually work for.  

It is a far stretch for the president to be controlled by a single group, however I would not be surprised if many lower level politicians are (nearly) controlled by a single person/group/organization ("third party"), however each third party likely controls very few politicians.