I don’t think successful reports should receive a merit for a single report. This is similar to you will not receive merit for every “good” post you write.

With the above being said, I think it might be appropriate for someone who is fairly active in reporting who is struggling to rank up due to a lack of merit to receive sufficient merit to rank up (maybe without the corresponding sMerit, or less than the normally expected amount) as a reward for helping reduce rule violations, which is ultimately what merit is trying to do.

This was stated by Lauda, but the fact that aTriz has posted multiple ANN/bounty threads subsequent to lauda making this announcement removes credibility from lauda's statement that aTriz was "suspended"

I agree the account was purchased, this is fairly clear.

I don't think aTriz has the private keys to addresses associated with the account from 2013. The reason being is that some of said addresses have had fairly substantial amounts of bitcoin held in them subsequent to the account being transferred. In fact, it appears that new aTriz transferred at least 0.2BTC to old aTriz subsequent to buying the account, which implies that new aTriz may have paid an extortion payment to cover up the fact he bought the account, which although I it is very wrong to extort someone, I find very ironic, considering lauda's involvement.

It looks like you are allegedly an alt of b3jo and bengsabeng.

Addresses associated with you and those two other members apparently claimed an air drop of "Rebellious" tokens. "The Pharmacist" believes this is "abuse". He has wrong.

You can take up the issue with The Pharmacist, if he is unable to give you a satisfactory response, you can speak to Blazed and hilariousandco, and if they cannot give you a satisfactory response, you can contact theymos.

It means a lot. Lauda has given negative trust to hundreds if not thousands of alleged sold accounts. If it turns out that lauda was in business with an actual sold account that would be very bad for lauda, especially if the sold account was sold not long before lauda went into business with it.

I am well versed and interested in various political topics in the US and to a lesser extent internationally.

I don’t currently frequently read the politics section and haven’t for a while because of its high level of garbage posts/threads.

I have my own opinions on various topics, but am respectful to opposing opinions, even if they are ridiculous.

I am familiar with the various forum rules.

I probably wouldn’t be able to commit to spending more than 5-10 hours/week helping out, although I may end up spending more time if I have the time.

Ignoring the fact you being aTriz would not make you post 24 hours a day, it would not be difficult to hide you are the same from theymos via similar methods you used to connect to slack in the past, and it would be fairly trivial to use a bot to delay the posting of some of your posts.

I haven’t verified the accuracy of these statements, however the person behind aTriz at the time was clearly involved in a pool in 2013. If this post is substantially accurate then I would say that the current aTriz is almost certainly lauda. I would simply not find it credible to suggest that lauda gives as much negative trust to sold accounts as he does to happen to miss the fact that his business partner himself is a sold account.

Previously, it could be argued that lauda was defending aTriz because of the conflict of interest being his business partner, however this cannot be attributed to laudas decision to go into business with aTriz. (Not that the conflict of interest is not a very bad thing to start with).

You don't know he didn't know of the scam before hand, but based on the number of scam ICOs he was involved in, you have to at least consider he did.

Also, not knowing ahead of time does not absolve him of responsibility. If he is closing his eyes when looking for red flags, he is just as responsible as if he knew ahead of time.

If you are allowed back in?

Based on your post history, over the past three days, you have created ANN threads for two distinct bounty campaigns, both of which were posted well after Lauda announced you were "suspended" from ALU.

I am not sure I would believe your involvement in ALU has been "suspended"

I understand that satoshi used tor to connect to the forum, did not disclose his identity to anyone, and took other steps to keep his identity secret.

I am also fairly confident that theymos is not satoshi, he allegedly did not get involved with Bitcoin until just under a year after the Genius block was date stamped. He even complained there was an extra random 0.44 BTC attached (tx fees) to the 50BTC block his computer found while he was still learning about Bitcoin.

this is not the first nor second time aTriz has made a “mistake” although in this case, I believe he may be a “fall guy” in order to protect others’ reputation. He is still not someone who should be trusted.

If you set your birth year to '0000' then your age on your profile will display as "N/A". If you set it to "5" then your age will be displayed as "2013"

Here is a fun fact: SMF will not allow you to claim you were born prior to the year 5 AD.

cobra -

https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin
https://medium.com/@CobraBitcoin
https://www.reddit.com/user/cobra-bitcoin/

To voice controversial statements/opinions, which he is far from shy about doing.

If cobra =/= theymos, then who is he, and what is the basis for trusting him with ultimate control over the domain names?

If memory serves me correctly, sirus and satoshi both founded the forum, so it would make sense for sirus to take it over when satoshi left, and theymos was active around here in the very early days, was made a moderator, made his way up the "ranks" to eventually be made an administrator, and presumably ran the forum well enough to eventually have control over the server.

From what I can tell, cobra just kinda appeared out of nowhere and was running things.

Okay fine.

Yes I received 20 BTC from TF for the purpose of pursuing civil litigation for a defamation lawsuit against Vod. It was worth about $4,500 at the time (our agreement was based on the USD of the BTC received). The agreement was that I would return any amount unspent after 6 months (I think that was the timeframe) to a specific address.

For reasons I prefer not to state publicly, during the course of due diligence about the situation, certain information was discovered and I told TF that even though I believe someone in Vod's position should be held accountable for his actions, pursuing civil litigation would be against public policy. TF responded by saying that he has other projects/priorities he would rather use the BTC for, and I asked for a signed message requesting the return of the BTC he wanted returned, with a stipulation that sending said amount of BTC to him would absolve further obligations of me to return any BTC to the above mentioned address within the signed message, he provided said signed message, and I promptly returned the BTC.

The specific reason I do not want to state publicly would not affect my reputation, and would make Vod look bad....although I don't particularly like Vod, I think this is the right thing to do.  Given sufficient pressure from those whose opinions I value (and Vod), I may change course. I would give particular weight to Vods pressure because it involves him personally. I will give no weight to what idiots like o_e_l_e_o and suchmoon have to say.


Although I previously opted not to pursue litigation regarding defamation in the past, I continue to reserve all rights. Five thousand dollars is not that much to me anymore, and if it really means all that much to Vod, spending that much on a defamation lawsuit against him would not particularly burden me. 

He is allegedly an admin of bitcoin.org and bitcointalk.org. If memory serves me correctly, he has control over both domains.

Realistically, he is either theymos, sirus or satoshi (unlikely) considering the timeline of when the administration was turned over from satoshi, and the first instances of evidence of the existence of his handle-identity. 

What exactly do you think that aTriz did that was so wrong?

If this is true, then I don't think you can shift the blame for the incident on aTriz.