Odd timing, this.  I was preparing to post something Lauda-related; but it is not yet ready, and probably won’t be for awhile.


theymos does not know.

By the way, I thought that your theory was that I am Lauda’s alt.


It’s not the first time that has happened.  By the transitive property, does this mean that I am theymos?


N.b. that Quickseller has also been accused of being a theymos alt.

---

Either way, Lauda never interfered with people’s guesses.

---

Evidently, you do not actually know any actual real-life women.


You misspelled “plagiarism”.  Furthermore, Lauda was banned on her own request, as you well know.  Stop making up defamatory FUD.  Quoted here so that you don’t mislead n00bs:

---

All Indo-European languages are gendered.  (Hungarian is not an Indo-European language.)  However, in languages that lack an explicit neuter (or where that is inappropriate), generic “he” is generally the default for unknown cases.


My guess is that theymos’ mother tongue is probably English.

---

Can’t be serious.

I am way ahead of you.  Long ago, I posted absolute PROOF that theymos is Lauda:


Would theymos meow, if he were not Lauda? 

The fact that Lauda-theymos didn’t delete that from a heavily-censored thread furthermore constitutes an admission.

---

It is unknown whether Lauda is male or female, or what age Lauda was.  I say “she”, because I think that Lauda had feminine behaviour.  But she refused to disclose all such information, for reason of privacy.  I myself asked her many personal questions.  All that she would say was, “I’m a cat.”

It’s clickbait.  But you have a point, insofar as I am bearish on human intelligence.  Will idiots see only the post title, and be thus induced to dump their real money for dollars? 

I will think on this...

sell sell sell your dollars, atl of 1666 sats coming soon.

Panic!  pANIC!!  Dump, dUMP, DuPM your dollars.


I have always been a bear.  A Dollar Bear™, more than a Bitcoin bull.  I am extremely negative about the markets.

People will do things to avoid loss that they will not risk for gains.  It is important to see the rapidly shrinking number of sats that a dollar can buy.

Number go DOWN!

And we (TINW) need to stop thinking in terms of dollars.  We (editorial “we”) know that 1 BTC = 1 BTC; but what is a dollar worth?  A dollar must be valued in sats.  We (royal “we”) therefore decree by fiat that henceforth, we shall quote sats/USD as we observe dollar sell walls.

---

Currently observing 1766 sats/$.  When 1700?

reserved

btw, this thread will be censored as hell.

It’s Official:  We (TINW) need to start pricing dollars in sats.

As a longtime Dollar Bear™, this has long been fundamental to my mental arithmetic based on proven maths and confirmed science.  Flippen your price quotes from USD per BTC to satoshis per dollar!  It is a radically revolutionary revelatory new way of thinkening.

Just over a decade ago, the dollar was priced at about 400,000,000,000 sats (400 billion sats!).  (This price is based on a guesstimate of how many dollars jercos actually paid for laszlo’s pizzas.)  Around the time that I first joined this forum, I recall that the dollar was hovering around 83,000 sats.  In late 2017, the dollar fell to 5000 sats and then bounced back, with dollar bulls riding high.  By last year, I had developed a habit of thinking of a dollar as being worth about 10k sats, more or less.

Now that the dollar has plummeted to under 1800 sats, what is next?

I expect to see the dollar struggle to hold a price floor around 1666 sats, before it breaks through and falls to the next floor at 1500 sats.  I do expect that in the near term, the dollar has a high risk of falling below 1000 sats.  If the dollar loses half of its current value within the next year, that will take it into the high three-digit range!

If that sounds excessively bearish, just remember that per the above numbers, the dollar has already lost about 99.9999995% of its value as priced in sats.  When the dollar hits 1000 sats, it will have lost 99.99999975% since May of 2010.

Of course, I would not be an Officially Certified Dollar Bear™ if I did not expect for the dollar to hit 100 sats (1¢ = 1 sat), or even lower ($1 ≤ 1 in a dollar hyperinflation scenario?).  But perhaps, that may take a bit longer—perhaps.

If you have dollars, DuPM!!!11


Naturally, I am also a Eurobear.  €DuPM before the € strongly breaks below the magical 2k sat mark, which the dollar has already subpassed!

Good to know.  No sane person wants for his e-mail provider to have access to sensitive financial information!

I know that some exchanges send such e-mails as, “You just withdrew 100 BTC to bc1qoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo9e75rs.”  That is not information that I would want a mailserver admin to be able to see.

Beware of such information leaks, lest you find yourself someday added to this list:

https://github.com/jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks

The official limit is 2MB.  Source:  Administrative statement in some Meta thread years ago (no link handy).

2MB.  I don’t know whether that is 2000000 bytes, or 2097152 (2²¹) bytes.

What a pleasure is it when people fear saying your name?

Phrased as a question, because—whose name did you apparently misspell?

Correct:  You’re not wrong, and nobody has balls.

---

This is not only a tacit invitation to spam-bump threads, but also a hint to spam social media sites.  All with plausible deniability:  Oh, no, users aren’t being paid to spam!  The suggestion is simply made that if you spam, then you may get onto the “helpful” list that’s a fast-track to coveted slots for Bestest Mostest Lucrativest Blockchainiest Bounties.

Frankly, I am of two minds about the social media stuff.  I hate the social media sites, and I want for them all to die miserable deaths.  In darker moments, I think that perhaps social media spam should be encouraged; it is an attack that turns the sites into sewers of shilling.  But I hate spam even more; so...

---

Accusations of “making drama” are a poor stock answer to the cogent expression of a legitimate concern.

And what’s with “you forum users”?  Are you, yahoo, not a forum user, too?  Or are forum users a degraded class prone to drama, to which you, a CM, are immune?  N.b. that eddie is a financially disinterested party, insofar as he doesn’t wear paid signatures.  Whereas you signature campaign people (insert criticism here).

IMO, a good CM should rate as “helpful” those members who are most helpful to the community.  In the long term, it makes better business sense, too:  It gets a signature ad seen in threads where the company is not being discussed.  It gets the ad seen by users who have never even heard of the company.

Looking back to OP:


Why not members who answer n00b questions in Beginners & Help, discuss code in Development & Technical Discussion (where mods nuke sigspam with extreme prejudice), give peer to peer technical support in the mining forums, etc.?  Those seem much more “helpful”.

If I were an advertiser, I would prefer such members to mere fanboys trying to kiss up to me on threads were everyone already knows about my company.  Of course, I would appreciate substantive discussion on my threads by people who genuinely appreciate my produce or service; but that is something that needs to be organic, lest it become an unreadable megathread of echo-chamber shilling.  On the customer side, I myself tend to avoid reading commercial threads where useful information is buried in fluff; who has time to read through such threads!?

---

Theoretically, yes.  But theoretically, if people were inherently good, we wouldn’t need Byzantine Fault Tolerance.  Or digital signatures.  Or spamfilters.  Or laws.


We (academic “we”) hypothesize that there is a game-theoretic Nash equilibrium under which every opportunity for advertising will tend towards spam.  In this context, the only solution would be to ban signature campaigns altogether.  We (royal “we”) posit that reputable CMs should want to avoid such an eventuality.

You idiot.  Biden is a good boy gender-nonspecific child.  They wears their mask at all times, even when inappropriately sniffing.


Yes, I know that Fauci flip-flopped on double-masking with ordinary masks.  But double-masking is still the recommended safety practice with the Presidential Noseless Mask.

Well, that is unavoidably logical.

From that perspective, more worrisome to me is that it gives an excuse to account sellers.  If nutildah or suchmoon tries to tag an account seller or a sold account, the person receiving negative trust feedback can point and say, “Why do I get negged when nutildah offered his own account for sale, and may actually have sold it, without any consequences?”

Of course, suchmoon would simply brush that off as “whataboutism”, i.e. a concept with a kernel of truth that gets abused as a liberal’s blank cheque for unlimited hypocrisy.


I reasonably disagree.  If the nutildah account was actually sold, that should be an enormous scandal.  A high-trust account with an established reputation passing into unknown hands undermines the whole concept of trust and reputation; and as a practical matter, it is dangerous to the community.  Who bought the account?  What were the motives of the buyer for purchasing an established account?  To what ends has the account been used since it was sold, leveraging the reputation of the person who created the account?

I am reasonably suspicious; and given the generally dishonest behaviour of the nutildah account, especially (but not limited to) its tendency to cover its tracks by scrubbing old posts, I am no longer willing to take at face value nutildah’s bare assertion that he changed his mind and never sold the account.  I want to know if there is more evidence (and I think there is).

Of course, that is my standard.  According to suchmoon’s standards, nutildah should already have at least a DT “neutral” tag stating that he probably sold his account to a well-known scammer, or something of that nature.

I want evidence.  Investigation is needed.  Well, you are apparently too busy enjoying a mountain of money; and for personal reasons, I have for the forum only limited time that I am not inclined to devote to chasing nutildah.  I have a months-long backlog of intended posts—technical, political, and for Reputation and Scam Accusations.  Why is nutildah so special?

---

The “drama” is not all contained in OP.  Anyway, argumentum ad hominem at OP does not prove that he has no point here; and much less does it obviate the subsequent discussion.  Say, doesn’t this get your scamfighting hackles up at least a little bit?


Password changed 10 times within 11 weeks, including several closely-spaced clusters of repeated password changes.  Of course, it does not prove that the account was sold or otherwise compromised.  Occam’s Leary’s Razor says that most likely explanation is that nutildah, an admitted LSD user, had a string of bad trips that made him even more paranoid than usual.

To be clear, that is sarcasm.  It would be a terrible excuse—and it would be funny if nutildah were actually to allege that as the explanation.

---

You have identified the apex of suchmoon’s vocabulary.  No wonder she accuses me of wordiness.


If you’re keeping score, and my opposition is at 0, then I, nullius, should aim to achieve ∞²/0².

Alas, that is mathematically undefined.  Perhaps I should borrow an acid tab from nutildah, and expand my mind so that I can invent some new maths and/or obsessively hurl unsupported alt accusations at forum members who make me paranoid.  Reality is for squares²!

I have already addressed nutildah’s imitation of Timothy Leary, the LSD evangelist who destroyed the minds of generations of American “intellectuals”.  Now, let us examine Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

Because book-length “walls of text” are incomprehensible to suchmoon, I will draw a brief summary from the well-known extreme right-wing conspiracy theory site known as “Wikipedia”:


Both nutildah and suchmoon consistently demonstrate the application of these “rules”.  I have only highlighted the ones that are most overtly displayed in this thread.  For example:




This is how suchmoon and nutildah deflect and evade my eminently reasonable, fact-oriented discussion.

Quickseller entered this thread to speak up for nutildah’s freedom of speech, despite his obvious and well-founded dislike for nutildah.  His reward:  This whole discussion is suddenly a matter of “Quicksy making shit up” (!).


In response to a very reasonable question by OP about whether nutildah’s password had been changed, I presented factual evidence, plus some suggestions on how to pursue an investigation.  suchmoon characterizes this as “The dream team consisting of a hypertroll, a wordy blowhard, and an account farmer...”


Further analysis is left as an exercise to the reader.

---

Although I don’t know if either nutildah or suchmoon has actually read Rules for Radicals, and I doubt that either of them is even capable of reading a whole book, the substantial use of its tactics is widely taught in left-wing circles; and their imprint on a discussion is obvious to anyone who is well-informed about them.

To anyone who has a brain and isn’t afraid to use it, people who use such tactics to twist public discourse come across as transparently dishonest, foolish, and childish.  But the above-quoted “Rules” make highly effective propaganda for brainwashing anyone who lacks adequate critical thinking skills.

---

I entered this thread—actually, I only even found this thread because suchmoon made the following off-topic personal attack in a Politics & Society debate where PrimeNumber7 was thoroughly trouncing nutildah:

An exact, unedited full quotation of suchmoon’s post:

Check the context.  Observe how, after PrimeNumber7 used facts and reason to shoot down some of nutildah’s idiocy, suchmoon stepped in to deflect ad hominem with a personal attack that has neither any relevance to the thread, nor any basis in reality.  suchmoon further smeared Quickseller by cherry-picking part of a quote, while removing the <quote> tag’s link attribute so that people could not click through to see that Quickseller was actually defending nutildah’s freedom of expression (albeit not defending nutildah himself).  Of course, suchmoon snipped out anything that PrimeNumber7 had actually said.

I saw that post because, although I am not generally following the forum right now, I occasionally glance through the e-mailed copies of replies in threads where I have posted.  It caught my eye.  Although suchmoon dishonestly avoided linking to this thread in any way, that post tipped me that I should check Reputation for new threads about nutildah.  So, I guess that the tactic backfired there.  Whoops!

Good question.  Let’s see:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210129212517/https://bpip.org/Profile?p=nutildah

https://web.archive.org/web/20200510115833/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.0
Post date: September 20, 2016, 06:54:36 PM
"Last edit: November 01, 2019, 10:32:27 AM by nutildah"
(Apparently edited in response to TOAA’s accusation?)

Earliest archive that I can find in a hurry:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190704162438/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.0

In July of 2017, when the account sale offer thread had apparently not been bumped for almost nine months, nutildah suddenly issued this denial:


It is still more than a year prior to the weird string of password changes.  That does not necessarily mean that the account was not sold prior to that post—and it obviously doesn’t prove that the person who originally offered the account for sale didn’t change his mind again.  I am hereby simply stating facts; I will decline to state here whatever inferences I may draw from this timeline.

---

OP, if you want to pursue this, I suggest that you look for any circumstantial evidence indicating when the account may have been sold.  Establishing a timeline is important.

I have some other suspicions about the nutildah account, but I am not ready to discuss those publicly.  nutildah has a nasty habit of editing or deleting posts to cover his tracks; and I don’t want to give even the slightest hint of what type of thing he should look to scrub.  I am pressed for time lately; and forum DT-related investigations are quite low on my priority list.

If you sift nutildah’s post history for leads, I suggest that you should avoid saying anything publicly, and avoid sharing information with anyone who may warn nutildah, until you have built a solid case with archives of everything that you could potentially need.  That’s not covering anything up; to the contrary, it is how police detectives handle investigations.

If the nutildah account really was sold, such an approach would be far more effective than repeated threads restating information that most Reputation regulars already know.  For better or for worse, many people seem to accept nutildah’s explanation that he “decided to keep” the account.

I quoted you urging me to try the “educational” experience of LSD, and insulting my “ignorance” because I opine on the subject without trying it.  How is that not pushing me to use drugs?

It is very clear that you are unsatisfied with the acceptance of your natural right to ruin yourself:  You actively try to brainwash others into doing drugs, using the same peer-pressure tactics and sales spiel that street dealers use to suck people in.  It is immaterial that you are not literally in the same room with me, pushing an acid tab into my hand.  You push drug abuse as something glamorous, glorious—something that makes you better than those who reject this “experience”.  It is reprehensible, and you are a danger to society.