It sounds a lot like this is more evidence that Lauda is leaving negative trust against those who do not share similar opinions with him in an effort to censor their opinions and viewpoints.

http://archive.is/WCuOi#selection-5963.151-5963.249

I would say that based on the fact that MZ changed his PW after the forum's member's table was leaked, that MZ not only posted, but also traded/lent BTC a decent number of times after the forum was hacked would make it reasonable to say that his account was secured after the forum hack. In addition to this, MZ repaid a loan several months late, many months after the hack, communicated with shorena regarding repayment, and shorena did not mention anything about MZ's account getting hacked at the time.

I would also argue that the way MZ is behaving is consistent with how I believe the "real" MZ behaves. Although this can reasonably be faked.

Lastly, per theymos, the IP address of MZ is ~the same as what it was previously. If shorena can confirm some kind of proof of knowledge, then I would say that the person behind the MZ account is likely to be the "real" MZ.

With the above being said, I would still be hesitant to trust someone who has been away from the community for as long as MZ was away, at least at first.....

Yes, they both very clearly gave the negative ratings to Bitmain, a company that although does not accept deposits/pre-orders, has been entrusted with tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars worth of obligations at a time and has followed through, for political reasons.

---

---

The merits of jonald_fyookball's opinions are irrelevant to this thread. What is clear here is that he has certain opinions and is being discredited for having those opinions. 

You would be surprised about how strong of a stance some people have on certain subjects.....although maybe you wouldn't be considering some of your stances.

You really have a problem with holding a grudge and not letting things go Martin. At one point an unhealthy obsession becomes much worse than that. Until you can learn how to let things go after sufficient time, you are not going to have happiness in your life.

I don't think KWH would sell his account, and a review of the archives of the security log reflect that no password changes have been made this year (it looks like there are some short periods in which password changes were not archived due to no one creating an archive frequently enough).

I would speculate that KWH has other interests that results in him not visiting the forum as frequently as he has in the past.

You are free to ask him for a signed message from an old address if you so choose. I would not take the lack of him providing such signed message as evidence that he sold his account.

I would be willing to accept that KWH has sold his account if sufficient additional evidence were presented.

Today is theymos' birthday.

Use this thread to wish him a happy birthday.

I think there is a decent chance it is hacked. Although his response he gave to your opening of this thread indicates it might not be.

I'm sorry, but there is proof linked in that quote (at least the original).

It seems that AztekPhoenix is right in that you are unable to respond to criticism (at least in this thread, but really in general) without resorting to personal attacks (that are honestly more or less baseless).

Actually your definition of "scammer" is more broad than what pretty much anyone else within the community has, and appears to include anyone who disagrees with you (at least this is what appears to be the case based on recent trends, and your history of leaving negative ratings for things that happened a very long time ago that you had been long aware of). The majority of your ratings do not appear to be in line with what the rest of the community would consider to be a "scammer" and you respond to concerns about your ratings with trolling.

It looks like there are a bunch of garbled letters at the bottom of the message, so it probably is legit.

It was also signed by the same key used here -- I don't remember how I validated your key previously, but I don't remember there being any issues back then, I so guess it is legit.

This is not the first time that Lauda has left negative ratings for people for political reasons.

Several months ago, Lauda gave a negative rating to franky1 that was clearly a political rating (source), however it was removed after being called out about it (archive for both). The difference in this case is that Lauda is not the only one to have given this person a negative rating for political purposes.

I think your concern is that jonald_fyookball's threads/posts are less neutral than you would like, however this is the nature of political discourse. I think you would be hard pressed to find a neutral article regarding President Trump on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, and it is fairly common for all of those major news outlets to editorialize stories they pass off as news.

As I mentioned previously, I think that jonald_fyookball should make it more public that it is Blazed who is effectively causing negative ratings to be given for political purposes via Lauda. 

You probably will want to at least setup access to your Coinbase account via their API as a backup.

It is not uncommon for their website to be down while customers will still have full functionality via API.

That would probably be a fairly awkward 2 seconds.

You are fairly clearly a troll based on your posting history, and I wouldn't be surprised to see you steal money that someone is dumb enough to entrust you with. 

You are trying to do this from the wrong computer. If you try to sign a message from your computer that has the "watch only" wallet (eg your online computer), then you will be unable to sign a message from any address.

You will need to sign the message from the machine that you sign transactions from (eg your 'offline' machine).

I am not a fan of using Authy myself.

If I were you, I would tell Gemini that you will continue using SMS for 2FA until they support google authenticator for 2FA (which I believe to be far superior in terms of security). You will just need to be sure that your phone number is fairly private because hackers may try to steal your phone number in order to gain access to your account. 

It is my understanding that there have been a couple of situations in the past at bitfinex in which some margin accounts had negative equity (eg, there was insufficient collateral to repay the margin loans due to high volatility, and insufficient liquidity) -- I understand that bitfinex covered the losses in these cases and did not even notify the lenders. I believe one of the times this happened was when someone quickly sold 20,000 BTC (IIRC) after the 1st block signaling XT was found in August 2015, and the price fell to ~$160 from ~$250 in a matter of minutes.

I don't think that any exchange is going to advertise that they cover losses because they probably want to reserve the right to not cover losses in the event that the losses are greater than what makes sense for them to trade. I have heard Phill from Bitfinex (the CSO) say in the past that if something "broke" Bitcoin that caused its price to quickly go to near zero and not recover (or some similar situation), then lenders would likely face losses.     

I would suggest that you make it known and public that blazed is the one effectively allowing this kind of ratings as he is the reason why lauda (an extortionist) is in the DT network.

Once the above has been addressed m, I would advise doing the same thing with theymos regarding nullc.

Lauda is absolutely not someone who should be in any position of power and/or discretion as he has proven himself to lack any kind of ethics and/or morals. I would absolutely not trust him nor would I advise others doing the same.

Lauda is allowed to have his own opinion, however using his position of power to attempt to silence and/or discredit those who disagree with him and speak out against him is absolutely not okay.

A court will only enforce a contract and has a high standard of evidence necessary to issue an order effectively "reversing" a fiat transaction.

Technically speaking, a court could reverse a Bitcoin transaction by ordering one party to pay another party the fiat equivalent of a btc transaction and jail someone who doesn't comply.

A "mass payment" pp transaction is going to be reversible because the owner of the sending account can claim their account was hacked and/or the funds could originate via fraudulent means.

I would not trade with the OP with the terms offered.

shapeshift.io

txid?

Their blog post about tx fees says that they will charge 0.0002 btc in tx fees. I don't see any reason why they would charge more than that. The user has no control over what inputs they use/have. They should charge fees in a way to account for the fact that they will sometimes need to consolidate many inputs as they did in your transaction.