You may continue to use Electrum; however, only download updates from this site: https://electrum.org. Also, learn how to verify PGP signatures.
Also, you can consider your device in now compromised. You may need to wipe and reinstall your OS before using it again. Also, consider getting a hardware wallet like Leger or Trezor. If you have this type of malware, the malware would have to request the Hardware wallet redo the signature, and you will be prompted again to approve or disapprove. If you are paying attention and disapprove, the malware won't succeed.

Unfortunately, for me, Nova exchange won't service US customers at this time. Congrats on the new exchange listing, though.

    The DNS server is not liable in any way. You would have to find and sue the scammer. Unfortunately, the scammer probably took many steps to ensure that he can't be located, easily Also, the scammer probably doesn't care how this affects your life. Even if you did manage to contact him and beg for the return of your BTC, he's likely going to try and scam you out of more money. Also, I would be very leery of anyone sending you PMs offering to help you recover your BTC, for a fee... They are likely a scammer as well wanting to take advantage of you.
  In the future, only download electrum from https://electrum.org and learn how to verify the PGB signature before executing.

I don't see that Vod has been excluded from the trust system by staff. I find that staff members Cyrus, Welsh and HostFat have included him and no staff members have excluded him. Are your confusing the trust system with the merit system? I do believe Vod was removed as a merit source. 

  I only see him placing the main blame on the two vultures who easily gained his confidence and conned him, which is exactly where most of the blame belongs. I don't see him blaming the forum or "everybody". Also, I can understand the reluctance someone would have in participating in the direct peer to peer exchange thing when the result was getting ripped off. Perhaps he will get back up on the horse again when he comes up with a better strategy to prevent getting so easily duped. Also, I think the $1300.00 loss gave him enough "tough love." That's a rather pricey expense to pay for getting schooled in the college of hard knocks. I'm sure that your extra 2 cents of "tough love" are really not needed here.


The lesson to be learned with the second scam is that one should always be leery of people who offer you a sympathetic ear with their palm extended. Chances are they are just another creep who found an easy mark.

   Exactly how is the OP "blaming the whole fourm?" I show that he is taking responsibility for his gullibility.

   

    Hmm, that is very interesting. Is that how the courts operate where you are from? Just make a decision based on the plantiff's written complaint?  If that is how your courts operate, that's kind of spooky. They don't work that way here in the US.

     Unfortunately, he won't just go away if the community remains silent. He will just keep spreading his lies and bullshit with no counterpoint. Although this situation is not nearly as grave as AIDS was in the 80's and 90s, I think the same principle behind the statement "Silence=Death." applies.

The LN network may have a quite a few issues, but there is no way to make it a fractional reserve. Each tx on the lightning network must be able to generate a valid closing tx on the blockchain(s). I suppose that you could do atomic swaps with some other coin that is supposedly redeemable for BTC 1 for 1. However, if people fall for that, they a stupid.


With gift cards and debit cards, someone is just going back to the fiat system. We all know the perils of using an Exchange for a wallet. If the exchange doesn't care for your particular transactions, they can just freeze your account and make you go through a bunch of red tape to get your coins back. Also, exchanges are big target and hackers like to go for the big score.

 I'm not certain why you chose LN to be the taxi and the blockchain to be the Bus, rather then the other way around. The other way around seems like it makes more sense. However, you probably couldn't get your analogy to show your point if you did that.  


OK, I'll start calling it offloading then. In any event, it will allow people to make more transactions and they can be rest assured that when the close the channel, they will posses every satoshi entitled to them, less the miner fee and less the extra millisatoshis.

What do you suggest BTC do? Have a contentious hard fork every year or so to increase the blocksize? As we can tell, just having a softfork creates tension, much more a hardfork. I suppose BTC could just have one hardfork to obliterate the capacity cap all together. However, I am not certain miners are going to appreciate the low transaction fees that will result. The only solution will be for the miners to set their own minimum fee and ignore all the other transactions.  


I don't see how this is a liability at all. If people prefer to use an altcoin rather than BTC, than that's their freedom to choose.

     Although there have been some notables that advocate for a blocksize decrease with BTC, this idea does not have enough traction to ever be implemented. Also, BSV is also going to have a halvening around the same time as BTC. In fact, BSV will probably go through a halvening before BTC. I don't see the increased block capacity making up for this difference since there is really no fee market in play with BSV. This especially is true since the BSV philosophy is to just hardfork and increase the block capacity. Isn't there talk to just drop the block capacity maximum all together? What incentive do people have to pay more than the absolute minimum fee possible?

But roycilik is on DT1 and has a strength of zero. But the DT1 icon is not by his name. Perhaps it is because even though he is on DT1, no other DT1 members trust or distrust him.

This is not a self moderated thread. Self moderated threads cannot be created in scam accusation. If your posts are getting deleted, it's a moderator, not the OP. (Although the OP or anyone else can report your posts to the moderator.)

What are you talking about? Darkstar has not given his alt account merits. It appears that you are confusing including someone in a trust list as giving merit,.

    No, they usually don't kick down someone's door, at first. They usually notify someone in writing  If they want to do an audit, they usually ask in writing for the tax payer's cooperation. The only time they are going to kick in a door is when they want to arrest someone for tax evasion (I believe the FBI actually does this) or they are seizing someone's property. However, a person's case has to be rather far advanced for them to resort to such extreme measures.

   First off, how are teeGumes and Bill gator "regular members?" Both of them were on DT1 and they still have the ability to trust or distrust other DT1 members, and their votes count. Also, teeGumes has given negative trust to Bill Gator, so I am uncertain how this falls in your narrative.
   Furthermore, my distrust of teeGumes has nothing to do with me "ass licking" Lauda. I'm a gold star gay man and have never touched a pussy since pussy had me.  I distrusted teeGumes because he originally gave red trust to people that gave merit to a post he found distasteful. Furthermore, I see teeGumes is trying to set a new precedent by red trusting someone for posting with an alt account and evading his ignore feature.  I'm not going to remove my distrust for him because I don't particularly care for his new approaches to utilizing the trust system.
 

   That sounds like a great idea for BestMixer.   When they have a money laundering rap and the Dutch government already seized their servers, they definitely should acknowledge on a public forum that there is 0.5 BTC more that the Dutch government should be looking for to seize. NOT!

    Unfortunately, that was validation from BitBlender and not BestMixer. Therefore, I am sure that Quickseller will continue to milk this cow for all that it is worth. Unfortunately, this cow is actually a bunch of bull.  

  A 15 word seed is more secure than a 12 word seed. However, the probability that someone will be able to brute force your 12 word seed is very small.

  Blockchain.com stores the private keys on your device. Therefore, it is only as secure as your device.

  One of the main reasons that Windows is less secure is because it has the most users and hackers want to program their malware to reach the widest audience possible as easy as possible. Don't be fooled. If a situation arises where hackers suspect that many Bitcoin users are using Linux, they will come up with malware that works on Linux to steal your Bitcoins.

 Both the Ledger and Trezor have measures to ensure that the private keys never leaves the device and gets exposed to a hacker. I believe that your 2TB Hard-Drive may end up loading your private keys into the memory of the device, before signing. You could connect your 2tB Hard drive to an air-gapped computer to create a signed transaction. Then use an internet connected machine to broadcast the transaction.

Yes. But once you have it interact with a compromised computer, anything loaded into the compromised computer's memory can also be considered compromised.


As long as you have your seed words, you can restore your Electrum wallet on any device that you choose. You may want to ensure that the wallet is indeed restored, before purging it entirely from your computer.

Maybe it would and maybe it wouldn't. Perhaps this is a question you should ask a Magic 8 ball. The answer you would get from it would probably be just as accurate.

    No, I am not compelled by the evidence that you presented at this time.