"Unknown" means mining pools or single users which haven't identified themselves. So it might be 100, but definitely not 2.

It would appear that the Bitcoin SV thread was written and is moderated by a banned troll!  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4985868.msg53092612#msg53092612

I was wondering who in their right mind at SV (not that there's many) would have sanctioned this idiot to compose and run their Bitcointalk thread for them. Turns out they most likely never did at all, and they probably had no intention of ever having a presence here.

Here's an archive of recent posts in case they get deleted by the banned troll in question.

The definition of "hearsay" isn't something that "is not true"; its something that isn't adequately substantiated. I provided you a chain of links with substantiating evidence, but if that's not adequate for you, again, that's out of my control.

Also, who did I kick when they were down? You or the guy who "lost" their coins? If them, I assure you they didn't feel it.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bankroll




What a stupid asshole. Nothing left to be said here.

Right, and like I said in the other thread, if theymos supported you and not our decision to render your email to h4ns a written contract, then we would have heard about it by now.

Now you're lying about not lying.



https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bankroll



I asked you if you had 800 BTC, in reference to your stated bankroll. Your response was this:


60,000 / 8458 = ~ 7.1 BTC

So, you lied.

Go fuck yourself, scammer.

You violated a written contract, and theymos is not on your side here. We as a community have decided that your email to h4ns in which you promised to refund his money constitutes a written contract, even if it is not a legally enforceable one. I'm sure you've sent theymos a hundred PMs. If he agreed with you and not us, we would have heard about it by now.

K, so you again lied in order to make your "service" seem greater than it actually is. Nobody with 2 brain cells to rub together is going to take you seriously.

Hey guys, nakakuha ako ng isang kahilingan upang makilala ang aking mapagkukunan ng mga pondo sa isang linggo nakaraan, sa kauna-unahang pagkakataon, at habang wala akong problema sa paggawa nito (freelance writer ako), wala akong dokumentasyon upang patunayan ito. Kaya nang makarating ako sa pagtatapos ng talatanungan ay hindi ko maisubmit dahil wala akong nakakabit.

Mayroon akong 2 katanungan:

- Gaano katagal maaari akong magsagawa ng cashout hanggang sa mas mababa dahil ang aking limitasyon sa 0?
- Kung maaari gusto kong mayroon video interview sa halip na mag-submit ng mga dokumento, o para sa iba pa?

Also, my account is level 3 -- no need for level 4.

LOL. This is great. I am going to post it to the BSV thread.

You're missing the point. The point is that acting professionally pays off. If a business maintains professionalism when dealing with criticism, they are far more likely to be successful in the future than if they act like you, which is anything but professional. You destroyed your own reputation by conducting your business like a vengefully insane person and now there's nobody to blame but yourself.

Seeing as how you, one of the worst trust abusers on the forum, is still here, there's obviously not much "legality" associated with the trust system. What are you even doing here? Every chance you've had to salvage your reputation you just doubled down with your crazy antics. You should not be in charge of any kind of business whatsoever, and certainly nobody should trust you with their money (or confidence, or personal information, or time for that matter).

It was a "yes" or "no" question, but let's just go with your answer here:



https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bankroll


So, you don't actually possess 800 BTC, so why would you say they are in your "bankroll"?

You've never once directly answered the question. Do you have 800 BTC or not?

Do you have 800 BTC or not?

LOL. Maybe the posted here by mistake. What morons. I think Coinsbit themselves are even dumber for continuing to hire them as they are no longer bumping their main thread. Their thread just looks like 104 pages of scammy garbage now.

So according to you, you have over 800 BTC under your control and make 35% profits on it monthly. What do you need the forum for?

Don't just say "no, the 800 BTC is my bankroll." Do you have 800 BTC or not?

The whole thing was in response to your question, which was lost somewhere along the way:


So I told you.



I can't make you understand that hearsay is only bad when applied to court room trials. Without doing that, almost every single news article that contains a rephrasing of another's words could be considered "hearsay."

If you are interested in the actual findings, here's where things currently stand:


In an earlier post, he determined that he only had 3.73452874 BTC missing after the dust settled...

3.7345 - 3.7 = 0.0345 still missing, if not accounted for by

1 - rounding done by guggero
2 - penalty transactions
3 - "unjust enrichment"

So basically, the entire thing actually was FUD, even if unintentional on the part of the guy who "lost" his coins. Basically my hunch was correct, and yours wasn't. You can point to whatever you consider to be a logical inconsistency in previous iterations of the argument but it doesn't change the outcome of me being right.

Be prepared for him to shift the argument to something else at this point. That's what he does after he's been caught not knowing what he's talking about. You'd think that the guy who said this wouldn't let himself be proven wrong so easily:


Really all it takes is about 15 minutes of research to thoroughly understand the difference between judicial and congressional subpoenas.

How is filtering transaction data irrelevant to the identification of penalty claims?


It is possible that not one of 400 nodes would have received "unjustified enrichment" without reporting it, but it is extremely unlikely and goes against common sense.


First of all, this isn't a courtroom. Second, the title of the article is "4 BITCOIN ‘LOSS’ ON LIGHTNING NETWORK IS FUD, SAYS COMMUNITY" --- the whole premise of the article is based on second-hand information. Third, the article does contain links to evidence, which contain links to more evidence.

- Bitcoinist article contains this paragraph:


- The referenced Twitter thread says this:


- The referenced Reddit thread says this:


@guggero (LN developer) says this in the GitHub issue thread:


So if you are willing to DYOR you can see that nothing is unsubstantiated, and while the issue may not technically be "FUD", it sounds like the guy didn't actually lose any coins at all, in spite of what appears to be his best attempts to do so.


Stop being such a baby. If suggesting you verify information for yourself is the same thing as "jumping down your throat" then you're not cut out to talk on an internet forum and should probably go join a sewing circle. He still may have put himself in this situation on purpose, though now I believe he earnestly just made a major fuckup -- for whatever reason is beyond me. Its a one-of-a-kind issue though so its good for LN devs to iron this sort of thing out now rather than later.

Admitting to changing my opinion on something after learning more about it is only "moving the goalposts" if you come from the viewpoint that you are trying to score a goal.


No, I didn't. I admitted that I changed my stance from "he's a liar" to "he may have accidentally fucked up." I still maintain that nowhere near 4 BTC was lost. Sounds like he lost nothing.