That's correct. I may have misunderstood what you were saying in the post I quoted.

So yes, the rates/brackets are different between regular income and cap gains, but cap gain rate depends on total income, not just on cap gain income. IOW regular income can push you into a higher cap gain bracket. Cap gains can't push you into a higher regular tax bracket. But there are other hidden costs (e.g. higher total income may affect eligibility for some retirement contributions).

This won't work if one of them is a scammer. Seller can have a studio-quality single take video of packing a $5000 widget and then ship a brick off-camera. Buyer likewise can open the package on video and "find" a brick, after previously removing the actual item.

If you ever resolved any disputes based on this type of "evidence", chances are that you helped a scammer.

In the US the federal long term cap gain tax rate depends on the total income. It can be 0, 15, or 20%.

Then there are state taxes, somewhere between 3-13%, although there are few states with 0%.

Yeah, inflation is gonna eat his billions. Should've bought bitcoins when he had a chance.

I checked it because OgNasty was recently attacking theymos and minerjones so I figured there must be something going on. He's very childishly transparent like that.

There was an incident with minerjones being very unhappy with some spam not being deleted on the Collectibles board. Not sure about the timeline though. But this kind of loss of trust surely isn't good for this type of multisig setup.

Og's removal is not surprising albeit long overdue.

~$4 per merit, money well spent.

I'M KIDDING! IT'S A JOKE!!! $4 is too much for a merit, you guys gotta send more merits.


This forum is brimful of scammers so your action stands out and that's a good thing (your thing... not the scammers). Too often we take honesty for granted but discuss fraud and lies and other garbage at length.

Kinda redundant, we already have Meta.

I might have missed the announcement so I apologize if it's old news but it looks like OgNasty and minerjones are no longer treasurers:


Edit - just to clarify because the quote makes it look like this happened in 2013: funds moved to a new address in April 2021, the thread was last edited on October 29, 2021.

Not sure what you expected... NFTs are not about art, just like shitcoins are not about coins or money, and DeFi is not about finance or decentralization. It's just a new method to separate the gullible from their money.

Granted I know nothing about how art really works but perhaps you can build up your portfolio and eventually land a job doing chintzy ads to pay the bills, while doing art that you like on the side. Remote work opportunities these days are better than ever so living in a poor country shouldn't hold you back if you're really good at it.

It's a fine line between being the winner or the first loser.

You still have Taylor who surely has a couple of 5xTD games left in him, and Colts will be fighting for the division title so no rest for him.

I think I'll keep my team without changes (unless there are injuries or other outs) across both games. Fiddling with the roster didn't really work out for me, should have trusted my best players and not moved them around because of a strong opponent or any such nonsense.

Oh it's on. I will fight to the end to make sure I don't lose this match by more than 100 points.

Yeah Bills are doing well but I'm watching Texans beating Chargers, the most overrated NFL team.

Was there ever an itemized list with receipts, like we're expecting now? I skimmed through the thread and I didn't see it. There as sporadic reporting of activities. Whether that's enough should be up to people who donated but I think they should have asked about it much sooner if that was a concern.

Here's the rough timeline involving the 1 BTC donations:

• Charity starts in March 2019.
• 1 BTC is donated about a year later (May 2020). It would seem that the charity had established a track record by that time and someone sending them 1 BTC is a serious endorsement. The charity had handled a total of ~0.1 BTC by that time.
• If that's not convincing, the same entity (funds coming from the change address of the prior transaction) sends them 1 BTC again six months later (November 2020). It would seem again that this large donor is happy with the work they're doing.
• Another year goes by (December 2021) and we're retroactively asking for accounting.

I would be interested in the opinion of the large donor - why they donated, and if they're happy with the outcome. But I guess they're unlikely to come forward.

There is nothing particularly wrong with the community asking questions, it's just that it's starting to sound a bit like digging up a trade of someone selling some trinket a year ago and now asking for a tracking number with signature confirmation. Let's be real, we won't get detailed receipts for every satoshi. Perhaps lowering those expectations and asking cabalism13 et al what is feasible to provide would be more productive, instead of facing them with an impossible task.


I wouldn't say "excused" but certainly it matters a lot what the expectations of donors are. If donors are like "don't waste your time on detailed accounting" and the charity runs basically on volunteer work, I can understand how the lack of accounting happens. But it wouldn't justify pocketing or losing charity money, if that's what happened here.

Speaking of trash... Arizona

Two missed FGs, bad snaps, 3rd loss in a row. Looking a bit shabby at this point in the season.

Apples and oranges. Across the street you can "check and balance" in person. Not feasible halfway across the world, not for $100 anyway. And most of the information provided remotely (pictures, receipts, spreadsheets) can be faked. So it comes down to trust.

In hindsight, with the ~2 BTC - yes.

However it didn't start like that. I didn't donate to this specific effort but I've given money in similar circumstances. Let's say you give $100 to someone halfway across the world and the person provided e.g. a picture of a happy crowd with what could be $100 worth of groceries in front of them, is a receipt going to change anything? Without being there in person you have no way to verify it so comes down to trusting - or not - that person with the $100. And if you didn't ask for a receipt to begin with, you'd be an asshole to start asking for it a year later.

Anyway, with the somewhat spotty evidence provided I have no reason to believe that crwth is at fault here. There seem to be significant amounts gone to the other two guys, so there is probably more work needed to untangle that part.

It's quite funny (in a cringe-inducing kind of way, I'm not trying to make light of this situation) how this compares to another incident recently where someone was accused of things and said "I was sick" and some people were outraged how the poor sick person was treated.

I've been sitting on the fence here (very uncomfortable) and honestly can't figure out what crwth is accused of. There were pictures provided of activities that seemed legit. I don't think the original thread promised detailed receipts.

That's not to say there isn't an issue with funds, or that there isn't a communication problem, but it looks to me like there also was a failure to convey expectations to the organizers of this charity, either in advance or at least after those big donations were given. It's seems a bit disingenuous to demand receipts a year later.

IOTW it was possible (at last for crwth; not sure about the other two people involved) to be completely honest and follow the letter and the spirit of the charity thread and end up with a red tag/flag for it because he didn't do something that wasn't part of the deal. I think that's messed up. I will oppose the flag until and unless actual proof of misconduct is provided.

How do you know that the other node doesn't belong to the same evil spying entity?