Can you describe what you are getting?

Did you do the dumpwallet command as I wrote above, because that won't work on a mac.

You don't understand what a ban is. A PERSON is banned, not an ACCOUNT. To ban a person, all of the ACCOUNTS associated with said PERSON will be banned. If someone has a hidden alt, and they use it, since their PERSON is banned, then they are evading the ban. If that hidden alt ACCOUNT is found to be an alt account of that PERSON (through multiple evidences including but not limited to IP evidence, transaction signing/blockchain evidence, they outright admit they are an alt, etc), it too will be banned. When a PERSON is banned and they are caught ban evading, then the ban time on ALL of his ACCOUNTS will increase. Repeat offenses will then result in a PERMABAN.

Just report his posts. It is possible that moderators don't see his posts, so report them to get their attention. That should help to remove the troll posts.

I think this guy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=361306 is the owner of Bitcoin Aliens. Send him a PM.

zapwallettxes will remove all of the unconfirmed transactions from your wallet, including that conflicted one.

Bitcoin Aliens will need to resend the Bitcoin. They cannot just resend the transaction, since resending it will not change its status of unconfirmed.

It looks like Bitcoin Aliens screwed up. They were creating transactions which have a High S signatures, which are now considered non-standard transactions. Some nodes on the network will malleate those high s signatures to low s signatures, thus changing the txid (but nothing else; the transactions are still valid and the coins go to where they are supposed to). The problem is that Bitcoin Aliens built a chain of transactions which includes yours that spent from an original transaction that got malleated. The malleated transaction is the one that was confirmed, so that original transaction and any transactions in its chain will never be confirmed.

Your best option is to contact their support.

This must have been part of their upgrade, to use the Bitcoin Core 0.11.1 rules. Bitcoin Core 0.11.1 and beyond now refuses to relay transactions that use a High S value in the signature scripts. This prevents transaction malleability. Transactions using a High S are now considered non-canonical (non-standard) and are now no longer relayed. This must have been part of bc.i's upgrade.

If someone thinks that you will scam, they can neg trust you. They can open a scam accusation against you if they think you will scam to key others know.

Why do people need to talk to you personally to find out if you are trustworthy or not? They shouldn't need that. You should post publicly in such a way that is trustworthy or at the very least, not support sketchy or seemingly not trustworthy.

Why should it be done privately? If one person thinks you are a scammer, then multiple people might, so you would have to prove yourself over and over again to people who think you are scamming. Secondly, having it public allows other public opinions to weigh in. Trusted members and people who have been here for a while can weigh in and give their opinions. Furthermore, if someone really is a scammer, then they need negative trust. Having a public discussion about someone scamming ensures that people on Default Trust will see the discussion and neg the person, instead of just one guy giving negative feedback which no one else sees or trusts. If you suggest that they can just pm DT members with the proof that you scammed, that proof can be manipulated, quotes that you say or that the accuser says can be changed. Having it public makes it so that it is more difficult to change what was previously said because people have seen it and may have quoted it. The edit times also indicate whether a post has been modified and for big scammers, theymos or badbear can even revert the posts so that people can see what has actually been said.

As for discussing people behind their backs, it isn't. The scam accusations are completely public. If you are active in the marketplace selling things, you should keep an eye on the scam accusations section just to make sure that no one opens an accusation against you. I also think it is common courtesy to give the person warning and inform them that you have opened an accusation against them. Send a few PMs several days before and inform them that they have X days to complete the deal or you will open a scam accusation. Then when you do open one, you send them the link to the accusation thread so that they can also give their side of the story.

What do you mean by "it drops connection for a while"?

How have you connected the two bitcoinds?

Blockchain.info has had many problems recently, they were just down for maintanence, but I don't know how well that went. For now, you should stop using their service and contact their support.

Time to add another username to the nuking bot: help******

No, bans are given to a person not an account. Using an alternate account to post it called van evasion, and if an account is found to be an alt of an account that is banned, it too will be banned, and the ban will be increased

Regarding the scan accusation section, I think that section is very important. The trust page is not for discussion, you cannot discuss with other people why you think someone is a scammer and whether others think that the lettering deserves trust. The scan accusations section allows people to do that. Accusers and post their proof, and the accused can defend themselves. The section is like the court, where people determine whether someone is a scammer and the trust given is then the punishments.

Actually, I don't think the problem is related to that. They were down for maintainence apparently, although that may have also had to do with upgrading their node to deal with transaction malleability.

On a side note, Blockchain.info needs to get their act together since all of the newbies think that blockchain.info is the "authority" or is the "actual blockchain", and their poor service reflects poorly on new users. It also creates a lot of spam on these forums whenever they go down since every freaks out about "bitcoin is failing because blockchain.info is down!!"

This is entirely blockchain.info's problem, which is a service, not the bitcoin blockchain. Please stop mixing the two.

Binaries are no longer there, only the source tarball.

This is specifically a problem kryptokit which apparently is using blockchain.info's api. Blockchain.info is not the blockchain, since the blockchain cannot be under maintenance. This is service issue with blockchain, nothing can really be done about it.

It is no longer posted on bitcoin.org. I can compile a copy for you and send it over. I have a windows version already compiled, and can compile Linux in a few hours. Since I use gitian, the hashes will match the signed hashes in the gitian.sigs repository on the github.

You only have 0.00006743 available in that address. You may have other addresses in your wallet that make your total balance higher but if you want to spend from that address only, you only have 0.00006743 btc

I think that is a good idea, but the problem is that in the initial payment request, the merchant has no way to know who (identity or bitcoin address) is sending them the bitcoin. They should definitely sign the request, but encrypting it is not possible without knowing the other party's public key, which is hard to know without knowing who is paying and public keys are not revealed until they sign a transaction.