Me thinks he wants to virtue signal 

This thread is a very good example of what is wrong with the trust system.

Not possible. He copied the entire post and didn’t add anything to what was copied.

My concerns are primarily around possible business relationships. If you would trust the keyholders with being solely in control of 500BTC, having this conflict will not make any difference, however if the conclusion is the person would only be safe to hold much less BTC, my concerns become more relevant.

This seems to have worked well with living treasurers, but not so much when the treasurer dies. I suspect this is in part because a treasurers heirs are not going to care about the community the same way a treasurer will, given a best case scenario, and a more common scenario is that the heirs will make a mistake and sell the treasurers computer equipment holding the private keys

It would be helpful if the last x number of your posts of yours that were reported and marked "good" by a moderator was included in the ban message. This would help cut down on these pointless threads in which the person claims they did nothing wrong, only to be shown proof they plagiarized.

txid fb74ace9823dfb5083c5fbc4e56b5d07d79903ff5b0ab846676ad2f87582678a

Please repay to the below address. Good luck!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

I have funded the loan (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5142562.0;all) to SM23031997 via TXID fb74ace9823dfb5083c5fbc4e56b5d07d79903ff5b0ab846676ad2f87582678a

Please repay according to the following address according to the following schedule:
36wD9WZri7utFL2x7Y8kMqB2piHcfqM6S2

By May 16, 2019: 0.0165 BTC

OR

By May 28, 2019: 0.01575

Regards
QS
May 13, 2019
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=L2lX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I am filling the loan.

OP please confirm.

Someone wanting to carry out a mass shooting wants to inflict maximum damage to his victims, and going to a gun free zone will mean the shooter has an extended time until he encounters any kind of resistance to his attack. If a shooter were to go into a school in which all the teachers have guns, he would be stopped nearly immidiately, which is not what he wants, so he will not even try.

First of all, this is ultimately theymos' money, legally speaking, so the decision starts and ends with him.

In order for it to be a good idea to allow someone to hold 500BTC of your money, you need to be confident they can be trusted holding said money. This is very straightforward as all you need to ask yourself if the person can be trusted with said amount of money. OgN has shown himself to be able to be trusted with the money -- he has not touched the money, even as its value exceeded $10 million, this is true even if you need to ask probing questions when relying on information provided by him.

If someone were to be a keyholder of a 4-of-7 address, they need to be similarly trusted. They perhaps to not need to have sufficient "trust" -- that is confidence they will keep their promises when amounts involved are in the millions, not having a bunch of ratings for $200 transactions and for having "good judgment" -- to hold 500BTC, but need enough trust to hold very substantial amounts of others' money.

If you were to rely on the fact that two "people" are truly separate people, you will have difficulty verifying this information.  First you need to verify they are two distinct people, but this is difficult because locations can easily be faked. Next you need to evaluate if the various keyholders have existing business or personal relationships that might conflict with the assumption the keyholders will not collude to steal the money. Two people that run a business venture together are going to be similar to being one person as they are likely to be loyal to eachother, and their financial success not only depends on the others' reputation, but also their financial situations are likely to be similar and will depend on how successful their venture is. The same is true if two people later form a venture after becoming a stakeholder. if two people have frequently traded with eachother, or are otherwise friendly, they may not disclose an (unsuccessful) attempt to collude to steal funds as a "joke" or would not otherwise report such an attempt.

The service is to hold the money, potentially for years (as has been the case), and to maintain the private keys holding the coins. Coinbase charges 0.5% per year to hold coins similarly to how the treasurers are holding funds. Gemini charges 0.4%/year. OgN's payment is probably a bit on the high side, but both he and theymos are free to negotiate a price they wish. 

I am not sure there are enough trustworthy people whom it would not be insane to trust with this much money, and to not collude to try to steal the money.

It looks like Vod might be trying to pull a “Michael Avenatti”

I have seen threads in which the banned user says they emailed the appeal email address and didn’t receive any response. This makes me believe appeals are ignored when they will not be granted.

Perhaps a better solution would be to give a response that the appeal has not been granted at this time when this is the case.

Your plagiarized posts were not from a long time ago when you were banned, giving you no time to have changed your ways, nor to otherwise contribute to the forum. Further:
which does not give me confidence you would not do something similarly harmful to the forum given the opportunity. There was also a high profile fight against plagiarism at the time, and it was well publicized that plagiarism was not acceptable around here.   

You are twisting my words.

OgN currently holds the only key to the 500 BTC he is holding for the forum, and there have not been any serious calls for forum funds to be held in a multisig address. What is being said about OgN is not unlike what was said about zeroaxl before he was extorted. The primary difference is that zeroaxl was privately accused of a bunch of BS, while OgN is being publicly accused of the same.

Guns are already banned from schools, and this is precisely the reason why there are so many mass shootings in schools.

Teachers and school administrators should be allowed to carry guns on school property, and this would probably stop ~all school shootings. Not every teacher needs to have a gun in their classroom, but the threat that they might have one is going to be enough to prevent someone from wanting to carry out a school shooting.

You can still trade on Gemini via their Active Trader^TM platform, that is similar to CoinbasePro, and will be charged a 1% fee if your 30 day rolling volume is less than $25k.

Gemini appears to be moving towards the model that Coinbase (not coinbase pro) used, that is to attract retail customers who are willing to pay a significant markup to buy or cashout. I suspect their trading volume was insufficient to generate enough revenue, even though their fees are among the highest in the industry, if not the highest. They appear to have given up on trying to compete with "real" exchanges and appear to be competing with LBC traders (and CB).

You can also create an API to get even lower fees.

I would advise against doing this.

Both mixing services are only guaranteeing the address will be valid for a limited amount of time. If there is a problem/delay with the 1st mixing service that causes the transaction to confirm after the cutoff time for the 2nd mixing service, or if multiple transactions are sent from the first mixing service with the last one being after the cutoff, then the second mixing service may not send you your money. This would be a real problem because some mixing services periodically delete their private keys associated with zero balance addresses in order to protect privacy of their users in case a government agency finds their servers.

They get away with his because no one is calling out their advertisers in a way similar to how left wing operative groups call out advertisers of Fox News and similar to silence their opinions.

This is hardly the most dishonest thing CNN has done in the past couple of years, or even months. In March, they ~immidiately started talking about healthcare at the public request of Nancy Pelosi.

CNN's coverage is anti-Trump enough so their viewers (who watch because CNN is anti-Trump) don't care when they are caught fabricating a story, or otherwise being dishonest, and they wont bother to fact-check what CNN is saying. 

In case my post was unclear (I don't think it is), I did not give Thule any personal information, I only offered to confirm if the information he had was accurate with a "yes/no" answer.

The purpose of my post was to lay out the facts as to what happened and allow others to form their own conclusions, however my conclusion is that Thule did not actually receive any personal information, and probably was not actually willing to pay for said information.

I am going to have to disagree with your conclusions on this one. You are free to do as you wish, but I stand by my statement that a defamatory statement against an online identity can be a tort, even if the person's IRL identity is not known.

If you were to go up to a random person on the street and say they are cheating on their spouse, you would be slandering them (assuming this is untrue), even if you do not know who they are. If the person is not a "public figure" ignorance of the truth is not a defense to libel nor is relying on inaccurate information.

It is also possible to libel/slander a business, or an entity that is DBA (doing business as) in a particular trade name.

I was under the impression she is going to fully recover from the cancer she had.

I do agree that RGB is very old and will probably not last through the end of Trump's second term if he get reelected. This is of course speculation.

Roberts used to be a solid conservative justice until the ObamaCare case. I get the feeling that Roberts does not particularly like Trump, and wants to avoid the court system becoming politicized. Obama/Clinton appointed judges are ignoring the law and making ruling based upon the fact they will hurt Trump, and Trump is responding by publicly criticizing the judges.

IMO, the best chances of Trump getting the court to shift farther to the right is Roberts retiring. This would eliminate a swing vote and replace it with a right leaning Justice. I think the chances are greatest this will happen sometime after the 2020 election, if it would happen during a Trump presidency at all.

On the topic of dox'ing via trust ratings, Vod has left trust ratings containing what purports to be personal information of the person receiving the rating for the following people:
*myself
* pmlv5555
* Gerald8

All of the ratings were sent after the rules on doxing were put in place. The two other users appear to have gotten nuked/banned, and I wonder if their actions that lead to their ban was in part caused by frustration of having this information freely available in their trust profile.

You really should stop being dishonest. The post you are referring to quite literally cited information you posted yourself.