[General] Bitcoin Wallets - Which, what, why?

[dkbit98]

Another HW checked by one collegue, it's BitBox 2.0, seems like very good alternative to Trezor and Ledger! Open source and nicely made.

Bitbox wallet is based on modified Trezor code with added secure element, and it is open source, that makes it good hardware wallet buying option.
However, there are some issues with their controversial swiss AOPP rule that is violating privacy, and they are now only wallet that is still supporting that.
Trzor, Bluewallet and few other wallets removed their AOPP rule support after negative feedback from community.

[MrSlippage]

Another HW checked by one collegue, it's BitBox 2.0, seems like very good alternative to Trezor and Ledger! Open source and nicely made.

Bitbox wallet is based on modified Trezor code with added secure element, and it is open source, that makes it good hardware wallet buying option.
However, there are some issues with their controversial swiss AOPP rule that is violating privacy, and they are now only wallet that is still supporting that.
Trzor, Bluewallet and few other wallets removed their AOPP rule support after negative feedback from community.

Thanks for this information, really useful, I didn't know about that till your appointment! thanks 

[BlackHatCoiner]

"Wasabi is an open-source, non-custodial, privacy-focused Bitcoin wallet

This is outdated. Wasabi is no longer privacy-focused. Implementing CoinJoin doesn't mean it focuses on privacy preservation for if it did, it wouldn't become pro-censorship, cooperate with chain analysis companies nor blacklist certain inputs from being mixed. The hardcoded coordinator does these things now more.

So I would remove it from "Desktop Wallets" and add it on "Not Recommended or outdated Wallets":

Not recommended or outdated Wallets
These wallets are either not-recommended for some reason or outdated. You should not use them! Please note that here we only list wallets that were previously on the list, or were suggested to be included by others. This does not include ALL wallets that exist and are not recommended. Wallets that are strongly not recommended:

• Copay, Bitpay, Blockchain.info, BTC.com — untrustworthy, misleading customers, high fees, lacking implementation.
• Mycelium — iOS app has been abandoned. Mycelium team was involved in various unethical scandals, e.g. raising money from ICOs, partying with the collected money and more.
• Multibit — This wallet is discontinued: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2293714.0.
• Coinbase, Freewallet — Custodial wallets. Freewallet has also many scam accusations against it.
• Ledger HW.1, Ledger Unplugged — Discontinued hardware wallets.
• Bitfi - John McAffee's "unhackable" hardware wallet, named also as “the world’s first unhackable device”. Besides McAffee's notorious lack of ethics and besides the admitted vulnerabilities of this product, McAffee offered in 2018 a 100.000$ bounty (raised afterwards to 250.000$) to anyone able to hack the hardware wallet. One week later, a 15 years old teen cracked the wallet and launched Doom on it, but he never received a dime from McAffee.
• Coinomi — Initially open source, then changed again to closed source. Had controversial situations in the past. More information can be found here.
• Trust Wallet — Mislead users that it was open source (only iOS app was). Later both versions of the wallet became closed source. They have not provided a reasonable explanation for this. More information can be found here, and here.
• Exodus — high fees (not customizable), security flaws, sync problems.
• Wasabi — misleading assertions, cooperation with companies that analyze the chain trying to make us treat bitcoin as non-fungible, blacklisting unknown inputs from being mixed arbitrarily.

[JayJuanGee]

"Wasabi is an open-source, non-custodial, privacy-focused Bitcoin wallet

This is outdated. Wasabi is no longer privacy-focused. Implementing CoinJoin doesn't mean it focuses on privacy preservation for if it did, it wouldn't become pro-censorship, cooperate with chain analysis companies nor blacklist certain inputs from being mixed. The hardcoded coordinator does these things now more.

So I would remove it from "Desktop Wallets" and add it on "Not Recommended or outdated Wallets":

Not recommended or outdated Wallets
These wallets are either not-recommended for some reason or outdated. You should not use them! Please note that here we only list wallets that were previously on the list, or were suggested to be included by others. This does not include ALL wallets that exist and are not recommended. Wallets that are strongly not recommended:

• Copay, Bitpay, Blockchain.info, BTC.com — untrustworthy, misleading customers, high fees, lacking implementation.
• Mycelium — iOS app has been abandoned. Mycelium team was involved in various unethical scandals, e.g. raising money from ICOs, partying with the collected money and more.
• Multibit — This wallet is discontinued: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2293714.0.
• Coinbase, Freewallet — Custodial wallets. Freewallet has also many scam accusations against it.
• Ledger HW.1, Ledger Unplugged — Discontinued hardware wallets.
• Bitfi - John McAffee's "unhackable" hardware wallet, named also as “the world’s first unhackable device”. Besides McAffee's notorious lack of ethics and besides the admitted vulnerabilities of this product, McAffee offered in 2018 a 100.000$ bounty (raised afterwards to 250.000$) to anyone able to hack the hardware wallet. One week later, a 15 years old teen cracked the wallet and launched Doom on it, but he never received a dime from McAffee.
• Coinomi — Initially open source, then changed again to closed source. Had controversial situations in the past. More information can be found here.
• Trust Wallet — Mislead users that it was open source (only iOS app was). Later both versions of the wallet became closed source. They have not provided a reasonable explanation for this. More information can be found here, and here.
• Exodus — high fees (not customizable), security flaws, sync problems.
• Wasabi — misleading assertions, cooperation with companies that analyze the chain trying to make us treat bitcoin as non-fungible, blacklisting unknown inputs from being mixed arbitrarily.

How do you do  accomplish your suggested changes with Op owner (Lauda) gone?  Do you petition theymos to assign this thread a new owner (which is surely possible, but would theymos do it?)?  Or maybe the thread needs to be locked and a new thread created?

[BlackHatCoiner]

Or maybe the thread needs to be locked and a new thread created?

I suggest to either remove the thread from "sticky" or just change owner.

[nullius]

How do you do  accomplish your suggested changes with Op owner (Lauda) gone?  Do you petition theymos to assign this thread a new owner (which is surely possible, but would theymos do it?)?  Or maybe the thread needs to be locked and a new thread created?

I suggest to either remove the thread from "sticky" or just change owner.

If there is a serious chance that the maintainership of this thread may be changed, I offer to take it up.

Pros:

• I have the general expertise to evaluate and collate information about Bitcoin wallets.
• In the technical forum, I have long demonstrated an ability to organize technical information into a focused, coherent presentation.
• I would have an exceedingly strong personal motive to uphold Lauda’s exacting standards for accuracy and professionalism, in her memory.  I don’t want to make my personal mark, show off, or strut my ego here; I do that elsewhere!  At this point, whatever Lauda did to make this thread such a legendary success, I would just want to keep it going the way she always did, insofar as reasonable and practicable.  I don’t feel like it’s my thread; if it ever were really to become my thread, it would need to evolve that way organically in the course of time.
• I have a strong general desire that Bitcoin newbies should be guided to secure storage for their coins, and away from so-called “privacy” wallets that suddenly embraced blockchain analysis and transaction censorship.

Cons:

• In terms of direct experience, I lack much breadth of knowledge about the ever-changing plethora of available Bitcoin wallets.  I don’t see that as an obstacle:  This thread is mainly about collating and organizing information from the community, as Lauda did.  To be upfront, I simply note my own limitations here.
• I frankly need the hassle like I need a hole in my head.  Maintaining this thread is a chore and a time sink.  It does not require frequent updates—but each update is a task with a public result that is only the tip of the iceberg.  I have some idea of what Lauda personally invested in this, behind the scenes—oh, most people have no idea what went into this!  I offer only because I understand both how important this thread is to the community, and how important it was to Lauda.  I mention how much of a hassle it is, because I don’t want for anyone to assume that I make this offer lightly.
• Per the below, I doubt the whole idea of changing maintainership.

By coincidence, the dread “nullius woke up” moment came near the beginning of activity period 1369, and was not intended to last beyond the end of it.  I need to attend some old business, conscionably to address some wrongdoings in my awareness, and belatedly to answer some PMs—none of which is yet done, for I am busy with other matters.  That’s it.  If I were somehow to be assigned to maintain this thread, it would be an ongoing commitment that I take with appropriate gravity.

Hereby, I do not yet express any opinion about what I think should be done with this thread; I need to think about that.  I only address the potential case of a change of maintainership.  I note that in several different subforums, there are stickies that don’t seem much maintained.  Needless to say, however, I understand the importance of accurate and up-to-date information for newbie wallet advice.  I jumped in here because I noticed people talking about this; my own opinion is quite ambivalent here.  If I arrive at an opinion that maintainership should stay as-is (one way or another), and I have not yet consummated any definite commitment, then I reserve the right to retract or modify the foregoing.

[suchmoon]

How do you do  accomplish your suggested changes with Op owner (Lauda) gone?  Do you petition theymos to assign this thread a new owner (which is surely possible, but would theymos do it?)?  Or maybe the thread needs to be locked and a new thread created?

Someone - BlackHatCoiner for example - creates a new thread, then theymos (or any other global mod AFAIK) can unpin the old one and pin the new one. That way mods can see that the replacement is better than the old thread, as opposed to just taking someone's word for it.

~

Like this clown here LOL

[JayJuanGee]

How do you do  accomplish your suggested changes with Op owner (Lauda) gone?  Do you petition theymos to assign this thread a new owner (which is surely possible, but would theymos do it?)?  Or maybe the thread needs to be locked and a new thread created?

Someone - BlackHatCoiner for example - creates a new thread, then theymos (or any other global mod AFAIK) can unpin the old one and pin the new one. That way mods can see that the replacement is better than the old thread, as opposed to just taking someone's word for it.

~

Like this clown here LOL

I am sure that having a track record is helpful in terms of perhaps maintaining a thread.. but what is the idea of pinning?

A new thread might refer to the old thread (and linking it) and then perhaps summarizing aspects of the old thread (including perhaps updating some information).  What would the pinning do?  close the old thread and then link to the new one?

[Charles-Tim]

If there is a serious chance that the maintainership of this thread may be changed, I offer to take it up.

Don't you know the ownership of the topic can not be changed, it belongs to Lauda forever.

I am sure that having a track record is helpful in terms of perhaps maintaining a thread.. but what is the idea of pinning?

A new thread might refer to the old thread (and linking it) and then perhaps summarizing aspects of the old thread (including perhaps updating some information).  What would the pinning do?  close the old thread and then link to the new one?

What I just think is that someone can do more research on his own and make a better version of this thread's topic in a way the topic (this topic) will be distinctly referenced. If it is worth that the thread should be pinned, it would. So the new thread already will reference the old one and would be pinned if it deserves it. Just my opinion.

[nullius]

If there is a serious chance that the maintainership of this thread may be changed, I offer to take it up.

Don't you know the ownership of the topic can not be changed, it belongs to Lauda forever.

Ownership of a topic can indeed be changed.  For example, it has happened to the Wall Observer.  Fun Lauda fact:  In 2017, Lauda was one of the leading candidates to run WO.  In that case, which did make sense for WO,^* the question was put to a vote with a non-secret ballot.  Lauda came in second after infofront, the current WO boss.

^* I do not think a vote would be right here, since (a) it is a decision that should be based on technical competence for the task, and (b) it is Lauda’s thread; Lauda was not the biggest fan of democracy.  WO is a sort of special free-for-all discussion thread with its own local culture, so I guess a poll made more sense there.

My biggest concern is, frankly, that certain parties may try to seize any opportunity to efface or to bury Lauda’s legacy of community contributions here.  Lauda touched many people’s lives here; she had friends and admirers.  But she also had many enemies—some of whom are as underhanded and duplicitous as they are petty and spiteful.

I do NOT want to take over Lauda’s thread.  I speak up here as her friend.  My personal wish would be that the thread should stay exactly as-is, forever and forever—but without being stuck with obsolete information.  That is clearly impossible.  Therefore, I am searching for the least-bad option.

Lauda did a huge service to the community with this thread.  It is one of the most highly-read threads on the entire forum.  She took justifiable pride in it; this thread was dear to her, and it was for her a labour of love.  I want to preserve it for her, in her memory, in any way that I reasonably can.  That may be best achieved by keeping it well-maintained, such that it shall remain the best one-stop source for beginner-level wallet advice—pinned at the top of Beginners & Help.

it belongs to Lauda forever.

With this, I emphatically want to agree.

A new thread might refer to the old thread (and linking it) and then perhaps summarizing aspects of the old thread (including perhaps updating some information).  What would the pinning do?  close the old thread and then link to the new one?

I see that as akin to rewriting a software project from scratch (LOL).

Lauda’s thread is great.  It just needs updates from time to time—what programmers call “refactoring”.  Those updates require a terrific amount of work; I know that what is seen publicly is only the tip of the iceberg, because I was on contact with Lauda.  However, it only needs to be done occasionally.  I could commit to that.

For another metaphor, this thread is a garden that was tended with great care.  The gardener dropped dead.  Weeds are moving in.  It is unnecessary to get rid of the garden, or to change it around altogether.  It just needs some tending.

I am sure that having a track record is helpful in terms of perhaps maintaining a thread..

I established my reputation in the technical forum, and most of my merit is from the technical forum.  When contemplating what is fundamentally a technical topic, i.e. wallet advice to newbies, my track record should obviously be evaluated from my long record of technical posts, not from Reputation dramas or whatever.

If I were to do such a thing, I may eventually experiment with placing thread’s top posts on Github, accepting issues and PRs, etc.  Eventually.  Maybe.  It would probably make it less of a hassle than how Lauda did it.  But I also would not want to raise a barrier to contributions by those who may not have (or may not want) Github accounts.

but what is the idea of pinning?

Lauda’s thread is pinned for a reason.


I believe there is no reason for me to answer attempts to inject substance-free ad hominem trollbait from someone with a demonstrated history of trolling, personal harassment, and extremely unprofessional behaviour.

When Lauda was a candidate for “topic starter” of the Wall Observer, r0ach had a fit of nigh apoplexy over the prospect that a (widely-presumed) woman may run WO—LOL.  Undoubtedly, my offer here will draw some irrational reactions, too.

[suchmoon]

I am sure that having a track record is helpful in terms of perhaps maintaining a thread.. but what is the idea of pinning?

A new thread might refer to the old thread (and linking it) and then perhaps summarizing aspects of the old thread (including perhaps updating some information).  What would the pinning do?  close the old thread and then link to the new one?

Not sure I understand the question so pardon me if this sounds patronizing... pinning is what makes the thread appear at the top of the board. That's basically the only reason to have this discussion at all, otherwise anyone can just create a thread and have at it, but they would not have the visibility that this thread has.

As for how the content is transferred, there are obviously options - linking, summarizing, etc. I think quoting the non-obsolete parts would work best - that way authorship is preserved and the contents is still in one place without having to click too many links. Rewritten parts can have reference links to the old stuff if needed.

Mucking around with ownership doesn't make much sense IMO, nor does keeping outdated info at the top of the board.

[JayJuanGee]

I am sure that having a track record is helpful in terms of perhaps maintaining a thread.. but what is the idea of pinning?

A new thread might refer to the old thread (and linking it) and then perhaps summarizing aspects of the old thread (including perhaps updating some information).  What would the pinning do?  close the old thread and then link to the new one?

Not sure I understand the question so pardon me if this sounds patronizing... pinning is what makes the thread appear at the top of the board. That's basically the only reason to have this discussion at all, otherwise anyone can just create a thread and have at it, but they would not have the visibility that this thread has.

Maybe you believe that I should know better, but I did not know what you meant by pinning.... so you did answer my question. Thanks.

[nullius]

Noise and objections are being raised here by someone with exactly zero prior contributions in the first 11 pages of this thread (unless Lauda deleted her prior posts^*)—who practically spat at Lauda’s departure, and at those who was grieving—who has been obsessively harassing and trolling me.

suchmoon’s only apparent purpose in this thread is to follow me around, and to attempt to stop me from engaging in positive activity with the forum community.  I generally ignore her, so she needs to try to find a way to get a rise out of me.  Her grand entrance here, her very first contribution, was to suggest that Lauda’s thread be unpinned (thus burying the cat’s legacy here), then immediately to insult me in a childish way.

When people who have some positive, constructive interest in this thread are attempting to find a solution to the problem of maintaining it, I suggest that that discussion should not be derailed.


BlackHatCoiner, Charles-Tim, and JayJuanGee all showed significant interest in this thread after Lauda left, and before the current discussion arose.  If I were to take up maintainership here, I expect that I would probably be working with them, among others.

Before Lauda left, there were some other regular contributors to this thread.  They worked with Lauda before.  I have had cordial prior contact with some of them; I worked with some of them on technical education topics back in early 2018, on terms of mutual respect.  I would reach out to them, if I were to take up maintainership here.

My interest here is Lauda and Bitcoin—both.  This, hereby, is both.

This thread is a legend in itself, with >130,000 views.  It has helped many newbies to get set up with their first Bitcoin wallets.  That was characteristic of Lauda—of a side of her that some Reputation regulars never saw.  She loved helping people.  (Heaven knows she helped me, and thus got a tenacious puppy following a cat.)   It was her motivating purpose on this forum; all else followed from that.  Accordingly, I wish to preserve some of her best and most cherished work here.

My biggest concern is, frankly, that certain parties may try to seize any opportunity to efface or to bury Lauda’s legacy of community contributions here.  Lauda touched many people’s lives here; she had friends and admirers.  But she also had many enemies—some of whom are as underhanded and duplicitous as they are petty and spiteful.

^* Lauda was generally ruthless with her self-moderation powers, to a degree that shocked even me.  She sometimes even trashed posts that she didn’t dislike, simply to make her threads less cluttered and more readable.  At the time she left, this wallets thread had ≥313 posts self-mod deleted (probably many more, from the years before that counter was implemented), and 96 posts remaining.  Naturally, I would do my best to follow her example in her own thread—although I don’t know if I could bring myself to be quite as trigger-happy as she was. 😼

[suchmoon]

Noise and objections are being raised here by someone with exactly zero prior contributions in the first 11 pages of this thread (unless Lauda deleted her prior posts^*)—who practically spat at Lauda’s departure, and at those who was grieving—who has been obsessively harassing and trolling me.

suchmoon’s only apparent purpose in this thread is to follow me around, and to attempt to stop me from engaging in positive activity with the forum community.  I generally ignore her, so she needs to try to find a way to get a rise out of me.  Her grand entrance here, her very first contribution, was to suggest that Lauda’s thread be unpinned (thus burying the cat’s legacy here), then immediately to insult me in a childish way.

The thread is about wallets, not about someone's legacy. Having outdated information at the top of a beginners board is worse than having no pinned thread at all, but luckily those are not the only options. Someone (even you) can create a new thread and then petition to have it pinned on the grounds of it being a better version of the existing thread.

Based on what I know about your writing style, your version would be ludicrously complicated, boastful, and too verbose for newbies, but feel free to surprise me.

When people who have some positive, constructive interest in this thread are attempting to find a solution to the problem of maintaining it, I suggest that that discussion should not be derailed.

Then stop derailing it with your cringy Lauda worship.

[nullius]

For those wondering how I wound up here:  I have made some minor contributions to this thread before.  Very minor, compared to some who spent a huge amount of time and effort actively helping Lauda with this; as I said, I do not have broad experience using many different wallets.  Nonetheless, Lauda trusted my technical judgment; and she admired my skill as a writer.  She sometimes bounced things off of me.

Credits: [...]
Additionally a huge shoutout to everyone who privately or publicly contributed to this thread.

She had many contacts here, including technical experts; I doubt I was the only one who contributed that way.  Anyone who actually knew her would know how she worked.

I am keenly aware of this thread, in case that was not obvious.  Newbie wallet guidance is an important part of promoting Bitcoin mass-adoption.  I have also sometimes sent people links to this thread.

The thread is about wallets, not about someone's legacy.

That is a fallacious false dilemma; and it is a slap in the face to anyone who contributes here with the expectation that they will be remembered when they are gone.

I believe that I have appropriately balanced two important considerations:  The important practical need of the community to continue having an excellent wallets guide for newbies, and the recognition of someone who provided that guide as a part of her years-long devotion of time and effort to this forum.  The latter is an ethical consideration, even a matter of simple decency.

You clearly just want to get rid of this thread.  Bury it.  Slide it away.

Based on what I know about your writing style, your version would be ludicrously complicated, boastful, and too verbose for newbies, but feel free to surprise me.

You don’t know how I handle technical issues, since you are practically nonexistent in the technical forum.

In technology generally, I optimize.  I have a reputation for keeping technical topics tightly focused amidst attempted derailment by Bcashers, et al.  Anyway, my own style is irrelevant here.

Insofar as is relevant here, my “style” is faithfully to continue applying Lauda’s style.  I offer hereby to serve as an executive editor, not to rewrite the thread from scratch.  I have no desire to create my own wallets thread; frankly, I would rather spend the time writing my own wallet.  I have been intending that for awhile.

OP and #2–4 are extremely long for forum posts, but well-organized and clearly presented.  They need maintenance.  Needless to say, I would add an appropriate note briefly recording the thread’s original authorship, with links for those who want to know more about the original author.

When people who have some positive, constructive interest in this thread are attempting to find a solution to the problem of maintaining it, I suggest that that discussion should not be derailed.

Then stop derailing it with your cringy Lauda worship.

You are clearly acting in bad faith here.  I think that you followed me in here to attack me—just like cryptohunter used to do to people, and as you are now doing in multiple threads.  Your very first post here consisted only of a suggestion to bury this thread, and a substance-free childish insult to me ad hominem.  And you have been seething for at least two years with a thinly-veiled dislike for Lauda.

Unfortunately, I think you may find a few supporters amongst those who may simply be jealous of Lauda’s thread.

My goal here is to keep this thread as close as practicable to what it has been for almost six years.  Just keep it updated, with a level of effort similar to what Lauda did behind the scenes.  Edit it with a scalpel, not kill it with an axe.  Those who love the thread as-is will appreciate that.

[Charles-Tim]

Insofar as is relevant here, my “style” is faithfully to continue applying Lauda’s style.  I offer hereby to serve as an executive editor, not to rewrite the thread from scratch.  I have no desire to create my own wallets thread; frankly, I would rather spend the time writing my own wallet.  I have been intending that for awhile.

I think you and suchmoon are right, what I understood from suchmoon post is that you can come up with a new thread about 'bitcoin wallet for newbies', the rest is left to you, you can do whatever you like, if you want to edit the thread, but distinctly referenced it to the original work of Lauda with the link available on the new topic that you created, I think you have nothing to be worried about. I may not be totally right, but I think you can send PM to theymos about this before any edition to give you the conditions to meet before the thread will be eligible to be pinned.

I think if you have done this before without any notice until you created a new topic about it would be better, distinctly referencing it and stating that it is the original work of Lauda will make it credible if your work is actually credible. If it deserves to be pinned, it would be pinned.

[suchmoon]

You clearly just want to get rid of this thread.  Bury it.  Slide it away.

My suggestion is to create a better replacement thread and then ask moderators to unpin this one. Calling it "burying" is disingenuous to say the least.

You don’t know how I handle technical issues, since you are practically nonexistent in the technical forum.

This is a newbie board.

[ ~ ego trip paragraphs skipped ~ ]

My point exactly. Instead of telling us how well you'd do it, you could have been halfway through creating a new thread and actually showing us how you'd do it.

Unfortunately, I think you may find a few supporters amongst those who may simply be jealous of Lauda’s thread.

It's a thread. About wallets. Your irrational emotional attachment to a long-gone forum member makes no sense here.

[nullius]

Insofar as is relevant here, my “style” is faithfully to continue applying Lauda’s style.  I offer hereby to serve as an executive editor, not to rewrite the thread from scratch.  I have no desire to create my own wallets thread; frankly, I would rather spend the time writing my own wallet.  I have been intending that for awhile.

I think you and suchmoon are right, what I understood from suchmoon post is that you can come up with a new thread about 'bitcoin wallet for newbies', the rest is left to you, you can do whatever you like, if you want to edit the thread, but distinctly referenced it to the original work of Lauda with the link available on the new topic that you created, I think you have nothing to be worried about. I may not be totally right, but I think you can send PM to theymos about this before any edition to give you the conditions to meet before the thread will be eligible to be pinned.

I think if you have done this before without any notice until you created a new topic about it would be better, distinctly referencing it and stating that it is the original work of Lauda will make it credible if your work is actually credible. If it deserves to be pinned, it would be pinned.

It occurred to me that this should be resolved administratively.

My point exactly. Instead of telling us how well you'd do it, you could have been halfway through creating a new thread and actually showing us how you'd do it.

You missed the point.  I want to keep and preserve something that has served the community well for years.  I do not want to throw it out and replace it.  Creating a new thread would be counterproductive to what I seek to achieve.

With that being said, perhaps I may make a new thread if there seems to be too much of a danger that this thread will be replaced rather than preserved.  Or perhaps not:  Although I care about the existence of a good wallets thread, the desire to preserve Lauda’s thread is what decisively motivates me to undertake a commitment that I take very seriously.  I haven’t decided, and I hope that I won’t need to.

You clearly just want to get rid of this thread.  Bury it.  Slide it away.

My suggestion is to create a better replacement thread and then ask moderators to unpin this one. Calling it "burying" is disingenuous to say the least.

By what disingenuous pretzel-logic does replacing and unpinning the thread not result in burying it?

Unpinning it means letting it slide into oblivion, with its 99% still-good information that only needs to be maintained against obsolescence.

You don’t know how I handle technical issues, since you are practically nonexistent in the technical forum.

This is a newbie board.

This is a thread where technical competence is required to collate and edit the information in OP.  It is fundamentally a technical thread, delivered at a newbie level.  Treating it otherwise is to invite misinformation.

It's a thread. About wallets. Your irrational emotional attachment to a long-gone forum member makes no sense here.

I have never seen such an overtly psychopathic statement anywhere on this forum.  You are celebrating psychopathy!

Some of us believe that people matter.  Some of us are loyal to our friends.  Some of us do not treat those who were kind to us as disposable things, to use and to throw away.

Yes, some of us have emotional attachments to human beings.  When you contemn that as “irrational”, you let your mask slip.  Classic psychopathy.


With that, for the time being, I will ignore further replies here unless something new and interesting arises.  This is a waste of time, not constructive action.  Lauda’s thread is probably the wrong place for this discussion, anyway—especially since she’s not here to delete anything that she deems not a useful addition to her wallets thread.  She always did that, without hesitation and without apology.

[BlackHatCoiner]

You don’t know how I handle technical issues, since you are practically nonexistent in the technical forum.

I'm afraid that this particular topic is an example of your posting technique, which I find non newbie-friendly. Almost all of your threads while perhaps educative, are hard to grasp. (What does this have to do with suchmoon?)

It is fundamentally a technical thread, delivered at a newbie level.  Treating it otherwise is to invite misinformation.

Then submit another, better thread and we're all going to judge if it's newbie-friendly enough with technical fundamentals. It shouldn't take you more than the time it took to write these 5 bedsheet-long posts.

[JayJuanGee]

You don’t know how I handle technical issues, since you are practically nonexistent in the technical forum.

I'm afraid that this particular topic is an example of your posting technique, which I find non newbie-friendly. Almost all of your threads while perhaps educative, are hard to grasp. (What does this have to do with suchmoon?)

It is fundamentally a technical thread, delivered at a newbie level.  Treating it otherwise is to invite misinformation.

Then submit another, better thread and we're all going to judge if it's newbie-friendly enough with technical fundamentals. It shouldn't take you more than the time it took to write these 5 bedsheet-long posts.

I tend to agree on this point too.  I do believe that nullius has had an ability to raise a lot of good points and even to frame matters in interesting ways, but surely his posts have not tended to be newbie-friendly as a whole. but that would not mean that he is not capable of maintaining a consistent streak of newbie-friendliness but surely many of us (including yours truly) have our doubts..  

I also have my doubts about nullius's ability to consistently refrain from allowing matters to become personal - when they should attempt to be topic-focused - especially if he is wanting to either take over this thread or to have his (hypothetical at the moment) thread to get promoted to pinned status or to take the place of this thread that is already in pinned status (I am not claiming to be an expert about pin status, either, since I just realized what the term means - even though I did realize that there were some threads that fit such a descriptive status).

Of course, we know that theymos has the ability to change the ownership of a thread, but that does not even seem like the most obvious way forward in this case - unless he were to see that a member (who would end up taking over ownership) already has a track record of sustaining the basic kind of information in a thread like this, and that surely would be up to theymos to conclude if he believes that nullius has such abilities (likely based on past posting conduct - and personally, I am having my doubts that theymos would reasonably be able to come to such conclusion - or even if he would want to get into making that kind of a determination), so in that regard, the creating of a similar thread that links back to this one or even updates some of the contents of its posts might substantiate the pinning of such thread...

so in that regard, if the similarly substantive replacement thread ends up doing a good job of equally (and likely better) presenting the same information, then the thread ends up speaking for itself in terms of whether it is newbie-friendly (and focused enough) - rather than potentially taking chances with the changing of ownership of an existing thread, and really, I wonder how common change of ownership on the forum happens to be anyhow?  Maybe the WO thread is the ONLY example, and there was a bit of a unique circumstance with the change of ownership with that thread in terms of both how it had become a kind of "one-stop-shopping" information sharing  (troll-box) point on the forum, and the seemingly widespread preferences (at the time of the ownership change - about 4 years ago?) in keeping it going (as a kind of forum chat area) - including that WO thread having some of the rules of that thread to be expressedly unique from other overall forum thread rules.