Where are you 'Iamnotback'?

[DooMAD]

Besides, you can't really ban him anyway.

The discussions with Anonymint's alts were never meant to take place as per the forum's rules.

I'm pretty sure you're having a discussion with one of his alts right now.  Maybe in Anonymint's head it's not inconceivable for one of his fans to feel the urge to go to every thread he posted in (and those are just some of them) before he was banned and provide a link to where the posts have been archived.  But back here in the real world, most people would view that as rather suspicious, to say the least.  No one has a greater desire for that unhinged screed to be read than Anonymint himself.  Talk about a turd that won't flush.

[1713526843]

1713526843

[1713526843]

1713526843

[1713526843]

1713526843

[1713526843]

1713526843

[Traxo]

https://steemit.com/freedom/@anonymint/non-decentralized-forums-are-clusterfucks-of-corruption

(link to Medium blog with the same content will be inserted here)

If they make sense on their own, the users are free to fetch them from the deletion PMs, edit them and repost them.

The users can’t retrieve their posts from the threads where @anunymint wrote the first post in the thread, because you acknowledged up-thread that users do not receive notifications of deletions when a moderator nukes an entire thread. Rather users only receive notifications (and copies) of deletions when only individual posts are deleted from a thread, not when the entire thread has been nuked. You admitted this up-thread and now you contradickT yourself.

I'm pretty sure you're having a discussion with one of his alts right now.

I already told you that my IP address is a well known ISP in Croatia thus verifiably not a VPN:

So we're just supposed to pretend this isn't yet another one of your accounts and you aren't talking about yourself in the third person right now?

The point is that it does not matter who I am. But seriously ask Theymos to check my IP address. How did Shelby transport himself to Croatia while he is simultaneously reading this from his account from an IP address in the Philippines.

He and I are not liars. Do you fantasize that he and decentralization are lone, isolated kooks?

So you’d also cut your dick off because someone pointed at you and yelled rape? God misplaced the discernment module when he conceived you.

 

I am not an administrator, and I don't know every single factor.  

All the factors were enumerated, but as usual accordingly to your preferred trolling pattern, once again you’re so interested in commenting on issues which you know nothing about and are too lazy to actually research.

so it seems pretty fucking difficult to get banned in this forum

Ostensibly it’s very easy to get banned when you offend many people by writing things that are total alien to their ignorant viewpoints. And then telling them that they are ignorant when the antagonists refuse to research, only after patience is exhausted when the anagonists have made numerous inflammatory and derogatory remarks such as you do.

The decentralized moderation idea Shelby has proposed would make it easy for offended people to Ignore him (even as a group with a shared chosen moderator), but not make it possible to actually erase data that otherwise (here on bitcointalk.org) prevents his circle of peers from having access to their hard work and effort. Not all of us have the same circle of peers. You boys over in the Wall Observer thread like to masturbate with jokes and what not. Shelby prefers serious technical work. You do not understand him and he has no desire to understand you.

Regarding, the supposed substantive importance of anunymint:  I would imagine if he was actually saying something that was so fucking substantively important, then it would either not be deleted or others would be ready, willing and able to say it.. in other words, we are likely not losing much if anything substantively by getting rid of peeps, such as anunymint, who rise to such high level of nonsense to actually get banned from a relatively permissive forum.

Once again there you go again with your generalities commenting about something you know nothing about. I provided you some examples which exemplify that it can be very damaging to presume the correctness of groupthink.

You pontificate from a position of ignorance. Any domain expert knows that is equivalent to pulling noise out of your asshole. Details matter. Very much. In domain expertise.

You apparently don't understand what is a troll.  You should look in the mirror or look at your fuck buddy, anunymint, as examples of what is a troll. If you spent more time providing good arguments and substance, then perhaps you could get somewhere with your various arguments, instead you and your fuck buddy, anunymint, seem to get caught up on questions of status and personalities.  

Lol, trolling while you "refute" my compliment that you’re an expert troll. Kudos again!

Maybe you should go suck anunymint's dick, if he has one?

Kudos. Well done. So @anunymint is the one who hurls insults???

[mprep]

<...>

If they make sense on their own, the users are free to fetch them from the deletion PMs, edit them and repost them.

The users can’t retrieve their posts from the threads where @anunymint wrote the first post in the thread, because you acknowledged up-thread that users do not receive notifications of deletions when a moderator nukes an entire thread. Rather users only receive notifications (and copies) of deletions when only individual posts are deleted from a thread, not when the entire thread has been nuked. You admitted this up-thread and now you contradickT yourself.

<...>

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

[JayJuanGee]

I am not an administrator, and I don't know every single factor.  

All the factors were enumerated, but as usual accordingly to your preferred trolling pattern, once again you’re so interested in commenting on issues which you know nothing about and are too lazy to actually research.

I could give a ratt's ass about reading through the history of anonymint according to his own presentation, unless I were assigned some kind of authority or position with bitcoin talk in which I needed to make some kind of recommendation.. which is not the case.  I have seen some presentations here from admins, such as mprep, that seem perfectly reasonable to me, and I presume that mprep did whatever due diligence research into the anonymint matter.

so it seems pretty fucking difficult to get banned in this forum

Ostensibly it’s very easy to get banned when you offend many people by writing things that are total alien to their ignorant viewpoints.

Has not been my experience.  I have seen some pretty aggressive trolling, shilling and offending in the forum that generally has to cross certain high boundaries before resulting in a ban or a suspension.

And then telling them that they are ignorant when the antagonists refuse to research, only after patience is exhausted when the anagonists have made numerous inflammatory and derogatory remarks such as you do.

What does this have to do with me?  Anonymint needs to figure out his own level of reasonableness, and I saw plenty of unnecessary trolling, irrelevance and provocation from him, so perhaps he needs to work on himself.  Has little to do with me, except that I had a few communications with him, but he seems to have dug his own grave (or whatever you want to call it - he put himself into his own perilous position by going beyond acceptable standards that are forum discretionary.. and there does not seem to be evidence that the forum has been rash in regards to the Anonymint-ban situation)

The decentralized moderation idea Shelby has proposed would make it easy for offended people to Ignore him (even as a group with a shared chosen moderator),

A banned person is not in a very credible position to be presenting forum rules, but of course, theymos and any mods can consider those proposals in either making or enforcing forum rules, to the extent that theymos has given them such authority.  Seems to be quite a bit f discretion in a forum like this concerning making and enforcing rules.

but not make it possible to actually erase data that otherwise (here on bitcointalk.org) prevents his circle of peers from having access to their hard work and effort.

Well, if you are concerned that your work product is going to get erased, then perhaps it would be a good idea to save it in another secure and accessible location.  There do seem to be some recourses for recovering deleted posts with the forum, too, so there is that.

Not all of us have the same circle of peers. You boys over in the Wall Observer thread like to masturbate with jokes and what not. Shelby prefers serious technical work. You do not understand him and he has no desire to understand you.

Well, he is going to have troubles if he does not seem to care about the audience in which he is presenting his ideas.  Therefore, it is probably better that he goes to circles in which he feels appreciated... especially if he has such thin skin.

Regarding, the supposed substantive importance of anunymint:  I would imagine if he was actually saying something that was so fucking substantively important, then it would either not be deleted or others would be ready, willing and able to say it.. in other words, we are likely not losing much if anything substantively by getting rid of peeps, such as anunymint, who rise to such high level of nonsense to actually get banned from a relatively permissive forum.

Once again there you go again with your generalities commenting about something you know nothing about. I provided you some examples which exemplify that it can be very damaging to presume the correctness of groupthink.

You make little sense with your assertion of "groupthink."

You pontificate from a position of ignorance. Any domain expert knows that is equivalent to pulling noise out of your asshole. Details matter. Very much. In domain expertise.

O.k... you and your butt buddy are very important peeps... And you know a lot too... good for you.

[vapourminer]

look, reading and understanding shelbys viewpoints takes a lot of time and homework on the readers part. there are no shortcuts to knowledge. sometimes you just need to put the time in and read the linked info. after all would you just blindly trust someone if he said something with no data to back it up. seems many do but thats not how trustlessness works. you need to show your work when presenting information.

sure many sheep blindly trust with no understanding of the subject (and pay dearly for their folly). but in crypto the whole point is trust is not needed. IOW understand the subject and its workings, dont just assume a particular group is trustworthy and blindly follow them.

shelby never tried to sell anything. he has repeatedly refused my offers of donations, saying to wait till he has a working product.

all he tries to do is help people save their btc investment by pointing out possible problems and to do that he needs to present the data that backs up that veiwpoint. and sure much is technical and the info needed is in many fields.

now sure he can be short, abrupt, and could make a better effort to be polite but reading some of the replies to him, especially those who dont read the links he provides.. well i can see how he could get a bit testy. not making excuses for him, he is who he is.

the laughable part of this ban? there are so many shitposters, scammers taking money, post whores upping their post counts, shillers, sockpuppets etc, they are allowed to stay. but shelby, who shares knowlede, provides interesting insights and conversations, get banned. riiiiiight.

[jbreher]

many sheep blindly trust with no understanding of the subject

Word.

the laughable part of this ban? there are so many shitposters, scammers taking money, post whores upping their post counts, shillers, sockpuppets etc, they are allowed to stay. but shelby, who shares knowlede, provides interesting insights and conversations, get banned. riiiiiight.

WordWord.

[DooMAD]

now sure he can be short, abrupt, and could make a better effort to be polite but reading some of the replies to him, especially those who dont read the links he provides.. well i can see how he could get a bit testy. not making excuses for him, he is who he is.

the laughable part of this ban? there are so many shitposters, scammers taking money, post whores upping their post counts, shillers, sockpuppets etc, they are allowed to stay. but shelby, who shares knowlede, provides interesting insights and conversations, get banned. riiiiiight.

How is it beneficial to derail and cross-talk over multiple unrelated threads that contain useful info?  That kind of behaviour is the exact opposite of useful.  If he has to post a load of FUD nonsense about Theftcoin, start a new thread specifically for it and keep all the drivel neatly contained in one place.  I'm sure it would cause tremendous pain to his ego to have a potentially smaller audience reading his tirades, but not everyone appreciates his profound tendency to completely hijack threads.

He has clearly demonstrated the ability to maintain numerous accounts where he chooses not to exhibit this kind of extreme behaviour straight away, so (unless he is a bona fide schizophrenic) it stands to reason he's being this much of an ass deliberately.

[Shelby_Moore_III]

If he has to post a load of FUD nonsense about Theftcoin, start a new thread specifically for it and keep all the drivel neatly contained in one place.

I tried to keep it all in one thread: Why do some people believe that only the nodes miners run matter?

But one of your cohort Core shills @Carlton Banks decided to entirely derail another thread with off-topic trolling about it which forced me to also reply in that thread: BLS signatures (better than Schnorr)

You and your Core shills allege “nonsense” but aren’t able to refute any of my statements. Thus I am of the opinion that y’all are just trolling.

Frankly I am not interested in wasting my time arguing about SegWit with your boyz club tribe. It’s impossible to argue against an irrational religion. Please do keep your Bitcons in Core addresses that begin with a 3 instead of Satoshi real Bitcoin addresses that begin with a 1, so that you will lose all your real Satoshi protocol BTC. Then you will be gone and worth-less as it should be.

I had clearly explained that Lightning Networks will work fine with Satoshi’s protocol once it centralizes as it must because it is a natural monopoly:

Anyway, I think frankly I am not that interested to return. All the smart engineers are gone from bitcointalk.org. There’s no interesting technological discussion any more. Only when I join the threads does anything accurate get spoken these days. For example the current LN thread discussion is incorrect or incomplete ever since @anunymint was nuked from the thread. They do not understand the concept of a natural monopoly and that the liquidity scale is the barrier-to-entry in LN because users always need to be where the liquidity is as exemplified by exchanges, especially in payment systems because merchants and users don’t want to be stuck and not be able to checkout the shopping cart.

Scale = better service (routing, etc) and higher liquidity

Decentralized exchanges have failed because everyone needs to be where the liquidity is. Much more so for payment systems. When someone can’t route their payment because of insufficient liquidity, both the merchant and the customer lose.

The LN Mt.Gox hubs can then leverage this need into entrenched oligarchies, which can dictate terms to users and merchants. Visa and Mastercard here we come again.

Nothing changes. We are right back where we started from.

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of mine in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account. Or if you want to just restore those two threads (and no others), that would be even better for me. Or even if you restored them long enough for me to archive them, and the deleted them again, that would also be better for me.

I could give a ratt's ass about reading

Indeed we’ve already established that you hate details and pontificate layered on top of derogatory ad hominem about all sorts of shit that you know nothing about.

Has not been my experience.  I have seen some pretty aggressive trolling, shilling and offending in the forum that generally has to cross certain high boundaries before resulting in a ban or a suspension.

We’ve already established that you stay safely within the Wall Observer echo chamber for the most part.

You did not for example refute Gregory Maxwell about CoinJoin and many other such far reaching and more “precarious” endeavors.

Stick your neck out sufficiently before you insinuate that you’ve walked in my shoes.

What does this have to do with me?

I patiently tried to explain. You (and other Core shills) allege that I am an idiot, troll who spreads “nonsense FUD”. So I am not allowed to respond by stating that y’all are the idiot trolls?

The decentralized moderation idea Shelby has proposed would make it easy for offended people to Ignore him (even as a group with a shared chosen moderator),

A banned person is not in a very credible position to be presenting forum rules, but of course, theymos and any mods can consider those proposals in either making or enforcing forum rules, to the extent that theymos has given them such authority.  Seems to be quite a bit f discretion in a forum like this concerning making and enforcing rules.

You’re just one giant inkblot.

Your reading comprehension is so faulty, that you do not even seem to realize I’m not proposing that decentralized moderation idea for bitcointalk.org. It is one of the projects I would like to implement. I’m not demanding changes to bitcointalk.org, although if they want to make some changes I am not against them doing so.

Well, if you are concerned that your work product is going to get erased, then perhaps it would be a good idea to save it in another secure and accessible location.  There do seem to be some recourses for recovering deleted posts with the forum, too, so there is that.

I did archive nearly everything in June, but in July I was so busy posting and other work that I thought maybe the moderators were going to leave me alone so I stopped archiving. Then I made the fatal mistake of making my first post in the Altcoin Discussion forum, which presumably caught @mprep’s (or one of my haters in the Bitcoin Killer thread's) attention. Wham! Nuke! Because archiving is very tedious, sort of like regressing to the sneakernet where we used to carry floppy disks between computers to share data. Every edit of a post then must remember to re-archive.

It’s the antithesis of the automation of computing to manually archive. So sorry once again just a huge inkblot from you.

Do you not understand that time is money. I’m probably worth $150+ an hour as a programmer (now that I’m no longer so ill). Do you know how many hours it takes to reconstruct posts and then where to post them? Reformat from BBcode to Markdown and post at STEEM?

I’m amazed how much time you guys waste in the Wall Observer thread posting nonsense:

Do some of you people get paid to post here?  It's the same retards who can't shut the fuck up.  Stop posting, find a hobby.

Reddit's circlejerkign hugbox is probably better than reading the same three posters ITT

https://i.imgur.com/YM0PKX8.jpg

Even if you’re already wealthy, don’t you have any intellectual or creative pursuits outside of slapstick humor with the boyz. The Wall Observer thread is like boyz who never matured. They’re still into playing pranks with the other boyz. It’s funny for about a day or two. But my lord, you guys have been doing that for how many years?

Therefore, it is probably better that he goes to circles in which he feels appreciated... especially if he has such thin skin.

I did. Even within your Wall Observer echo chamber thread there are several people who appreciate my posts. You ostensibly think the minority doesn’t matter. But remember the minority holds all the wealth, knowledge, and other resources.

You make little sense with your assertion of "groupthink."

Lol. It’s okay snowflake. It’s above your paygrade to understand what cage you are inside.

O.k... you and your butt buddy are very important peeps... And you know a lot too... good for you.

You feel superior to those slobs who didn’t already buy Bitcoin don’t you? Feeling confident?

Other people’s attitudes towards bitcoin now are embarrassing, my girlfriend’s parents & sister don’t have a lot of money. Last year during the big bull run they were jealous AF, asking loads of questions, asking how many I’ve got etc, asking what the fiat value was.

[…]

I have to bite my lip, besides if I cashed in today I’d still have enough to outright buy about 4 houses of the value of the one’s they live in that they’ve got mortgages on.

Peasants!

And then it is going to be so funny and perfectly fit when you lose all your Bitcoins because you were too proud and lazy to understand what I was explaining, then you are right back in the cage with the slobs you were looking down on. I was trying to share my expertise to those who wanted it. I wasn’t forcing it down the throat of sheep.

But that is the way it is. Not much anybody can do to change it.

You Core shills with your “social consensus” and “non-mining nodes matter” delusions remind me of what a friend of mine recently wrote:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-14/elon-musk-told-shove-proposed-cave-solution-his

Lefties love Musk so much, this is a consequence of their personality eternally seeking a savior, a messiah to lead the herd to paradise. Musk, a highly intelligent and malicious man, is playing them big time

The fact that Musk privately does something not only contrary to what he is selling to his public, but ultimately dangerous for his reputation, is indicative that something is fishy with him. This is the same than marxists heavily invested in Bitcoin (there is some Juan Carlos Monedero  -literally "Purse" or "Wallet", in English) who is a leader of a postmodern leftist party, turns out he is heavily invested in Bitcoin (leftists abhor Bitcoin since they are not only willing to give up monetary control to a central authority, but also political and moral control). This private/public life deviation is indicative of sociopathy

[jbreher]

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of his in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account.

Indeed. It is quite beyond the pale to delete posts of users not running afoul of any posting standards. Offensive, really.

[vapourminer]

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of his in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account.

Indeed. It is quite beyond the pale to delete posts of users not running afoul of any posting standards. Offensive, really.

i second this. this blind nuking of all posts in threads started by someone who gets banned, without regard as to the posts other authors make in reply, does a great disservice to the forum and the (supposedly) unbiased information it stands for.

[Shelby_Moore_III]

If someone is willing to link or quote this in the LN discussion thread, I suppose that would stimulate the discussion points over there. I guess my last contribution.

I had clearly explained that Lightning Networks will work fine with Satoshi’s protocol once it centralizes as it must because it is a natural monopoly:

For example the current LN thread discussion is incorrect or incomplete ever since @anunymint was nuked from the thread. They do not understand the concept of a natural monopoly and that the liquidity scale is the barrier-to-entry in LN because users always need to be where the liquidity is as exemplified by exchanges, especially in payment systems because merchants and users don’t want to be stuck and not be able to checkout the shopping cart.

Scale = better service (routing, etc) and higher liquidity

Decentralized exchanges have failed because everyone needs to be where the liquidity is. Much more so for payment systems. When someone can’t route their payment because of insufficient liquidity, both the merchant and the customer lose.

The LN Mt.Gox hubs can then leverage this need into entrenched oligarchies, which can dictate terms to users and merchants. Visa and Mastercard here we come again.

Nothing changes. We are right back where we started from.

Also I mostly agree with this post there:

Once a problem looks to be a challenge on first layer, one should firstly think of improving the infrastructure. Bitcoin is not a rigid, dead system. This infrastructure has more potentials to be unleashed and yet we have sharding solutions in the horizon as well. Sharding is a first layer protocol, an on-chain scalability solution.

Sharding is more elegant and beautiful compared to ugly complicated second layer solutions like LN, which completely abstracts users from the consensus algorithm, the way google, facebook, .... ruined the Internet and turned it to such a dangerous place for ordinary people by compromising their privacy and security. I suppose you guys have a same agenda for destroying bitcoin by putting people behind layers of abstraction.

It is an insane strategy. Bitcoin needs fresh breath to breath interaction with users and simplicity. Only a corporate employee would take second layer development serious, a hacker, just don't GAS.  

The caveat is that I had explained (but my posts were nuked) some of my reasons in the Limits of PoW thread and his PoCW thread, why my technological understanding is that the potential on-chain transaction volume scalability of proof-of-work (in any configuration such as even sharding) is limited and could not attain IoT scale. He seems to think otherwise, but until I see a research paper with convincing formalization, I believe he is incorrect in his belief.

In the nuked posts I had explained in detail for example elaborating on the analysis of OmniLedger which I had previously blogged about:

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/scaling-decentralization-security-of-distributed-ledgers

Decentralized exchanges have failed because everyone needs to be where the liquidity is. Much more so for payment systems. When someone can’t route their payment because of insufficient liquidity, both the merchant and the customer lose.

Decentralized exchanges are still in a raw state. They are not newbie friendly, just like the Lightning Network. I wouldn't call them a failure because there is still a lot of work which needs to be done. We still lack user-friendly Lightning Network wallets which could provide channel backup and easy full-node setup process. There is a risk that the whole network becomes more centralized in the future because of people opening their channels to the biggest nodes or depending on a third party. Despite all this facts, the number of nodes and users is constantly growing and you must be asking yourself, why is that?

Lightning Network is still in its early state, why not compare it to the early days of Bitcoin when it was fairly easy to take over the network with a 51% attack? Give it some more time. Nobody expects to see every Bitcoin user using the Lightning Network this year.

Love that “trolling” (not ad hominem but still time wasting crap) when someone replies but totally ignores the economic point and builds a strawman argument to obfuscate the fact they actually didn’t make any relevant rebuttal.

I didn’t claim that decentralized exchanges will never be used. In fact OTC markets are used by the very wealthy, but they go no bid in times of stress because there’s no possible way to do secure shorting in a non-centralized exchange.

The salient point which he side-stepped entirely is that for payment systems, users have no choice but to be where the liquidity is.

There’s no amount of improvement to the usability of the software that can overcome the economics bottom-line which is that everyone who uses a payment system needs to be on the same system and there needs to be always enough liquidity.

Of course the other bunny rabbits will think he actually rebutted me and carry on blissfully to the woodchipper.

[Traxo]

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of mine in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account. Or if you want to just restore those two threads (and no others), that would be even better for me. Or even if you restored them long enough for me to archive them, and the deleted them again, that would also be better for me.

Traxo partially archived both threads (see the 2 recent threads he posted). As for the other posts, the interested parties should PM me and I can send over the posts' BBCodes. Since all your posts (aside from the thread itself) were deleted, you technically should have all the post contents from said threads as well.

Shelby tells me that you are incorrect. He never received any copies of the deleted posts from the threads which were entirely nuked. And he would like to have a copy of those posts.
Please do send them to either of his banned accounts and post here indicating which account you sent them to.

Also he still thinks it is ridiculous that he has lost the context of the posts of the others who were in the discussion. And the archives I had made are highly incomplete for the two threads he mentioned. I had posted nearly complete archives for the other threads you nuked. Those two Shelby listed are the most problematic. Please.

Shelby informs me via Crypto.cat that he was unable to reply to your private message because he was only allowed 2 messages per day and you and he had already consumed his prior day’s allotment and then his account was banned. So he asked me to insert his reply here.

[mprep]

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of mine in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account. Or if you want to just restore those two threads (and no others), that would be even better for me. Or even if you restored them long enough for me to archive them, and the deleted them again, that would also be better for me.

Traxo partially archived both threads (see the 2 recent threads he posted). As for the other posts, the interested parties should PM me and I can send over the posts' BBCodes. Since all your posts (aside from the thread itself) were deleted, you technically should have all the post contents from said threads as well.

Shelby tells me that you are incorrect. He never received any copies of the deleted posts from the threads which were entirely nuked. And he would like to have a copy of those posts.
Please do send them to either of his banned accounts and post here indicating which account you sent them to.

Also he still thinks it is ridiculous that he has lost the context of the posts of the others who were in the discussion. And the archives I had made are highly incomplete for the two threads he mentioned. I had posted nearly complete archives for the other threads you nuked. Those two Shelby listed are the most problematic. Please.

Shelby informs me via Crypto.cat that he was unable to reply to your private message because he was only allowed 2 messages per day and you and he had already consumed his prior day’s allotment and then his account was banned. So he asked me to insert his reply here.

The last sentence in my PM refers to his own posts (as noted by the "since all your posts <...> were deleted" and the sentence before it mentioning other people's posts) - looking back at it, I can understand how it could've come off as him having access to all the threads' posts. If he hasn't received his own post deletion notification PMs for posts in his own thread (aside from the OP, which you've already archived), I can't help him since I don't have access over the deleted posts. As for the posts of other users, as mentioned in the PM, they (not Anonymint) should contact me and I'll send over the BBCodes of their posts.

[Shelby_Moore_III_]

It’s been 9+ months so I wanted to add an update on my perma-ban.

For those who might be curious about if I disappeared from crypto, absolutely not. I wrote a very important new blog slamdunk refuting all those Core supporters who wanted me perma-banned:

Lightning Networks must FAIL, if it succeeds

(an alternative link for the above which has different fonts)

And over the past several days was my prescient prediction of today’s BTC price breakout which occurred on the exact day I predicted days in advance.

The above linked blog ties in links to all archived past discussion (other than the posts which weren’t archived) which was deleted by @mprep. And it flattens my analysis of Lightning Networks and the impossibility of Bitcoin transaction scaling.

Bitcoin Core is an altcoin. This will become evident eventually over the next several years, decade, or so. This is an example of a very unpopular analysis which caused so many to want me perma-banned.

Here is a link to an update about my ongoing gut health battle (after apparently curing the Tuberculosis in 2017 with 6 months of liver toxic antibiotics), as well as the latest naming ideas for the altcoin project I’m still involved.

P.S. I have respected the perma-ban and have not attempted to post outside of Meta for the past 9+ months. Also I have not even relayed posts outside of Meta via my friends (who are indeed not my sockpuppet accounts) such as @Traxo.

[JayJuanGee]

It’s been 9+ months so I wanted to add an update on my perma-ban.

For those who might be curious about if I disappeared from crypto, absolutely not. I wrote a very important new blog slamdunk refuting all those Core supporters who wanted me perma-banned:

Lightning Networks must FAIL, if it succeeds

(an alternative link for the above which has different fonts)

And over the past several days was my prescient prediction of today’s BTC price breakout which occurred on the exact day I predicted days in advance.

The above linked blog ties in links to all archived past discussion (other than the posts which weren’t archived) which was deleted by @mprep. And it flattens my analysis of Lightning Networks and the impossible of Bitcoin transaction scaling.

Bitcoin Core is an altcoin. This will become evident eventually over the next several years, decade, or so. This is an example of a very unpopular analysis which caused so many to want me perma-banned.

Here is a link to an update about my ongoing gut health battle (after apparently curing the Tuberculosis in 2017 with 6 months of liver toxic antibiotics), as well as the latest naming ideas for the altcoin project I’m still involved.

P.S. I have respected the perma-ban and have not attempted to post outside of Meta for the past 9+ months. Also I have not even relayed posts outside of Meta via my friends (who are indeed not my sockpuppet accounts) such as @Traxo.

Your above post doesn't make much sense to me.

Aren't you making a substantive post by providing links to your various topics (likely crap, but whatever).

Who gives a ratt's ass that you making this particular post in meta, since you are not keeping the topic of your post related to the subject of attempting to get your account(s) back or attempting to resolve your perma-ban issues (to the extent there are any outstanding possible issues?), so I don't really understand how that kind of posting conduct, including this particular post, could be "respecting the perma-ban." 

Maybe someone can educate me?  I don't proclaim to be an expert in "respecting the perma-ban", so maybe I am missing something?

[Shelby_Moore_III_]

Your above post doesn't make much sense to me.

Here’s some explanations of why nothing correct makes much sense to you (these links were provided in the blog I linked for you in my prior post but obviously you didn’t even digest it because you’re a disingenuous Core sycophant lacking your own independent brain stem):

http://trilema.com/2018/how-to-piss-me-the-fuck-off-a-guide/
http://trilema.com/2016/thats-right-time-to-move-on-please-do-bitcoin-is-really-not-for-you/
http://trilema.com/2015/if-you-go-on-a-bitcoin-fork-irrespective-which-scammer-proposes-it-you-will-lose-your-bitcoins/
http://trilema.com/2016/the-end-of-democracy/
http://trilema.com/2018/the-common-psychosis/
http://trilema.com/2013/because-most-people-are-idiots-in-spite-of-never-manning-up-and-admitting-to-it/
http://trilema.com/2014/why-dogecoin-is-a-scam-why-the-people-pushing-it-are-assholes-why-business-insider-is-a-contemptible-piece-of-shit-why-anyone-who-ever-worked-for-it-will-be-dancing-in-the-street-for-nickels-and-wh/
http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/

Aren't you making a substantive post by providing links to your various topics (likely crap, but whatever).

Who gives a ratt's ass that you making this particular post in meta, since you are not keeping the topic of your post related to the subject of attempting to get your account(s) back or attempting to resolve your perma-ban issues (to the extent there are any outstanding possible issues?), so I don't really understand how that kind of posting conduct, including this particular post, could be "respecting the perma-ban."  

Maybe someone can educate me?  I don't proclaim to be an expert in "respecting the perma-ban", so maybe I am missing something?

Lol, you’re so butt hurt by my success.

You Core sycophants think you own this forum. Anyone who is intelligent and capable of exposing your lies is perma-banned.

My post was both pointing out that I haven’t been evading the ban for some 9 months. For example, as a point about “good behavior” in case for example @Theymos decided that I don’t have to kiss his feet and he can respect my independence and dignity while still doing the correct action and removing the perma-ban in the middle of a crypto winter so he won't have egg all over his face when the altcoin I am working on likely ends up being in the Top 10 on the next bull market circa 2021. The subtle allusions to the fact that I am making a lot of progress on my work, was intended to be a subtle hint to that effect for the astute.

My post was also providing a holistic compilation of the posts which were deleted by @mprep. I do believe @mprep allowed such links to archives to be posted here, because many other users complained about losing the context of discussions they had been involved in. The prior posts of links to the deleted posts were spread all over the place and not holistically compiled in one place. That post after 9 months was tying it all together in one place so the afflicted innocent parties can more easily recover from the transgression that was made against them.

And in general my post was to further the evidence I am presenting of a Core conspiracy to ban me, by further establishing that Core is an attack on Bitcoin.

And my recent blog I linked is another belated technical response to the post @Gmaxwell made in the other thread about my perma-ban.

[JayJuanGee]

Your above post doesn't make much sense to me.

Here’s some explanations of why nothing correct makes much sense to you (these links were provided in the blog I linked for you in my prior post but obviously you didn’t even digest it because you’re a disingenuous Core sycophant lacking your own independent brain stem):

Pretty much you were able to reiterate enough information to show that I was correct in my initial speculation that whatever you had provided in the first post did not make much if any sense because it was not really meant to make sense, and the reason for such lack of sense was because it was mostly gobble-dee-gook. 

I've seen this kind of similar convoluted mumbo-jumbo baloney from you before, when you were typing under the name anunymint.

[Shelby_Moore_III_]

Your above post doesn't make much sense to me.

Here’s some explanations of why nothing correct makes much sense to you (these links were provided in the blog I linked for you in my prior post but obviously you didn’t even digest it because you’re a disingenuous Core sycophant lacking your own independent brain stem):

Pretty much you were able to reiterate enough information to show that I was correct in my initial speculation that whatever you had provided in the first post did not make much if any sense because it was not really meant to make sense, and the reason for such lack of sense was because it was mostly gobble-dee-gook.  

I've seen this kind of similar convoluted mumbo-jumbo baloney from you before, when you were typing under the name anunymint.

This is indicative of either laziness/disinterest on your part or the only other possible explanation is that it is well known that for a reader with two standard deviations (SD) lower IQ than the author will perceive the author as unintelligible. And in the case of the Dunning-Kruger phenomenon, the retard will perceive the genius as being the retard.

I suggest you exert more diligent effort in your reading, because otherwise this is indicating that your IQ is below 1 SD. I was informed by Omar Bessa (confirmed 170+ IQ, i.e. 5 SD) that in his judgement the ~0.5 million BTC trilema.com author (who was the DAO attacker) has roughly a 3 SD IQ (so 145 IQ).

P.S. I’ve been told that trilema.com (actually the The Most Serene Republic, aka TMSR) represents the philosophy (and support of Satoshi’s original protocol without SegWit) of those who hodl millions (plural) of BTC.

[Last of the V8s]

searched for 'channel factories' and 'sighash_noinput' in your steemit piece
could not find
afaiu they - with schnorr - are the pieces of the puzzle that that lot of devs think might address all your concerns about blocksize and huge hubs/banks

[Shelby_Moore_III_]

searched for 'channel factories' and 'sighash_noinput' in your steemit piece
could not find
afaiu they - with schnorr - are the pieces of the puzzle that that lot of devs think might address all your concerns about blocksize and huge hubs/banks

Please search my blog post for “Edit:” wherein I have noted your peer review. Note that before these edits, my linked blog had already mentioned the ‘channel factories’ but not by that name and had already linked to the relevant paper by C.Decker et al. AFAICT, that Layer 3 technology doesn’t solve the fundamental flaw I have alleged and explained in my blog.

AFAICT, ‘sighash_noinput’ doesn’t address the fundamental flaw I raised and if it were extended to the point of making on-chain transaction capacity unbounded (which is not its intended purpose) then it would destroy miner revenue. I have pointed this out in my edits.

P.S. This continuing discussion may be heading off-topic from the issues I was addressing about my perma-ban and it’s evolving into technological discussion (which would not fall under the umbrella of linking the blog to refute @Gmaxwell’s post about my perma-ban). So to avoid others accusing me of circumventing the perma-ban and discussing technology in Meta, I respectfully request that any future technological discussion be in a private message or another forum. I am available on protonmail as well. I also have a GPG key.

Aren't you making a substantive post by providing links to your various topics (likely crap, but whatever).

Who gives a ratt's ass that you making this particular post in meta, since you are not keeping the topic of your post related to the subject of attempting to get your account(s) back or attempting to resolve your perma-ban issues (to the extent there are any outstanding possible issues?), so I don't really understand how that kind of posting conduct, including this particular post, could be "respecting the perma-ban."  

Maybe someone can educate me?  I don't proclaim to be an expert in "respecting the perma-ban", so maybe I am missing something?

[…]

My post was both pointing out that I haven’t been evading the ban for some 9 months. For example, as a point about “good behavior” in case for example @Theymos decided that I don’t have to kiss his feet and he can respect my independence and dignity while still doing the correct action and removing the perma-ban in the middle of a crypto winter so he won't have egg all over his face when the altcoin I am working on likely ends up being in the Top 10 on the next bull market circa 2021. The subtle allusions to the fact that I am making a lot of progress on my work, was intended to be a subtle hint to that effect for the astute.

My post was also providing a holistic compilation of the posts which were deleted by @mprep. I do believe @mprep allowed such links to archives to be posted here, because many other users complained about losing the context of discussions they had been involved in […]

On further reflection and until further notice, I kindly withdraw any perceived request to be unbanned, because it would actually reduce my productivity because I would end up consuming much of my time on never ending technical and political-economic debates (and especially the sort of ad hominem vacuous content attacks that unfortunately seem so prevalent on bitcointalk.org), such as this recent itch I had to scratch to correct some very important errors in @dinofelis’ overconfident technical arguments. And when I am overworked and exhausted (being age 54 and still suffering from some gut dysbiosis causing delirium weary fatigue), I tend to get sloppy with my writing and thought process. Much better for me to post my rebuttals elsewhere where the counter parties aren’t likely to bother to signup to go debate me there, so that I don’t end up wasting precious time that needs to be focused on coding and development work.

I do hope that Theymos and the mods will not ban those (who are not my sockpuppets!) who decide to post links to my comments in the relevant threads of BCT?

Also I received a respectful and courteous reply from @Theymos in a PM about my critique of Grin, so that is a positive step for building some mutual respect. I’d like to leave it rest with that for the time being.