question about my reputation

[mocacinno]

As some of you might know, the last couple of months, there was a rather big backlog of unconfirmed transactions in the mempool. As a result, the average fee per byte of transaction data rose significantly.
A lot of new (and sometimes longtime) members ended up paying way to low fees, or started to get messed up in an unconfirmed child/parent situation.

I've been trying to help, and finally realised nobody is interested in learning what they did wrong, they just want their problem fixed.

So, i created a thread offering free help: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1942069.msg19295724#msg19295724
Since i have some experience in helping people getting their transaction into a block, i already knew which were the default things i should ask for, so i decided to ask for the following information from users that were experiencing slow confirmations:

• the transaction id
• wether or not you're the sender or the receiver (or both)
• which of the addresses used in the stsuck belong to your wallet (also list the change addresses). I can also work the other way around: in this case, tell me which address you were trying to fund
• which wallet software you're using
• acknowledge that your transaction is in my mempool (check requirement 2 ^^)
• acknowledge there's nothing "strange" going on with your transaction
• acknowledge you will rectify your situation, so that in the future you'll add sufficient fees... I will not help accelerate transactions for freeloaders that just keep cheaping out on the fees!!!
• if you tipped me, you can list the transaction id of the tip (not required)

Shortly thereafter, user johnsmithx posted following reply:

What a great way to make stupid people publicly reveal their btc addresses, ownership, wallet software and other details. Excellent idea indeed. Big brother is surely very proud of you.

followed by a red tag on my account:



followed by putting me at the very top of his (locked) scammers list:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608165.msg16148777#msg16148777



I know this sounds a bit butthurt... Maybe i am, i was trying to help the community, and i'm a bit p*ssd off to be accused of being a scammer... However, what i mainly wanted to ask the community: does anybody really see a problem with asking transaction id's, wallet addresses and which wallet is being used... Is this unsafe (i'm a rathere technical person, and i didn't see a problem with it, but maybe i'm missing something here), or is this guy just a super troll, or maybe an alt of somebody i couldn't help (just a theory toughà?

[1713951623]

1713951623

[1713951623]

1713951623

[1713951623]

1713951623

[Iranus]

He has a fairly significant trading history, so I would be inclined to think that he's not an alt or irritated newbie.

A couple of the pieces of feedback that he's given include extremely high "risked BTC", including another one which was 5,000 as purely retaliatory feedback.  I personally wouldn't trust this user - and I respect that the retaliatory feedback you left him was neutral and explained properly.

does anybody really see a problem with asking transaction id's, wallet addresses and which wallet is being used... Is this unsafe

No.  Those are things that you ask/get told in ordinary threads about transaction problems as well, and are fully relevant to how the user is going to sort out their problems.  There's no security issue that I can think of, and being able to view people's address balances on the blockchain could be a privacy issue in some circumstances of course but it usually isn't.
The main reason I don't think he's lying about his thoughts though are his signature.

Never publicly reveal your btc addresses, ownership or any other details

[Lauda]

He has a fairly significant trading history, so I would be inclined to think that he's not an alt or irritated newbie.

Very significant trading history indeed:

Without going into the specifics, @op I may or may have not required your service for someone else's transaction. The reason for which I have not asked for help is because you ask that users post the transaction details out in the public and not via PM.

However, what i mainly wanted to ask the community: does anybody really see a problem with asking transaction id's, wallet addresses and which wallet is being used... Is this unsafe (i'm a rathere technical person, and i didn't see a problem with it, but maybe i'm missing something here), or is this guy just a super troll, or maybe an alt of somebody i couldn't help (just a theory toughà?

If privacy or anonymity is of any value to you, then yes. Otherwise, not really beside that you may get specifically targeted by hackers if you're transferring big amounts.

[mocacinno]

@Iranus: thanks for the reply
@Lauda: If somebody still needs my help, you can always contact me in PM

After reading both replies, i still don't understand why this user reacted the way he did... After reading Lauda's reply, i now realise that it might be better to rephrase my thread's OP to clearly indicate that everything posted on a public forum stays there forever, and can be used to measure somebody's wealth... However, i still fail to see why i was called a scammer and red-tagged.
I tried responding to the user tagging me by replying to his post, but he didn't even bother to reply, just got out his red paint and smeared my name.

EDIT:
I have now added following disclaimer at the top of my OP... I hope this is sufficient:
<disclaimer>
Disclaimer: I cannot help you without knowing a basic amount of information (like the transaction id, which addresses in the transaction belong to you and which wallet software you use). However, everybody should realise this is a public forum... Everything you post on this forum is world-readable, and can be analysed by anyone. Furtheremore, using datamining, it is possible to discover more wallet addresses as soon as you're combining outputs or using change sent back to your own wallet. This should NOT be a security issue, unless you're involved in illegal transactions, you have so much BTC you're in danger of being robbed or if you're a very privacy-concerned person.
If you belong to either of these 3 cases, this service might not be suited for you!
</disclaimer>


If this disclaimer is sufficient, i guess it's only my pride that's been hurt a little bit (yup, i'm a bit butthurt  ), but that's not the worst thing that's happening in todays world.

[Patatas]

After reading both replies, i still don't understand why this user reacted the way he did...

You can be brightest peach in the lot,some people just don't like peaches.I have noticed you helping most of the newbies in the Technical Support Section and do appreciate and use your bitcoin tools.
You need not bother ignorants.He is tagged by Danny,he must really annoying to deserve it.
If petty things like those feedback's bother you,you shouldn't be on bitcointalk.

[Lauda]

@Lauda: If somebody still needs my help, you can always contact me in PM

Your thread explicitly stated not to contact you via PM.

After reading both replies, i still don't understand why this user reacted the way he did...

People tend to react/overreact in weird ways. Nothing unusual. I would have expected him/her to warn you about this issue first though.

After reading Lauda's reply, i now realise that it might be better to rephrase my thread's OP to clearly indicate that everything posted on a public forum stays there forever, and can be used to measure somebody's wealth...

It is kind-of a pretty big issue IMO. Any kind of transaction data posted publicly can be very dangerous, especially in the future as blockchain analysis tools improve. Every time you post some data publicly, hiding your past and future transactions becomes harder by some factor.

However, i still fail to see why i was called a scammer and red-tagged.

Untrusted feedback is just that, untrusted. I have a lot of retaliatory feedback that is just nonsense.

I tried responding to the user tagging me by replying to his post, but he didn't even bother to reply, just got out his red paint and smeared my name.

Again, untrusted feedback.