If my brother wishes to comment on how he planned to prove that he was a girl, then he will do so.
I’ve thought it odd that he has left you standing alone amidst a scandal which, if you tell the truth, was largely of his creation. Thus, I sent him a PM to request his comment:
Subject: You got Alia in trouble!Young man, you got your poor sister in a whole heap of trouble. It would behoove you to help her out here:
If my brother wishes to comment on how he planned to prove that he was a girl, then he will do so.
That’s not the only place on that thread where she’s said similarly: “If my brother wishes to comment...” Yet you remain silent! How could you hang your own sister out to dry like that?
I’ll hold my breath awaiting your word on the public thread.
The context of her above-quoted plea for your assistance:
— snip long quote —
Personally, I don't see how any boy can fool a live interview. My voice is probably the most girly there is, and I'll appear on camera with my face cut off.
It’s amusing how you think you get to set all the rules, and dictate what would have evidentiary value. This ain’t a camshow for horny customers, honey. An interview with your face cut off would be dead worthless for “verification”, for many reasons—not least of which is that a skilled interviewer can infer much about the honesty of your answers from facial expressions and eye motions.
An interview for this type of purpose must not only include faces, but also have those faces adequately lit (as in police interview rooms) and clearly focused. For you to suggest a
faceless interview is so patently absurd as to insult the intelligence of everybody here, as well as showing your own lack thereof.
Moreover, to review for those who have the memories of fruit flies, the original idea here was a (non-faceless) dual interview
of you and your brother together:I find the little-brother story almost entirely unbelievable, but someone trustworthy could try skyping Alia, get both her and her brother on video at the same time, and interview them about this matter to check that they're not just actors.
Anyone can sell ewhore packs and put on fake videos on Skype, which is likely what many people do, but a live interview with specific questions directed towards me? That I answer in my own voice live on camera? Pretty solid evidence right there.
Remind me to never hire you to perform any type of investigation.
Skype is easy and it's what I use.
Skype is
not easy for anybody who roams freely outside the control of computer platforms and network configurations approved by large American corporations. More to the point:
“I.” Why do you think the issue of primary importance is what
you use, you self-entitled snowflake? Anybody who did such an interview would be doing you a favour, at the expense of his or her own time and effort plus risk to reputation. As transpired in PMs:
Accuse me of whatever you want, but before doing so, video call and interview me. You'll see the truth.
I offered you Tox. Ball’s in your court. Or give me one good reason why I should jump through hoops and spend time configuring a Skype VM plus special networking for you.
No good reason. Only if you want to know the truth, and if you want spreading lies. Which I doubt
Let me rephrase that for your understanding: You’re the one who wants something from me, not
vice versa.
I really don’t do Skype. Last time I touched Skype was before Microsoft bought it, years ago; and I’d need to do a special VM configuration with a VPN between Tor and Skype, which would all just be a pain in the arse. I would need a very special reason to deal with that, much moreso than trying to help prove the innocence of someone I think is *probably* guilty all the way.
I don't want anything from you. If you want to verify me, do it on Skype. Plain and simple.
Read that again, folks:
“I don't want anything from you. If you want to verify me, do it on Skype. Plain and simple.” The prince(ess?) who deigns to grace us with his/her presence is so magnanimous as to permit a lowly commoner who lacks -(263-1) trust to verify that certain issues of identity—“plain and simple”. Thank you for having granted me the opportunity to dance to your tune!I take it back: Not “snowflake”. Just “flake”.
I'm not asking you to use it, you're not trusted enough. I'd prefer someone trusted to do it, thanks anyway
okI'd like a trusted member (hopefully theymos, nullius, ibminer, Lauda, etc etc) to Skype me.
(Plus, the “plain and simple” conversation.)
Face not being visible makes no difference. If myself and my brother's bodies are visible, and my voice, clearly a girl's, is answering questions, it should be sufficient.
With my psychic powers, I foretell that you shall have much future experience with police. For your own good, I suggest that you avoid trying to dictate to them what you think “should be sufficient” for investigative purposes.
I'm not choosing the member, I just want the member to be trusted (aka dark green trust)
Oh, the irony of this statement from one of the most distrusted users in Bitcoin Forum history!
Next, master-P will return and present his peremptory demands for how others should bend over backwards to help him prove his total innocence.
That is part of my point that alia is not in a position to be dictating various terms of the process,
Exactly. (I began to assemble the foregoing before your most recent posts, which explained the matter rather well. It took me awhile to actually get this posted...)
