Bitcoin Forum
December 15, 2019, 05:48:20 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Anunymint ban  (Read 8737 times)
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1165

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
July 21, 2018, 04:58:48 PM
Last edit: July 21, 2018, 05:09:35 PM by cryptohunter
Merited by vapourminer (1)
 #61

Shelby (aka @AnonyMint) claimed the opposite up-thread.
He claims he was banned originally because he wrote critically about Monero and Ethereum and because he was insulting (those who were also insulting Shelby) influential anonymous members such as @gmaxwell1, @Foxpup, @stereotype, @Lauda, @iCEBREAKER, etc..
Shelby claims that the original “multi-posting” allegation (which he entirely stopped doing a long-time ago) is something everyone does (look here is a link to (archived here) @aliashraf doing it yesterday) and was a fabricated reason to silence him because he is the one who speaks with the most critical technological rigor on the entire forum.
A clear indicator that he is a delusional troll. If you believe that he has made anything more than a couple *decent* technological remarks, then you are equally delusional. All he does is post walls of technical gibberish which require too much valuable time to address given their size and repetitiveness (ad naseum).

Fact is, he broke rules for which others also get warned/temp. banned (perm. banned for continuity and/or ban evading).

The solution is simple I feel from here.

Anonymint makes an agreement directly with Theymos to reactivate one of his legendary accounts ... maybe the anonymint original or which ever AM wants on the basis he WILL follow the rules as they are.

Then in future ONLY Theymos can ban him, but then if banned will not return.

This may seem like special treatment for AM but then sometimes if someone has put in exceptional effort for the board then they can have a bit of special consideration from the board owner.
Completely disagreed. For the super majority of people we wouldn't even consider bending the rules this much. The forum needs to dedicate its resources to combating the issue with spam and not debating whether the banned troll should be unbanned temporarily (and given their behavior, they'd get themselves banned again relatively soon).

That is your opinion Lauda and you are entitled to it and you could be correct that he would be banned again.

Then this is the acid test. Give anonymint back his primary legend account and if Theymos has to ban him again then you were right that he would simply get banned again.

Let's be frank this forum could reduce 90% of spam and bots with several simple solutions. One of which I have suggested already. Wasting time with manual reporting and moderation is never going to work.

You have to accept many persons here (and actually lots of the most proven talented and smartest here do not wish to see him banned). His effort in posting here has earned him such respect with those people and this to me does warrant special treatment above and beyond what you would be willing to bend for others who have not invested even 1% of the effort he has into this board.

Surely this is how life should work ... you put more effort in and you will get more in return right?

I think it's quite clear that if a person has put in extreme time and effort above and beyond 99% of this board then they will be seen by the majority here to warrant another chance from this point on. I mean he was not a scammer, or some serious actions that caused harm to many here. Multi posting (yes uses board resources) but if it is useful to cross post things for other readers who may have missed that post on another thread ...there is argument for wondering if this is even comparable to the 90% shilling and spam filling endless threads all over the main board wasting far far more resources..

But yeah fair enough if Theymos says NO then we have to accept that he makes the rules and sure we stick by it or banned. However it is at his discretion to give another chance if he thinks its a good idea.

I think in this case Theymos should give him his primary account back and see how we go. That is just my opinion on it of course I am just one person but I can see many others think the same.

Many think people support AM because he is way smarter than them but I think it is because he is also quite interesting and in some ways quite a vulnerable person who gets targeted sometimes to get a rise out of him. He also comes across as very honest and open talking about his life and past. On a psychological level people sense this and like to read his stuff.

If Theymos bans him again himself after deciding himself it is a warranted ban.... then fair enough.

1576432100
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576432100

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576432100
Reply with quote  #2

1576432100
Report to moderator
1576432100
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576432100

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576432100
Reply with quote  #2

1576432100
Report to moderator
Best ratesfor crypto
EXCHANGE
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1576432100
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576432100

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576432100
Reply with quote  #2

1576432100
Report to moderator
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2898
Merit: 2865



View Profile
July 22, 2018, 01:22:55 AM
Merited by Lauda (50), Foxpup (8), mprep (2), JayJuanGee (1), Anon136 (1)
 #62

I just noticed that AnonyMint was banned again, sadly as a result of him posting under a new sock account.

I believe that, as much as any single person could possibly be, AnonyMint (and the forum's historical failure to get him under control) is responsible for a significant fraction of the technically competent people becoming largely inactive.

AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble.  His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.  He relentlessly floods threads with his trademark nonsense and switches to slanderous personal attacks whenever someone disagrees with him.   If that were all there was to it the ignore button would be sufficient, but his multi-posting derails basically any thread he targets because if even a few people fail to ignore him they'll respond (usually disagreeing, sometimes just trying to figure out what the heck he means) and make it nearly impossible for productive discussion to continue. Worse, AnonyMint's abusive but "technical sounding" approach is moderately effective at mobilizing throngs of well meaning but ignorant people to his defense (especially ones who are interested in pumping altcoins and find Anonymit to be sufficient 'proof' for whatever they already wanted to believe). When mobilizing an ignorant mob fails he resorts to the use of copious alt accounts.

People who are really savvy with the technology have valuable time (as is the case for anyone with valuable skills).  It's a waste of that time to spend it in a place where there are decent odds of their efforts being buried under a mountain of abusive nonsense.   Even those few who don't find his dishonest practices extremely annoying are forced to admit that it's just a waste of time to be in the same venue as someone like that.

AnonyMint is not the only example of this sort of abusive ignorance that shows up on the forum, -- it's not uncommon for newbies who are used to being the smartest guy in whatever little pond they came from to show up and say they're going to "fix bitcoin" while calling everyone else an idiot for the couple months it takes for them to realize how little they actually know...  but most of these people are just ignorant and can be educated and they aren't especially relentless.  By comparison, AnonyMint's consistent conduct year after year is especially demoralizing. With some angry newbie there is a least the hope that you'll get through to them or that ignoring them will be sufficient.  With AnonyMint from the moment he takes interest in a thread the outcome is clear in advance-- he's going to post and rant until everyone gives up or flames out and it's never going to change.

I think the people concerned about AnonyMint's "free speech" in this thread are being duped into being pawns in AnonyMint's efforts to shut down the freedom of others to communicate and associate. AnonyMint is clearly free to post whatever he wants on his own site (and any other site that can stand him). You're free to discuss his "ideas" with him there, if they interest you.   But when the forum invites AnonyMint to post without restriction, other people aren't practically able to have the discussions they want to have-- he drowns them out and buries them under toxic stink. If a community can't choose topics and participants then anyone who wants can shut down a communities ability to communicate.

If this isn't obvious to you yet, consider a silly analogy:  I think we can all mostly agree that people generally ought to be able to operate their own bodies as they see fit, without other people restricting how they use them. But then we have a public pool that the community likes to use and since it's a public pool we all agree everyone ought to have equal access to it.  But then comes AnonyMint and for whatever reason he insists on using his autonomy over his bodily functions to deficate in the pool and refuses to cut it out.  Some people can't smell it and aren't worried about pathogens and don't mind. But a lot of people do mind and won't get in the crapped up water. So his "freedom" to use the pool without restriction on his conduct ultimately denies others the free use of the pool that they ought to be able to use. If the pool operator won't keep the crapper out, then people will go off to use other shit free pools... and leave the original one for people who like shitting in the pool and the few who don't mind it.

Reasonable people can usually disagree about exactly _where_ the line should be drawn. But the principle that sometimes you've got to set and enforce limits to create a space that people can actually enjoy should be something we all agree on.  In AnonyMint's case, I think almost everyone would agree his conduct has been consistently far over the line, but I think his abusive conspiracy theorizing rants strike a resonance in some people and blind them to how intolerable the guy actually is...


cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1165

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
July 22, 2018, 01:57:53 PM
Last edit: July 22, 2018, 08:59:56 PM by cryptohunter
Merited by vapourminer (1), Ix (1)
 #63

@gmaxwell

I know you are one of the most recognised/respected people in crypto although I have not actually ever seen a thread with you in before on here.

That would probably be for one reason.

You are primarily in threads that are purely for those with a deep understanding in the field or as you would say those threads that are beyond the comprehension of the tech ignorant masses that are just your usual every day people. Mostly other developers and such.

You are busy as you say and simply don't have the time to engage with the board on things that are not important or directly for advancement of this technology. This is understandable and for sure works best like that.

Anonymint has often spent days discussing and trying to breakdown designs for others to get a brief understanding of the inner workings of these new designs.

I would say I have never seen him or his posts being used by others to pump alts. Actually he is usually one for finding issues with designs and has actually saved me personally from falling for some very exciting sounding designs (because to those that are tech ignorant all kinds of things can sound plausible and exciting) that later turned out to be as he put it "word salad" that sounded very workable but then  had no substance.  

Your pool analogy is a good one and I liked it but I feel it is a little too simplistic to truly represent the scenario here. Also a pool for the most part (well a public one) is kind of solitary place you may speak to your family or partner or kids but a forum is for interaction between all members as much as possible.

You see a pool can be a boring place for the broad spectrum if there is no interaction. I don't just come to a forum to talk to those I already know. Most are only able to bob up and down and are not very talkative or outgoing perhaps don't have much to say and just like to listen. Other small groups are very talkative but about things the majority do not understand. Then you get a character like AM comes in and is quite intriguing/interesting and different to most people he gets them all talking/sometimes arguing but gets a lot of interaction going ..some from that selective group (that don't usually talk to the masses)  will then come and talk to the others in threads in conversations that would not have even started if not for AM. A lot of fun and interest is had by many and perhaps now and then AM may kick off and splash a few people, dunk a few people and now and again take a shit in the pool. ( i mean a shit can cause actual physical harm so maybe spashing or dunking etc would be the best analogy)

So if you took the consensus of the entire pool I would say if you want people to keep coming to this pool he could be more of an attraction than you are allowing for in your analogy even with the odd outburst of what some would deem unacceptable behaviour. I found the forum boring without him when he was gone and I noticed many of those that seem to get into discussions with him (sys dev, dinofelis, smooth, cfb, jl777 and many other smart and in their own way very interesting characters) never posted on the main boards half as much when he was not around. I don't really visit any sub boards like Ivory tower etc

I can not deny or confirm that in a highly technical discussion he may be derailing without making sense to high level designers and coders like yourself because I would not have the capacity to confirm or deny this.

However I only doubt this to be the case very often simply due to my reasoning that surely these other high level developers would always get discussing and debating things with him and often they are very complimentary to him and his ideas.

It's strange in someways because I just clicked on your post history to see if you were still a regular poster...which you are (most of what you say 99% is over my head of course ) but in a way your posting style has some small similarity to Anonymint... I mean this one I think the most recent https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4687032.msg42577799#msg42577799 ... that tone is a tone I often see that is exasperation and frustration at people not seeing things as you do (or as they really are) even after a long discussion. I did not read any other part of that thread but just from that I really could have believed anonymint could have be the author. It was a touch condescending and arrogant born from frustration and exasperation. Having said that if you are high functioning and you have a right to be arrogant then I would say that is understandable under certain conditions. Like I said I really think ego becomes a huge huge thing the more you concentrate brilliant minds. I don't think that is a bad thing either. It is a driving force and motivator.

The board is a lot of different things to a lot of different people.
You are not here for the chit chat and other social elements perhaps due to the nature of your work/interests/spare time so will perhaps see things differently to others.

I appreciate your pov and of course we need all the super smart characters we can get so we certainly don't want to see you driven from this community at all. I think though his initial ban was for a small thing compared to scamming or something very nasty. Subsequent bans were related to that first ban so..... Let's let Theymos give him his original account back and see what happens.

To be fair the pool has been filled with 1000's of ico sharks and bots lately so the pathogens from an occasional Anonymint turd (emotional outburst) seem to be the least of the problems for the pool inhabitants.

This is only my point of view of course but I am quite certain many others would like to see him given another go... the first ban reason really was not super super serious although for sure that's up to Theymos to decide.

When I read a few the high level devs comments about each others designs including VB, larimer and others they do get into the odd spat over things. I think egos at this level of intelligence are going to be big and you will get these spats but I know there is limit to the level that things can be allowed to get to and thats what the board rules are for. Let's just see how we go from here on. We should take into account that sometimes he is seriously ill and not fully himself also. That to me is quite a factor.

Anyway this is not going to be a widely read thread by most (here in meta) but I see some mods, lauda and now you are here so a lot of big players who make the decisions so I guess what will be will be. I see most mods are against a reinstatement so Theymos may not do it but he did say he may consider if If AM will not multi post in future.

Guess we wait and see.

All seem interesting characters indeed. Loved the pool analogy very amusing. This is what I mean smart people are not just useful for making great technology they are also very funny and capable of being interesting at many levels accessible by the average person. Let's all try to get along.

















Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1771



View Profile WWW
July 22, 2018, 08:03:45 PM
 #64

I may manually reconsider his ban if he promises to actually try not to break forum rules.
As I mentioned before, I am willing to reconsider your ban if you promise to follow the same rules as everyone else and try to avoid getting banned, rather than having the attitude of "you can't ban me".


I think Anunymint should agree to not excessively create successive posts in threads

I was perma-banned for that?

Of course I have no problem with not doing that and have not been doing that since I realized that was a rule.
[...]
I was apparently temp-banned not for consecutive posting but for copy+paste posting in multiple threads [...]

I would follow rules if they are clearly explained and make sense.

[...]
I think Anunymint has agreed to not break the 'multi-posting' rule, along with other rules. He also says he believes the specific reason for his ban was that he was posting the same post in multiple threads, which he also has agreed to do, and in practice has actually stopped this practice, as in my interactions with him, he would "url reference" previous points he has made instead of actually copying the point again. For example:
It is not possible for a LN "hub" to run on fractional reserve under the LN protocol as it exists now.

I think you misunderstand the issue I raised.


Find the fire hydrant in my Avatar for a prize.
gmaxwell
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2898
Merit: 2865



View Profile
July 22, 2018, 11:55:43 PM
Last edit: July 23, 2018, 12:51:07 AM by gmaxwell
Merited by Foxpup (6), digaran (1)
 #65

You are busy as you say and simply don't have the time to engage with the board on things that are not important or directly for advancement of this technology. This is understandable and for sure works best like that.

Quote
It's strange in someways because I just clicked on your post history to see if you were still a regular poster...which you are (most of what you say 99% is over my head of course ) but in a way your posting style has some small similarity to Anonymint... I mean this one I think the most recent https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4687032.msg42577799#msg42577799 ... that tone is a tone I often see that is exasperation and frustration at people not seeing things as you do (or as they really are) even after a long discussion. I did not read any other part of that thread but just from that I really could have believed anonymint could have be the author.

I have almost 5000 posts on the forum, in many different subforums and subjects.  But only something like 13 posts in 2018, most in February. Like me, many other technical parties have stopped using the forum entirely or almost entirely. I don't think it's reasonable to that that I am active.  Usually I only post now when a journalist sees something on BCT and asks me to comment,  instead of comment to the journalist I prefer to just go reply to the the thread.

Your example is one of those in fact, the poster in question was running around with incorrect claims of vulnerabilities in Bitcoin.  I got asked.  I'm ashamed that my post looked anything like anonymint's to you but I'm also not surprised: As you note, you don't currently have the background to evaluate the technical content. So you're reading for tone.   If I write in a less than kind tone even when addressing someone who is themselves unkind, it's a mistake on my part which I regret.  But I hope-- and have reason to believe from the results-- that the good I contribute eclipses the crime of having a bit of humanity here and there. Smiley  Unfortunately, to you-- and you are not alone-- someone who does interesting technical work that makes a real difference and someone who strings together terms and disrupts discussions can look pretty similar.  It seems that many draw an equivalence among all people who say things that they don't understand,  and in doing so they do everyone including themselves a great disservice; you can probably understand more than you give yourself credit for, when you don't understand at least some of it is a failure on the speaker's part to make themselves understandable. Sometimes that failure is because they don't understand what they're saying themselves.

To some in shoes like yours, the constant and unrelenting anger in anonymint's posts make him feel even more credible.  Arguably, other more competent posters could win those people over by matching tone.  But most of us don't want to live like that,  we don't want to be king of the crapped up pool. We'd rather just go away, and-- in large-- we have.

Sometimes it's a question of venue-- if I'm writing in the technical subforum I'm usually not trying to address a particularly general audience... but if I'm not comprehensible to the audience I'm addressing it's because I'm making a mistake or because I don't fully understand what I'm talking about myself and so I can't (yet) explain it clearly (it happens from time to time...).  Please feel free to ask me to expand on any of my posts if one interests you but sounds like opaque jargon.

Quote
but I see some mods, lauda and now you are here so a lot of big players who make the decisions

Just as a point of order, sub-forum mods on BCT don't really have much in the way of authority.  Mostly we have the technical ability to zot spammers and move around threads,  but forum norms and policies generally frown on using those tools in an especially editorial way. (Moreover, even if a subforum moderator can get away with it, it doesn't help much without the support of global mods and theymos to do things like ban users).  Generally, subforum mods have about the same clout they'd have as a similar non-mod long time community member.   I wouldn't be surprised if a respected technical contributor like me standing up and saying that anonymint's posting drives him off the forum had some impact-- otherwise I wouldn't have commented-- but thats about it, after all I've been telling people to hit [ignore] on anonymint for years, and he's still been here all this time. We don't, for example, have the ability to ban accounts from particular subforums.  If that had been up to me I would have done that with the tech subforum and anonymint years ago-- the people who find him disruptive are mostly in there and the people who don't are mostly elsewhere...
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
July 23, 2018, 12:35:13 AM
Merited by digaran (1)
 #66

someone who does interesting technical work that makes a real difference and someone who strings together terms and disrupts discussions can look pretty similar.

It can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between someone who is blowing smoke and someone who simply knows some things that you do not know. But, I have always valued your opinion quite highly so, for me, this is case settled on the AnonyMint question. Thanks for taking time to weigh in. Good luck and god speed in your work.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Traxo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 421
Merit: 252



View Profile
July 23, 2018, 08:59:12 PM
Last edit: July 24, 2018, 03:16:02 PM by Traxo
 #67

I received the following rebuttal verbatim from Shelby (aka AnonyMint) via Crypto.cat.

My gosh I take 2 or 3 days break from BCT to get some real work done and I see that the Core shills have sent Gregory Maxwell to spread lies about me.

Let’s make two things very clear:

1. I am not interested in posting on this forum in its current state without a decentralized form of moderation. Because as I already explained, I would want to mute the trolls from my circle, without any danger of anyone’s (including my) posts being actually removed and inaccessible entirely. So removal of the ban is irrelevant. Preferably all the data should be on a transparent decentralized block chain ledger instead of a centralized, opaque database.

2. Gregory you’re trolling firstly because you know damn well I have caught you making technological errors more than once. Secondly I will challenge you below on your claims about my technological expertise. On the first point for example in your CoinJoin thread wherein you proposed a blacklist as a solution to jamming which made no sense whatsover as I (AnonyMint) pointed out in 2013. You were mighty offended. Or the Ogg discussion in Meta which I recently documented in my censored posts. You have also caught me making errors, e.g. when I was first learning about Winternitz and my posts in the Compact Confidential Transactions thread. The difference being that I readily admitted my errors (archived here and here) and thanked Gregory for his assistance even after he had gone about in a dictatorial and intentionly demeaning manner; whereas, he never reciprocates when he is in error in my interactions with him and he trolls me with lies. I have never claimed to be an expert in cryptography specifically. But if you want to discuss programming language design, the design of garbage collectors, type theory, parallelism, concurrency, and various other technologies in computer science then my knowledge is more on the high end. For example, can Gregory point out a flaw in my Github post today pointing out an error in a research paper on the scaling of cache coherency to multi-core? Since Gregory erroneously claims everything technological I write even in the blockchain and crypto arena is an error, I would like for him to refute the solution I recently devised for jam-resistent atomic cross-chain exchange:

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

Don’t be shy now Mr. Ego.
Remember I was the one who pointed out to @TierNolan that his cut-and-choose protocol was still not jam resistant. I have now solved that open problem and published my solution openly for anyone to implement.

Also please refute this technical explanation I made that “Actually HTLCs can be done on the Satoshi’s Bitcoin without the Core cruft added (with the SegWit improvements unncessary when only a small number of large Mt. Box hubs will be relevant because Lightning Networks naturally centralizes due to liquidity pressure)”.

Anytime you would like to attempt to prove your claim about technological superiority by engaging in a debate with me about SegWit, Lightning Networks, Side-chains etc. then I am willing, but it must be done on a neutral forum where neither of us can control the moderation. That will be very illuminating for sure. And I expect you will not do it, because you know you are going to be widely seen as much more fallible after that.

I am also contented to continue my work, be free from all the stress of the BCT trolls including the Core shill trolls, and leave this just die here as it is dying. The ball is in your court.


I have almost 5000 posts on the forum, in many different subforums and subjects.  But only something like 13 posts in 2018, most in February. Like me, many other technical parties have stopped using the forum entirely or almost entirely. [...]  Usually I only post now when a journalist sees something on BCT and asks me to comment,  instead of comment to the journalist I prefer to just go reply to the the thread.

It's a waste of that time to spend it in a place where there are decent odds of their efforts being buried under a mountain of abusive nonsense.   Even those few who don't find his dishonest practices extremely annoying are forced to admit that it's just a waste of time to be in the same venue as someone like that.

I believe that, as much as any single person could possibly be, AnonyMint (and the forum's historical failure to get him under control) is responsible for a significant fraction of the technically competent people becoming largely inactive.
Lol, you try to blame your forum inactivity on me. As if I am responsible for the 2 million sockpuppet troll accounts that make BCT such a pita now.

Fact is that you already achieved the coup d’etat of Satoshi’s protocol, so you are no longer burdened with the necessity of censoring and railroading the community discussion to prevent disagreement with Core’s propaganda. That is until I come back to the board, then y’all need to scamper back into “r0ach motel” censorship mode. You bring out your “big guns” now to try to discredit my truths. Lol.

I like how you tried to obfuscate your trolling as victimization. You’re always playing the social consensus politics. As Mircea Popescu correctly stated, you’re a conniving, manipulative, dishonest, and duplicitous individual. Rather I am frank and straightforward.

Quote from: @gmaxwell’s signature
Bitcoin will not be compromised

Which is exactly what Core hath done, as explained with detail in my censored posts.


With AnonyMint from the moment he takes interest in a thread the outcome is clear in advance-- he's going to post and rant until everyone gives up or flames out and it's never going to change.

IOW, you do not like the truths I have been relentlessly explaining, such as the corruption that is Core’s hijack of Bitcoin. My censored posts contain all that information. Of course you will try to attack my reputation. Who would expect anything less when you’re more of a political hack than an accomplished technological expert. If we really dig into debate about what you claim to have accomplished, the gleam is going to come off of it. Mostly you’ve been pushing a social consensus hijack of Satoshi’s protocol in order to move the people on to the Core altcoin and/or off-chain onto to what must become fractional reserves.

It can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between someone who is blowing smoke and someone who simply knows some things that you do not know. But, I have always valued your opinion quite highly so, for me, this is case settled on the AnonyMint question. Thanks for taking time to weigh in. Good luck and god speed in your work.

Obviously you still can’t discern the difference. And you believe what you want to believe. So enjoy the outcome when I am entirely correct in the end. Make sure you hodl your Bitcoins in SegWit addresses so you can thank Gregory Maxwell when you lose all your real Bitcoin.



On the topic of interpersonal skills, I wrote the following today on Quora:

I upvoted (before I read your comment) because it’s a well articulated explanation of one way to handle the situation. But this might also be indicative of the quality level of the rest of the team being too low. I don’t think dumbing down the rockstar developer is the only correct way to look at the problem. He may be frustrated by the inferior abilities of the rest of the team. Although IQ is not necessarily correlated to rockstar programmer status, it’s a well known fact that people 2–3 SD below in IQ are incapable of keeping up and the higher IQ person would just become frustrated if they even tried. So I can imagine the same phenomenon can go on in programming. Well not just imagine, because I have experienced it (probably from both sides of the situation both being inferior to rockstars above me and be superior to others below me in skill level).

So his demeanor may have been an accumulation of frustration, not just a lack of interpersonal skills. But it would require assessment of the details to know in each case. I do agree it is more likely to just be poor interpersonal skills since that seems to be the norm amongst the INTJ stereotype (note I am ENTP). Also the question seems to imply the offender did this immediately upon landing, so not exhibiting any patience or accumulation of frustration would seem to indicate poor interpersonal skills, I could also imagine he being so smart that he would preempt the frustration he doesn’t want to endure. Smart people cut a beeline to the ultimate outcome which is basically forcing the company to upgrade the team he is asked to work with or fire him.

I admit I am turned off by the this answer to some degree because it presumes the inertia of the group is more valuable than the rockstar developer (and the cohorts he might entice to a smaller more efficient team). This group-first mentality is Asian, not Western. We in the West didn’t rise to the top by defeating individualism. We did defeat tribalism and clans to increase our cooperation[1] (which is what held the East back during the Agricultural and Industrial revolutions), but this wasn’t at the expense of individual excellence and invention.[2]

[1] https://blog.jim.com/culture/thermodynamics-of-social-entropy/
[2] https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead-part-2

The technological decline in the West is due to all this egalitarianism nonsense is getting severe:

https://blog.jim.com/war/technological-decline-3/

And so let’s quote from one of those cited sources as it applies directly to why decentralized moderation is going to win:

You will notice that Putin dealt with Pussy Riot’s weaponized supererogatory holiness preaching in a way that deliberately maximized disorder – maximized outgroup disorder in order to sustain ingroup order.  That is the way to do it.

Or in less words, successful order increases external disorder, so that it is on trend with inexorable universal maximization of entropy.

It’s interesting to tie that in with another quote so we understand why the global elite try to destroy us with disorder:

Peoples that allow female sexual choice disappear.

And if you don’t comprehend those quotes Gregory, then you can’t blame it on me, because I didn’t write it. You might just come to realize that you don't know everything, or stated another way, you’re not as smart as you think you are.
 

EDIT: frankly I think this entire drama is childish. Anyone looking at this from the outside would think they were observing 5 years throwing sand in the sandbox. Maybe we should all grow up.
infofront
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862
Merit: 1906


Shitcoin Minimalist


View Profile
July 25, 2018, 01:53:39 AM
Last edit: July 25, 2018, 02:05:48 AM by infofront
 #68

AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble.  His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.  

If this is true, it would be trivial for someone with similar or greater technical knowledge than him to publicly prove him wrong and/or defeat him in a debate.

I didn't follow many of Anonymint's older posts. I've been paying more attention for the last couple months or so. I'm willing to entertain the notion that Anonymint may be a sophisticated troll. If this is the case, however, I would personally require more evidence to convince me. So far, across multiple threads, most of the arguments against him that I've read have consisted of some variation of, "He's a troll, and "His ideas are dangerous." I have not seen anyone with similar or greater technical knowledge disprove many (any?) of his ideas.
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
July 25, 2018, 02:20:20 AM
 #69

Quote
Obviously you still can’t discern the difference.

I understand a lot. Everything short of the deeper math and cutting edge proposals. Honestly, I still never read any of your ridiculously verbose (and presumably the technical) posts. I decided a little while back, when I found out that you were the real anonymint (someone I have positive impressions of from the early days of bitcoin talk for reasons I no longer remember), that if I saw another one I would actually read it this time but I haven't seen one since and I haven't felt inclined to go searching through the thousands of wall observer pages to dig one up.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2184
Merit: 1386


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2018, 12:32:07 PM
Merited by gmaxwell (1)
 #70

most of the arguments against him that I've read have consisted of some variation of, "He's a troll, and "His ideas are dangerous." I have not seen anyone with similar or greater technical knowledge disprove many (any?) of his ideas.

And there's a very good reason for that.  He always argues that some terrible event is going to occur at some unspecified time in the future.  You can't empirically prove anything one way or the other until it doesn't happen.  And it never does.  But by the time it was supposed to have happened, Anonymint has already moved on to "imminent" catastrophe #573853 and everyone has already forgotten about whatever alarmist flailing he was doing before.  Complete and utter headcase. 

He clearly likes the attention and the odd occasions some person gets the mistaken impression that he's actually smart.  When, in truth, it's just an overactive imagination, a strong vocabulary and a flair for the dramatic.  Don't be taken in by it.

aliashraf
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 726

always remember, remember the cause


View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 06:03:11 AM
 #71

I received the following rebuttal verbatim from Shelby (aka AnonyMint) via Crypto.cat.

My gosh I take 2 or 3 days break from BCT to get some real work done and I see that the Core shills have sent Gregory Maxwell to spread lies about me.

I have almost 5000 posts on the forum, in many different subforums and subjects.  But only something like 13 posts in 2018, most in February. Like me, many other technical parties have stopped using the forum entirely or almost entirely. [...]  Usually I only post now when a journalist sees something on BCT and asks me to comment,  instead of comment to the journalist I prefer to just go reply to the the thread.

It's a waste of that time to spend it in a place where there are decent odds of their efforts being buried under a mountain of abusive nonsense.   Even those few who don't find his dishonest practices extremely annoying are forced to admit that it's just a waste of time to be in the same venue as someone like that.


Fact is that you already achieved the coup d’etat of Satoshi’s protocol, so you are no longer burdened with the necessity of censoring and railroading the community discussion to prevent disagreement with Core’s propaganda. That is until I come back to the board, then y’all need to scamper back into “r0ach motel” censorship mode. You bring out your “big guns” now to try to discredit my truths. Lol.

I like how you tried to obfuscate your trolling as victimization. You’re always playing the social consensus politics. As Mircea Popescu correctly stated, you’re a conniving, manipulative, dishonest, and duplicitous individual. Rather I am frank and straightforward.

Quote from: @gmaxwell’s signature
Bitcoin will not be compromised

Which is exactly what Core hath done, as explained with detail in my censored posts.


God forgive me, but this Greg dude is really a troll. I mean it. He seriously trolls in this forum and everywhere else.
Any chance to have him beheaded instead of Shelby?  Grin



Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1771



View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 07:13:05 AM
 #72

Greg Maxwell's comments about Anunymint should be condemned in the strongest way possible. It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

The comments made by Maxwell only give credibility to those claiming censorship on bitcointalk and r/bitcoin (Greg Maxwell is a moderator of both). The same is true for the absence of a strong condemnation of Maxwell's statement.

Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this. 

Find the fire hydrant in my Avatar for a prize.
DooMAD
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2184
Merit: 1386


Leave no FUD unchallenged


View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 01:21:26 PM
Merited by gmaxwell (1)
 #73

Greg Maxwell's comments about Anunymint should be condemned in the strongest way possible. It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

Anonymint didn't get banned because people don't like him, though.  He got banned for ban-evasion and disrupting unrelated threads with his doomsday prognostications.  He derails and dominates every thread he posts in.  As he's proven time and again, he's perfectly capable of registering new accounts totally undetected.  If he were to do that and just post like a normal human being, he'd probably never get caught.  But every time, he has to broadcast to the world that he's Anonymint and he's here to tell us everything is broken yet again, even though it isn't.  Apparently posting here just doesn't stroke his ego enough unless his small number of fans know for sure that it's him.  So they ban him for ban-evasion for the Nth time because he openly flouts it.  He says he's never going to post here again but, much like every other claim he's ever made, I'll believe it when I see it.

Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 04:37:06 PM
 #74

It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

Nice strawman. Please give the actual quote word for word where he said that, instead of just saying that he said it.


Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this. 

Okay... So what did he change on wikipedia that was "vandalism"?

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Shelby_Moore_III_
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 3


View Profile
July 29, 2018, 08:29:14 AM
Last edit: July 31, 2018, 02:29:15 AM by Shelby_Moore_III_
 #75

@Quickseller, @aliashraf, @Ix, @Traxo, @miscreanity et al, I appreciate that you’re awake to the evils of centralized databases on the Internet. Don’t expect altcoin shills to have any conscience, astute ethics, vision for future, or ability to foresee their own self-destruction. For example, the Core shills vision for the future is off-chain, fractional reserves, but they’re too blinded by their ignorance, fantasies, and/or vested interests to observe reality. There’s no solution that can brought forth within such a corrupt paradigm. The only solution is to move the Internet forward to “Web 3.0” on decentralized ledgers. So let’s just stop fighting the corruption from inside the corruption and get the necessary work done to disintermediate the corruption. You will get no where feeding the trolls and arguing with those who will vehemently shill for their altcoin (which is mostly the Core altcoin shills in this thread).

@cryptohunter my reaction to both your public and private comments, is I don’t want to return. Because I agree with what you noted, that you and virtually all (99%) the other guys here on this forum aren’t able to discern the technological arguments.

Thus attempting to explain such technological, game theory, economics, sociology, is a mostly fruitless (or let’s say insignificant ROI) misallocation of precious time. For example, after all the careful and patient effort I put into holding @Wind_FURY's (and to a lesser extent @Anon136’s) hand(s) recently and explaining everything to him very carefully in numerous threads and posts (which were censored), they both for example continue to make clueless and ignorantly boastful, erroneous statements in the Lightning Networks discussion thread. The shills for altcoins such as Core (and all the others such Ethereum, etc) are analogous to violent soccer fans. It’s always “my team is better than you team” with hands over ears and eyes, yelling “na, na, na, na, I can’t hear you nor see you” and employing whatever sort of trolling is necessary to support their team and show their allegiance to either vested interests and/or inaccurate fantasies.

It’s like baboons who are cheering on the blue vs. red team which they religiously believe in while the blue team is leading to a failure which they can’t comprehend. It’s both sad and hilarious. This is the unfortunate reason the masses are and will always be fodder. Unlike scammers and manipulators who only want to use their ignorance or who don’t care, I really tried to explain and help them but all I get in return in their ire (and ridiculously boastful ignorance) even when I patiently tried to teach them. So there’s nothing to be gained from me posting here where I can’t form my own decentralized circles and kick off the riff-raff. And worse, since the content is not stored on a decentralized, open database, I risk my effort being nuked as it has been so many times.

It’s a wiser allocation of my resources and much more productive for me to focus on my work. And no I am not frustrated at all that others don’t understand my work. They don’t really understand Bitcoin either yet they appreciate it. My work can be similarly appreciated at the correct juncture if I am able to complete it, which is mostly dependent on my health and my ability to not waste time.

Here is an example of what I am referring to and I must post here in Meta instead of in the LN thread where the discussion is:

Indeed, it's very telling how much effort they put into trash talking in comparison to how much they want to add supporting voices to alternative ideas to improve cryptocurrencies.

This, exactly this, was my problem with Shelby lately.

I addressed this twice near the end of this post in Meta.

Also when y’all admit Core is an altcoin, then it can receive the same critical analysis that the other altcoins receive from myself. I don’t discriminate against Core.

I had also stated (in the posts that were nuked from the LN thread) that I’m not against the LN experiment. I stated very clearly the reasons I think it will become entirely centralized, run by the banksters, and be a fractional reserve system, that also donates all the real Bitcoin to the powers-that-be. In the future, we’ll observe if I am correct in my analysis and expectation.

Yet you all go on and on thinking that your errors in the LN thread will change that outcome. It won’t. And y’all do not understand why, even though I tried to explain it to you. So there isn’t anything more that needs to be said. Carry on to your destiny.

Even Gregory Maxwell admitted the LN is not what you retards[n00bs] think it is:

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-curious-case-of-gregory-maxwell-and-the-lightning-network/



AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble.  His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.  

If this is true, it would be trivial for someone with similar or greater technical knowledge than him to publicly prove him wrong and/or defeat him in a debate.

Oh Gregory surely can dig up something where I have been wrong (and probably where I even admitted my error) in order to obfuscate that Gregory will be unable to address the specific technological challenges that I presented in my prior post.

Note in the prior post made by @Traxo on my behalf, I have provided two examples where in a debate with Gregory he was shown to be incorrect and he refused (even until this day) to admit he was incorrect.



I understand a lot.

No you do not understand much in any holistic sense. Compounded on top of your lack of holistic understanding is your bunny rabbit fantasy confirmation bias, i.e. you really want to believe that proof-of-work can have some form of off-chain instant transactions and transaction volume scaling that won’t be centralized and won’t be fractional reserves. This fantasy bias causes you to reject becoming holistically astute, yet I also doubt that you have the ability to assimilate all the necessary information because of the extreme level of discipline and effort that is required.

By analogy, females-at-large (and note there’s always exceptions) can be awarded engineering degrees (by corrupted SJW holiness cesspools they name universities), but then can’t produce tritium or complete the Obamacare website. Not even because they’re not smart enough (as James Donald astutely points out females more typically excel as first lieutenants although of course there can be exceptions), but because as Jordan Petersen explains, most of them aren’t willing to work 100 hours a week like I do grinding away at assimilating all the “boring” engineering details. Similarly, you may understand (but as you admit at lower level of understanding) paradigmatically in the way the computer science student thinks he understands how to program and then gets into the real world of needing to holistically integrate programming, economics, game theory, sociology, etc. and falls flat on his face. Which BTW, is also one of Gregory Maxwell’s failure modes to some degree (although he’s expert in cryptography and encodings and various other computer science disciplines). Yet Gregory also suffers the SJW victimization holiness psychosis which he probably learned as most Millennials do these days from these cesspools of academia.

Your Dunning-Kruger overconfidence can be best explained by a woman on Quora who has a 160 IQ. She is smarter than me. Read how she explains it. @WIND_Fury you should also read that and take heed about what I had explained to you in the nuked posts, that if you’re 1 to 2 SD below in IQ or equivalently in detailed expertise, then you don’t understand anything at all and are just making errors pretty much every time you write anything. Leah also wrote more about the hateful, ignorance you trolls spew.

An IQ of 135 is just over 2 standard deviations above normal. The definition for gifted should be 130, which is 2 standard deviations about normal. If 100 is average, then the gifted individual has as much in common with the person of average IQ as a person of average IQ has in common with someone of labeled as needing special services. The person who qualifies for special education services, at 2 standard deviations below, would have an IQ of about 70.

One could ask, does a person of average intelligence become frustrated with someone of less than average intelligence? I believe that the question would have the same answer, as the differences in IQ and functioning would be exactly the same.

The 160 IQ Eric S. Raymond wrote about the destiny that awaits you n00bs: The return of the servant problem

I wrote on Quora:

Leah, you put into words the thought I’ve had that Millennials don’t appreciate their elders enough to apprentice under our expertise. I’m 53 and in the computer science field. I had the desire to work with the youth and build something together but the chasm between our respective attitudes seems so great. For example, I reject the SJWs mayonnaise spread on everything. For example recently I contributed to a question on Stackoverflow Meta about how to address the spam problem of low quality questions that could be easily answered with a Google search. I suggested the simple economic solution to charge for asking a question more than the opportunity cost of doing a Google search. I pointed out that attempting to give away for free what is not free is impossible. Thus the insoluble problem they have and until they address the root cause they’ll just dig deeper into a clusterfuck of for example enabling arbitrary censorship. The Millennials downvoted my answer relentlessly because in their logic this would disincentivize participation (and I’m noting that uniform anything is negentropic). The irony is their votes cost them nothing so they had nothing at stake of than their ideology (and could potentially be sockpuppet accounts harvested for free). My point is they’re losing the participation of those with high opportunity cost who value quality, for which the negligible cost for posting questions would be far outweighed by the gain in relevancy. The cost charged could be reputation instead of money, if identities are not free. Actually that is only a simplistic summary, as I have a more complex design in mind for a decentralized ledger. Anyway, my point is that they’re not experienced or open-minded enough to consider the holistic integration of economics. That is just one of many example interactions that indicate to me that they prioritize SJW egalitarianism mayonnaise on everything. I’m probably oversimplifying and missing some other facets of this generational phenomenon. Maybe I’m coming into contact with too many INTJs who lack interpersonal skills and an appreciation for hardwork, because I did stumble on this counter-example today:

SOLD EVERYTHING | GOOD-BYE USA | Jake Mace - Living in Portugal, pt. 2

Also it’s not surprising that Millennials don’t value their elders, because Millennials are being thrown under the bus by the Boomers who filled their heads with political nonsense and have supported a politics that has saddled the country with debt servitude. I wrote on Medium:

If you want the country to be less polarized then stop writing, talking, and thinking about…


Quote from: @Anon136’s signature
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?

That nonsense is a perfect example of your bunny rabbit fantasy and lack of holistic understanding of the world you live in. Rights don’t exist without the power to defend them. That’s why you bunny rabbits huddle together in a collective in order to try to assert some power to defend some rights. But a collective is a power vacuum that demands that the bunny rabbits be manipulated by the most ruthless. Core is another bunny rabbit collectivized clusterfuck. So the answer to your question is power and the power vacuum of collective rights. In that light, your question reveals how blissfully ignorant you are. Yet you claim you understand much. No you don’t.

Honestly, I still never read any of your ridiculously verbose (and presumably the technical) posts.

If you want only soundbites, then you will never understand anything holistically at a level capable of not making a fool of yourself as you continue to do in the Lightning Networks (LN) thread you started recently.

How silly that you blame me for the complexity of the confluence of technology, economics, game theory, sociology, etc.. That exemplifies the ridiculousness of your claim of understanding a lot. Come on man stop jerking yourself off and get in touch with reality. Or don’t. Stay in your bunny rabbit fantasy and be played by disorder as it should be (see the tail end of the prior post from @Traxo about order and disorder which I am confident is entirely incomprehensible to you).

Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this.  

Okay... So what did he change on wikipedia that was "vandalism"?

You claim, “I understand a lot.” But you’re unable or unwilling to do a Google search:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=36639732#User:Gmaxwell
https://twitter.com/sayurichick/status/954381661885538304
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/74se80/wikipedia_admins_gregory_maxwell_of_blockstream/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45ail1/wikipedians_on_greg_maxwell_in_2006_now_cto_of/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/459iyw/gmaxwell_in_2006_during_his_wikipedia_vandalism/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/457y0k/greg_maxwells_wikipedia_war_or_he_how_learned_to/



He always argues that some terrible event is going to occur at some unspecified time in the future.

Oh like I called the BTC triple bottom in late June and early July before the rest of the Speculation forum caught up to the concept. And I emphatically stated (which is in the nuked posts that @mprep refuses to assist in sending me a copy of) that BTC would bounce from $6100 up to $8000+. That’s both not terrible and quite empirical.

I could go through a laundry list of examples like this such as my correct public prediction in 2010 that silver would rise from $25 to $45 by Q2 2011 then crash (which is exactly what it did), but you’re just here to troll and write lies. So it would be a waste of my time, because you’re not interested in being non-disingenuous. Or never mind that I screamed all over these forums multi-posting in numerous threads in early 2017 to buy LTC at $6 days before it blasted off and proceeded to over $350 in 2017. As I said, I could go on and on. But you trolls will try to make up some lies about my record by citing something out-of-context or based on your incorrect vague memory. And I don’t have enough time to continuously correct all your lies and errors. Because there’s a lot of more of you Core shills than myself. One against a horde of trolls is certainly a recipe for misallocation of scarce resources.

Did you also forget my Speculation Rule: buy when others are IRRATIONALLY pessimistic/cautious (c.f. also my blog of the same title) on October 25, 2016 when Bitcoin was in the low $600s right before it started to blast off.

He clearly likes the attention

Where’s your empirical proof? No, I would actually like to mute you from the circle of people I want to discuss with, so I never see your useless slobbering.

Readers be very clear that every person spreading lies about me on this thread is a Core shill. They are offended about the truths I have explained.

It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

Nice strawman. Please give the actual quote word for word where he said that, instead of just saying that he said it.

Anonymint didn't get banned because people don't like him, though.

Ah yes, we must remain technically accurate while obfuscating the reality of the situation. The Jews weren’t exterminated as cockroaches because they were Jews, but because they didn’t have the correct papers indicating they were not Jews.

Your point is analogous to “Slick Willy” Bill Clinton arguing in the court what the definition of ‘is’ is.

I explained up-thread that I felt that people who didn’t like my dissenting information were asking mods to temp-ban me for spreading that information. They used technicalities to single me out for the activities that others were also doing and not being temp-banned for. The response here has been just because other people get away with it, doesn’t absolve me from responsibility to adhere to “the rules”. And I have pointed out that “the rules” aren’t even working to prevent trolling and spamming, so basically those rules exist so that shills (presumably who buy off the mods and @theymos behind the curtain, yeah where is the audit of the finances of these individuals?) have the means to be arbitrary against your critics. @QuickSeller and others (including myself) have correctly pointed out such a paradigm of censorship is the antithesis of our decentralization movement.

I’m not arguing with you because I want to come back to your centralized clusterfuck. I’m making sure that others who read this in the future (and we are archiving everything in case you realize I’m winning the argument and devolve to censoring in Meta as Stackoverflow does), will understand the importance of the decentralized replacement I will create to disintermediate your corrupt shit.

he's here to tell us everything is broken yet again, even though it isn't.

Core shills want to dominate bitcointalk.org and r/Bitcoin with their propaganda and censor any dissenting information especially when a dissenting person is quite successful at attracting attention to that dissenting information.

So you Core shills want to have a monopoly on truth. But the fact is that we could not even exist (time would not be irreversible and thermodynamic processes would not move forward irreversibly) if anyone had a monopoly on information.
aliashraf
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 726

always remember, remember the cause


View Profile WWW
July 29, 2018, 09:38:18 AM
 #76

Shelby, is such a dedicated author, just look at the above post of him.  Shocked

I'm so sorry for his situation with btctalk and I feel responsible about the brutal act that they committed against him and his posts. I lost a great part of my motives when they banned @anunymint and slaughtered his posts.

Although it is an old and disgusting story with centralized forums, I become frustrated whenever it happens.  Sad
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
July 29, 2018, 12:48:47 PM
Last edit: July 29, 2018, 01:11:17 PM by Anon136
 #77

Quote
You claim, “I understand a lot.” But you’re unable or unwilling to do a Google search:

I was talking about the Bitcoin protocol... Roll Eyes

*edit* Yea I don't know. I've been fiddling around with the links for a while now and I still can't figure out the answer to my question. The reason I'm not impressed that his "peers at wikipedia" rebuked him is that I know wikipedia is full of left wing culture warriors. It's so bad that they libel people they don't like as "white supremacists". The way I see it is, if you are interacting with those people on a regular basis and somehow haven't managed to become embroiled in conflict with them than that is probably because you are one of them.

Anyway, it's difficult enough that I think the burden of proof rests on someone who wants to use this as an attack against him, not just assumed that he did something wrong and anyone who wants to dispute it must dig through ancient archives.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
hornetsnest
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 487
Merit: 173


View Profile
July 29, 2018, 01:06:35 PM
Last edit: July 29, 2018, 01:20:36 PM by hornetsnest
 #78

Shelby, is such a dedicated author, just look at the above post of him.  Shocked

I'm so sorry for his situation with btctalk and I feel responsible about the brutal act that they committed against him and his posts. I lost a great part of my motives when they banned @anunymint and slaughtered his posts.

Although it is an old and disgusting story with centralized forums, I become frustrated whenever it happens.  Sad


"To see the farm is to leave it"

Leave it and start your own forum with your own rules if you are not happy.I liked reading anonymint's posts myself even if I didn't agree with some of his opinions and am sad to see such censorship instead of opposing arguments.Certainly a tradgedy of the commons can happen when peoples viewpoints propogate and multiply but freedom is freedom like truth is truth and selective truths are no better than lies etc etc etc.We could argue all day about what is and what is not but I will admit some his posts were entertaining and didn't coerce me to think differently.Only the feeble minded allow this to happen and its up to the individual to take responsibility as to how the aggregate and correolate or interpret information etc.

Shelby_Moore_III_
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 3


View Profile
July 29, 2018, 02:51:58 PM
Last edit: August 01, 2018, 04:56:04 AM by Shelby_Moore_III_
 #79

Anyway, it's difficult enough that I think the burden of proof rests on someone who wants to use this as an attack against him, not just assumed that he did something wrong and anyone who wants to dispute it must dig through ancient archives.

Ditto his slanderous and incorrect characterization of my technological worth. Right there he demonstrated he is a sleazy troll. You will not see him debate me about SegWit (on a neutral forum) because he knows damn well I am correct and he will be unmasked in the debate.

IOW, Gregory shouldn’t throw stones in his glass house.

I was talking about the Bitcoin protocol... Roll Eyes

How can you claim you understand Satoshi’s protocol and then have such ignorance about Core being an altcoin as defined by the protocol and its associated game theory. Again this is not a matter of opinion for those who really know the protocol and the game theory which gives Bitcoin its value and security.

If you want to assert that Core has been consensus voted to be popularly known as the new Bitcoin, then okay but first recognize that any change to the protocol which modifies its security and game theory, thus constitutes an altcoin. Then I will accept that the n00bs voted to rename the Core altcoin “Bitcoin” and fool themselves into donating all their real BTC to the miners who have no choice but to restore the security by accepting those donations (and my nuked posts explained in great detail the mechanism by which that massive n00bs donation will come about eventually).

(for readers new to this thread, I am not a BCH shill)

P.S. I refer you again to some additional thoughts from Leah on how much we don’t know until we dig in deep into STEM fields:

…architecture is a complex and comprehensive profession and it is stronger because our experiences are so disparate from one another…

“A lot of people in our industry haven’t had very diverse experiences. So they don’t have enough dots to connect, and they end up with very linear solutions without a broad perspective on the problem. The broader one’s understanding of the human experience, the better design we will have.” — Steve Jobs

Because architecture is such a challenging profession with so much to learn, growing and taking on leadership roles can take a very long time and many never even see the business management side of the industry! But the positions I held before were simpler, with fewer barriers to advancement, and I grew into management and leadership positions quickly where I gained invaluable skills, like accounting, operations, and business administration, that most of my architecture peers now (and even superiors) don’t have yet. Not only that, but I had the opportunity to tackle tough problems by developing unique solutions unburdened by influence of over a century’s worth of practice legacy, which gave me what my colleagues call my “rebel spirit”. I see fundamental flaws in practice and management and immediately innovate, looking outside of the AEC industry for inspiration, connect dots from a larger picture, and prototype new ideas without hesitation or fear.

That last paragraph indicates to me that she and I followed an analogous path in life and explains our conscientious “rebel spirit”. The preference to tinker and dabble in so many interesting tangents, experienced being a leader at a very early age (actually age 5 in my case1) and to become even isolated from the real world at times, and then feeling out-of-sync with the mainstream, yet also coming back into it via entrepreneurialism. Note again though, her IQ is higher than mine.

1 When I was 5 years old, my father was preparing to build a platform in the back of his VW bus to support a bed with storage underneath. I was unaware this was the camper he was to use to leave our family and go to Belize with the N.American lady who became his second wife. He seemed to be having some pause formulating the design he would employ (and note my attorney father seems to have a higher IQ than mine especially in logic and the literary arts, but I may have greater visual math skills than him). So I instantly visualized and explained the design I would use. I also instinctively became the leader in our neighborhood football games and relished my daily bloody nose at age 5. No exaggeration!
digaran
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 613

111113DUwES2ZNWSJztA3oBuhzfcdmiaG


View Profile
July 29, 2018, 03:38:49 PM
 #80

Stop evading your bans and appeal for your ban like everybody else. you are not better than anybody, you are a man like several billion men living on earth.

HOWEYCOINS   ▮      Excitement and         ⭐  ● TWITTER  ● FACEBOOK   ⭐      
  ▮    guaranteed returns                 ●TELEGRAM                         
  ▮  of the travel industry
    ⭐  ●Ann Thread ●Instagram   ⭐ 
✅    U.S.Sec    ➡️
✅  approved!  ➡️
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!