Folks, read the post again, but in context. It'll make much more sense. CoinHunter was merely referring to himself in the third person. You'll notice, however, that references to "me" allow apply to CoinHunter.
Correct. However, tenses are usually synchronized. Infact almost always, unless conscious thought is applied inorder to produce another communicative effect. If thirdpersons are used with a communicative effect in mind, quotes are usually put around the third person tense. The reference to "Solidcoin would be run by people I
don't like" is what stands out to me - it comes right after a third-person tense. Right after. This "I" is referring to CH (who runs solidcoin). This is an negative opinion which is expressed from a first-person perspective about the person expressing it, right after a third-person tense? No, that's not congruent at all. Massive tense changes don't 'just happen'. If they do 'just happen', then you need to go see your doctor because you have a neurological disorder.
You're correct that eventually he refers to himself in the first person. But the way I see it this only allows for three options
1) Either he 'accidentally' switched back and forth between tenses
2) He has a neurological disorder
3) He got mixed up using sockpuppet accounts.
1 is unlikely because the brain just doesn't work like that.
2 is debatable but in this case unlikely (i imagine it'd make it hard to code).
3 is most likely according to Occam's Razor.
I don't know coding at all, there's a lot of people who can vouch for code around here. But when it comes to Hermeneutics... that's my area.
Edit: Hermeneutics pretty useless when it comes to code. But when it comes to lieing, it'll catch them every