VIP Member hacked?

[SaltySpitoon]

While I do have the gut feeling that JFY is the original owner, based on their speaking patterns, I do believe that qwk's actions are within reason. The only thing that is bothering me right now, is that JFY actually cares about the negative feedback from qwk, even though it was very clearly laid out to be a temporary and precautionary thing. Its not like there is a scam accusation, its a case of, let me know when you happen across something to prove your identity and I'll remove it. As the account owner, I'd imagine you'd have two thoughts. The first being, hey don't tag me jerk, and the second being, thanks for looking out for the best interest of my account. Rather than firing off against qwk, I'd imagine that "thanks for having my interest in mind" part would cause one to spend a few extra minutes trying to confirm their identity rather than getting very upset over it.

Regardless, I don't see this as something that really needs much discussion, its kind of just a matter of time until either its proven not to be the original owner, or it is. When you've been here this long, you'll remember an interaction you had with someone that isn't recorded. Something like that can clear doubts.

[1714194508]

1714194508

[1714194508]

1714194508

[Quickseller]

Yea it’s too bad I haven’t dealt in accounts in many years.

And I'm willing to believe you, because I trust you, as you might recall.
But from your professional experience, is something like the above story at least plausible?

Is it possible? Sure, but I don't think that is what happened.

Buying accounts is very risky, not only because of the risk of negative trust from the SJW forum police, but also from fake claims of the account being hacked, fake hidden loans, so I don't think it would be a profitable business to buy up accounts to resell anymore. I would suspect someone buying up accounts would quickly find themselves with many accounts that are worthless, or otherwise cannot sell, of course after paying for them.

It would make more sense to me that the majority of account sellers farm them either themselves or with the help of a group of close business associates that they can trust (or is an individual who is in need of money and is willing to part ways with their account).

Not long after I exited the account business (or maybe it was just before I exited it, I don't remember), someone asked me to post from some of their accounts for a month in exchange for a fee. I was told to avoid any threads involving a dispute between groups, and threads in meta (IIRC), so it is known to avoid those types of threads, by at least that person.

Similar to your "Nigerian prince" scenario, there is not any evidence this is the case. There is also the capitalism strangeness in his posts, and account selling is a very low skill task, and I can't really see an account broker/seller picking up on this.

If someone wants to sell me bitcoin who has no trade history and I don't know, and asks that I send money to him first, I would obviously not trust him, but I would respond by saying that he can either agree to use a mutually agreed upon escrow, or he can send me the bitcoin first -- what I would not do is respond with giving negative trust (if he later shows signs he was trying to scam me, that might change).

Similarly, I don't have any particular reason to trust btc_bear and would certainly not send him money first in a trade. However that is not to say that he is going to try to trade with me with the intention of trying to scam me.

[marlboroza]

An address on a profile may be there regardless of when it was updated. This is why I did not bring up the archive.

I know. Still a bit weird to keep an address that you lost private keys of. I'd like the hear the excuse for that
Even more weird is to add that address to one's profile after the alleged loss occurred... since it wasn't there in March 2016:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160328090413/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021

Address was never there, except in 2017:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120204034159/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: February 04, 2012, 03:41:58 AM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20130306223343/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: March 06, 2013, 10:33:08 PM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20130502220324/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: May 02, 2013, 10:03:10 PM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140406072602/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: April 06, 2014, 07:25:43 AM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140811112842/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: August 11, 2014, 11:28:43 AM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20150922020050/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: September 22, 2015, 02:00:50 AM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20160127233052/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: January 27, 2016, 11:30:50 PM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20160328090413/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: March 28, 2016, 09:04:15 AM
Last active: May 26, 2015, 12:51:36 PM
Last post: May 26, 2015, 03:00:33 AM
No address.

http://web.archive.org/web/20171126120414/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=18021
Archived: November 26, 2017, 12:04:14 PM
Last active: Last Active: August 15, 2017, 08:32:13 PM
First post after gap: August 13, 2017, 11:28:17 PM
Last post:  August 15, 2017, 08:01:00 PM
Address.

http://archive.is/3E1Vf
Archived: November 08, 2018, 03:11:02 PM
First post after gap: November 07, 2018, 09:43:04 AM
No address.

There are no posts between May 26. 2015 - August 13, 2017 and activity between March 28, 2016 - August 13, 2017 is unknown.

If I have to guess, I would say that address was placed on profile in 2017.

And when did your hard drive crash?

It was around Jan 2016 due to a electricity overload in my house.

Strange.

~

They start using "@":

Code:

@LoyceV has already noticed
You could put @DdmrDdmr as an example
Hope @theymos consider this
@The Pharmacist already discussed with me
Good to see a new update by @theymos which could
Hope @theymos replies here with a answer
@ETFbitcoin your example posts show that
but I can trust @qwk and send him
I would like to suggest @theymos to add

Proves nothing, same as upper letters.

[qwk]

Lauda look it is simple. Presenting facts demonstrating you are a liar is not trolling, It is not being a nut job. It is simply presenting the truth that you are proven untrustworthy.

It is also against the rules of this forum, when you keep presenting these facts in threads where they are off-topic.
Wether your claims about Lauda are true or not simply doesn't matter here in this thread.

There's only one place in your posts where you are allowed to make the same off-topic statements again and again: your signature.
Please restrain yourself to adopting a signature that says "Lauda is a liar - see evidence here" and link to a thread about that issue.

[cryptohunter]

Lauda look it is simple. Presenting facts demonstrating you are a liar is not trolling, It is not being a nut job. It is simply presenting the truth that you are proven untrustworthy.

It is also against the rules of this forum, when you keep presenting these facts in threads where they are off-topic.
Wether your claims about Lauda are true or not simply doesn't matter here in this thread.

There's only one place in your posts where you are allowed to make the same off-topic statements again and again: your signature.
Please restrain yourself to adopting a signature that says "Lauda is a liar - see evidence here" and link to a thread about that issue.

This again is a very strange reaction.

Please demonstrate where they are off topic and not relevant. That they have not been raised or joked about by others before I respond to them.

Also unless you are trolling me you just said in your prior post they are on -topic here.

Now stop being afraid of lauda and changing your mind it looks even more strange than your behaviour that I just described above.

Just because he shows up and orders you to stop posting don't change your mind and reverse what you just said 2 posts back. You appear to be very scared of this person. Do not be frightened of these people.

"Whether my claims are true or not does not matter"? this is quite a ridiculous thing to say when we are discussing here matters of trust. Especially when a lot of times those very points are raised and joked about by  others first in many threads.

It is clear lauda shows up here tells you off and you just completely change your tone and reverse something you just said to the opposite. It can not be certainly on-topic here and then moments later become off topic here.

[qwk]

It is also against the rules of this forum, when you keep presenting these facts in threads where they are off-topic.
Wether your claims about Lauda are true or not simply doesn't matter here in this thread.

Please demonstrate where they are off topic and not relevant.

Also unless you are trolling me you just said in your prior post they are on -topic here.

I'm unaware of saying this.
If so, it was a mishap.
JFY is on-topic here, Lauda isn't.
This post is in "Reputation" and called "VIP Member hacked?".
Lauda is not a VIP member, so it's not about her reputation or her being hacked.
q.e.d.

Now stop being afraid of lauda and changing your mind.

As for changing my mind, I'm unaware of it.
As for being afraid of Lauda: hey, she lives relatively close to me (AFAIR), I have much more reason to be afraid than you are

Now let me repeat, because I mean it:

Please restrain yourself to adopting a signature that says "Lauda is a liar - see evidence here" and link to a thread about that issue.

[cryptohunter]

It is also against the rules of this forum, when you keep presenting these facts in threads where they are off-topic.
Wether your claims about Lauda are true or not simply doesn't matter here in this thread.

Please demonstrate where they are off topic and not relevant.

Also unless you are trolling me you just said in your prior post they are on -topic here.

I'm unaware of saying this.
If so, it was a mishap.
JFY is on-topic here, Lauda isn't.
This post is in "Reputation" and called "VIP Member hacked?".
Lauda is not a VIP member, so it's not about her reputation or her being hacked.
q.e.d.

Now stop being afraid of lauda and changing your mind.

As for changing my mind, I'm unaware of it.
As for being afraid of Lauda: hey, she lives relatively close to me (AFAIR), I have much more reason to be afraid than you are

Now let me repeat, because I mean it:

Please restrain yourself to adopting a signature that says "Lauda is a liar - see evidence here" and link to a thread about that issue.

So now you say you did not mean to say it before? and that you are not changing your mind as soon as lauda shows up?

I will continue to post facts and observable events where they are on topic and where they are relevant. If they can reasonably and logically be demonstrated off topic or irrelevant then I will delete them. Otherwise you are suggesting censorship.

Explain what your  meaning when you say "because  I mean it"  ?

It has been suggested here that motive for red trust is part of the debate. Therefore prior speaking out about Lauda and other DT by JFY becomes on topic and relevant. We must not try to be so narrow in our debates. All relevant fact must be permitted debate and discussion.

Anyway since you said it was on topic originally and now altered this I was confused as to why you were saying that. Now at least you cleared this matter up.

[qwk]

So now you say you did not mean to say it before? and that you are not changing your mind as soon as lauda shows up?

That's what I say, yes. I've also looked through my post history and was unable to find me telling you to post about Lauda here.
And why would I change my mind because Lauda shows up?
I have no beef with the Meta-trust-merit-infighting bunch (which includes you).
I'm just an innocent, amused observer of all the bickering and bitching going on.

I will continue to post facts and observable events where they are on topic and where they are relevant.

Good for you.
Now "Lauda is a liar" is on-topic in a thread about Lauda, so would you please continue your discussion there?
(AFAIR, there's a reasonable selection of threads you may freely chose from)

If they can reasonably and logically be demonstrated off topic or irrelevant then I will delete them.

I suggest you leave them where they are, but just stop adding to them.
Deleting posts can be worse than leaving off-topic posts standing.

Otherwise you are suggesting censorship.

You've asked for my favorite xkcd comic, you get my favorite xkcd comic:

https://xkcd.com/1357/
 

Explain what your  meaning when you say "because  I mean it"  ?

I meant that I mean it?
Sorry, I don't really understand the question.
I meant, literally, what I wrote.
I understand that "I mean it" can have an aggressive undertone in English, that was not my intention.

It has been suggested here that motive for red trust is part of the debate. Therefore prior speaking out about Lauda and other DT by JFY becomes on topic and relevant. We must not try to be so narrow in our debates. All relevant fact must be permitted debate and discussion.

I'd prefer to keep threads narrow, not to derail topics too much.
Granted, I'm no saint either when it comes to derailing from time to time, but for the sake of civilized conversation, let's stay as closely on-topic as possible.

[cryptohunter]

So now you say you did not mean to say it before? and that you are not changing your mind as soon as lauda shows up?

That's what I say, yes. I've also looked through my post history and was unable to find me telling you to post about Lauda here.
And why would I change my mind because Lauda shows up?
I have no beef with the Meta-trust-merit-infighting bunch (which includes you).
I'm just an innocent, amused observer of all the bickering and bitching going on.

I will continue to post facts and observable events where they are on topic and where they are relevant.

Good for you.
Now "Lauda is a liar" is on-topic in a thread about Lauda, so would you please continue your discussion there?
(AFAIR, there's a reasonable selection of threads you may freely chose from)

If they can reasonably and logically be demonstrated off topic or irrelevant then I will delete them.

I suggest you leave them where they are, but just stop adding to them.
Deleting posts can be worse than leaving off-topic posts standing.

Otherwise you are suggesting censorship.

You've asked for my favorite xkcd comic, you get my favorite xkcd comic:

https://xkcd.com/1357/
 

Explain what your  meaning when you say "because  I mean it"  ?

I meant that I mean it?
Sorry, I don't really understand the question.
I meant, literally, what I wrote.
I understand that "I mean it" can have an aggressive undertone in English, that was not my intention.

It has been suggested here that motive for red trust is part of the debate. Therefore prior speaking out about Lauda and other DT by JFY becomes on topic and relevant. We must not try to be so narrow in our debates. All relevant fact must be permitted debate and discussion.

I'd prefer to keep threads narrow, not to derail topics too much.
Granted, I'm no saint either when it comes to derailing from time to time, but for the sake of civilized conversation, let's stay as closely on-topic as possible.

See here is what I am referring to - perhaps just a typo

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5071290.msg49568366#msg49568366

Look after the post ....where you were HAL. I thought you mean it was best to not talk there about it but rather talk here about it on-topic here as you said.

I have no idea why you would like to change after lauda appears. Perhaps I thought after he told you off for talking to "trolls" then you felt like you needed to fit in more with his demands. but anyway if this is not the case and If you say you are not changing but it was initially a mistake then I will believe you. It kind of makes sense now that I think about it that it was a typo because I was encouraged at first believing you wanted to discuss it now, but then you said once again no that you would not hear or investigate the evidence.

I respect your desire to keep things narrow if you feel this is the best course. I feel that if it is related and factual then there is sensible argument for it to be presented. A debate should make use of all relevant and factual information. Persons can decide to strike this information from their consideration or not. Only after some time can we know which course was more optimal/efficient and it will not be the same in all instances. There is no default correct path.

Ha, yes I remember your picture from the first time you showed it to me..

Okay it seems that I am unable to convince you or present any case that will cause you to change your mind at this time. I feel you are making a mistake but of course you feel that you are doing what is best in this case.

[qwk]

See here is what I am referring to - perhaps just a typo

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5071290.msg49568366#msg49568366

Now I see it:

Also would you mind returning to the DT thread in meta

I find it off-topic there. It's definitely on-topic here.

With "it" I meant the JFY debate, not Lauda.
I.e. I wanted to say "JFY is on-topic here, not on the DT-thread".
Obviously a misunderstanding.

I have no idea why you would like to change after lauda appears. Perhaps I thought after he told you off for talking to "trolls" then you felt like you needed to fit in more with his demands.

When Lauda asks me to buy her an amazon gift card, I follow.
When she asks me to shut up, not so much

I respect your desire to keep things narrow if you feel this is the best course.

Thank you, and yes, I believe it's the best course of action.
Let's leave this topic to JFY's case.

[cryptohunter]

See here is what I am referring to - perhaps just a typo

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5071290.msg49568366#msg49568366

Now I see it:

Also would you mind returning to the DT thread in meta

I find it off-topic there. It's definitely on-topic here.

With "it" I meant the JFY debate, not Lauda.
I.e. I wanted to say "JFY is on-topic here, not on the DT-thread".
Obviously a misunderstanding.

Ah okay I understand what you mean now.

I have no idea why you would like to change after lauda appears. Perhaps I thought after he told you off for talking to "trolls" then you felt like you needed to fit in more with his demands.

When Lauda asks me to buy her an amazon gift card, I follow.
When she asks me to shut up, not so much

I'm guessing you are just kidding me about amazon. However, yes that is encouraging that you will not be bossed around.

I respect your desire to keep things narrow if you feel this is the best course.

Thank you, and yes, I believe it's the best course of action.
Let's leave this topic to JFY's case.

Okay, cool. I hope for a good resolution in the end.
For me personally I always try to imagine being in the other persons position and then take action accordingly after then considering all available information.

[bones261]

I'm not sure if this was a "legit" sale back in December 2017, but someone offered 2 VIP accounts with original e-mail. 1 was "sold", but the link to the transaction is expired. So I can see the concern with the JFY account. Personally, I'm undecided in this case. However, INTP personality types are usually undecided.  

Link to sale thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2563257.0

[The Sceptical Chymist]

However, INTP personality types are usually undecided. 

Lol, I'm an INFP so we're pretty close.  I don't know if that makes me as indecisive or not, but in this case I kind of was in the beginning.

Interesting that those VIP accounts for sale included the original e-mail addresses, which was one of the only pieces of proof that JFY could provide.

[Quickseller]

I'm not sure if this was a "legit" sale back in December 2017, but someone offered 2 VIP accounts with original e-mail. 1 was "sold", but the link to the transaction is expired. So I can see the concern with the JFY account. Personally, I'm undecided in this case. However, INTP personality types are usually undecided.  

Link to sale thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2563257.0

If that thread was real, someone paid $1,000 for a VIP based on the $20k price at the time. I can’t imagine earning that much with an account, even over a year.

Edit: That thread was created Dec 11 2017, and last edited a week later saying one was sold. However the account “woke up” in August, 6 months earlier. Unless the password was reset within a week of Dec 11, 2017 this thread was not selling btc_bear.

[mikeywith]

 beside all the other opinions it only makes sense that someone who ever donated 50BTC and as any early adopter, should not give a fudge about any DT bullshit on this forum, but this is the opposite of what JFY is doing, before even looking at this topic, i saw him discuss the new DT changes with a DT member,
and i thought to myself " what the fuck is he wasting his time on ? why ain't he cruising in his lambo or 1m$ yacht ?"

but anyhow, the current owner regardless of  (his true identity) is constructive and nice to say the least.

[Quickseller]

beside all the other opinions it only makes sense that someone who ever donated 50BTC and as any early adopter, should not give a fudge about any DT bullshit on this forum, but this is the opposite of what JFY is doing, before even looking at this topic, i saw him discuss the new DT changes with a DT member,
and i thought to myself " what the fuck is he wasting his time on ? why ain't he cruising in his lambo or 1m$ yacht ?"

but anyhow, the current owner regardless of  (his true identity) is constructive and nice to say the least.

The original owner likely purchased bitcoin at $2/coin, and potentially a lot. However you assume he didn’t sell at $200.

If he bought at $20 and sold at $200, he would have done 5x as good as someone who bought at $1k and sold at $20k later that year.

[bones261]

I'm not sure if this was a "legit" sale back in December 2017, but someone offered 2 VIP accounts with original e-mail. 1 was "sold", but the link to the transaction is expired. So I can see the concern with the JFY account. Personally, I'm undecided in this case. However, INTP personality types are usually undecided.  

Link to sale thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2563257.0

If that thread was real, someone paid $1,000 for a VIP based on the $20k price at the time. I can’t imagine earning that much with an account, even over a year.

Edit: That thread was created Dec 11 2017, and last edited a week later saying one was sold. However the account “woke up” in August, 6 months earlier. Unless the password was reset within a week of Dec 11, 2017 this thread was not selling btc_bear.

Yes, I just looked through some achived seclogs. No PW reset for Bad_bear around the time after "purchase." I can't imagine someone purchasing an account for $1000, and not resetting the PW right away. Account sellers can't be trusted, after all. So, this isn't any smoking gun. However, it is an example that it is theoretically possible to have a VIP account to be transferred with e-mail. I've even seen offers to sell accounts with the private key for a staked address. Wish this practice of buying and selling accounts could be stopped. But with the internet, no way to stop it.

[owlcatz]

https://twitter.com/btc_bear  

Is this the same guy?  

Edit... Wasn't he on irc/otr? Why can't he post a message using his pgp key like everyone else?

[mikeywith]

If he bought at $20 and sold at $200, he would have done 5x as good as someone who bought at $1k and sold at $20k later that year.

hmm possible, but unlikely , he said he lost his wallets, never mentioned selling !  also whatever i said above represents what i would personally be doing/feeling , if i bought tons of btc for 20$ , donated 50 of them to the forum which alone at some point were worth a million dollars and lost the rest in my hdd !

there would be a million things i would do , coming back to the forum to discuss who is on DT and why is differently non of them.

* just expressing my thoughts based on logic and emotions as everybody else, since non of us here has any solid proof to support any side of the argument yet 

[owlcatz]

Here is the auction where he paid for VIP:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53387.msg640282#msg640282