SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper

[DaveF]

From twitter:

Defamation and libel cases won by Craig Wright.
Wright v. @rogerkver       ❌ Nope Nope
Wright v. @hodlonaut       ❌ Nope Nope Nope Nope
Wright v. @adam3us      ❌ Nope
Wright v. @VitalikButerin   ❌ Nope
Wright v. @PeterMcCormack ⏳ Pending

If they are all entitled to court costs makes you wonder if they can combine their owed money into one pile and then hire collections lawyers to go after assets.
No idea on how it works internationally. But would probably be good entertainment to watch.

-Dave

[1715076060]

1715076060

[1715076060]

1715076060

[nutildah]

This seems like a business opportunity. What do I need to do to get sued by faketoshi? I take it calling him a lying piece of shit is not enough?

You need to:

- be a social media influencer
- call him a fraud repeatedly
- not live in the U.S. or other country with lax libel laws

Going by the precedents set by the other cases, I'd just have to assume McCormack is in the clear at this point, after several other courts have roundly decided that Wright enjoys no notable reputation that could be tarnished.

[gentlemand]

Going by the precedents set by the other cases, I'd just have to assume McCormack is in the clear at this point, after several other courts have roundly decided that Wright enjoys no notable reputation that could be tarnished.

I think the next phase will be Calvin employing some actors to make a pretend court case of 'Satoshi vs World' and livestreaming the judge gravely announcing 'It is clear that you are Satoshi, you always have been and you always will be. I thank you from the bottom of our hearts and apologise profusely for your mistreatment on behalf of this planet. I hereby award you... everything. Case dismissulated'.

Other actors will mob Craig as he leaves.

That should draw in enough saps and keep them happy. Clavin will screen it every Christmas.

[notblox1]

Craig and Calvin scammers are pushing coingeek platfrom and coingeekconference.com still promoting CSW as Satoshi Nakamoto.
Just look at this freak clown 

[mindrust]

Craig and Calvin scammers are pushing coingeek platfrom and coingeekconference.com still promoting CSW as Satoshi Nakamoto.
Just look at this freak clown 

I might be wrong but if I remember this right, coingeek has always been pro BSV and even more likely that either Craig or Calvin owns the platform.

[gentlemand]

I might be wrong but if I remember this right, coingeek has always been pro BSV and even more likely that either Craig or Calvin owns the platform.

Calvin owns it. I doubt Craig even owns the red socks he's actually famous for. He probably arrived at Calvin's office with an old carrier bag wearing a sheet he found in the river. Everything after that is on loan.

[nullius]

Note that BSV has been deployed for almost 2 years.

That sounds to me like an admission that BSV was not deployed on 3 January 2009.  Unless my maths be off a bit.  Perhaps I should ask Dr. Faketoshi for arithmetical assistance; I hear that he is some sort of a genius.

What do I need to do to get sued by faketoshi?

Provoke his attorneys in some personally humiliating way that underscores their own helplessness.  It is more likely to incite a disproportionate response.  Think on the same psychological principle as ridiculing the lawyers’ penis sizes, but classier.

Speaking from experience that I will not dox here—a stereotypical lawyer who feels humiliated by you, especially from a challenge seen by others, will take up the cause with all the obsessiveness of Captain Ahab, and all the refined gracefulness of a toddler throwing a tantrum.

If I had more free time, I might try something like the below on the Faketoshi legal team.  Combined with a statement on Faketoshi’s crimes, and my judgment of his character.  Just for the amusement of watching them send subpoenas to Tor exit nodes.

LOL.  Bragging about a legal warchest on a cypherpunk forum founded by a Tor user who invented a new form of permissionless money.

Few affronts are as frustrating to a man as demonstrating to him the limits of his own power.

I suspect that in large part, this is why Faketoshi and his clique tend to froth at the mouth against anonymity:  Their litigious lawyers are powerless to terrorize people who cannot be located.

Mr Bear, I can’t speak for anybody else, but I have some news for my own part:  Your legal “war chest” is a contemptible joke, insofar as I am concerned.  I am above your corrupt laws, and untouchable to your corrupt courts.

[Mine] is the anarchy of the good who, being good, hold fast to honour out of pride:  For the most sincere morality is the self-glorification of the proud, whose judgments of others honour the best of what they see in themselves.  It is they who would embrace death before the self-negation of dishonour—not as a sacrifice, but as a supreme act of pure selfishness...

Free yourself first from the moral authority of the mob.  You owe nothing to mass opinion; therefore, the laws which rise on mass opinion have no proper authority over you.  You do not consent to be governed by the votes of millions of anthropoid livestock who want to be bound in chains—who eagerly embrace those chains just as long as they remain warm, fed, and adequately entertained.  You are a law unto yourself.

Wherefore “anarchy” as to the masses and their so-called “governments”, which are in truth no more than the largest, most well-armed organized criminal gangs.  Don’t reject authority:  Be your own authority.

Rankles a bit, does it not.  The rattling of blunt sabres doth not impress.

Protip:  It is inadvisable to try this with anyone who has access to classified national intelligence agency resources, etc., etc.

[gmaxwell]

This seems like a business opportunity. What do I need to do to get sued by faketoshi? I take it calling him a lying piece of shit is not enough?

Assuming that he couldn't possibly refuse to pay up, what with him being a multi-billionaire and all...

You likely need to be in a jurisdiction with terrible laws like the UK where it's even slightly possible that he could win through by assembling a critical mass of fraud. You probably also have to be a high enough profile person so that he can spin the prolonged lawsuit against you as some kind of proof that he's not the scammer he so obviously appears to be.

Provoke his attorneys in some personally humiliating way that underscores their own helplessness.  It is more likely to incite a disproportionate response.  Think on the same psychological principle as ridiculing the lawyers’ penis sizes, but classier.

His UK attorneys appear to be total morons.

They eventually sent me some threatening note about my failure to respond to their demand to identify where I got some link ... to craig wright's public blog.  Two seconds googling showed that it was posted a day prior on reddit.  ... and this demand I supposedly failed to respond to?  They claimed to send it to a public mailing list, which I haven't been on for years ... and who's public list and moderation archives seems to show that the message was never received there.

They subsequently send some long list of demands that I admit to being various people (whom I am not), too funny. (And no, if you didn't get a message about me about it, you weren't one of them: Try harder. )

As far as I can tell they're either drooling idiots of the highest degree or they are knowingly and willfully complicit in the Wright/Ayre criminal enterprise.

Going by the precedents set by the other cases, I'd just have to assume McCormack is in the clear at this point, after several other courts have roundly decided that Wright enjoys no notable reputation that could be tarnished.

Don't be so sure here, given how extremely awful UK libel law is, it is completely plausible that wright could win.  His lawsuits against other people were either tossed for jurisdiction issues or dropped because he was going to focus on McCormack. ... I'm guessing he chose to focus on McCormack because he gauged him to be the most financially vulnerable target.  My understanding is that UK will put the burden of the case substantially on McCormack, then wright will probably saturate him with endless thickets of forgeries, making the defence extremely expensive.

Plus, by failing to pay his court ordered judgement in other cases Wright is demonstrating that the endlessless attorneys fees he's racking up for the defence may still be unrecoverable even if wright loses and the other side is awarded fees.

I'd recommend if anyone did want to protect the public by calling out Wright's fraud more at the risk of a lawsuit, they should make sure they're in a pretty good jurisdiction for it.  California doesn't look bad-- residents in California are protected by state and federal law against UK libel suits specifically, and the criteria for libel under California case law (and the over-poweredness of anti-slapp) are pretty lax on the accused.

If you are in a place where he'll actually sue (like the UK) you're probably signing up for hundreds of thousands of dollars in expense.  There are probably much better ways to spend $100k to take out this conman.  For example,  hiring a lobby firm to put pressure on prosecutors (and the ATO) to take action against him might be an option.

[nutildah]

Going by the precedents set by the other cases, I'd just have to assume McCormack is in the clear at this point, after several other courts have roundly decided that Wright enjoys no notable reputation that could be tarnished.

Don't be so sure here, given how extremely awful UK libel law is, it is completely plausible that wright could win.  His lawsuits against other people were either tossed for jurisdiction issues or dropped because he was going to focus on McCormack. ... I'm guessing he chose to focus on McCormack because he gauged him to be the most financially vulnerable target.  My understanding is that UK will put the burden of the case substantially on McCormack, then wright will probably saturate him with endless thickets of forgeries, making the defence extremely expensive.

I'm not familiar with the finer nuances of the McCormack case but I do wonder what the main difference is between his and Adam Back's case is. They both reside in the same jurisdiction and they both referred to Wright as a fraud. Do you have any insider information you can share about how Back got his suit dismissed so quickly?

I've listened to a few of Peter's podcasts and it sounds like the lawsuit is a royal pain in the ass, but he's not giving up or giving in any time soon and vows to fight it until the bitter end, which could be years or even a decade. He's undertaking what is one of the most honorable struggles happening in the bitcoin media sphere. Let's hope his lawyers are better than Craig's.

[gmaxwell]

I'm not familiar with the finer nuances of the McCormack case but I do wonder what the main difference is between his and Adam Back's case is. They both reside in the same jurisdiction and they both referred to Wright as a fraud. Do you have any insider information you can share about how Back got his suit dismissed so quickly?

AFAIK the primary difference is that when Wright acted against Adam, Adam didn't make it public and give wright free publicity (I'm not faulting McCormack here-- he needed public support), and Adam appeared to be in a position to outspend Wright.  It's also the case that what Adam said made for a simpler and easily defended case, e.g. more squarely centred on the unambiguous fact that all of wright's "evidence" was fraudulent.  Otherwise, I think it was just a question of having multiple ongoing cases being an extremely poor legal strategy.  It may also be that wright realized that having to provide discovery to adam might end up exposing other actions by wright that he didn't want exposed.

[Iamtutut]

If not mistaken, Peter has the financial support of several entities, including exchanges to pay for the litigation costs. And he's making (happy for him) very good money with his activities.

[BitcoinFX]

"For the lolz ..."

..........Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi, because I don't know him ... I did communicate (online) with the real Satoshi you see ...
Comprende ? 

Yeah is your imaginary friend we know..... we know  ....


Dude..... You are American! I understand now why you are a frustrated life ! Dude you sat on 300 million dollars (where are the taxes...) lost?! I understand now why you're hiding in Lapu-Lapu on a boat.



    If you still had them (300M) you wouldn't be here so that explains why so you are a real.... LOSER Bwahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's where greed gets you!! 

Dude isn't talking to me anymore...... Go out and buy new hair the International shame over 3 generations 

  WTF he lost 300million?!!  Seriously!?! WoOw Fucking Guiness World Record Book of shame!!! I now understand "the deep obsession". It must be the same for her boyfriends


  We're going to organise a solidarity BSV fund to pay for his new hair to this hobo   just because BSV is REAL BitCoin mwhuahahah is a fact

Nope. You see you BSV clowns just proved again that you don't know the first thing in regards to the real inception of the original Bitcoin (BTC).

The first Bitcoin exchange service was here: http://newlibertystandard.wikifoundry.com/ (originally at wetpaint)

2009 Exchange Rate
- http://newlibertystandard.wikifoundry.com/page/2009+Exchange+Rate

I ran an early Bitcoin exchange service aside the NLS exchange, before the Bitcoin Market website.

The 'Zero Balance' Bitcoin (BTC) address above is provably (historically) associated with my bitcointalk forum account and my former exchange service.

Topic: Verifying my (old) zero balance wallet address for blockchain research etc.,
- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4630066.0

So you see not "300M" at all.

Unlike Craig Wright, I have signed cryptographically verifiable messages as proof. I have also paid relevant taxes on all or any of my past Bitcoin holdings.

Craig Wright, to-date has not signed a cryptographically assured proof of actually being Satoshi and is instead claiming that a bad fork of Bitcoin (i.e. BSV) is the original Bitcoin. Craig Wright has also submitted questionable evidence to a court of law, amongst a boat load of other Tomfoolery ...

The Faketoshi Fifteen (Times Two)
Craig Wright’s most epic lies, frauds and forgeries 2013 — 2020
- https://medium.com/coinmonks/the-faketoshi-fifteen-times-two-76e8060905b4

You see BSV is NOT Bitcoin and Craig Wright is NOT satoshi.

...

Further, you have not (and will not) "organise a solidarity BSV fund" on my behalf, because I won't accept fake Bitcoin.

...

Terry Jacks - Seasons In The Sun
- https://youtu.be/YG9otasNmxI

[nutildah]

I honestly don't understand why you keep posting in that thread... Every time you post there it bumps it to the top of the Altcoin ANN section where it is seen by random passerbys looking for altcoins to invest in. You're just giving them free exposure.

Most of the newbie accounts posting there are owned by the same person who apparently gets paid to post translated Coingeek articles as pretend original content.

He's outright plagiarized several stories by Coingeek and I report them when I see them but the mods rarely ban the account for plagiarism; its getting a bit frustrating actually.

Then the topic starter, BitcoinSV, doesn't actually have anything to do with BSV _whatsoever_. You might get a temporary satisfaction from having "owned" an idiotic troll who doesn't actually give a shit about BSV one way or the other, but in the long run it accomplishes nothing. Eventually your posts will be deleted by BitcoinSV anyway -- that's what he does. Its up to 472 deleted posts!

It's an exercise in futility. Just let them talk among their newbie account selves, then the thread will fall off the first page and into obscurity where it belongs.

Yesterday BSV reached an all-year low against BTC -- I'd say the battle has been won, for now. Craig's court case has been delayed until April of next year. I likely won't have much to contribute before then.

[BitcoinFX]

I honestly don't understand why you keep posting in that thread... Every time you post there it bumps it to the top of the Altcoin ANN section where it is seen by random passerbys looking for altcoins to invest in. You're just giving them free exposure.

Most of the newbie accounts posting there are owned by the same person who apparently gets paid to post translated Coingeek articles as pretend original content.

He's outright plagiarized several stories by Coingeek and I report them when I see them but the mods rarely ban the account for plagiarism; its getting a bit frustrating actually.

Then the topic starter, BitcoinSV, doesn't actually have anything to do with BSV _whatsoever_. You might get a temporary satisfaction from having "owned" an idiotic troll who doesn't actually give a shit about BSV one way or the other, but in the long run it accomplishes nothing. Eventually your posts will be deleted by BitcoinSV anyway -- that's what he does. Its up to 472 deleted posts!

It's an exercise in futility. Just let them talk among their newbie account selves, then the thread will fall off the first page and into obscurity where it belongs.

Yesterday BSV reached an all-year low against BTC -- I'd say the battle has been won, for now. Craig's court case has been delayed until April of next year. I likely won't have much to contribute before then.

I honestly don't understand why the BSV thread(s) are allowed to persist!

Is it not perfectly clear to the current owners and moderators of this forum that a "nullity based on a sham" has been perpetrated ?!?

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

Whilst this forum apparently tries to maintain freedom of speech, I feel it is also important to allow individuals to make informed choices ...

i.e. Caveat emptor "Let the buyer beware" or know your Bitcoin etc.,

Am I to be blamed for posting rebuttals to what have often been personal verbal 'attacks' against me?

Herewith, an example of a deleted message (by PM notification) ...

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

BSV is for losers.

What are you still talking about?! What the fuck are you doing on the internet! Get your fingers out of your ass, get off your boat and get a real job instead of exposing your bullshit here
[Redacted]  

I'm the uncle of the frustrated lapu-lapu Fx moron let me write that I'm sorry for his childish behavior but his nauseating obsession for you is stronger than the way he fucks his girlfriend. That's the way it is.
I would like to write to you that middle age is the most beautiful of all. One is old enough to recognize one's mistakes and still young enough to make others. Happy Birthday to Craig Wright/Satoshi Nakamoto. God bless you.

 

Bothered.

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5.msg188#msg188

Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi, because I don't know him ... I did communicate (online) with the real Satoshi you see ...

Comprende ?  

...

Behind the scenes I'm a very technical and somewhat private individual, whom, due to an unfortunate past (and perhaps unlucky history relative to Bitcoin), I now have a love and hate relationship with it.

Good people I've known in this space have sadly passed away over the years.

I've known honest folks who have had (legally) hard earned funds confiscated or effectively 'stolen' by governments and/or 'the powers that be'.

At times, I've perhaps been imagined as a high-worth individual, but without seeing a dime !?

I've often accurately predicted the future and being powerless to participate in it ...

It's complicated.

TBH trying to continue doing things above board isn't easy whilst maintaining work on privacy systems and trying to forge a cypher-punk path!

...

I try to be an ethical "white hat" Bitcoiner and 'computer person'. Truth is I could've made a lot more Bitcoin by being an unethical "black hat" and probably lived to tell the tale without fear of looking over my shoulder. Many did and continue to do so.

To think the mods on this forum once banned me as a 'spammer' (WT actual F) and that twitter has suspended my various accounts, without rhyme or reason or response - for truth reporting of BSV BS !?

Ulterior motives and setting narratives perhaps !? Self-preservation keeps the crowd alive !? Who knows !?

Hypothetically, I could cause BSV complete and absolute chaos, permitted the right resources of course ...

Quite literally by spinning up around 40-ish nodes (through Tor, proxies and VPN's), eclipsing select BSV pools, nodes and 'resources' whilst simultaneously flooding the mempool and 'big blocks' with vast amounts of pointless data ... all in an afternoons work !? [citation needed]

Eclipse Attacks on Bitcoin’s Peer-to-Peer Network (USENIX 2015)
- https://youtu.be/J-lF0zxGpu0

However, that would most certainly not be ethical or legal. So, no can do.

BSV has already likely destroyed itself through the due legal process. We shall all wait and see.

The law is an ass. Thus, I do not expect justice from an unjust and biased system. It has already been to long for justice to really prevail, in any regard.

Money talks! I'm 99.99999999% (and perhaps a few more 9's) sure that I know who the real Satoshi Nakamoto is ...

He quite literally moved onto other things. Arguably, he got 'rich' off of the back of others and in many regards the misfortunes of others. He of course also put the work in and in fact continues to put the work in, for the just rewards!

The media are always seemingly more interested in a mythopoeia style narrative and reporting ill-gotten gains than they are in any sort of 'truth'.

I'm not surprised Satoshi left us. I seem to remember I originally left before Satoshi!

Perhaps you will understand me better now @nutildah ?

Onward! The "struggle".

[BitcoinFX]

All my marbles are 100% intact thank you.

...snip...

Wait. there's more ...

...snip...

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi and BSV is NOT Bitcoin.

....

The genuine Satoshi Nakamoto has a PGP Key, here:

For future reference, here's my public key.  It's the same one that's been there since the bitcoin.org site first went up in 2008.  Grab it now in case you need it later.

http://www.bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=458.msg5772#msg5772

However, it is not currently on bitcoin.org in its rightful place! Why not? 

The correct PGP Key is here: https://bitcointalk.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

The very same PGP Key is also located on the Web Archive page for bitcoin.org :

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090303195936/http://bitcoin.org/

Satoshi Nakamoto
satoshin@gmx.com
PGP key

- https://web.archive.org/web/20090303195936/http://bitcoin.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

Key ID: 5EC948A1

Created: 2008-10-30

Fingerprint: DE4E FCA3 E1AB 9E41 CE96 CECB 18C0 9E86 5EC9 48A1

Code:

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
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=3FTe
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

...



...



...



...

Perhaps anyone claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto should Sign something with this PGP Key?

Just a thought! You know, NOT your Keys; NOT your coins ... and all that.

Seriously though, "powers that be", put the goddamn PGP Key back on bitcoin.org!

Could you ask Craig Wright to go and Sign this Key please ?

He has not done it yet.

I doubt he can do it.

This means he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! - SWIM

...

Craig Wright is NOT satoshi and BSV is NOT Bitcoin.

...

[nutildah]

Well, it's been a few months now and a few Craig-related things have happened.

This came across my eye today and thought it was worth posting here. It's Square's pushback to a letter sent by Craig's lawyers demanding they remove a hosted copy of the white paper. Their response is that the basis of the claim is not factually represented and have a well-thought list of questions that Satoshi could answer, if Craig were indeed Satoshi:




I doubt they'll respond, of course, but they're pretty legit questions nontheless.


Something particularly weird I noticed is that BSV transactions have dwindled tremendously and are much less volatile than before. What's extra weird is that around the same time BSV transactions were ramping down, BCH transactions were ramping up:



BSV had these huge swings in the number of ongoing transactions whereas BCH is relatively stable. But sometime around the end of the year transactions dropped off significantly and are now almost neck-and-neck with BCH.

The orange line is what organic transaction volumes look like:



The other two lines, c'mon, what are you telling me? There was a huge customer exodus from BSV into BCH? Highly unlikely. My theory is that whatever service BSV was employing to boost their transaction load is now working on BCH, for whatever reason. The shift happened during January and now all 3 coins have around the same daily tx volumes, oddly enough.

Finally, I took a look at the hash rates and both BSV and BCH declined starting late Oct., right when BTC was picking up in price.



So BCH's hash rate is going down but its "usage" is up -- way up -- like 10x up this year. Doesn't make sense.

[fuckoffSappers]

This came across my eye today and thought it was worth posting here. It's Square's pushback to a letter sent by Craig's lawyers demanding they remove a hosted copy of the white paper. Their response is that the basis of the claim is not factually represented and have a well-thought list of questions that Satoshi could answer, if Craig were indeed Satoshi:

https://i.imgur.com/zue4XBE.png
https://i.imgur.com/eciO4EP.png

I doubt they'll respond, of course, but they're pretty legit questions nontheless.


I’ll answer.

Oh my gorsh, what have I done? To the Internet!  Yikes. I’m sorry. I actually forgot all about Bitcoin until last week.  Is what the real Satoshi would say.  He would also also blurt out in court under oath:

1. Like I always said, I didn’t know what I was searching for but I knew it was very important.  I came up with “the solution” to the myriad problems we face in a digital world, after 10 odd years of thinking about it and talking my colleagues ears off in crazy rants while filling up white boards with indecipherable nonsense during many all-night benders. Like God and nature intended. Defining a simple self-correcting ruleset allowing for complex emergent behavior. Biomimicry. A fabric for virtual reality. A balance to the force. Truth. Justice. Freedom. Grateful death.
2. Summer 2007, pretty sure.
3. My office.
4. Had some help with that.
5. After my initial ASCII whitepapers with the big logo, I may have produced an upgraded bitmap version with my girlfriend.  Since I’d only taken the first few weeks of a free online cryptography course I knew I didn’t know a lot, so I sought the help of smarter math-crypto-programmers who I knew would know what to do and handed them the keys for free. (A frequent hobby.  vaping *cough* Felix’s energy patent *cough* humdinger *achoo*)
6. I choose other.
7. Self employed.
8. Yes.
9. I released it to the public domain to maintain the game, Mang.

BTW, that faggot Craig “El Psychonaught” Wright didn’t have anything to do with bitcoin until Satoshi propositioned him via Skype in 2011-2012 to post ads looking for $1 billion VC for all Nakamoto IP.  He reposted the full text of Satoshi’s example ad, the amounts of two possibly real bitcoin wallets and corresponding real signatures.  I notice they claim EmptyGOX lost them to badguys, about the exact same day they were required in court.  Hmm.  I wonder if Craig’s Skype records match Satoshi’s.  If Craig could show that was true, would he be innocent of fraud charges, acting as Satoshi’s authorized representative?  Do it Craig! Fess up. It’s your only chance.

-GT

p.s. Cut Craig some slack. It’s not all his fault.

[LevyMi]

I am currently making a research paper. Through linguistic analysis, I am trying to see who is likely to be the autor of all the Satoshi posts on this forum. And funnily enough, CSW just happens to be the farthest from Satoshi out of all of my control samples :D

[Iamtutut]

Well, it's no surprise 

[Hueristic]

I am currently making a research paper. Through linguistic analysis, I am trying to see who is likely to be the autor of all the Satoshi posts on this forum. And funnily enough, CSW just happens to be the farthest from Satoshi out of all of my control samples

Absolutely zero surprise here, do you have a link to the paper?