The
first thread on this subject is kind of a dumpster fire so I thought I'd open a new one to present more compelling evidence. While I haven't found any blockchain evidence linking
Quickseller to
PrimeNumber7 (didn't look into it much TBH), they do share a number of linguistic similarities, most notably of which are quirks in their writing style, spelling habits, and usage of relatively uncommon phrases.
Here are a few examples of unique misspellings shared by both accounts:
- "passphraise"
Major HW wallet implementations allow for users to use a passphraise as the last word in their seed, and can potentially have multiple passphraises that create multiple seeds.
When you setup your trezors you will want to use an encryption passphraise in addition to the seed that is created (you may want to actually create two encryption passphraises on top of the same seed -- more on this later).
- "immidiately"
The losses exceed the trading volume of Clam during the flash crash, so it is probably safe to assume not all positions were sold immidiately. If no Clams were sold, and their value was written down to zero, as few as 21% of Clams outsanding could have been in open positions. I would believe that Poloniex sold the open Clams positions they were unable to sell in the open market, probably at a fairly large discount.
Further, the time frame that Hhampuz spent the money is not constant with what one would expect. Assuming the BestMixer operators have not been arrested, recovering ~$4,300 in advertising expenses is probably low on their list of priorities immidiately after the government shut down their business.
- "boarder"
The chances of your electronic device being searched at the boarder is low.
I don't see anything about New Zealand in the link you posted, and the link is an article about the US boarder protection agents searching phones/laptops when they enter the US.
- "Rodger Ver"
Rodger Ver tweeted that since sanctions are an act of War, the US should immediately drop all sanctions against NK, as he sees war as universally evil.
Perhaps Rodger Ver will respond with his own arguments and any one can come to their own conclusions.
- "monitory"
This sounds like a sure fire way to corrupt the merit sources and change merit from being a reward for making posts the forum needs more of to something with monitory value.
Until this happens, it is most likely that deposits and withdrawals will not be processed due to the high risk of monitory loss.
Here's some uncommon words/phrases being used by both accounts, many of which are used by QS on more than one occasion:
- "underlying root cause"
The underlying root cause problem with college is the government is willing to subsidize the cost of college for all students, regardless of their ability to repay, or the value of the program they are taking, in nearly unlimited amounts.
This in large part can be attributed to the
Default Trust changes implemented this past January, but the
underlying root cause of the problem is a very small number of people leaving a very large number of controversial ratings.
- "sow discord"
The intent of the Russian interference was not even to benefit Trump, it was to sow discord within the US.
Ironically, the reported goals of the 2016 Russian meddling was to sow discord in US politics, which those on the Left are gladly furthering, probably to the point that their behavior is resulting in much greater discord than Russia could have even hoped for.
- "maximum benefit of the doubt"
I prefer to give maximum benefit of the doubt, but I cannot see any circumstances in which it would be a good idea to invest in this.
The above also gives the maximum benefit of the doubt to merit sources, that I don't think is necessarily appropriate to give all of them.
- Odd use of the word "transparently"
They are all transparently the same person today.
Suchmoon is transparently one of the people who is reporting plagiarized posts
It's true that just one of these examples on its own isn't really evidence or proof of anything, as it's quite possible other users engage in the same habits. However, the chances of 2 random users sharing all of these quirks and traits is exceedingly slim and can only mean that PN7 and QS are the same people. There are likely to be several more similarities that weren't pointed out above.
In addition to these examples, other similarities between QS and PN7 include:
- their political stance (both hard right Republicans)
- they tend to frequent the same sections (Meta, Reputation, Politics & Society)
- they both care
a lot about signature campaigns
- they both are highly knowledgeable about the inner-workings of the forum, and
- they both mention or interact with theymos relatively often.
As a matter of fact, PN7's very first post was about theymos:
theymos accepting Grin is symbolic more than anything.
Grin doesn't appear to be accepted for ad auction payments, which leaves payments for Copper memberships and proxy bans (I am unsure if the later accepts payment via Grin).
There are less than 680 copper members wearing their copper membership title. The payments for these memberships could fit into one Bitcoin block, and the copper membership has been available for years.
What kind of a newbie mentions theymos and copper membership statistics in their first post??
He also really knows how to work merits out of people, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing as it means he is contributing at least
something to some people under that moniker. He seems quite pleased with himself, as
he wanted to nominate himself as "Newbie of the Year" recently, and is really
looking forward to becoming a Hero Member.
Short of attempting to escrow for himself again, I think this is enough evidence to
reasonably ascertain that they are indeed the same person. If you're not a native English speaker (and an American one at that), then it may be more difficult to judge just how uncommon certain words, phrases and misspellings are, and equally how unlikely it is that they would all be shared by 2 random people.
Disclaimers: no need to bring up the obvious that this is not absolute, stone-cold proof of anything, as I know that already. You're of course allowed to come to your own conclusion, but please spare the "unjustly tried and convicted" mantra I can already feel coming. This is not a court of law and we are not judges; just observers on a forum.
Also, this is not all my own work, as some of this evidence was provided to me by various sources who wish to remain unaccredited for the time being.
