Who is in charge of removing this post?

[aliashraf]

Somebody is getting more aggressive and abuses his power frequently:

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.

Two-way-pegged so-called "side-chains" is all that Dirvechain is about and it is what LN is doing right now with the exception that the latter doesn't require any form of soft forks, unlike Drivechain. Ironically, they have been working on this layer-2 solution to scalability in Block Stream for years along with LN and when it won the race and deployed, all of a sudden they abandoned the original idea. 

What Maxwell says in his long mail is not directly a criticism of the idea but a general understanding of the way an open-source project should be handled, refuting "roadmap" oriented approaches to this issue, like what has ruined Ethereum already. I didn't find any specific "criticism" from his side but for Poelstra it is not the case he is concerned about the security of putting everything in hands of miners "with the current centralized situation in mining bitcoin" which I think Greg Maxwell shares with him because of the latest debate I had with him.

Here is the thing, LN is complicated and liquidity hungry because it relies just on Hashed Time-Locked Contracts, HTLC and non-LN sidechain ideas are abandoned because of the stupid situation with pools and ASICs! And guess what? We are doomed as long as we are trapped with such a discourse: two-way pegged sidechains as a scaling solution for bitcoin.

BTW, I'm working on a one-way sidechain solution that absorbs bitcoin gradually by its own virtue (if ever), stay tuned 

Removing this post is an obvious sign of abusing moderation power because there is nothing offensive or any misinformation presented in there. Somebody is doing what he can to guarantee nothing meaningful is ever said in the technical subforum just a bunch of boring applauses about how 'great' and 'genius' he is! Very disappointing for a forum established by an anonymous believer in decentralization and freedom of speech. 

[nutildah]

I wouldn't surprised if it was deleted for being off-topic, but without any sort of context its hard to know for sure. Ergo, its removal is in no way "obviously" moderation abuse. Wonder why you didn't include the context.

[aliashraf]

I wouldn't surprised if it was deleted for being off-topic, but without any sort of context its hard to know for sure. Ergo, its removal is in no way "obviously" moderation abuse. Wonder why you didn't include the context.

Here you are, This is the context:

For the newbies, who might not know. Drivechain is a software side-chain project by Paul Sztorc, which may help Bitcoin in scaling, privacy, and other "short-comings" that altcoins are trying to "fix". With Drivechain, we wouldn't need altcoins. Everything will be a side-chain of Bitcoin.

Drivechain allows BTC to travel back-and-forth to other software applications (called “sidechains”). Thus, BTC-owners can opt-in to new features or tradeoffs. Those who don’t opt-in, never need to care what any sidechain is doing.

As with the Lightning Network, DC-users move their coins into a “layer-2” – a zone where BTC can change hands an unlimited number of times. Eventually, just the net effect of these transfers is recorded back on layer-1.

Bitcoin Core can’t observe any layer-2 (by design), so we need a way to discourage fraudulent “netting”. LN counters theft via “justice transactions”; DC via forsaken mining revenues. LN-netting is private and instant; DC-netting is public and VERY slow (once per ~3 months).

Key benefits – only obtainable via Drivechain:

Three existential threats to BTC are neutralized – altcoin-competition, hard fork campaigns, and extension block campaigns.
BTC development becomes anti-fragile with respect to CoreDev mistakes.
BTC maintains hashrate security in the long run.
BTC can scale to credit-card level txn-processing – without changing the CONOP of Bitcoin Core. These cheap txns have optimal fungibility and supply vital pretext to the BTC ecosystem.
BTC gains new, experimental abilities, especially P2P event derivatives.

But this is not what the topic is about. It's about criticisms from the past from respected Bitcoin experts, and a revisitation of if they still believe they hold true.

gmaxwell, you said these in the past. With the dawn of Lightning and Liquid side-chains, and observing their own flaws, and short-comings, have you changed your mind from past criticisims on Drivechain?

Your July, 2017 criticism, https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-July/014726.html

December, 2018 criticism with Andrew Poelstra, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NA1xSe2nLoY&feature=youtu.be&t=5635

Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?

[Jet Cash]

I guess the good news for you is that your post got increased publicity. People who otherwise wouldn't have seen it have read it, and reflected on your points. This is one of the results from sanctions and censorship - it creates an increased awareness of the issues that you are trying to suppress.

[nutildah]

I wouldn't surprised if it was deleted for being off-topic, but without any sort of context its hard to know for sure. Ergo, its removal is in no way "obviously" moderation abuse. Wonder why you didn't include the context.

LOL,
go post something in the topic, such as a comparison between Ethereum new PoS and should bitcoin adopt it, and soon zap!  

You're talking about this section?

Development & Technical Discussion
Technical discussion about Satoshi's Bitcoin client and the Bitcoin network in general.

What you're talking about sounds like it belongs in Altcoin Discussion.

Here you are, This is the context:
...
Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?

I can see your post being both on and off topic. Even though you are speaking for gmax (which is a bit weird and you could be totally wrong in your assessment of his words), you are addressing the first part of the topic, which is "about criticisms from the past (on Drivechain) from respected Bitcoin experts." The parts about Ethereum and your own "one-way sidechain solution" are off-topic.

Some moderators take the approach that so long as a post contains at least one on-topic element, even if the rest is irrelevant, then the post as a whole is deemed to be "on-topic." Some take the reverse approach. I don't think there's an absolute standard here.

I suppose you'll have to wait for clarification from gmax (or achow) as neither of us actually know what he's (they're) thinking.

[aliashraf]

Here you are, This is the context:
...
Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?

I can see your post being both on and off topic. Even though you are speaking for gmax (which is a bit weird and you could be totally wrong in your assessment of his words), you are addressing the first part of the topic, which is "about criticisms from the past (on Drivechain) from respected Bitcoin experts." The parts about Ethereum and your own "one-way sidechain solution" are off-topic.

Some moderators take the approach that so long as a post contains at least one on-topic element, even if the rest is irrelevant, then the post as a whole is deemed to be "on-topic." Some take the reverse approach. I don't think there's an absolute standard here.

I suppose you'll have to wait for clarification from gmax (or achow) as neither of us actually know what he's (they're) thinking.

I strongly disagree with your idea of on-topic/off-topic.

It is absolutely impossible to have a technical discussion to remain solely jailed in what OPs say or think! It is technical for the god sake, and it comes with analysis and debates and surprises and descriptions and alternatives without such elements what would be a technical discussion after all?

Somebody starts a topic about LN and Drivechain experiments and bitcoin scaling ... Greg or Andrew expect what? People praising them for LN and saying nothing else? Just sending greetings for LN? Why?

[DooMAD]

I think it tends to go something like this:


*Ordinary, sane user starts topic about any given subject*

[aliashraf] *token reference to the actual subject, then POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS ASICS*

[Zin-Zang/Khaos77]  *token reference to the actual subject, then POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION*

[franky1]  *token reference to the actual subject, then CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK, CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK, CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK*


Almost every damn topic.  You literally can't help yourselves.  Basically, all three of you sound completely obsessed about the same old shit and derail topics left, right and centre with your mindless, repetitive dross.  Change the fucking record already.  I'm not surprised the mods delete that crap on sight.

[aliashraf]

I think it tends to go something like this:


*Ordinary, sane user starts topic about any given subject*

[aliashraf] *token reference to the actual subject, then POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS, ASICS, POOLS ASICS*

[Zin-Zang/Khaos77]  *token reference to the actual subject, then POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION, POS, LN=BANK, MINER COLLUSION*

[franky1]  *token reference to the actual subject, then CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK, CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK, CONSENSUS BYPASS, DEV CONTROL, LN=BANK*


Almost every damn topic.  You literally can't help yourselves.  Basically, all three of you sound completely obsessed about the same old shit and derail topics left, right and centre with your mindless, repetitive dross.  Change the fucking record already.  I'm not surprised the mods delete that crap on sight.

Well, so you are ok with deleting that post? Congrats! I suppose you would vote for Donald Trump in November. Don't you?  

Firstly, I'm not responsible for other users' behaviors, not commenting on your claims about them but you are obviously exaggerating. Mocking users because they are opinionated on crucial topics is inappropriate. Please behave.

Secondly, pools and ASICs are not jokes and I have the absolute right to bring up them whenever relevant. Although they happen to be relevant in this special topic, I didn't bring up anything! I just quoted Poelstra essentially!

Please don't make a smear campaign against me or other users, out of this thread.
My deleted post is quoted in op, your personal attacks against me or other users are not relevant and prove just how bad is the situation with Maxwell and his shills.

[DooMAD]

and prove just how bad is the situation with Maxwell and his shills.

Why is it "bad" that people with an all-consuming agenda aren't permitted to incessantly derail topics simply because they have "an axe to grind"?  That's exactly what you're doing.  And that's what's not allowed anymore.  Deal with it.  Or feign innocence, stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it doesn't apply to you.  Whatever floats your boat.  You posted in the topic when that rule was announced, so don't act like you weren't warned.  Whether you recognise it or not, your posts are clearly starting to annoy people, including the mods. 

Further, there are precisely ZERO serious, credible or realistic proposals to ban, restrict, disincentivise or otherwise remove either ASICs or Pools from Bitcoin.  These things, hate them all you want, are part of Bitcoin.  As such, it would seem there is not a great deal of scope for discussions about their removal in the Bitcoin Development & Technical Discussion sub.  If you want a coin without ASICs or Pools, you may wish to consider discussing it in a more suitable subforum where it would be more appropriate.  There are many altcoins that make grandiose (read: horseshit) claims about ASIC resistance and limiting pooling pressure, so I suggest you go preach to the converted and stop irritating the people who have dismissed you as a "crank".

[aliashraf]

and prove just how bad is the situation with Maxwell and his shills.

Why is it "bad" that people with an all-consuming agenda aren't permitted to incessantly derail topics simply because they have "an axe to grind"?  

Derailing this topic is what you are doing, right now. It is so disgusting arguing with a person like you but I'm angry enough to destroy you right now:

It is all about money, isn't it? Greedy people like you and your mentor are thinking about money, just money aren't you? Your disgusting censorship and politics shit is just about "defending" bitcoin reputation as being ideal, blah, blah to have prices skyrocketing and you become rich enough to buy a yacht and get skinny models onboard, don't you? Sure you do!

I have quoted a deleted post of mine above thread, it is decent and solid and your hero, Maxwell the "genius" has deleted it with no reason.

Don't "derail' this topic by accusing me of being some stupid person who has nothing to say other than complaining about pools, etc. My post and merit history speak. Just a few days ago I have made your mentor absolutely mute debating the economic concept of "bitcoin value" and the importance of PoW and how stupid is saying things like "miners are a party, one should not trust". Believe it? Satoshi is gone and bitcoin has been left in hands of a bunch of "genius" people who have figured out after consuming so much brain energy that miners are a party you should not trust!

In whom we should trust? You stupids, with your failed LN shit? A "liquidity hungry" piece of garbage that is vulnerable to childish attacks?

I think your era, Maxwell and company era, in bitcoin will come to an end sooner or later and bitcoin will grow up to become what it deserves to be and historians will highlight this stupid claim of you people with exclamation marks and students will make jokes about it.

[Little Mouse]

You clearly don't visit "Development & Technical Discussion" enough, even though the topic isn't related with Bitcoin directly, it's allowed as long as the discussion is polite and there's no FUD/troll.

I just have checked a couple of his latest post and I can see almost all of his posts are in Development and Technical Discussion boards although he posted less frequently. I think critic is not the case here because it is allowed here to criticism in a polite way.

[aliashraf]

The real problem isn't censorship/abusing power, but the way you express what you said isn't polite, sometimes you're going off-topic and sometimes attack certain people.
I've made several critique about LN and block size, but none of my posts were removed by moderator.

P.S. i don't mean to offend you in any way and i'd like to see your opinion

Thank you for not meaning to offend me.  
But it is not about me, it is about my specific post removed in cold blood.

Look, some posts for some people are just like their newborn child, carried for months and labored with pain. For me, it is the case more usually. I don't write for fun or for being paid to do so, I write because of my love and passion for bitcoin, it is what corrupted people and their shills have no clue about.

I know you are a great guy, please don't pay attention to Maxwell's smear campaign and accusations against me. He does it because he is desperately failing to address the most crucial problems in bitcoin and he thinks he is too BIG to fail.

[suchmoon]

Look, some posts for some people are just like their newborn child, carried for months and labored with pain. For me, it is the case more usually. I don't write for fun or for being paid to do so, I write because of my love and passion for bitcoin, it is what corrupted people and their shills have no clue about.

Create your own thread then and set the topic to what you want it to be. Post your newborn child there.

[aliashraf]

Look, some posts for some people are just like their newborn child, carried for months and labored with pain. For me, it is the case more usually. I don't write for fun or for being paid to do so, I write because of my love and passion for bitcoin, it is what corrupted people and their shills have no clue about.

Create your own thread then and set the topic to what you want it to be. Post your newborn child there.

Sure. But my post is by no means off-topic, it is the point. I've forwarded enough material to make it crystal clear that my post is neither offensive/FUD/etc. nor off-topic. But sure, I'd consider your suggestion.

By the way, I felt a bit offended by you generously sending merits to a troller who mocked at me and other users in favor of brutal ripping of users material in compliance with the latest "executive order" by GMaxwell ...it is ok, never mind,  just saying.

[suchmoon]

By the way, I felt a bit offended by you generously sending merits to a troller who mocked at me and other users in favor of brutal ripping of users material in compliance with the latest "executive order" by GMaxwell ...it is ok, never mind,  just saying.

No idea what you're talking about but in general I don't expect you to like every post I merit nor does merit necessarily mean that I agree with the post.

[stompix]

Almost every damn topic.  You literally can't help yourselves.  Basically, all three of you sound completely obsessed about the same old shit and derail topics left, right and centre with your mindless, repetitive dross.  Change the fucking record already.  I'm not surprised the mods delete that crap on sight.

Same feeling here, a topic with "LN" in the title is opened you can start couting the seconds till one of them appears and starts the endless debate trolling of LN is bad, POW is bad etc etc . But at least with Franky1, he has cut down a bit in the last period, even on boards he is not banned (yet!) the others ...
There are two kinds of criticism: constructive criticism and shit throwing, and what they are doing is worse than the second, they are not debating anything, all they are doing is repeating the same stuff over and over and over and over.

And look what we have here, in this topic, Even if this is about censorship, they can't help themselves, they must dedicate 95% of their post not arguing about the forum policy but about LN and why BTC is kaput cause we're not listening to them.

[aliashraf]

Almost every damn topic.  You literally can't help yourselves.  Basically, all three of you sound completely obsessed about the same old shit and derail topics left, right and centre with your mindless, repetitive dross.  Change the fucking record already.  I'm not surprised the mods delete that crap on sight.

And look what we have here, in this topic, Even if this is about censorship, they can't help themselves, they must dedicate 95% of their post not arguing about the forum policy but about LN and why BTC is kaput cause we're not listening to them.

Nobody will be fooled with such arguments. A troll comes around mocking at me (the one who has been wrongfully censored) accusing me of being a stupid nob who has nothing to say other than cursing pools or ASICs then attacks other users blaming them why they have standpoints about LN or PoS or anything other than what the great Maxwell likes to hear about and when he gets the appropriate treatment another troll (you) comes around and says "look at them! {?} they can't help themselves stay focused on forum policy."

Who brought up LN in the first place, genius?

Look! We are all grownups here. I know what's going on here and you know too,  most people know. Let's not play dirty anymore.

It is Meta subforum, a post of mine is deleted with no FUD, no misinformation, no personal attack while being exactly on-topic by a person who is known for his harsh attitude towards anybody not aligned with him and being too much opinionated almost in any topic in bitcoin sphere. It is all this topic is about, you got something to say about my post? Say it! Otherwise, just shut your mouth and don't derail this topic by telling tales about how bad franky1 is or how you or anybody else feels about LN. Your mate told shit about it and I've already refuted his arguments, nothing more left to talk about.

[stompix]

Otherwise, just shut your mouth and don't derail this topic by telling

Oh the irony, how about you keep your advice for yourself and we wouldn't have this topic in the first place?
It's quite amusing, people fighting an imaginary censorship are the first to advocate for one to be imposed, do you take yoga classes for this?

Who brought up LN in the first place, genius?

First:

In your post, you did not praise LN, so zap.

Second:

Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?

Satisfied genius? 

[DooMAD]

Your mate told shit about it and I've already refuted his arguments

Keep telling yourself that.  You think just because people don't bother wasting their time trying to convince you what an obstinate, audacious and ultimately misguided fool you are that you've somehow won the debate?  Get over yourself.

I was going to start a new topic in Reputation, "Greedy DooMAD versus the Three Stooges", where I point out that all three of you topic-derailing wingnuts have, at some point or another, accused me of wanting to "get rich" by supporting blockstream's supposed "agenda".  Incidentally, it always seems to happen when you've run out of arguments and have nothing left to offer up.  Anyway, I was going to do that to demonstrate just how easy it is to avoid derailing a topic.  Lead by example and such.  But you know what?  Screw you, I'm going to ruin your topic and see how you like it for a change, because it's not like you're ever going to learn, even when shown how.  So here goes:

When I get old and people ask me what I did during Bitcoin's formative years, I'll tell them I tried my best to keep this place sane while it was set upon by a small but determined number of mentally unhinged fanatics.  If I tell you your idea is a load of mindless drivel, I'm not saying it because I'm chasing some mythical paycheck or anticipated future profit.  I say it because I believe integrity is important.  And that's all forms of integrity.    

First up there's personal integrity, where I have to be intellectually honest with myself and say that even if I have what I believe to be a great idea about how Bitcoin should move forward, I'm probably not in a position to single-handedly turn an entire ecosystem on its head to implement whatever changes I might find favourable.  Even in the unlikely event that I ever thought the same way you do about ASICs and pools, I would have to be an egomaniac to believe I can simply undo something that numerous people have invested time, effort and money into in order to nurture and develop.  You don't just snap your fingers and undo the hard work of others.  In fact, you can't in this particular instance.  But you seem to think that, not only is it a piece of cake to completely decimate what is effectively an entire industry in its own right, but there are seemingly no moral implications to consider either.  The only "good" is your good and anything else is unquestionably evil.  It's that black and white to you.  Reasonable people, on the other hand, may have misgivings about pools or ASICs, but don't believe themselves to have either the power or moral authority to simply wipe them from existence as though they were nothing.  Who the hell do you think you are?

Then there's the integrity of the Bitcoin network itself.  If changes are to be made, they should never endanger the security or decentralisation of the network.  You demonstrate time and again that you have literally no concept of what those words mean.  I don't need to start a "smear campaign" for people to see what kind of moron you are.  They have eyes and are perfectly capable of seeing it for themselves.  You would gladly sacrifice the security of the network for even a hint of a chance that your fantasies would come true.  They won't, though.  

Cry about it all you want.  This is not censorship.  People aren't trying to extinguish your unique and precious flame.  They're just trying to talk some damn sense into you.  But you flagrantly ignore them and keep spouting dangerous, ignorant nonsense.  Then you act like the victim when mods delete your inane, whiny potshots meagerly disguised as casual conversation.  You still genuinely believe that what you saying is important, but sadly you are the only person who seems to think so.  And on top of that, you can't find a manner in which to express it that doesn't piss people off.  To say that's not a winning formula would be an understatement.


Other assorted thoughts in the topic:

Look, some posts for some people are just like their newborn child, carried for months and labored with pain.

I'm sure you're very proud of your inbred mutant circus freak-show offspring.  Doesn't mean the rest of us have to pretend to care.

desperately failing to address the most crucial problems in bitcoin

I'm not a developer, but I'm fairly sure that introducing much larger problems in the mistaken belief that it might fix something is not how development works.

Mocking users because they are opinionated on crucial topics is inappropriate.

Topics that are important to you personally != crucial.  Perhaps you're confusing it with the word "crusade", since you definitely seem to be on one.

I think your era, Maxwell and company era, in bitcoin will come to an end sooner or later and bitcoin will grow up to become what it deserves to be and historians will highlight this stupid claim of you people with exclamation marks and students will make jokes about it.

I think history is written by the winners and you are one of life's losers.  It won't remember you at all.

[aliashraf]

Otherwise, just shut your mouth and don't derail this topic by telling

Oh the irony, how about you keep your advice for yourself and we wouldn't have this topic in the first place?
It's quite amusing, people fighting an imaginary censorship are the first to advocate for one to be imposed, do you take yoga classes for this?

Oh, so you are pro in trolling and you need the classic treatment, gotcha it.
Firstly, it is not censorship to ask trolls not to derail a topic. Irony is having a "legendary" (WTF?) who doesn't understand the difference!
Secondly, it is not "imaginary" censorship it has happened and hung up in front of your eyes:

Who brought up LN in the first place, genius?

First:

In your post, you did not praise LN, so zap.

Not a post of mine!

Second:

Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?

Satisfied genius?  

It is not about LN, it is about the post being deleted and the context. A user asked for the context and I responded very carefully.

Stay focused on the question or go find another thread to show people how productive you are: Is the deletion of the post under consideration justifiable by any measure? How is that?