Re: Farewell

[Kruw]

JayJuanGee, what do you think about the proof that o_e_l_e_o betrayed the Bitcointalk community by lying about non custodial privacy software, which led to users losing their data and deposits to the government?

[JayJuanGee]

JayJuanGee, what do you think about the proof that o_e_l_e_o betrayed the Bitcointalk community by lying about non custodial privacy software, which led to users losing their data and deposits to the government?

I believe that it is a bad idea to purposefully make arguments that are aimed at someone's credibility and past conduct at the news of his announcement that he is leaving the forum due to his belief that he does not have much time left on this planet (perhaps a matter of months in terms of his representations), and we have no reason to believe that Leo is making up his reason for leaving the forum.. even though we likely are not able to completely confirm his claims either - except that he had been considered a reliable and credible person on the forum, and I have not seen any significant and/or meaningful posts to establish that o_e_l_e_o engaged in the conduct that you are accusing him of having had done, including that lying is a kind act that seems to need to establish bad intentions, and largely I came to this thread in order to post my response to the news of o_e_l_e_o's farewell since o_e_l_e_o had locked his thread by the time I was in the process of drafting my response that I was going to post in that thread that he closed.  

Admittedly, I am not very much interested in the topic of your OP in terms of your framing it as o_e_l_e_o  being a bad intention person, which seems quite contrary to my own interactions and experiences with his post history to the extent that I had come across his posts, read them and/or felt that I might have understood some of them, so maybe it is my own mistake to participate in this thread and to mostly ignore what seems to be the intentions of your OP, which many members are repelled by your behavior rather than the substantive points that you proclaim to be making (which is difficult to believe that you would really need to make your points in the denigrating ways that you did. and several members have added neutral (but still negative) comments about your conduct to your trust page based on the way that you are going about the raising of these supposed concerns.. ... report me for being somewhat off-topic and my not being very interested to engage in the substantive points of your OP, if you must...

Another thing, I think that if you had disagreements with o_e_l_e_o in regards to various posts that he made in various threads then you would have had already likely addressed those concerns inside of those other threads, or maybe you will repeat your claims against o_e_l_e_o in those threads, but based on his farewell thread and even his post claiming that he is not posting any more on the forum, now you know that he is not going to be responding to your posts, and it seems that he is the best person to respond to the claims contained within the specific kinds of posts that you are making that raise issues of his credibility or his bad intentions as you characterize them to be...

Maybe you are wanting me to read your OP with more detail?  Is that what you are requesting, even though I am not really that interested in complaints of past behaviors in regards to a guy (o_e_l_e_o  in this case) who is not going to be defending himself, and so his posts likely speak for themselves in terms of how much credibility they deserve.  You are suggesting that there are some smoking gun pieces of evidence contained in your OP outline of evidence that I need to review in order to change my opinion (or my historical trust) of o_e_l_e_o and/or his historical representations?  And, at the same time, you raise your concerns in such a way that is largely distasteful and reprehensible rather than anything that any of us should really treat seriously. I would imagine that forum administrators/mods may even be considering whether you should be punished for this post/thread, even though the forum is generally pretty tolerant towards a certain level of brashness and bad tastes in the way that members raise, present and/or respond to issues.

Edited:  After posting I had to read through various parts of this post and make some additional changes to my various responses.

[Vod]

Here's where you addressed how o_e_l_e_o acted:

Do you have proof that o_e_l_e_o knew they were lies?

So what is the lie o_e_l_e_o knew was being told?

I asked two questions - I addressed nothing.  You are a liar.

I enjoyed reading the reactions to this quote. It’s actually pretty thought provoking and interesting to me that people allow their bias to cloud their judgement to the point it makes them see a lack of mourning as celebration.

Don't you judge yourself to be the most trusted here?   That's pretty clouded judgement...
And then you enjoy learning new insults for the dead/dying?

Now please move on with your life before you give yourself a stroke like Vod and stop trying to waste my time with replying to your idiotic nonsense.

Then, after TECShare died from a stroke:

My attacks?  LOL.  Look at the name of this thread.  People aren't stupid...  Your little group of friends has been dropping like flies after stressing themselves literally to death trying to destroy my honest reputation with lies.  How many more users have to disappear from this forum before you guys stop giving yourselves strokes and overdoses trying to further your petty internet drama?  What are you trying to achieve?  Maybe I can help.

[Kruw]

I believe that it is a bad idea to purposefully make arguments that are aimed at someone's credibility and past conduct at the new of his announcement that he is leaving the forum due to his belief that he does not have much time left on this planet, and we have no reason to believe that Leo is making up his reason for leaving the forum.. even though we likely are not able to completely confirm his claims either - except that he had been considered a reliable and credible person on the forum, and I have not seen any significant and/or meaningful posts to establish that o_e_l_e_o engaged in the conduct that you are accusing him of having had done, including that lying is a kind act that seems to need to establish bad intentions, and largely I came to this thread in order to post my response to the news of o_e_l_e_o's farewell since o_e_l_e_o had locked his thread by the time I had drafted my response that I was going to post in that thread.

Admittedly, I am not very much interested in the topic of your OP, so maybe it is my own mistake to participate in this thread and to mostly ignore your OP... report me for being somewhat off-topic if you must...

That's a fair (albeit long) statement.

Another thing, I think that if you had disagreements with o_e_l_e_o in regards to various posts that he made in various threads then you would have had already likely addressed those concerns inside of those other threads, or maybe you will repeat your claims against o_e_l_e_o in those threads, but based on his farewell thread and even his post claiming that he is not posting any more on the forum, now you know that he is not going to be responding to your posts, and it seems that he is the best person to respond to the claims contained within the specific kinds of posts that you are making that raise issues of his credibility or his bad intentions as you characterize them to be...

You'll notice that I have not referred to any "disagreements" between myself and o_e_l_e_o for proof, in fact, most of the evidence I quoted from o_e_l_e_o was authored before I joined Bitcointalk.

Maybe you are wanting me to read your OP with more detail?  Is that what you are requesting, even though I am not really that interested in complaints of past behaviors in regards to a guy (o_e_l_e_o  in this case) who is not going to be defending himself, and so his posts likely speak for themselves in terms of how much credibility they deserve.  You are suggesting that there are some smoking gun pieces of evidence contained in your OP outline of evidence that I need to review in order to change my opinion (or my historical trust) of o_e_l_e_o and/or his historical representations?

The OP is rather intimidatingly long, so if you want to focus on the "smoking gun", the first two quotes are the ones that reveal o_e_l_e_o was aware that a coordinator spying on Wasabi users is not possible:

TIMELINE

March 14 2022 - o_e_l_e_o admits coordinator policy doesn’t affect your inputs, admits to BlackHatCoiner that switching coordinators solves the censorship problem, and admits to BlackHatCoiner that his motivation is simply to fight against Wasabi anyways:

Even if this change from Wasabi won't affect any of your inputs, they are no longer an entity which I can trust to fight for my privacy.

Would it be possible for some to start running coordinators?

Absolutely. The coordinator code is open source, so anyone can download it and spin up their own instance. That would solve the immediate problem if everyone switched to a different coordinator, but it doesn't stop these other coordinators being pressured in to implementing the same restrictions and it doesn't change the fact that Wasabi did this in the first place instead of fighting against it.

March 15 2022 - o_e_l_e_o admits that the data feed is a 1 way street from a blockchain analysis company to the coordinator, and that no data is provided to blockchain analysis:

In fact, they need to cooperate with blockchain analysis to obtain information about "taint" UTXOs.

Well, they only need to cooperate in this sense to have the blockchain analysis entity feed them data about which UTXO's to block. But as I said, if they cooperate like this then it won't be long before that cooperation becomes a two way street, with them feeding data back to the blockchain analysis entity.

[JayJuanGee]

I believe that it is a bad idea to purposefully make arguments that are aimed at someone's credibility and past conduct at the new of his announcement that he is leaving the forum due to his belief that he does not have much time left on this planet, and we have no reason to believe that Leo is making up his reason for leaving the forum.. even though we likely are not able to completely confirm his claims either - except that he had been considered a reliable and credible person on the forum, and I have not seen any significant and/or meaningful posts to establish that o_e_l_e_o engaged in the conduct that you are accusing him of having had done, including that lying is a kind act that seems to need to establish bad intentions, and largely I came to this thread in order to post my response to the news of o_e_l_e_o's farewell since o_e_l_e_o had locked his thread by the time I had drafted my response that I was going to post in that thread.

Admittedly, I am not very much interested in the topic of your OP, so maybe it is my own mistake to participate in this thread and to mostly ignore your OP... report me for being somewhat off-topic if you must...

That's a fair (albeit long) statement.

Another thing, I think that if you had disagreements with o_e_l_e_o in regards to various posts that he made in various threads then you would have had already likely addressed those concerns inside of those other threads, or maybe you will repeat your claims against o_e_l_e_o in those threads, but based on his farewell thread and even his post claiming that he is not posting any more on the forum, now you know that he is not going to be responding to your posts, and it seems that he is the best person to respond to the claims contained within the specific kinds of posts that you are making that raise issues of his credibility or his bad intentions as you characterize them to be...

You'll notice that I have not referred to any "disagreements" between myself and o_e_l_e_o for proof, in fact, most of the evidence I quoted from o_e_l_e_o was authored before I joined Bitcointalk.

Maybe you are wanting me to read your OP with more detail?  Is that what you are requesting, even though I am not really that interested in complaints of past behaviors in regards to a guy (o_e_l_e_o  in this case) who is not going to be defending himself, and so his posts likely speak for themselves in terms of how much credibility they deserve.  You are suggesting that there are some smoking gun pieces of evidence contained in your OP outline of evidence that I need to review in order to change my opinion (or my historical trust) of o_e_l_e_o and/or his historical representations?

The OP is rather intimidatingly long, so if you want to focus on the "smoking gun", the first two quotes are the ones that reveal o_e_l_e_o was aware that a coordinator spying on Wasabi users is not possible:

TIMELINE

March 14 2022 - o_e_l_e_o admits coordinator policy doesn’t affect your inputs, admits to BlackHatCoiner that switching coordinators solves the censorship problem, and admits to BlackHatCoiner that his motivation is simply to fight against Wasabi anyways:

Even if this change from Wasabi won't affect any of your inputs, they are no longer an entity which I can trust to fight for my privacy.

Would it be possible for some to start running coordinators?

Absolutely. The coordinator code is open source, so anyone can download it and spin up their own instance. That would solve the immediate problem if everyone switched to a different coordinator, but it doesn't stop these other coordinators being pressured in to implementing the same restrictions and it doesn't change the fact that Wasabi did this in the first place instead of fighting against it.

March 15 2022 - o_e_l_e_o admits that the data feed is a 1 way street from a blockchain analysis company to the coordinator, and that no data is provided to blockchain analysis:

In fact, they need to cooperate with blockchain analysis to obtain information about "taint" UTXOs.

Well, they only need to cooperate in this sense to have the blockchain analysis entity feed them data about which UTXO's to block. But as I said, if they cooperate like this then it won't be long before that cooperation becomes a two way street, with them feeding data back to the blockchain analysis entity.

Between the time that you made this responsive post and my earlier post, I made did some further editing of my earlier post... so it is not exactly a comfortable topic for me.

I will admit that I read through one or two Wasabi wallet threads, and I had not been much of a fan of wasabi wallet in the last couple of years when a lot of the negative press had been coming out regarding some changes that were made regarding coordinators, and I am likely not even able to clearly articulate my concerns, and I don't really want to use the mixing services because I think that other members are raising plenty of concerns regarding why not to trust the wallet in terms of cooperation agreements that Wasabi has with chain analysis firms. Maybe historically I had agreed with some of the judgements of o_e_l_e_o on the topic and even BlackHatcoiner and some other fairly vocal Wasabi critics. I don't see any problems with the kinds of statements from o_e_l_e_o  and his continued assertions of not trusting Wasabi wallet... maybe he is wrong about some things, but I doubt that his conduct rises to the level of intentionally lying or misleading even if he was wrong or admitted that he was wrong about some of Wasabi's practices.

I am surely not technical enough to even understand a lot of the assertions, even though from time to time I do read through some of those kind of technical and/or privacy threads, but sometimes it is not easy for me to relate to all of the things that are being claimed, even though I am not retarded so I do understand some of the claims and/or some of the overall assessments and generally from time to time, I end up relying on various representations and assessments of other forum members who seem to have more technical knowledge than me...and yeah if it starts to appear to me that one or another member is lying or being disingenuine in his posts and/or his assertions then I might choose to rely less upon their representations in future posts... and I still believe that o_e_l_e_o tended to post in good faith, even though I can recall that sometimes he took some pretty strict privacy stances, and I am not even clear if I would be willing to take similar steps as him because sometimes there is a need for greater technical knowledge if any of us were going to take some of the additional privacy steps such as discontinuing to use some of the consumer-friendly phones or applications, but that still does not mean that I have been very excited about Wasabi in the last few years, even though I don't claim to completely understand all of the details - but in the last year or two I have not been feeling any inclinations to want to use Wasabi. 

In the coming weeks, I will try to make some time and look at that 5 page Wasabi thread that you highlighted with o_e_l_e_o 's participation therein, even though no member has posted in that thread since mid 2022.

[FinneysTrueVision]

I will not read through all these giant walls of text, most of it is rehashing things which have been discussed many times already, but I will comment on a few of the posts I did read. Oeleo might've had some extreme views on certain issues but I don't hold him responsible for the actions of those who were renting his signature space. I only ever saw him recommend custodial mixers when people were specifically willing to trust a custodian to mix their coins. He could've been more outspoken about the risks associated with them but it is not his responsibility to stop people from doing something stupid. That doesn't make him complicit or a partner in their actions. It's something I hate about this forum but most people try to stay on the good side of those throwing lots of money at them.

I am not in agreement with zkSNACKS decision to prohibit supposedly "tainted" coins from entering their coinjoins but as a private business they have the right to deny their service to whomever they choose. Clearly regulators are not big fans of privacy services, and from my perspective, there was a high enough probability that if they had not made this choice their lead developers would be in a jail cell sitting next to the Tornado Cash devs, ChipMixer operators, and countless other mixers who have passed through this forum. It should be up to the free market to decide if they are willing to accept this compromise. While there is justifiable criticism against Wasabi, I find that a lot of it is entirely hypocritical or outright dishonest. Address reuse is not ideal when it happens in Wasabi, but it also isn't ideal when it happens in Samourai, or when it happened in Chipmixer. For some reason only when it happens in Wasabi do people on this forum consider it bad. In those other cases it was completely ignored because nobody wants to agitate certain merit sources and campaign managers who can ruin their reputation or exclude them from campaigns. Wasabi is also not "spying on their users". WabiSabi coinjoins are designed in a way where the coordinator can't really gather any useful information from participants. Some of these scenarios where they could deanonymize users seem too complex and expensive to be viable without it being detected. Somehow these spying concerns are dismissed when it comes to Samourai having access to xpubs. Developers lying directly to people's face is also not a concern. Developers and community being toxic assholes, also not a concern for the Whirlpool enthusiasts who will criticize Wasabi for these exact things. I'm not really a partisan and have used Wasabi, Samourai and other privacy services but there is a lot of inconsistency and double standards that sometimes I will defend Wasabi when certain arguments seem to be made in bad faith.

[EarnOnVictor]

Bro, you are entitled to all your opinions, but at times, we should be more human and be insensitive.

What I see you doing here is so insensitive. Fine, you and the guy could have had one or two issues together, but it is just a forum where we share opinions, and nothing more. We could be trolled at times or even get so angry but it shouldn't be unto death. This person is dying and what you could do is to be engaging in all sorts like this? It is certainly not fair.

The best you could have done is to just ignore the thread if you still hold a grudge against him. Let's be human for once.

This isn't a matter of "one or two issues" or "opinions":  Did you know o_e_l_e_o was knowingly lying to Bitcointalk users to trick them out of gaining privacy on their Bitcoins so the custodian he was promoting could steal those Bitcoins and turn the data of those Bitcointalk users over to the government?

This is a huge allegation that it better be true with the way you are saying it. I also read a lot of replies to others on the general post I managed to cut off the excerpt of mine, and I must say that this is so serious. You take this too personally to the point that I begin to have concerns, and for that, giving you more audience now as a lot could even be happening behind the scenes truly.

But first, you need proof to convince us on this forum rather than a mere allegation. Anyone can allege another, it is not new, and you who could have known this much should be able to have one or two proofs to back it up too. I will never attack anyone. They say talk is cheap, but action is better, I expect that from you soon.

[FatFork]

So you are basically saying you have no basic human traits and operate under the same guise as a weak AI or pre-programmed chatbot? Noted. Here's a truth for you, which you should be able to accept; You're an asshole.

Actually, o_e_l_e_o is an asshole.  

Nope. General consensus suggests you're an asshole in this case.  Your self-assessment is irrelevant.

[Kruw]

I don't see any problems with the kinds of statements from o_e_l_e_o  and his continued assertions of not trusting Wasabi wallet... maybe he is wrong about some things, but I doubt that his conduct rises to the level of intentionally lying or misleading even if he was wrong or admitted that he was wrong about some of Wasabi's practices.

The first two quotes establish the fact that the lying was intentional.  In March 2022, o_e_l_e_o was completely aware that using Wasabi does not lead to data being provided to blockchain analysis.

and I still believe that o_e_l_e_o tended to post in good faith, even though I can recall that sometimes he took some pretty strict privacy stances

Here's proof that o_e_l_e_o was posting in bad faith the entire time because he took extremely anti-privacy stances in support of the custodial mixing site he was promoting: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5465398.msg62803897#msg62803897

3. Quality scoring of incoming transactions
We run a thorough background check of incoming funds through a proprietary algorithm.

2.1. Privacy Policy

Please refer to our Privacy Policy to get an understanding of our confidentiality obligations. You consent to the collection and use of information as described in the Privacy Policy.

2.2 Suspension or termination of services

[banned mixer] reserves the right to suspend or terminate access to services at any time at its own discretion, with or without reasons, with or without notification assuming no responsibility whatsoever.

For example, services may be suspended or terminated due to the following reasons:

    an actual or suspected violation of these Terms and Conditions;
    use of the service in such a manner that is conducive to the legal liability of [banned mixer] or Service malfunction;
    planned or unplanned maintenance, etc.

2.3 Unacceptable use

You agree that you personally will not commit, encourage or support the committal of:

    use of any unauthorized means to access the [banned mixer] service or use of any automated process or service (for example, spider, crawler or periodic caching of information stored or generated by [banned mixer]) except for the functions described in our API, as well as distribution of instructions, software or tools with this aim in view;
    modification, change, distortion or any other interference in work of the [banned mixer] service;
    disturbing or interference in operation of servers or networks used by [banned mixer] to deliver the Services;
    disabling, overload or degradation of [banned mixer] performance (or any other network connected to the service);
    use of the [banned mixer] service or website for any other purposes other than those specifically provided by these Terms and Privacy Policy;
    any illegal or fraudulent activity, as well as use of this Service in order to legalize illegal income, financing of terrorism, participation in schemes of phishing, forgery or other such falsification or manipulation;
    unauthorized spamming, pyramid schemes or any other activity duplicating unwanted messages should they be commercially oriented or of other nature.

2.4 Service updates

At any time and at its absolute discretion [banned mixer] can carry out unscheduled works related to the service modification, update and enhancement. We are liable to add or remove functions and cease activities of the service and website.
2.5 License and restrictions

[banned mixer] provides you with a personal nontransferable nonexclusive license to use the Service as it is stipulated for you by [banned mixer]. This license is provided under conditions and restricted to the provisions, stipulations and constraints stated in these Terms. Therewith, such license is intended for personal, noncommercial use. You may not copy, modify, create a derivative work of, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the service or any part thereof, exclusive of data permitted by law, or expressly allowed by the [banned mixer] platform (use of templates, API, etc.). You may not reassign (or grant a sublicense of) your rights to use the service, or otherwise transfer any part of your rights in accordance with these Terms. These Rules do not provide you with any license or permission to copy, distribute, change or otherwise use any applications programming interface despite any provisions to the contrary. No property rights or ownership rights related to the Service are not granted to you according to these Terms. [banned mixer] reserves all rights that have not been expressly granted.

I only ever saw him recommend custodial mixers when people were specifically willing to trust a custodian to mix their coins. He could've been more outspoken about the risks associated with them but it is not his responsibility to stop people from doing something stupid.

No, he specifically was recommending the custodian that leaked everyone's data and stole everyone's coins on the thread of a non custodial privacy wallet:

August 23 2022 – o_e_l_e_o lies and says the custodian he partnered with that stole everyone’s deposits and turned over their data to the government has as good or better privacy than Wasabi

If projects such as Samourai, JoinMarket, ChipMixer, Bisq, LocalCryptos, Monero, and anything else which gives users as good or better privacy than Wasabi can continue unencumbered, then Wasabi can too. They simply choose not to.

You correctly identified this tactic:

Several posts in this and some other threads do give off the appearance of being thinly veiled attempts to promote competing privacy services. It seems odd that people who advertised failed mixer after failed mixer are so laser focused on Wasabi. Custodial mixers aren’t held to nearly the same standard despite having a much higher risk of losing money. It is only natural to question people’s motivations when attacking one service but ignoring or downplaying glaring problems with custodial mixers.

I am not in agreement with zkSNACKS decision to prohibit supposedly "tainted" coins from entering their coinjoins but as a private business they have the right to deny their service to whomever they choose.

I am not in agreement with that decision either, I don't care about the origin of the funds I coinjoin with.

This is a huge allegation that it better be true with the way you are saying it. I also read a lot of replies to others on the general post I managed to cut off the excerpt of mine, and I must say that this is so serious. You take this too personally to the point that I begin to have concerns, and for that, giving you more audience now as a lot could even be happening behind the scenes truly.

But first, you need proof to convince us on this forum rather than a mere allegation. Anyone can allege another, it is not new, and you who could have known this much should be able to have one or two proofs to back it up too. I will never attack anyone. They say talk is cheap, but action is better, I expect that from you soon.

Check the OP of the thread, I provided a detailed timeline.

Nope. General consensus suggests you're an asshole in this case.  Your self-assessment is irrelevant.

Good thing that general consensus and self assessment don't matter because I have proof (not opinions) backing up this thread.

[FatFork]

I only ever saw him recommend custodial mixers when people were specifically willing to trust a custodian to mix their coins. He could've been more outspoken about the risks associated with them but it is not his responsibility to stop people from doing something stupid.

No, he specifically was recommending the custodian that leaked everyone's data and stole everyone's coins on the thread of a non custodial privacy wallet:

August 23 2022 – o_e_l_e_o lies and says the custodian he partnered with that stole everyone’s deposits and turned over their data to the government has as good or better privacy than Wasabi

If projects such as Samourai, JoinMarket, ChipMixer, Bisq, LocalCryptos, Monero, and anything else which gives users as good or better privacy than Wasabi can continue unencumbered, then Wasabi can too. They simply choose not to.

While I think we're getting a bit off track, but you're the one spreading lies here.

1. Chipmixer did NOT steal everyone's deposits, and you have no evidence to back up that claim.

2. Chipmixer has NOT handed over any of their data to the government, and you have no proof of that either.  They were seized. As for the content of the seized data, we can only speculate, the evidence is inconclusive.

3. When Leo recommended using that centralized mixing service, it was a trusted and respected platform in the community. It was promoted/endorsed by many high-ranking members, not just him, and I've never heard of any legitimate scam accusations against them. I can personally testify that they were a legitimate service, as I have used them on numerous occasions without any issues.

So, while the claim that a centralized mixer service offers comparable or superior privacy to Wasabi can be considered a matter of opinion, it is unfair and inaccurate to label it as an outright lie.

Nope. General consensus suggests you're an asshole in this case.  Your self-assessment is irrelevant.

Good thing that general consensus and self assessment don't matter because I have proof (not opinions) backing up this thread.

The general perception others have of your character is shaped by your actions and interactions within the community, not by your ability to argue your stance or your relentless pursuit of self-justification.

[Kruw]

While I think we're getting a bit off track, but you're the one spreading lies here.

1. Chipmixer did NOT steal everyone's deposits, and you have no evidence to back up that claim.

2. Chipmixer has NOT handed over any of their data to the government, and you have no proof of that either.  They were seized. As for the content of the seized data, we can only speculate, the evidence is inconclusive.

3. When Leo recommended using that centralized mixing service, it was a trusted and respected platform in the community. It was promoted/endorsed by many high-ranking members, not just him, and I've never heard of any legitimate scam accusations against them. I can personally testify that they were a legitimate service, as I have used them on numerous occasions without any issues.

Here's the evidence that backs up my claim:

Even my chips which I had in chipmixer service for which they claimed to "delete private" keys after 7 days or whatever, were seized/transfered. and these transactions took place good 3 months ago.

It seems that you are right, whoever had vouchers or chips was left without them. I checked some old wallets older than 1 year that only contained chips from CM, and they were all emptied. Yes, it's a bit stupid that I didn't spend them, but honestly I forgot about a few $ in those old wallets. It's really strange that it wasn't all deleted, but now we at least know where even 7GB of data came from.

Can confirm, they stole a chip of mine a friend of mine that he hadn't yet spent. :/ Really fucking bad practice of ChipMixer to keep private keys, not gonna lie.
It was still there today morning and even when the news broke here; I he had not considered that private keys may have been backed up on CM servers to be honest.

So, while the claim that a centralized mixer service offers comparable or superior privacy to Wasabi can be considered a matter of opinion, it is unfair and inaccurate to label it as an outright lie.

No, it's a literal outright lie.  The privacy of Wasabi is strictly superior because no one is trusted with your financial history.  With ChipMixer, your financial history is completely exposed to the trusted third party.

The general perception others have of your character is shaped by your actions and interactions within the community, not by your ability to argue your stance or your relentless pursuit of self-justification.

If someone falsely accused you of rape for years, wouldn't you relentlessly defend yourself against the false accusation by posting the proof that the accuser was lying the entire time?

[mrust_mobile]

I would say a decentralized mixing service is superior to any centralized mixing service, especially if the code is open source. (I have no idea if wasabi is capable of doing it, not interested at the moment, i am talking in general)

Let's be honest now, those high ranking members have no idea if the clients of that mixing service were getting logged or not. (just like we don't know what information the government got from seizing the service) Was [BannedMixer] an open source project? As far as I know, no. Then who can guarantee any safety of anything that happened on that platform?

Some of the current mixing services may very well be a trap being operated by the state btw.

[Kruw]

Let's be honest now, those high ranking members have no idea if the clients of that mixing service were getting logged or not. (just like we don't know what information the government got from seizing the service) Was [BannedMixer] an open source project? As far as I know, no. Then who can guarantee any safety of anything that happened on that platform?

Some of the current mixing services may very well be a trap being operated by the state btw.

Given that these "high ranking members" have no way to guarantee their claims about the trustworthiness of the mixer they are promoting, that makes their attacks against trustless open source privacy projects even more of a betrayal.

[Sexylizzy2813]

I see no sense in this.
Death is never a good thing even if Leo had offended you indirectly in the past you should at least bid him a farewell based on his condition. Not everyone is strong enough to fight cancer for over a decade.

Actually, I would say the opposite:  Since o_e_l_e_o doesn't have much time left to make things right, he should use this chance to correct the record and apologize for knowingly spreading lies about weaknesses in Bitcoin's privacy.  Bitcointalk posts are a legacy you leave behind even after you die, so it's worth it to extend eternity your honesty.

No matter how things are between you and o_e_l_e_o I don't think him having a short time to live is something you should be happy about, is like you're taking advantage of the fact that he's not going to be here to defend himself to say some crazy things.
Come on OP,  even if he did something you don't like or he stole your money or something, that shouldn't make you wish him death, at least he never prayed you stop breathing , give him the last respect he deserves and not the way you're going about business. Try and keep a better legacy too, who knows this guy o_e_l_e_o can make it past this month next year and many more years, I just wish him well where ever he is.

[FatFork]

While I think we're getting a bit off track, but you're the one spreading lies here.

1. Chipmixer did NOT steal everyone's deposits, and you have no evidence to back up that claim.

2. Chipmixer has NOT handed over any of their data to the government, and you have no proof of that either.  They were seized. As for the content of the seized data, we can only speculate, the evidence is inconclusive.

3. When Leo recommended using that centralized mixing service, it was a trusted and respected platform in the community. It was promoted/endorsed by many high-ranking members, not just him, and I've never heard of any legitimate scam accusations against them. I can personally testify that they were a legitimate service, as I have used them on numerous occasions without any issues.

Here's the evidence that backs up my claim:

Even my chips which I had in chipmixer service for which they claimed to "delete private" keys after 7 days or whatever, were seized/transfered. and these transactions took place good 3 months ago.

It seems that you are right, whoever had vouchers or chips was left without them. I checked some old wallets older than 1 year that only contained chips from CM, and they were all emptied. Yes, it's a bit stupid that I didn't spend them, but honestly I forgot about a few $ in those old wallets. It's really strange that it wasn't all deleted, but now we at least know where even 7GB of data came from.

Can confirm, they stole a chip of mine a friend of mine that he hadn't yet spent. :/ Really fucking bad practice of ChipMixer to keep private keys, not gonna lie.
It was still there today morning and even when the news broke here; I he had not considered that private keys may have been backed up on CM servers to be honest.

So now we accept someone else's claims as evidence? OK... But it seems to me that you have double standards.

OK. Assuming these claims are true (and I have no reason to doubt them, I'm just pointing out that they do not constitute irrefutable evidence), based on the information provided, it's reasonable to conclude that ChipMixer did not steal those coins, but rather a government agency confiscated them.

To sum it up, your claim that Chipmixer "stole everyone's coins" was a lie, or at the very least an exaggeration. And your second claim, again unsubstantiated, that they "turned over their data to the government" is equally bogus. You're either delusional or deliberately spreading misinformation.

If someone falsely accused you of rape for years, wouldn't you relentlessly defend yourself against the false accusation by posting the proof that the accuser was lying the entire time?

You don't defend yourself against "false accusations" by wishing someone dead, or by coming to someone's "farewell" thread to gloat over their imminent demise. Have some respect.

[Kruw]

No matter how things are between you and o_e_l_e_o I don't think him having a short time to live is something you should be happy about, is like you're taking advantage of the fact that he's not going to be here to defend himself to say some crazy things.

I'm not saying "crazy things", I provided o_e_l_e_o's own quotes that prove he was lying about innocent non custodial open source privacy projects and telling people to deposit their coins into a scam that stole depositor funds and turned over user data to the government.

Come on OP,  even if he did something you don't like or he stole your money or something, that shouldn't make you wish him death, at least he never prayed you stop breathing , give him the last respect he deserves and not the way you're going about business. Try and keep a better legacy too, who knows this guy o_e_l_e_o can make it past this month next year and many more years, I just wish him well where ever he is.

"Even if he stole your money"?...

I'm curious, how would you feel if someone who was impostering your profile to scam people out of their money died?  Would you say "well, at least my imposter deserves respect"?

So now we accept someone else's claims as evidence? OK... But it seems to me that you have double standards.

What do you mean I have "double standards"?  Can you provide an example?

OK. Assuming these claims are true (and I have no reason to doubt them, I'm just pointing out that they do not constitute irrefutable evidence), based on the information provided, it's reasonable to conclude that ChipMixer did not steal those coins, but rather a government agency confiscated them.

To sum it up, your claim that Chipmixer "stole everyone's coins" was a lie, or at the very least an exaggeration. And your second claim, again unsubstantiated, that they "turned over their data to the government" is equally bogus. You're either delusional or deliberately spreading misinformation.

It's not an "exaggeration", ChipMixer explicitly claimed that they delete the private keys:

Destroying the session deletes chip private key.

^This was a scam.

You don't defend yourself against "false accusations" by wishing someone dead, or by coming to someone's "farewell" thread to gloat over their imminent demise. Have some respect.

I didn't "wish someone dead", I posted proof that o_e_l_e_o knew the accusations he was making were false.

[SamReomo]

I didn't "wish someone dead", I posted proof that o_e_l_e_o knew the accusations he was making were false.

Even if you know that the accusations he was making weren't right you should not post comments like that on his farewell thread. When he was present on this forum and no one was aware of his health issue then you could create a thread and come up with your accusations.

However, you have chosen a wrong thread to make those comments as his farewell message shocked the all members of the forum and no one even thought that something like that could happen to a doctor. I hope by now you might understand that whatever you said wasn't right especially in a thread like that.

Trust me your comment on that thread hurt the feelings of many members of the forum. We as humans should understand that sometimes our words in wrong occasions can hurt others feelings. I'm not sure what's with you or with o_e_l_e_o, but if must say that your comment wasn't right on that thread.

[FatFork]

What do you mean I have "double standards"?  Can you provide an example?

Sure I can. Here is an example.

So, to paraphrase your words, you have never provided any proof of Chipmixer scamming anyone, you just reposted it without verifying it.

OK. Assuming these claims are true (and I have no reason to doubt them, I'm just pointing out that they do not constitute irrefutable evidence), based on the information provided, it's reasonable to conclude that ChipMixer did not steal those coins, but rather a government agency confiscated them.

To sum it up, your claim that Chipmixer "stole everyone's coins" was a lie, or at the very least an exaggeration. And your second claim, again unsubstantiated, that they "turned over their data to the government" is equally bogus. You're either delusional or deliberately spreading misinformation.

It's not an "exaggeration", ChipMixer explicitly claimed that they delete the private keys:

Destroying the session deletes chip private key.

^This was a scam.

That's your opinion, but I disagree. They were seized by a government and all available private keys were confiscated. That's not the definition of a scam.

But you specifically stated "they stole everyone's coins". Was that a lie?

You don't defend yourself against "false accusations" by wishing someone dead, or by coming to someone's "farewell" thread to gloat over their imminent demise. Have some respect.

I didn't "wish someone dead", I posted proof that o_e_l_e_o knew the accusations he was making were false.

That's another lie. Here's your original post in o_e_l_e_o's "farewell" thread: https://ninjastic.space/post/63517379
That post contains no proofs whatsoever, just your baseless opinion and a disgusting comment about his terminal illness.

[dkbit98]

Thanks for calling o_e_l_e_o out for the pathetic way he ruined his reputation.

You publicly lied and twisted my words, so now I have full right to call you a liar and you are not far from being a scammer if you continue down this path.

Talking with this member is a waste of time since he thinks he is always right, so I would suggest everyone to ignore him and stop replying on his posts.
Let him enjoy his eco chamber.

[Kruw]

Even if you know that the accusations he was making weren't right you should not post comments like that on his farewell thread. When he was present on this forum and no one was aware of his health issue then you could create a thread and come up with your accusations.

I was actively warning users about o_e_l_e_o scamming while he was still present too.

However, you have chosen a wrong thread to make those comments as his farewell message shocked the all members of the forum and no one even thought that something like that could happen to a doctor. I hope by now you might understand that whatever you said wasn't right especially in a thread like that.

You seem to misunderstand:  Saying "Farewell" does not mean that you only say goodbye to your friends, saying farewell also means you say goodbye to your victims.  The victims deserve just as much of a voice as the friends, if not more.

Trust me your comment on that thread hurt the feelings of many members of the forum. We as humans should understand that sometimes our words in wrong occasions can hurt others feelings. I'm not sure what's with you or with o_e_l_e_o, but if must say that your comment wasn't right on that thread.

I don't care about people's feelings, I care about the truth.

Sure I can. Here is an example.

So, to paraphrase your words, you have never provided any proof of Chipmixer scamming anyone, you just reposted it without verifying it.

I did verify those reports are from real victims of ChipMixer and ChipMixer partners, and I did verify it was not ChipMixer competitors purposely lying (like the evidence you linked shows.)

Proof of james3441 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935098.msg52372824#msg52372824
Proof of Lucius - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5440942.msg61812722#msg61812722
Proof of n0nce - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935179.msg61736973#msg61736973

As you can see, I do not have a double standard because I always make sure my accusations are backed up with proof.

That's your opinion, but I disagree. They were seized by a government and all available private keys were confiscated. That's not the definition of a scam.

If ChipMixer wasn't a scam, please explain how all the NON available private keys that ChipMixer said they deleted were also confiscated.

That's another lie. Here's your original post in o_e_l_e_o's "farewell" thread: https://ninjastic.space/post/63517379
That post contains no proofs whatsoever, just your baseless opinion and a disgusting comment about his terminal illness.

As you can see from the quote, I made no comment whatsoever about his illness:

Good riddance o_e_l_e_o.  No one else I've interacted with on this forum has done more damage to the future of Bitcoin and freedom than you.  Even after your involvement with the Chipmixer scam, you knowingly spread continuous lies about privacy weaknesses in Bitcoin that do not exist. Your scheme of tricking people into giving up their data and stealing their coins will finally come to an end.

As I mentioned earlier, if o_e_l_e_o's farewell thread said he was leaving the forum to become a Buddhist monk or Amish farmer, my "Good Riddance" post would not change at all, because no mention was made whatsoever about his physical condition.