ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
 |
September 10, 2026, 08:15:45 AM |
|
Account: songchunlaiAdditional information (optional): * Another fraud who claim himself as Satoshi Nakamoto, https://web.archive.org/web/20260910080306/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5344415.0. List of post: Public key:
04678AFDB0FE5548271967F1A67130B7105CD6A828E03909A67962E0EA1F61DEB649F6BC3F4CEF3 8C4F35504E51EC112DE5C384DF7BA0B8D578A4C702B6BF11D5F
It is said that the private key is the hash of the public key, which is a very rare coincidence.It is said that the private key is the hash of the public key, which is a very rare coincidence.
Also the hash of SongChunLai1985/02/04111111111111111111111111, And some salt.
Private key is not hash of the public key. It's usually generated with secure random generator.
Account: ShareTheVibesAdditional information (optional): * Another SEO spammer account. List of post: Unhelpful. SEO spam/excessive promotion violate forum rule. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
September 12, 2026, 09:24:11 AM |
|
Account: theguywhoisniceAdditional information (optional): 1. This account created at least 31 post in 24 hours. 2. Some of his post already deleted by moderator, but he keep spamming. List of post: Unhelpful. The one who asked for help already solved their issue. you can create ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf yourself it doesn't have to exist by default
for examples, i'd check the bitcoin core configuration documentation, some guy listed link to it
Unhelpful, only repeat things that already posted earlier by other user.
Account: robertcarlyleAdditional information (optional): 1. This account also got accusation "Someone who asks questions without paying attention to the answers". List of post: Spam/unhelpful. All of those thread that ask vague, semi off-topic or generic question already deleted by moderator. Those question could be asked on his other thread such as 2009 vs 2010 or Limit? as follow-up question. |
|
|
|
LoyceV
Legendary
Activity: 4200
Merit: 22996
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
|
September 12, 2026, 09:36:40 AM
Last edit: September 12, 2026, 10:15:17 AM by LoyceV |
|
I had 3 of his posts deleted, Modlog shows 9 deleted posts, and he's not banned yet  Update: I've added a Shitposter-tag. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
September 12, 2026, 09:52:29 AM |
|
I had 3 of his posts deleted, Modlog shows 9 deleted posts, and he's not banned yet We know that happens sometimes. So meanwhile, consider do more reporting and tag such account. Anyway, we're on "cat-and-mouse game" stage. Those account farmer will create new account and probably spam technical board again, despite their post more likely to be reported and their account got tagged. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
September 18, 2026, 07:09:13 AM |
|
Account: CharleslieAdditional information (optional): - List of post: Unhelpful. It doesn't answer question "Should I use this derivation path for all three signers (keystore), or to enter derivation path from the wallets?" at all. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
September 25, 2026, 07:59:28 AM |
|
Account: fighter2627Additional information (optional): - List of post: Generally unhelpful, due to vagueness of the statements. Statement such as "Miners cannot provide hashpower if they do not use electricity, due to electricity is where the hashpower comes from." is also wrong, because mining hardware (ASIC) is also required to perform mining. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
October 03, 2026, 07:17:21 AM |
|
Account: Morpheus030Additional information (optional): - List of post: As stated by other user on https://bitlist.co/post/67200639, this thread is plagiarism of https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/is-the-pre-finality-double-spend-race-intrinsic-to-single-owner-coins/2929.
Account: SowatAdditional information (optional): * This account also got accusation of spamming with AI/chatbot and merit abuse, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg67174534#msg67174534. List of post:  It could also be interesting to analyze one behavior of the wallet that seems to be interesting to study because it might have its matching behavior in Bitcoin Core and in other wallets like Coinomi and Mycelium. I am not claiming that this is an Electrum specific thing, and that this can be corrected easily. Whether the issue in question can be consistently reproduced and studied, and then optimized, without adding other new risk points in the process, remains an open question. However, I've been told the issue was already reported in the Electrum backlog, see also the issue #6016. For that reason, I think that this issue should be discussed technically even if both reproducing and fixing it may be difficult. In any case I would like to hear from these well-versed users with technical experience who have experienced this problem themselves. As it might affect multiple wallets, this might also raise some additional questions on the wallet design and implementation. Has anyone succeeded in reproducing this bug in Electrum and/or Bitcoin Core? Do you have a suggestion of how this problem can be tested from a technical perspective? Partially non-sense, as described on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5595754.msg67202967#msg67202967.
Account: IDRIS22Additional information (optional): * Possibly new farming account List of post: Poor/generic question thread that already deleted by moderator. Bitcoin wallet itself run on a computer or computer-like device. |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
October 13, 2026, 09:19:27 AM Merited by DireWolfM14 (1) |
|
Account: wapwapwendyAdditional information (optional): - List of post: All of them are generic reply that deleted by moderator.
Account: LemonmateAdditional information (optional): - List of post: Unhelpful post which only re-told information from earlier posts, which is probably why it's deleted by moderator.
Account: osasshemAdditional information (optional): * This account received accusation as part of alt accounts, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg59261219#msg59261219. List of post: Electrum is the best wallet to use for storage of your Bitcoin, both for the long and short term, and large or small quantity of your holdings. Since this year, there has been different hacks and security breach of cold wallet storage, which has broken the trust people has had on those wallet. They are expensive to purchase and yet it got hacked, but Electrum for the time being has proven to be fast, secured and easy to use by any of its user. Electrum is a Multi-Signature wallet, that requires more than one private key to authorize a transaction.
It is the best to use for both long/short term holding, large/small amount that is being held.
As stated on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5596570.msg67233042#msg67233042, it's misleading post because Electrum isn't multi-sig only wallet. |
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
October 16, 2026, 10:11:50 AM |
|
User: alani123Additional information (optional): * While i only list 2 posts, this user actually created more posts containing false information about Taproot, SegWit and OP_RETURN. List of post: Is taproot important? Not in any functional way. Although, in terms of adoption, many thousands of NFT users abused exploits introduced by taproot soft forks to pump useless data like images into bitcoin. The so called ordinals and inscriptions had a huge impact on the bitcoin Blockchain. So although very far from the envisioned use, taproot did receive a lot of use just because it introduced these colours that wouldn't have let BTC to otherwise support this ridiculous NFT tulip mania.
Taproot actually have 2 main technical benefit, 1. Schnorr Signature. It aggregate signature, which reduce signature size then Taproot address require N-of-M signature for spending. 2. Tapscript. When you spend Bitcoin from Taproot address with multiple spending condition, Tapscript only reveal part of the script which reduce overall TX size and slightly improve privacy. NFT and token actually can be "created" on Bitcoin network without using SegWit or Taproot. Counterparty (exist since 2014) and Runes (which use OP_RETURN) prove that. I read it, and I read it again. I can't see why anyone would want this. When syncing Bitcoin Core, you sync everything. When using an API, I assume you're looking for specific parts, and the parts you're looking for shouldn't be altered. So I see absolutely no use for this.
When bitcoin core 30 is implemented (it's already scheduled to) the OP_RETURN limit being turned off will result to unlimited amounts of data being added in a block and utilizing the witness discount. Ordinals become obsolete. There will be no more need for stitching together 40 byte inputs through third party tools and external implementations. This means that anyone storing the Blockchain in full could potential have entire images or files of whatever has been uploaded. And yes it's no lie that this can result in harmful files which many parties would be interested to filter. As if everyone hadn't been warned before this being implementation on core 30. This makes bitcoin prone to sabotage and nodes even more centralised. 1. OP_RETURN doesn't benefit from witness discount, because OP_RETURN isn't categorized as witness data. 2. If spammer switch from Ordinal (or other approach that use witness data) to OP_RETURN, the negative impact would be lower since OP_RETURN isn't added to chainstate/UTXO set and maximum block size (in bytes) would be lower. Almost a year passed, I tried to message you OP, but it says messages are blocked so here goes... I'll say what I'm thinking here. I was wrong in terms of what the impact of Ordinals/Runes/BRC etc would be. It was a fad that never really returned and since I've said many of these things, over that whole time I was saying that and continuing till now, Bitcoin has had some of it's lowest transaction volumes continuously. The fad went away and never came back. Now, even more protocols have been created to proport to adding functionality on bitcoin by writing some of their data on-chain, like Citrea. But all of them have failed to gather that much traction that this would affect the blockspace. To the contrary, now almost every pool was forced to accept sub 1sat/vByte transactions because otherwise there would be blocks mined with too much empty space. And even with that measure blocks aren't always full. The scare about "spam" was exaggerated but I also feel like there was a misunderstanding I'd be a supporter of Luke DashJr. I have to clarify, I never truly liked Luke. But after he forked BTC to create his own altcoin, and even hard-forked it again to lower the blocksize, I'm just thinking that I should have always been super critical about this lunatic's dealings. In any case, please accept my apologies and also please let me know if I could do anything to have that rating removed from my profile. it hurts me to see my profile tagged like that as a user of BTC since 2013 and I really don't think I deserve to have it especially after my more recent admission that I was exaggerating my claims and was wrong about many things. I hope other members of the community will read my post in an understanding way. I never had the intention to harm anybody, surely I expressed some opinions in a way that should (and did) garner criticism, but I've even changed my mind on most things I've said. This whole ordeal could also raise some discussion about how to handle trust ratings here imo. But I'm hoping me and OP can just amend it. Cheers to OP and anyone reading |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
October 17, 2026, 09:55:49 AM |
|
--snip--
1. its not 1 year yet. 2. my accusation is about stating wrong technical information, not your opinion. whether ordinal is "dead" or still dominate block space today, it doesn't change some of your statement (such as "OP_RETURN limit being turned off will result to unlimited amounts of data being added in a block and utilizing the witness discount.") is wrong. truly disappointing, even AI/chatbot these days can point out your attempt to present wrong technical information as "opinion". Based on the provided text, yes, alani123 does attempt to deflect and misdirect the specific technical accusations made by ABCbits, although they do so while framing the response as an apology. Here is the breakdown of how the deflection and misdirection occur: 1. Avoidance of Technical CorrectionsABCbits provided two very specific technical corrections: - Correction A: Taproot provides functional benefits via Schnorr Signatures and Tapscript (reducing size and improving privacy).
- Correction B: OP_RETURN does not benefit from the witness discount.
In the response, alani123 never addresses these technical points. They do not acknowledge that they were wrong about how Schnorr signatures work or how the witness discount applies to OP_RETURN. Instead of admitting to technical ignorance or error, they shift the conversation to the outcome of the events. 2. Shifting from "Technical Fact" to "Market Impact" (Deflection)Instead of discussing the mechanics of Bitcoin Core or Taproot, alani123 pivots to a discussion about market trends: - They claim they were "wrong in terms of what the impact of Ordinals/Runes/BRC etc would be."
- They argue that because the "fad went away" and blockspace is currently underutilized, their previous warnings were simply "exaggerated."
This is a classic deflection: they are attempting to excuse technical falsehoods by arguing that the practical result of those falsehoods didn't cause as much damage as they feared. Whether or not Ordinals were a "fad" is irrelevant to whether OP_RETURN receives a witness discount. 3. The "External Enemy" Pivot (Misdirection)Alani123 introduces a third party—Luke DashJr—to redirect the narrative: - They spend a paragraph distancing themselves from Luke DashJr, calling him a "lunatic."
- By doing this, they attempt to rebrand their previous incorrect statements not as "false information," but as the result of being influenced by a "lunatic." This shifts the focus from the user's own technical accuracy to their personal judgment of another community member.
4. Appeal to Emotion and Longevity (Misdirection)Finally, the user shifts the conversation from a technical dispute to a plea for mercy: - They mention being a user since 2013.
- They express that the profile tag "hurts" them.
- They frame the issue as a "trust rating" discussion rather than a "factual accuracy" discussion.
SummaryWhile alani123 uses the language of an apology ("please accept my apologies," "I was wrong"), they do not actually apologize for the technical misinformation. They admit to "exaggerating," but they steer the conversation away from the specific technical errors (which are binary—either true or false) and toward subjective topics like "fads," "lunatics," and "hurt feelings." |
|
|
|
Shishir99
Legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1102
|
|
October 17, 2026, 12:40:51 PM |
|
1. its not 1 year yet.
2. my accusation is about stating wrong technical information, not your opinion. whether ordinal is "dead" or still dominate block space today, it doesn't change some of your statement (such as "OP_RETURN limit being turned off will result to unlimited amounts of data being added in a block and utilizing the witness discount.") is wrong.
truly disappointing, even AI/chatbot these days can point out your attempt to present wrong technical information as "opinion". Excuse me, please. I am just an average forum member, and I don't understand much about these things you guys were discussing. Which is why I am asking this here. I am just curious to know: was it his intention to spread the false information? Or is there a possibility that he does not know how these things actually work, and he probably does not know enough? Personally, I sometimes think that I know a lot of things about Bitcoin. But when it comes to technical things, I might be wrong in some cases, and I might write something wrong without knowing that I am actually wrong. In such cases, I would expect someone who knows better than me to correct me. Isn't that how a community is supposed to work? I see alani123 actually apologises, which means he is willing to correct himself and learn more. If he was wrong and now he admits it and wants to correct himself, I would recommend you consider his request if his post/opinion/feedback does not harm anyone. |
|
EARNBET | | | ⚽ 🏀
🏈 🏓
🎯 🥊 |
| ⚾ 🎾
⛳ 🏐
🏏 🏎️ | | |
███████▄▄███████████
████▄██████████████████
██▄▀▀███████████████▀▀███
█▄████████████████████████
▄▄████████▀▀▀▀▀████████▄▄██
███████████████████████████
█████████▌████▀████████████
███████████████████████████
▀▀███████▄▄▄▄▄█████████▀▀██
█▀█████████████████████▀██
██▀▄▄███████████████▄▄███
████▀██████████████████
███████▀▀███████████ |
....HIGHEST....
VIP REWARDS
✔ G U A R A N T E E D
| | |
🜲 | KING OF
THE CASTLE
$200K in prizes | | |
..PLAY NOW.. |
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
October 17, 2026, 01:43:53 PM |
|
--snip--
1. its not 1 year yet. 2. my accusation is about stating wrong technical information, not your opinion. whether ordinal is "dead" or still dominate block space today, it doesn't change some of your statement (such as "OP_RETURN limit being turned off will result to unlimited amounts of data being added in a block and utilizing the witness discount.") is wrong. truly disappointing, even AI/chatbot these days can point out your attempt to present wrong technical information as "opinion". Based on the provided text, yes, alani123 does attempt to deflect and misdirect the specific technical accusations made by ABCbits, although they do so while framing the response as an apology. Here is the breakdown of how the deflection and misdirection occur: 1. Avoidance of Technical CorrectionsABCbits provided two very specific technical corrections: - Correction A: Taproot provides functional benefits via Schnorr Signatures and Tapscript (reducing size and improving privacy).
- Correction B: OP_RETURN does not benefit from the witness discount.
In the response, alani123 never addresses these technical points. They do not acknowledge that they were wrong about how Schnorr signatures work or how the witness discount applies to OP_RETURN. Instead of admitting to technical ignorance or error, they shift the conversation to the outcome of the events. 2. Shifting from "Technical Fact" to "Market Impact" (Deflection)Instead of discussing the mechanics of Bitcoin Core or Taproot, alani123 pivots to a discussion about market trends: - They claim they were "wrong in terms of what the impact of Ordinals/Runes/BRC etc would be."
- They argue that because the "fad went away" and blockspace is currently underutilized, their previous warnings were simply "exaggerated."
This is a classic deflection: they are attempting to excuse technical falsehoods by arguing that the practical result of those falsehoods didn't cause as much damage as they feared. Whether or not Ordinals were a "fad" is irrelevant to whether OP_RETURN receives a witness discount. 3. The "External Enemy" Pivot (Misdirection)Alani123 introduces a third party—Luke DashJr—to redirect the narrative: - They spend a paragraph distancing themselves from Luke DashJr, calling him a "lunatic."
- By doing this, they attempt to rebrand their previous incorrect statements not as "false information," but as the result of being influenced by a "lunatic." This shifts the focus from the user's own technical accuracy to their personal judgment of another community member.
4. Appeal to Emotion and Longevity (Misdirection)Finally, the user shifts the conversation from a technical dispute to a plea for mercy: - They mention being a user since 2013.
- They express that the profile tag "hurts" them.
- They frame the issue as a "trust rating" discussion rather than a "factual accuracy" discussion.
SummaryWhile alani123 uses the language of an apology ("please accept my apologies," "I was wrong"), they do not actually apologize for the technical misinformation. They admit to "exaggerating," but they steer the conversation away from the specific technical errors (which are binary—either true or false) and toward subjective topics like "fads," "lunatics," and "hurt feelings." OP come on man, did your chat bot read that I directly asked you what I should do to amend things in your view? It seems to me it has more of the A aspect of AI then 😁 I'd honestly appreciate a real answer but now I have to explain myself against AI. I watched 2001 space odyssey recently, I didn't expect having to live through a real life reference. (For the record, this is a joke, please don't feed it into your personalised AI chatbot because it'll clearly read over all of my points again just to call it deflection). In my post I did say I regretted the things I said and even went on to say WHY I think I was wrong. My stance on Luke Dashjr changing matters because he is to this day the primary source of what you call misinformation. I was neutral and now I'm hypercritical of him and any of his claims. People's mind works in different ways as you can understand. A super harsh rating hurting me is not a lie or deflection, it's 100% true. I'm not expecting empathy from everyone, although I kinda asked for it, but among other things I asked you in specific what to do because you're the one who left the rating. So let me get back to the point. I offer to delete any responses I can which you deam are critical in spreading misinformation, or amend/archive those which can't be deleted. If you want, I can post here or in a separate thread to say I was wrong about these posts. Going through old posts I may find other topics and responses which I may find wrong, I'll report on these too. Honestly, what else can I do to show my regret OP. 😁 Give me a chance |
|
|
|
ABCbits (OP)
Legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 10442
|
|
October 18, 2026, 08:33:41 AM |
|
I am just curious to know: was it his intention to spread the false information? Or is there a possibility that he does not know how these things actually work, and he probably does not know enough? Personally, I sometimes think that I know a lot of things about Bitcoin. But when it comes to technical things, I might be wrong in some cases, and I might write something wrong without knowing that I am actually wrong. In such cases, I would expect someone who knows better than me to correct me. Isn't that how a community is supposed to work?
I'm not sure you missed this part of my post or you disagree with it. User: alani123Additional information (optional): * While i only list 2 posts, this user actually created more posts containing false information about Taproot, SegWit and OP_RETURN. --snip--
--snip--
Honestly, what else can I do to show my regret OP. 😁 Give me a chance
pick one, 1. wait for 1 year passed since the tag created and re-ask me to consider. 2. give proof for at least 2 out of 4 of your statement ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5482297.msg66154246#msg66154246) is factually correct/accurate enough. by proof, it could be source code, BIP, technical explanation or other credible source. |
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
October 18, 2026, 11:04:32 AM |
|
OP that is a catch 22
If my statements are incorrect as you say, and I offer to correct them or delete them,
you go back saying I should substantiate false statements? It's very paradoxical you'd follow up with this after what I offered to do.
So what's the conclusion here?
Are we clear that I regret saying these things and want to put the record straight?
Are we ok if I delete the posts you pointed out after my apology?
|
|
|
|
nutildah
Legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 12105
|
|
Today at 01:32:11 AM |
|
So what's the conclusion here?
The conclusion is don't write posts if you're unsure what you're talking about. For a few years now I've noticed that your posts in general aren't very good -- you just kind of say whatever comes to the top of your head without respect to the reality of any given situation. The policy of ABCbits regarding his neutral tags is fair. I suggest you put a bit more thought into your writing. |
1864jXLSdbZq319oQScCNG1m7nLYbGHuBX
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
Today at 01:49:27 AM |
|
So what's the conclusion here?
The conclusion is don't write posts if you're unsure what you're talking about. For a few years now I've noticed that your posts in general aren't very good -- you just kind of say whatever comes to the top of your head without respect to the reality of any given situation. Years? I barely recall us having interaction or participating in common threads, so how's that observation humanly possible? I can't help but think that this is an exaggeration. Years? Without respect to the reality of any given situation? Come on. If you're just gonna bring up exaggerations off the top of your head about me I could easily pull a "no u" here because your exact accusations could very easily be directed towards you when you have such an attitude to make posts like that one  I mean really, I'm trying to keep things classy here, nothing personal, but I don't see how sweeping generalisations help. The policy of ABCbits regarding his neutral tags is fair. I suggest you put a bit more thought into your writing.
Ok, I'll bite. Trust ratings are for trades, I've never conducted any trade with OP and there's zero complaints about any of my posts causing harm by anyone. OP says I posted information he disagreed with. If you go back enough pages you see several people posted in this thread saying opinions shouldn't be tagged either negative nor neutral. So even if I'm admiting that the specific opinions of mine that OP disagreed with have changed and I'm willing to admit I was exaggerating some concerns which turned out I was wrong, and even amend what he called false/inaccurate or whatever, why should the rating stay? Even when it was a huge exaggeration to receive such resting in the first place? I have almost completely abstained from posting on technical discussions for around a year. What else am I supposed to do to show my regrets and help rid myself of such rating? Honest questions here. |
|
|
|
nutildah
Legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 12105
|
|
Today at 03:26:57 AM |
|
I barely recall us having interaction or participating in common threads, so how's that observation humanly possible?
That doesn't mean I haven't seen your posts, which your merits speak for the quality of. If your account wasn't as old as it was, you'd still be a Hero member, even after 8 years of the merit system. In any case, I recommend just waiting it out until the 365 day period is over and then ask ABCbits to consider removing the tag. |
1864jXLSdbZq319oQScCNG1m7nLYbGHuBX
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
Today at 03:51:55 AM |
|
I barely recall us having interaction or participating in common threads, so how's that observation humanly possible?
That doesn't mean I haven't seen your posts, which your merits speak for the quality of. If your account wasn't as old as it was, you'd still be a Hero member, even after 8 years of the merit system. To the contrary I think it's quite easy to prove you don't remember us interacting or any of my posts, let alone "for years" for that matter. Recently I made some positive remarks about your recent actions in the forum about sig bans, with later suggestions of mine even recommending the access given to moderators taking such actions against spam are expanded.
I think had you remembered me at all from that recent interaction, you wouldn't be alluring to me being a shit poster. Another fun fact about me is that I was awol from the forum for many many years. I came back recently and even verified it was me in an indisputable way. Maybe you'd know that about me if you were keeping tabs on me "for years". I don't expect you do do that but it was just an extraordinary claim that was easy to disprove. So conflating my account age with merits is just making it worse. Anyway, fwiw, I appreciate your work in the forum and will continue to appreciate it infinitely just please be a little considerate throwing out accusations |
|
|
|
LoyceV
Legendary
Activity: 4200
Merit: 22996
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
|
|
Today at 05:41:01 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 1885
αθάνατoς
|
|
Today at 05:53:53 AM |
|
2 active posters with 10+ year accounts in the same forum, having not posted in the same threads, some of which have hundreds of pages, has chances trending towards zero probably so it's mostly the intersections that matter other than a vague sense of co existing in the same space. I think I provided examples that were pretty practical about having a positive interaction a few days ago. My logic says had nutildah remembered this it would have been less likely to act so hot headed towards me. This isn't an accusation btw, it's just a well meaning observation. If we can have a level headed discussion on one occasion, there's no need to turn things around by making random accusations just days later. 🤷
Edit: and also in the thread where I came back after a long hiatus from bitcoin talk and verified myself, nutidah was defending me..lol I just noticed that and don't think I remembered this detail that well my self. I don't think he'd remember either. It's pretty safe to say I think we haven't had NOTABLE interaction. But the moral of the story for me is: try to be nice. I don't think I was mean to anyone anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
