Old Accounts That Have Likely Been Hacked/Traded

[nutildah]

I have traded with users both inside and outside the forum, though the majority of them are no longer active here. I have been using the same wallet address and Telegram ID for a very long time—specifically, the same Telegram ID for at least 10 years.

You are not the original owner of the account. The original owner of the account was a native English speaker, most likely from the USA. You are not a native English speaker. The original owner was also more intelligent than you. People don't get dumber and their native language skills don't get worse over the years.

[7788bitcoin]

I have traded with users both inside and outside the forum, though the majority of them are no longer active here. I have been using the same wallet address and Telegram ID for a very long time—specifically, the same Telegram ID for at least 10 years.

You are not the original owner of the account. The original owner of the account was a native English speaker, most likely from the USA. You are not a native English speaker. The original owner was also more intelligent than you. People don't get dumber and their native language skills don't get worse over the years.

linguistics and your gossip do not dictate my ownership of the account. Hard data does. The forum administration can easily verify that the underlying registration email and IP routing history show a decade of consistency. I am happy to let Cyrus and the backend database logs settle this debate rather than expecting your speech policing to disprove my ownership.

This is coming from someone who created this account or the new owner.

http://web.archive.org/web/20190704162438/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.0

There are archive records linking the original owner to Hawaii. Have you moved, or are you still in the same place?

I know you posted this along the way as a distraction to show how lucky you were that you didn't sell the account. Let's say the admins check your account history from the very start; I am more than willing to let them check mine.

Since the idea here is just to throw mud and see whether it sticks, I fully expect a few keyboard warriors who are active on this board to join in. I will only post archive posts, not wild guesses. I am going through all the data I have collected over the years, and I will definitely get back to nutildah and stompix once I pull the records stored in my old drives including your email and password changes.

[nutildah]

linguistics and your gossip do not dictate my ownership of the account. Hard data does.

Its pretty clear "you" own the account. That's not what's in question. And I do believe you've owned it for a long time, but you are not the original owner.

Compare this:

I have gone back and looked at #3 again, I think the correct answer should be EAhBp

192 (7)-1 should be h. See the pdf file again, page 192 should be the page 208 in the pdf.

Hello! i will hold on for a day or two to Announche  any right answers again

The OP purposely have a capital A in "announce" and an additional h, meaning the h is behind A => EAhBp

this is a small hint. but hints can be small. but this Hint is: Softcover
Level 3

"this is a small hint" &  "but hints can be small" => a small "h"

OP is really smart!!

Anyone willing to put their computing power into brute forcing the answer?

to this:

What a wonderful day for New Zealand. Matt Henry and Glenn Phillips missed out on the match due to injury. The New Zealand opening partnership scored 317 runs for the first wicket. It is now one of the best partnerships ever by New Zealand against England.

England with almost the same team they played in the first Test and yet New Zealand dominated the day's play, even though they lost a few late wickets by stumps. England dropped a crucial catch off Tom Latham when he was on 129 runs and failed to take a DRS review on Devon Conway when he was on 71 runs. These mishaps had a major impact on the match.

To be reasonable, I take back my assertion that the original owner was a native English speaker. Upon closer inspection they seem to be something else, but their English is still better than yours, and they are definitely more intelligent than you.

I will withdraw my red tag for now and replace it with a neutral.

[7788bitcoin]

linguistics and your gossip do not dictate my ownership of the account. Hard data does.

Its pretty clear "you" own the account. That's not what's in question. And I do believe you've owned it for a long time, but you are not the original owner.

Compare this:

I have gone back and looked at #3 again, I think the correct answer should be EAhBp

192 (7)-1 should be h. See the pdf file again, page 192 should be the page 208 in the pdf.

Hello! i will hold on for a day or two to Announche  any right answers again

The OP purposely have a capital A in "announce" and an additional h, meaning the h is behind A => EAhBp

this is a small hint. but hints can be small. but this Hint is: Softcover
Level 3

"this is a small hint" &  "but hints can be small" => a small "h"

OP is really smart!!

Anyone willing to put their computing power into brute forcing the answer?

to this:

What a wonderful day for New Zealand. Matt Henry and Glenn Phillips missed out on the match due to injury. The New Zealand opening partnership scored 317 runs for the first wicket. It is now one of the best partnerships ever by New Zealand against England.

England with almost the same team they played in the first Test and yet New Zealand dominated the day's play, even though they lost a few late wickets by stumps. England dropped a crucial catch off Tom Latham when he was on 129 runs and failed to take a DRS review on Devon Conway when he was on 71 runs. These mishaps had a major impact on the match.

To be reasonable, I take back my assertion that the original owner was a native English speaker. Upon closer inspection they seem to be something else, but their English is still better than yours, and they are definitely more intelligent than you.

I will withdraw my red tag for now and replace it with a neutral.

You are still quoting cricket banter and sarcasm that only those who actually understand the game will get—which you clearly don't. You haven't even participated in that thread during the years I have been active, yet you are judging what I wrote about cricket. Are you serious?

[nutildah]

You haven't even participated in that thread during the years I have been active, yet you are judging what I wrote about cricket. Are you serious?

That post represents 90% of your recent posts, that's why I chose it. You're not saying anything to anybody, about anything. Nobody reads your posts because they're not interesting, and you don't care. That's why you only have 26 earned merits after 5,600 posts.

This is the exact opposite behavior as the "2015 you".

[7788bitcoin]

You haven't even participated in that thread during the years I have been active, yet you are judging what I wrote about cricket. Are you serious?

That post represents 90% of your recent posts, that's why I chose it. You're not saying anything to anybody, about anything. Nobody reads your posts because they're not interesting, and you don't care. That's why you only have 26 earned merits after 5,600 posts.

This is the exact opposite behavior as the "2015 you".

Are you seriously claiming that I bought this account after 2015? I can make the exact same accusation against you. I've already posted evidence of the original owner's pitch, and the rest of the archives are coming shortly. I'm not going to throw wild accusations around like you do—I only post facts with proof..

[nutildah]

Are you seriously claiming that I bought this account after 2015?

No, I'm just claiming that you're not the original owner of the account. But you're right to demand more sufficient proof. That's why I changed my tag to a neutral.

[7788bitcoin]

Are you seriously claiming that I bought this account after 2015?

No, I'm just claiming that you're not the original owner of the account. But you're right to demand more sufficient proof. That's why I changed my tag to a neutral.

Claim whatever you want. I wouldn't even be posting here since all my old colleagues have left the forum. But after your accusation, I reached out to an old contact who was active here long before I registered. I won't disclose his name because I don't want to drag him into this, we are aware of sad state of the drama that unfolds here daily.

Users who purchased old accounts, and account sellers in the past, suddenly become vigilantes. I am not going to name them unless they are willing to come forward here. There were hundreds of scammers active here — I'm certain they're still active with other alts. I am not against your actions and vigilance, but throwing random accusations is just ridiculous. Earlier theymos used to tag scammers even when they returned with alts.

I'm just curious — since you created your dogermint persona, did you actually ask Wendell Davis about your idea, or were you just winging it?

[nutildah]

I am not against your actions and vigilance, but throwing random accusations is just ridiculous. Earlier theymos used to tag scammers even when they returned with alts.

The problem is account buying and selling is now more of a problem than ever before. It seems to be encouraged by campaign managers who seek out professional SEO stampers like yourself. Sometimes innocent accounts do get unfairly tagged, its an unfortunate truth. But that's the beautiful thing about the trust system: mistakes can easily be corrected.

I'm just curious — since you created your dogermint persona, did you actually ask Wendell Davis about your idea, or were you just winging it?

Wendell abandoned Dogeparty in 2015 and hasn't been heard from since, so no, I never asked him about "my idea," whatever it is you are referring to.

[eternalgloom]

Name:   nutildah
Posts:   2152
Activity:   560
Position:   Hero Member
Date Registered:   April 19, 2014, 11:50:27 AM
Trust:   0: -0 / +0

My posts were frequently contentious and sometimes downright argumentative, but that's because I'm a real person who was genuinely interested in bitcoin and this forum, and I wasn't just trying to build up an account to sell it or do sig campaigns.

Its a completely anonymous account, never been linked to my real identity. I stopped posting for the most part about 6 months ago.

I would like 0.3 BTC for it.

You can get back to me here or via PM. Thanks!

Account still for sale, dropped the price to 0.275 BTC

ps: it was brought to my attention that a large amount of user accounts had been stolen recently. i am more than happy to provide proof of original ownership upon request.

Quoted from: Wayback Machine

Hmm, consider me skeptical.

nutildah, would you mind signing a message with any Bitcoin address that you staked before those dates?

That would help verify the original ownership of the account.

[7788bitcoin]

I am not against your actions and vigilance, but throwing random accusations is just ridiculous. Earlier theymos used to tag scammers even when they returned with alts.

The problem is account buying and selling is now more of a problem than ever before. It seems to be encouraged by campaign managers who are actively seeking professional SEO stampers like yourself. Sometimes innocent accounts do get unfairly tagged, its an unfortunate truth. But that's the beautiful thing about the trust system: mistakes can easily be corrected.

I'm just curious — since you created your dogermint persona, did you actually ask Wendell Davis about your idea, or were you just winging it?

Wendell abandoned Dogeparty in 2015 and hasn't been heard from since, so no, I never asked him about "my idea," whatever it is you are referring to.

I am not against stamping out scammers, account buyers, and sellers. However, the idea of speech policing is ridiculous. I remember another user around 2015 who did the exact same thing and posted wild accusations here.

Wendell Davis was active on Slack. He might have stopped using this forum account, but he did not abandon his entire online presence around 2015.

[nutildah]

nutildah, would you mind signing a message with any Bitcoin address that you staked before those dates?

I didn't stake an address before those dates, but I can sign a message from an address used for a Bitcoin token project from Aug 2014. This is the first token collection ever created on Bitcoin:

BitBowl team tokens now back up for sale!

This is the project I am currently wearing an avatar for and have in my signature.

...
I should really come up with a more automated way of doing it before next season starts. But if you're interested in buying the complete set, let me know; they're all under the same address:

1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi

Address: 1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi

Message:

Code:

This is nutildah. The date is 7/7/26. Its the same for both US and international date standards.

Signed:

Code:

H4C6Z9aRmx/NrtjWmughpkVt36YkNhwtRP5bEcm9jBfvS3VOftlR8j+yQLLb550eb7m/rq4QEMZo1tkHagQXAmw=

I am not against stamping out scammers, account buyers, and sellers. However, the idea of speech policing is ridiculous.

If "speech policing" means discouraging spammers and others who contribute nothing of substance to the forum, I'm all for it.

Wendell Davis was active on Slack. He might have stopped using this forum account, but he did not abandon his entire online presence around 2015.

Okay. This has nothing to do with anything.

[7788bitcoin]

nutildah, would you mind signing a message with any Bitcoin address that you staked before those dates?

I didn't stake an address before those dates, but I can sign a message from an address used for a Bitcoin token project from Aug 2014. This is the first token collection ever created on Bitcoin:

BitBowl team tokens now back up for sale!

This is the project I am currently wearing an avatar for and have in my signature.

...
I should really come up with a more automated way of doing it before next season starts. But if you're interested in buying the complete set, let me know; they're all under the same address:

1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi

Address: 1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi

Message:

Code:

This is nutildah. The date is 7/7/26. Its the same for both US and international date standards.

Signed:

Code:

H4C6Z9aRmx/NrtjWmughpkVt36YkNhwtRP5bEcm9jBfvS3VOftlR8j+yQLLb550eb7m/rq4QEMZo1tkHagQXAmw=

I am not against stamping out scammers, account buyers, and sellers. However, the idea of speech policing is ridiculous.

If "speech policing" means discouraging spammers and others who contribute nothing of substance to the forum, I'm all for it.

Wendell Davis was active on Slack. He might have stopped using this forum account, but he did not abandon his entire online presence around 2015.

Okay. This has nothing to do with anything.

Do not worry mate, I will provide you with the archive of the bitcoin address posted way before 2017 from your account. I am well aware that you will sign everything and anything after, late 2016/ 2017.

[nutildah]

Do not worry mate, I will provide you with the archive of the bitcoin address posted way before 2017 from your account. I am well aware that you will sign everything and anything after later 2016/ 2017.

I just signed something from 2014. Let me explain:

Below is a list of team token prices currently on the Counterparty Asset Exchange, for your reference. Please feel free to ask here if you should have any questions in regards to the whole operation.

Let the BitBowl Begin!!

- price list updated 8/26

Asset Name   XCP price
CARDINALS   0.1667
FALCONS   0.1667
RAVENS   0.2632
BILLS   0.1111

XCP = Counterparty's native asset.

Asset: CARDINALS

Issuance date: 2014-07-02

Issuer: 1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi



This is actually better proof of address ownership than just posting an address and saying you own it.

If its not good enough for you, I suggest deferring to those who are capable of unbiased critical thinking.

I won't ask you to sign any messages. I already reworded my tag in such a way that it won't prevent you from getting hired in the future.

I accept that I was wrong to red tag you without providing better evidence first, and deleted the tag within 24 hours.

[7788bitcoin]

Do not worry mate, I will provide you with the archive of the bitcoin address posted way before 2017 from your account. I am well aware that you will sign everything and anything after later 2016/ 2017.

I just signed something from 2014. Let me explain:

Below is a list of team token prices currently on the Counterparty Asset Exchange, for your reference. Please feel free to ask here if you should have any questions in regards to the whole operation.

Let the BitBowl Begin!!

- price list updated 8/26

Asset Name   XCP price
CARDINALS   0.1667
FALCONS   0.1667
RAVENS   0.2632
BILLS   0.1111

XCP = Counterparty's native asset.

Asset: CARDINALS

Issuance date: 2014-07-02

Issuer: 1PypgzaAJXHzLPvkLQwWzqwn1AyhJd9YUi



This is actually better proof of address ownership than just posting an address and saying you own it.

If its not good enough for you, I suggest deferring to those who are capable of unbiased critical thinking.

I won't ask you to sign any messages. I already reworded my tag in such a way that it won't prevent you from getting hired in the future.

I accept that I was wrong to red tag you without providing better evidence first, and deleted the tag within 24 hours.

I appreciate you removing the tag. Keep up the good work catching real scammers. Account buyers and sellers should definitely be tagged to prevent future scams.

I have doubts about this account being controlled by its original owner. It seems to belong to an account farmer.

This is your quote; I barely spend time here anymore. The crypto space has been good enough to provide everything I earned, as I have been here since the start. I only logged back in after a long break simply because of a persistant request from an old friend.

@stompix. If your goal is just to tag people without checking the facts simply to maintain your presence on the Reputation board, then you are welcome to do so. I will get back to you later, as I haven't had the time to look into your background yet.

[nutildah]

Maybe I'm too jaded but this immediately makes me think "account farming shitposter":



That's admittedly more my problem than yours. At least you aren't out there kissing ass for merits.

@stompix. If your goal is just to tag people without checking the facts simply to maintain your presence on the Reputation board, then you are welcome to do so. I will get back to you later, as I haven't had the time to look into your background yet.

Stop with the threats. Its unnecessary. Either do it or shut up.

[7788bitcoin]

Maybe I'm too jaded but this immediately makes me think "account farming shitposter":



That's admittedly more my problem than yours. At least you aren't out there kissing ass for merits.

@stompix. If your goal is just to tag people without checking the facts simply to maintain your presence on the Reputation board, then you are welcome to do so. I will get back to you later, as I haven't had the time to look into your background yet.

Stop with the threats. Its unnecessary. Either do it or shut up.

I have already missed two football games because of this accusation. I have never bothered to argue with anyone up until this point on this forum, nor am I interested in delving into any drama. I just want to live a peaceful life doing what I actually enjoy.

@stompix just quoted me randomly without bothering to check the facts before tagging me. I am certain he didn't verify a single thing. He just dropped a random quote and walked away, simply fulfilling his daily quota on the Reputation board.

Do not consider those threats. It is just my frustration over missing my bets and the match tonight.

[JSRAW]

@Zwei ... with whom I had private conversations earlier and who are active now—could attest to this.

i don't know why you would tag me here tbh, i do not remember you or any of our interactions outside of the wolfbet campaign (which i had to look up), and that was a long time ago.
so if you were hoping that i would defend you or something like that based on that, you are wrong.

More or less same thoughts.

@7788bitcoin we had a fair amount of discussion in cricketing threads but sorry bhai, as far as i remember we exchanged 2-3 DMs at best because of cricket pools, which i was hosting and with all due respect, don't think it could be categorised as private conversation, imo it's just gives a wrong impression.

Regarding your cricket post which the other person pulled out in comparison. From just cricket POV, i don't see anything wrong in your post except the latter part of your post is just commentary and I am sure you already know why it's a big turn off.

[stompix]

@stompix. If your goal is just to tag people without checking the facts simply to maintain your presence on the Reputation board, then you are welcome to do so. I will get back to you later, as I haven't had the time to look into your background yet.

Is this a threat?
If it is one, I can do the same, and don't worry about that tag cause there is another one coming right after it, and it will NEVER come down!

Simple answer: was it a threat or no?

With nutildah changing it to neutral, I felt like, well, I should just do the same to avoid more drama till I read that little line!
So, as clearly as possible, with that attitude, the tag will not go down till the forum does!