Bitcointalk Defensive Alliance and 1miau. Convenient timing or coincidence?

[MaxMueller]

Doesn't that tell you everything you need to know already? If it would be me, I'd make sure I post enough so everyone can have enough "material" to really compare posts.

Yes it does -> In case of doubt, in favor of the defendant.
What you expect is proof that can't be provided promptly. In addition it's not objective an anyone can interpret “enough” however they like and expand it to infinity. The approach seems wrong to me.

To be clear, i am only speaking out against negative trust, as it no longer seems justified after an old address has been verified.

[PrivacyG]

Someone with no experience on this forum will never realize there is this way. I have no idea how busy 1miau was but certainly when I look into my private message history, I even struggle to find a message that I received or exchanged a few weeks ago. My inbox has 257 pages of message and outbox has 199 pages of message. If I am not wrong then each page contains 20 messages.

Correct.  What I said definitely only applies for an experienced Bitcoin Talk member.  Which I implicitly consider would be the case as the 'Alliance' is not some thing a Newbie would be able to come up with either.

-----

Yes it does -> In case of doubt, in favor of the defendant.

To be clear, i am only speaking out against negative trust, as it no longer seems justified after an old address has been verified.

The negative tags have been removed as soon as that signed message appeared.  He has no more negative tags left, only neutrals.

Anyway.  I am assuming everyone who left the negative or neutral tags did not leave them to indict 1miau or to expel him from the Forum but to prevent Newbies and others who may have missed his 'death announcement' from getting scammed by trusting a possibly false identity.  This is not a 'will we press charges on him' situation but rather a 'could someone else suffer if this is not the real 1miau' situation.

If he proves to still be 1miau in time then I doubt the neutral tags will stay either.  I do not find this as an attack or even a toxic welcoming, in fact I do not really understand why he thinks of it that way.  The skepticism is an expected way to be welcomed here after pretending you DIED and came back to life.  I have no personal issues with the real 1miau, in fact I never had any negative opinion on him and always appreciated his Bitcoin Talk work.

[Lucius]

~snip~
If he proves to still be 1miau in time then I doubt the neutral tags will stay either.  I do not find this as an attack or even a toxic welcoming, in fact I do not really understand why he thinks of it that way.  The skepticism is an expected way to be welcomed here after pretending you DIED and came back to life.  I have no personal issues with the real 1miau, in fact I never had any negative opinion on him and always appreciated his Bitcoin Talk work.

The problem is that suspicion will always remain, regardless of the signed message, some members will always wonder if the account has changed hands since it "returned from the dead". The only thing that would provide additional confirmation that it is indeed the same person are the IP logs, which only the admin has access to, of course assuming that VPN/Tor was not used.

I have nothing against @1miau returning to the forum, but the way he returned is not the way 99% of members in a similar situation would return.

[JollyGood]

This is how many members probably feel about the situation. With the exception of maybe a handful of members with what could be legitimate reasons according them, the majority that interacted with him in the Global and German boards probably have nothing against him too.

My concern is that if the 1miau account has changed hands, it created the Bitcointalk Defensive Alliance for the specific purpose of deflecting criticism or questions that were inevitably going to be directed towards the new operator. This is one of the primary reasons the account cannot be trusted.

The problem is that suspicion will always remain, regardless of the signed message, some members will always wonder if the account has changed hands since it "returned from the dead". The only thing that would provide additional confirmation that it is indeed the same person are the IP logs, which only the admin has access to, of course assuming that VPN/Tor was not used.

I have nothing against @1miau returning to the forum, but the way he returned is not the way 99% of members in a similar situation would return.

[PrivacyG]

The problem is that suspicion will always remain, regardless of the signed message,

And that is fine.  Their skepticism is justified in my opinion.  Now 1miau needs to accept that it will take some time for things to come back to mostly normal.  If he proves to be the legitimate owner and a few members will still not accept it as evidence, it is what it is.

I have nothing against @1miau returning to the forum, but the way he returned is not the way 99% of members in a similar situation would return.

I agree.