Topic: Anunymint ban - page 3. (Read 9083 times)

Anonymint didn't get banned because people don't like him, though.  He got banned for ban-evasion and disrupting unrelated threads with his doomsday prognostications.  He derails and dominates every thread he posts in.  As he's proven time and again, he's perfectly capable of registering new accounts totally undetected.  If he were to do that and just post like a normal human being, he'd probably never get caught.  But every time, he has to broadcast to the world that he's Anonymint and he's here to tell us everything is broken yet again, even though it isn't.  Apparently posting here just doesn't stroke his ego enough unless his small number of fans know for sure that it's him.  So they ban him for ban-evasion for the Nth time because he openly flouts it.  He says he's never going to post here again but, much like every other claim he's ever made, I'll believe it when I see it.

Greg Maxwell's comments about Anunymint should be condemned in the strongest way possible. It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.

The comments made by Maxwell only give credibility to those claiming censorship on bitcointalk and r/bitcoin (Greg Maxwell is a moderator of both). The same is true for the absence of a strong condemnation of Maxwell's statement.

Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this. 

God forgive me, but this Greg dude is really a troll. I mean it. He seriously trolls in this forum and everywhere else.
Any chance to have him beheaded instead of Shelby?  

And there's a very good reason for that.  He always argues that some terrible event is going to occur at some unspecified time in the future.  You can't empirically prove anything one way or the other until it doesn't happen.  And it never does.  But by the time it was supposed to have happened, Anonymint has already moved on to "imminent" catastrophe #573853 and everyone has already forgotten about whatever alarmist flailing he was doing before.  Complete and utter headcase. 

He clearly likes the attention and the odd occasions some person gets the mistaken impression that he's actually smart.  When, in truth, it's just an overactive imagination, a strong vocabulary and a flair for the dramatic.  Don't be taken in by it.

I understand a lot. Everything short of the deeper math and cutting edge proposals. Honestly, I still never read any of your ridiculously verbose (and presumably the technical) posts. I decided a little while back, when I found out that you were the real anonymint (someone I have positive impressions of from the early days of bitcoin talk for reasons I no longer remember), that if I saw another one I would actually read it this time but I haven't seen one since and I haven't felt inclined to go searching through the thousands of wall observer pages to dig one up.

If this is true, it would be trivial for someone with similar or greater technical knowledge than him to publicly prove him wrong and/or defeat him in a debate.

I didn't follow many of Anonymint's older posts. I've been paying more attention for the last couple months or so. I'm willing to entertain the notion that Anonymint may be a sophisticated troll. If this is the case, however, I would personally require more evidence to convince me. So far, across multiple threads, most of the arguments against him that I've read have consisted of some variation of, "He's a troll, and "His ideas are dangerous." I have not seen anyone with similar or greater technical knowledge disprove many (any?) of his ideas.

I received the following rebuttal verbatim from Shelby (aka AnonyMint) via Crypto.cat.

My gosh I take 2 or 3 days break from BCT to get some real work done and I see that the Core shills have sent Gregory Maxwell to spread lies about me.

Let’s make two things very clear:

1. I am not interested in posting on this forum in its current state without a decentralized form of moderation. Because as I already explained, I would want to mute the trolls from my circle, without any danger of anyone’s (including my) posts being actually removed and inaccessible entirely. So removal of the ban is irrelevant. Preferably all the data should be on a transparent decentralized block chain ledger instead of a centralized, opaque database.

2. Gregory you’re trolling firstly because you know damn well I have caught you making technological errors more than once. Secondly I will challenge you below on your claims about my technological expertise. On the first point for example in your CoinJoin thread wherein you proposed a blacklist as a solution to jamming which made no sense whatsover as I (AnonyMint) pointed out in 2013. You were mighty offended. Or the Ogg discussion in Meta which I recently documented in my censored posts. You have also caught me making errors, e.g. when I was first learning about Winternitz and my posts in the Compact Confidential Transactions thread. The difference being that I readily admitted my errors (archived here and here) and thanked Gregory for his assistance even after he had gone about in a dictatorial and intentionly demeaning manner; whereas, he never reciprocates when he is in error in my interactions with him and he trolls me with lies. I have never claimed to be an expert in cryptography specifically. But if you want to discuss programming language design, the design of garbage collectors, type theory, parallelism, concurrency, and various other technologies in computer science then my knowledge is more on the high end. For example, can Gregory point out a flaw in my Github post today pointing out an error in a research paper on the scaling of cache coherency to multi-core? Since Gregory erroneously claims everything technological I write even in the blockchain and crypto arena is an error, I would like for him to refute the solution I recently devised for jam-resistent atomic cross-chain exchange:

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/scaling-decentralization-security-of-distributed-ledgers

Don’t be shy now Mr. Ego.
Remember I was the one who pointed out to @TierNolan that his cut-and-choose protocol was still not jam resistant. I have now solved that open problem and published my solution openly for anyone to implement.

Also please refute this technical explanation I made that “Actually HTLCs can be done on the Satoshi’s Bitcoin without the Core cruft added (with the SegWit improvements unncessary when only a small number of large Mt. Box hubs will be relevant because Lightning Networks naturally centralizes due to liquidity pressure)”.

Anytime you would like to attempt to prove your claim about technological superiority by engaging in a debate with me about SegWit, Lightning Networks, Side-chains etc. then I am willing, but it must be done on a neutral forum where neither of us can control the moderation. That will be very illuminating for sure. And I expect you will not do it, because you know you are going to be widely seen as much more fallible after that.

I am also contented to continue my work, be free from all the stress of the BCT trolls including the Core shill trolls, and leave this just die here as it is dying. The ball is in your court.




Lol, you try to blame your forum inactivity on me. As if I am responsible for the 2 million sockpuppet troll accounts that make BCT such a pita now.

Fact is that you already achieved the coup d’etat of Satoshi’s protocol, so you are no longer burdened with the necessity of censoring and railroading the community discussion to prevent disagreement with Core’s propaganda. That is until I come back to the board, then y’all need to scamper back into “r0ach motel” censorship mode. You bring out your “big guns” now to try to discredit my truths. Lol.

I like how you tried to obfuscate your trolling as victimization. You’re always playing the social consensus politics. As Mircea Popescu correctly stated, you’re a conniving, manipulative, dishonest, and duplicitous individual. Rather I am frank and straightforward.


IOW, you do not like the truths I have been relentlessly explaining, such as the corruption that is Core’s hijack of Bitcoin. My censored posts contain all that information. Of course you will try to attack my reputation. Who would expect anything less when you’re more of a political hack than an accomplished technological expert. If we really dig into debate about what you claim to have accomplished, the gleam is going to come off of it. Mostly you’ve been pushing a social consensus hijack of Satoshi’s protocol in order to move the people on to the Core altcoin and/or off-chain onto to what must become fractional reserves.


Obviously you still can’t discern the difference. And you believe what you want to believe. So enjoy the outcome when I am entirely correct in the end. Make sure you hodl your Bitcoins in SegWit addresses so you can thank Gregory Maxwell when you lose all your real Bitcoin.



On the topic of interpersonal skills, I wrote the following today on Quora:


And so let’s quote from one of those cited sources as it applies directly to why decentralized moderation is going to win:


Or in less words, successful order increases external disorder, so that it is on trend with inexorable universal maximization of entropy.

It’s interesting to tie that in with another quote so we understand why the global elite try to destroy us with disorder:


And if you don’t comprehend those quotes Gregory, then you can’t blame it on me, because I didn’t write it. You might just come to realize that you don't know everything, or stated another way, you’re not as smart as you think you are.
 

EDIT: frankly I think this entire drama is childish. Anyone looking at this from the outside would think they were observing 5 years throwing sand in the sandbox. Maybe we should all grow up.

It can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between someone who is blowing smoke and someone who simply knows some things that you do not know. But, I have always valued your opinion quite highly so, for me, this is case settled on the AnonyMint question. Thanks for taking time to weigh in. Good luck and god speed in your work.

Just as a point of order, sub-forum mods on BCT don't really have much in the way of authority.  Mostly we have the technical ability to zot spammers and move around threads,  but forum norms and policies generally frown on using those tools in an especially editorial way. (Moreover, even if a subforum moderator can get away with it, it doesn't help much without the support of global mods and theymos to do things like ban users).  Generally, subforum mods have about the same clout they'd have as a similar non-mod long time community member.   I wouldn't be surprised if a respected technical contributor like me standing up and saying that anonymint's posting drives him off the forum had some impact-- otherwise I wouldn't have commented-- but thats about it, after all I've been telling people to hit [ignore] on anonymint for years, and he's still been here all this time. We don't, for example, have the ability to ban accounts from particular subforums.  If that had been up to me I would have done that with the tech subforum and anonymint years ago-- the people who find him disruptive are mostly in there and the people who don't are mostly elsewhere...

I think Anunymint has agreed to not break the 'multi-posting' rule, along with other rules. He also says he believes the specific reason for his ban was that he was posting the same post in multiple threads, which he also has agreed to do, and in practice has actually stopped this practice, as in my interactions with him, he would "url reference" previous points he has made instead of actually copying the point again. For example:

@gmaxwell

I know you are one of the most recognised/respected people in crypto although I have not actually ever seen a thread with you in before on here.

That would probably be for one reason.

You are primarily in threads that are purely for those with a deep understanding in the field or as you would say those threads that are beyond the comprehension of the tech ignorant masses that are just your usual every day people. Mostly other developers and such.

You are busy as you say and simply don't have the time to engage with the board on things that are not important or directly for advancement of this technology. This is understandable and for sure works best like that.

Anonymint has often spent days discussing and trying to breakdown designs for others to get a brief understanding of the inner workings of these new designs.

I would say I have never seen him or his posts being used by others to pump alts. Actually he is usually one for finding issues with designs and has actually saved me personally from falling for some very exciting sounding designs (because to those that are tech ignorant all kinds of things can sound plausible and exciting) that later turned out to be as he put it "word salad" that sounded very workable but then  had no substance.  

Your pool analogy is a good one and I liked it but I feel it is a little too simplistic to truly represent the scenario here. Also a pool for the most part (well a public one) is kind of solitary place you may speak to your family or partner or kids but a forum is for interaction between all members as much as possible.

You see a pool can be a boring place for the broad spectrum if there is no interaction. I don't just come to a forum to talk to those I already know. Most are only able to bob up and down and are not very talkative or outgoing perhaps don't have much to say and just like to listen. Other small groups are very talkative but about things the majority do not understand. Then you get a character like AM comes in and is quite intriguing/interesting and different to most people he gets them all talking/sometimes arguing but gets a lot of interaction going ..some from that selective group (that don't usually talk to the masses)  will then come and talk to the others in threads in conversations that would not have even started if not for AM. A lot of fun and interest is had by many and perhaps now and then AM may kick off and splash a few people, dunk a few people and now and again take a shit in the pool. ( i mean a shit can cause actual physical harm so maybe spashing or dunking etc would be the best analogy)

So if you took the consensus of the entire pool I would say if you want people to keep coming to this pool he could be more of an attraction than you are allowing for in your analogy even with the odd outburst of what some would deem unacceptable behaviour. I found the forum boring without him when he was gone and I noticed many of those that seem to get into discussions with him (sys dev, dinofelis, smooth, cfb, jl777 and many other smart and in their own way very interesting characters) never posted on the main boards half as much when he was not around. I don't really visit any sub boards like Ivory tower etc

I can not deny or confirm that in a highly technical discussion he may be derailing without making sense to high level designers and coders like yourself because I would not have the capacity to confirm or deny this.

However I only doubt this to be the case very often simply due to my reasoning that surely these other high level developers would always get discussing and debating things with him and often they are very complimentary to him and his ideas.

It's strange in someways because I just clicked on your post history to see if you were still a regular poster...which you are (most of what you say 99% is over my head of course ) but in a way your posting style has some small similarity to Anonymint... I mean this one I think the most recent https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.42577799 ... that tone is a tone I often see that is exasperation and frustration at people not seeing things as you do (or as they really are) even after a long discussion. I did not read any other part of that thread but just from that I really could have believed anonymint could have be the author. It was a touch condescending and arrogant born from frustration and exasperation. Having said that if you are high functioning and you have a right to be arrogant then I would say that is understandable under certain conditions. Like I said I really think ego becomes a huge huge thing the more you concentrate brilliant minds. I don't think that is a bad thing either. It is a driving force and motivator.

The board is a lot of different things to a lot of different people.
You are not here for the chit chat and other social elements perhaps due to the nature of your work/interests/spare time so will perhaps see things differently to others.

I appreciate your pov and of course we need all the super smart characters we can get so we certainly don't want to see you driven from this community at all. I think though his initial ban was for a small thing compared to scamming or something very nasty. Subsequent bans were related to that first ban so..... Let's let Theymos give him his original account back and see what happens.

To be fair the pool has been filled with 1000's of ico sharks and bots lately so the pathogens from an occasional Anonymint turd (emotional outburst) seem to be the least of the problems for the pool inhabitants.

This is only my point of view of course but I am quite certain many others would like to see him given another go... the first ban reason really was not super super serious although for sure that's up to Theymos to decide.

When I read a few the high level devs comments about each others designs including VB, larimer and others they do get into the odd spat over things. I think egos at this level of intelligence are going to be big and you will get these spats but I know there is limit to the level that things can be allowed to get to and thats what the board rules are for. Let's just see how we go from here on. We should take into account that sometimes he is seriously ill and not fully himself also. That to me is quite a factor.

Anyway this is not going to be a widely read thread by most (here in meta) but I see some mods, lauda and now you are here so a lot of big players who make the decisions so I guess what will be will be. I see most mods are against a reinstatement so Theymos may not do it but he did say he may consider if If AM will not multi post in future.

Guess we wait and see.

All seem interesting characters indeed. Loved the pool analogy very amusing. This is what I mean smart people are not just useful for making great technology they are also very funny and capable of being interesting at many levels accessible by the average person. Let's all try to get along.

I just noticed that AnonyMint was banned again, sadly as a result of him posting under a new sock account.

I believe that, as much as any single person could possibly be, AnonyMint (and the forum's historical failure to get him under control) is responsible for a significant fraction of the technically competent people becoming largely inactive.

AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble.  His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.  He relentlessly floods threads with his trademark nonsense and switches to slanderous personal attacks whenever someone disagrees with him.   If that were all there was to it the ignore button would be sufficient, but his multi-posting derails basically any thread he targets because if even a few people fail to ignore him they'll respond (usually disagreeing, sometimes just trying to figure out what the heck he means) and make it nearly impossible for productive discussion to continue. Worse, AnonyMint's abusive but "technical sounding" approach is moderately effective at mobilizing throngs of well meaning but ignorant people to his defense (especially ones who are interested in pumping altcoins and find Anonymit to be sufficient 'proof' for whatever they already wanted to believe). When mobilizing an ignorant mob fails he resorts to the use of copious alt accounts.

People who are really savvy with the technology have valuable time (as is the case for anyone with valuable skills).  It's a waste of that time to spend it in a place where there are decent odds of their efforts being buried under a mountain of abusive nonsense.   Even those few who don't find his dishonest practices extremely annoying are forced to admit that it's just a waste of time to be in the same venue as someone like that.

AnonyMint is not the only example of this sort of abusive ignorance that shows up on the forum, -- it's not uncommon for newbies who are used to being the smartest guy in whatever little pond they came from to show up and say they're going to "fix bitcoin" while calling everyone else an idiot for the couple months it takes for them to realize how little they actually know...  but most of these people are just ignorant and can be educated and they aren't especially relentless.  By comparison, AnonyMint's consistent conduct year after year is especially demoralizing. With some angry newbie there is a least the hope that you'll get through to them or that ignoring them will be sufficient.  With AnonyMint from the moment he takes interest in a thread the outcome is clear in advance-- he's going to post and rant until everyone gives up or flames out and it's never going to change.

I think the people concerned about AnonyMint's "free speech" in this thread are being duped into being pawns in AnonyMint's efforts to shut down the freedom of others to communicate and associate. AnonyMint is clearly free to post whatever he wants on his own site (and any other site that can stand him). You're free to discuss his "ideas" with him there, if they interest you.   But when the forum invites AnonyMint to post without restriction, other people aren't practically able to have the discussions they want to have-- he drowns them out and buries them under toxic stink. If a community can't choose topics and participants then anyone who wants can shut down a communities ability to communicate.

If this isn't obvious to you yet, consider a silly analogy:  I think we can all mostly agree that people generally ought to be able to operate their own bodies as they see fit, without other people restricting how they use them. But then we have a public pool that the community likes to use and since it's a public pool we all agree everyone ought to have equal access to it.  But then comes AnonyMint and for whatever reason he insists on using his autonomy over his bodily functions to deficate in the pool and refuses to cut it out.  Some people can't smell it and aren't worried about pathogens and don't mind. But a lot of people do mind and won't get in the crapped up water. So his "freedom" to use the pool without restriction on his conduct ultimately denies others the free use of the pool that they ought to be able to use. If the pool operator won't keep the crapper out, then people will go off to use other shit free pools... and leave the original one for people who like shitting in the pool and the few who don't mind it.

Reasonable people can usually disagree about exactly _where_ the line should be drawn. But the principle that sometimes you've got to set and enforce limits to create a space that people can actually enjoy should be something we all agree on.  In AnonyMint's case, I think almost everyone would agree his conduct has been consistently far over the line, but I think his abusive conspiracy theorizing rants strike a resonance in some people and blind them to how intolerable the guy actually is...

That is your opinion Lauda and you are entitled to it and you could be correct that he would be banned again.

Then this is the acid test. Give anonymint back his primary legend account and if Theymos has to ban him again then you were right that he would simply get banned again.

Let's be frank this forum could reduce 90% of spam and bots with several simple solutions. One of which I have suggested already. Wasting time with manual reporting and moderation is never going to work.

You have to accept many persons here (and actually lots of the most proven talented and smartest here do not wish to see him banned). His effort in posting here has earned him such respect with those people and this to me does warrant special treatment above and beyond what you would be willing to bend for others who have not invested even 1% of the effort he has into this board.

Surely this is how life should work ... you put more effort in and you will get more in return right?

I think it's quite clear that if a person has put in extreme time and effort above and beyond 99% of this board then they will be seen by the majority here to warrant another chance from this point on. I mean he was not a scammer, or some serious actions that caused harm to many here. Multi posting (yes uses board resources) but if it is useful to cross post things for other readers who may have missed that post on another thread ...there is argument for wondering if this is even comparable to the 90% shilling and spam filling endless threads all over the main board wasting far far more resources..

But yeah fair enough if Theymos says NO then we have to accept that he makes the rules and sure we stick by it or banned. However it is at his discretion to give another chance if he thinks its a good idea.

I think in this case Theymos should give him his primary account back and see how we go. That is just my opinion on it of course I am just one person but I can see many others think the same.

Many think people support AM because he is way smarter than them but I think it is because he is also quite interesting and in some ways quite a vulnerable person who gets targeted sometimes to get a rise out of him. He also comes across as very honest and open talking about his life and past. On a psychological level people sense this and like to read his stuff.

If Theymos bans him again himself after deciding himself it is a warranted ban.... then fair enough.

A clear indicator that he is a delusional troll. If you believe that he has made anything more than a couple *decent* technological remarks, then you are equally delusional. All he does is post walls of technical gibberish which require too much valuable time to address given their size and repetitiveness (ad naseum).

---

Fact is, he broke rules for which others also get warned/temp. banned (perm. banned for continuity and/or ban evading).

Completely disagreed. For the super majority of people we wouldn't even consider bending the rules this much. The forum needs to dedicate its resources to combating the issue with spam and not debating whether the banned troll should be unbanned temporarily (and given their behavior, they'd get themselves banned again relatively soon).

I actually like to read both anonymints posts and lauda's.

One does not have to agree with or like them personally to gain a lot from reading good posts from those that present very useful content.

Both seem okay to me anyway. of course strong characters will butt heads that is part of the creative/evolutionary process.... it is healthy.

The forum is poorer for banning anonymint ...there can be no sensible rebuttal to this.

The forum would be poorer for banning Lauda too. His posts are interesting and he has even got the kind of personality that can admit when he was wrong about something ... although in the past we have had many arguments before he was a mod.

Theymos has offered a fig leaf in saying he will allow AM back ...because I secretly think he knows this is the case that AM does bring a lot to this board and many other members can appreciate that too. I know the argument about board resources is valid and sure the rules should be followed. However the rules really are not working that well for this board right now. I would say 90% of this boards resources are being used and 0 useful content is being added. I say 0 but really most content being added to the main boards is negative to the board since all the junk drowns out and smothers the odd gems of useful discussion. ICO shilling and spamming is rife.

I actually see the main boards becoming unusable lately. I did post an idea to reduce it in meta I hope it or something similar can be implemented before the board is too difficult to use.

The solution is simple I feel from here.

Anonymint makes an agreement directly with Theymos to reactivate one of his legendary accounts ... maybe the anonymint original or which ever AM wants on the basis he WILL follow the rules as they are.

Then in future ONLY Theymos can ban him, but then if banned will not return.

This may seem like special treatment for AM but then sometimes if someone has put in exceptional effort for the board then they can have a bit of special consideration from the board owner.

Let's face it would there be this fuss over ANY other member here being banned??

If Theymos will give AM the opportunity to have one of his old accounts reactivated and AM agrees to not break the rules it should be fine. I think though because all rules have some small element of subjectivity only Theymos who made the rules himself should decide if they have been broken in special cases like this. It also nulls any bad feeling any of the mods may or may not have toward him.

 Of course even anonymint will acknowledge he can have outbursts (probably due to poor health and people goading him) that can make him temporarily hard to communicate with unless you can immediately comprehend what he is trying to explain and agree. You see that is not the fault of anonymint or the person that does not agree really... they to the best of their ability believe they are correct but it is usually because they don't understand it to a deep enough level. Frustrating to both sides.

I don't understand most of what he says but do rely on the conclusions he often comes to. When I see sys dev, dinofelis  smooth and so many other obviously smart people engaging him over and over and even asking his opinion then it is all a "normal" person can do to form an opinion his level of expertise. The very best bit about anonymint was.... that no other members that had the skillset would evaluate a design then publish their opinion with an explanation of every point made 100% FOR FREE for everyone to see. Most that were able to evaluate new designs keep this secret for their own benefit only.

. That is just part of anonymint and if someone is contributing  A LOT for 90% of their time here and 10% blows of some frustration and steam I think the onus is on others to just accept this or not engage him at all. It is their choice not really an issue for mods unless what he says breaks the forum rules. Mostly it is just harsh criticism (that may be true but not expressed within the usual confines of forum etiquette) on the other hand some members have said some really nasty evil stuff to him over the years.

The mods are just doing their job as they thought best so not being critical of those mods either.

I am not commenting on the past now this is just going forward.

Seems fair from all sides then.

Sometimes extremely focused people have personalities that may seem extreme to "normal" folks. However, if you want to benefit from their extreme focus you have to take a little rough with the smooth as they say.

This board is the best place on the net imho and that is in part to the free speech and lack of moderation. Theymos is operating a great board here and I like his style he has a good balance and seems quite fair. Sometimes delegation of tasks works great and has to. Then again sometimes direct intervention is the most economical and fruitful way.

I would think a nice resolution here could work out well going forward for everyone.

The forum staff’s time would be better spent playing with tinker toys or bunny rabbits so they can satiate their fantasies concerning the relevance of bureaucracy.

---

We already had this discussion. What fucking rules? It is all arbitrary shit.
You just keep pointing at “the rules” which are obviously a bizzaro clusterfuck. Yet you come back for sloppy seconds on more of the same.
Just keep your clusterfuck Core-shill controlled echo chamber designed to take all your n00bs’ real Bitcoins as SegWit donations some years from now.
Shelby isn’t coming back to receive more abuse. So that you n00bs can’t shift the blame for all your bizzaro clusterfucks on him.

A scapegoat is what the MOB always wants. That is why the elite create a war when the economy is collapsing.

Shelby already wrote up-thread that he will only want to come back if the fucking forum is changed in someway such that it’s not an insane asylum.


Now I see the Core-brigade is attempting to get @aliashraf banned. They are building their case by labeling him a troll.


2 million spambot accounts you mean. Of those real humans who joined in 2013 or before which include Shelby as @AnonyMint and @Ix as @Etlase and who still remain on this forum, I bet that is less than 1000.


An example of non-arbitrary rules is Nakamoto proof-of-work.
If you don’t obey the rules and instead follow some n00b MOB-rule consensus nonsense, you lose all your Bitcoins.
It is non-arbitrary because it does not depend on the insanity and mass delusions of the masses (such as your equating of 2 million sockpuppet spambots with actual real users of merit):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

As usual I expect this post to be completely incomprehensible to n00bs like @theymos.






But “trolling” is ill-defined as that quoted thread points out. The rule is a subjective clusterfuck which can be abused by moderators.
And does not actually protect anyone against highly abusive trolling as Shelby pointed out by example in his first post on the page 1 of this thread.

---

 
Shelby received an email response from the Dept. of Finance:

I just responded to you in that other thread 

Ok so one time 7 years ago a poster "apparently" had his rights to post revoked and then re-instated.  Could be a mistake was made, who know's.  IF you're correct 1 time in 7 years over almost 2 million users, sounds like a good record to me!


Or you know he could just follow the rules like the rest of us, hell I don't really know why that is a foreign concept to people around here?  Is this fucking bizzaro land or something...

I would just like to point out that in 2011 the account "etlase" was squelched (not banned, but unable to post) and had roughly 30 posts deleted for being overly opinionated and anti-bitcoin. You can see in the posting history here, where the account was accused of being a professional troll by a global moderator, although there is a distinct lack of context available. Apparently russians later hacked the account after posting privileges had been restored.

My point is in addition to the seemingly valid claim that the rules can be arbitrarily enforced. That is of course at the discretion of the moderators, but keeping this up as an appearance of a technicality of breaking rules seems deceptive. I agree that anonymint goes too far on subjects that don't seem to have much merit, but there are many, many other situations where he has keen insight and those posts vastly outweigh the negatives in intellectual merit. He can be a loud, obnoxious, and negative voice so he gets the ban grease while 75% of the forum fills up with copypasta post spam (a rule violation) for signature campaigns.

I don't know what warnings he has received or what was the real original reason for his ban, but if subsequent bans are merely because of "ban evasion" maybe it's time to just drop it and let him post? If he is really mucking up individual threads, maybe allow the thread creators to turn them into moderated threads and moderate the discussion themselves?

Back to shelby issue:

I think there are things both sides can do about it:

Shelby has not to plea guilty or something, imo, he can just re-state his commitment to the forum rules.

Mods should remove his ban.

We can help in contributing privately or publicly by recommending to him better practices when appropriate and showing more tolerance.