Topic: Should speculation about satoshi's identity be subject to doxxing rules? - page 3. (Read 1005 times)

Yes, everyone has the right to be reckless, selfish and inconsiderate.  Doesn't mean they should, though.  People only seem to care about themselves and don't stop to consider the harm they might bring upon others.

---

In other words, there's no victim yet, so it's okay to keep trying until there is a victim.  Great argument.   

The thing about crossing that line is that you won't know you've done it until it's too late.

Sorry, I'm not following the Vod - OgNasty forum drama. I had once tried to read it, but I was just lost after a couple of minutes. So, yeah. Any other examples?

Yes, but the process of identifying someone is the prerequisite for doxxing them. You obviously can't dox someone if you don't know who they are, but the process of de-anonymizing someone online in public is enough to inevitably have the same consequences of doxxing them.

How would you feel if I, a data mining analyst, created a new topic, posting my research around the pseudonym "dkbit98", presenting horrifyingly accurate analysis which involved running metrics like textual analysis, essentially matching you with a single digit number of suspects (you included) with minimum uncertainty? Wouldn't you start feeling like you're having your privacy invaded? Sure, it is not solid evidence, and you can refuse it in real life all you like, but it is clearly a dox attempt.

This is called Faketoshi and we have many examples of people claiming to be Satoshi, starting with biggest scammer of all Craigh Wright, but there are others like Bilal Khalid, etc.
Actually I think that most of the people would not believe any new information, and they would ask to see really hard evidence, even if someone would came up with full documentation claiming to be coming from real Satoshi.

PS
For anyone wondering who the heck is Bilal Khalid:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/faketoshi-2-tabula-rasa-videos-5197670

Indeed.  I also had my information posted here with links to local law enforcement as well as homeland security and the IRS urging members here to report me for made up crimes.  The user who did it didn't even get suspended for doing so.  That's pretty crazy.  Especially when I got suspended for alluding to punching another member in the face for spreading lies about me.  How ridiculous is that?  People here can do everything in their power to spread lies about you, dox you, get your arrested, ruin your reputation, try to have others report you for fake crimes to law enforcement and if you even allege that you would punch someone for spreading these lies about you, you get suspended...  In other words, you can illegally commit libel all day here, but if you exercise legal free speech against the protected class you get suspended.  Ridiculous.  

they were curious who Satoshi is. but there is nothing to dox about him or her.

i agree though since the man disappears to be anonymous for life. although he seems to be good at disappearing, his posts are analyzed many times as to where he could have reside and these information are all public. so far that's just what they got and nothing else.  all are just guesswork. we don't even know if Satoshi is his real name.

Yeah, I don't think there's anything wrong with speculating on the potential identity of Satoshi, and that's something that will forever be discussed, but if someone was like this is Satoshi, here's his social security number and home address then I'm sure that would fall foul of the rules, but I don't think merely speculating on his identity should be classified as doxing. If Satoshi's identity was ever discovered then it would not be limited to this forum anyway and would quickly become widespread online.

You can't dox someone when you don't know his real identity, and everyone has the right to examine history and potential candidates for Satoshi.
This is called speculation, not doxxing.

How about we first fix double standards and make permanent ban for members who made multiple threats to other members, and even reported other members to government officials with fake claims 

I would be the perfect example. I was doxxed by a member here and that member was merited by merit sources for the doxxing as well as is currently included in the trust networks of some of the most popular DT members, one of who even supposedly wrote the book on proper usage of the trust network. 

It’s actually a joke what the trust network has become but most are afraid to do the right thing because they know that they would be retaliated against, so as long as they aren’t the targets it’s fine with them.

I’ll let someone else ‘name names’ but it’s pretty shocking that this could happen to me, one of the most trusted and established users here while nobody even seems to care or notice. Imagine what chance regular users have when these people gang up on them. Absolutely none. That’s how they want it though.

Can you give us a few examples? I have never witnessed DT1 people meriting doxxers.

Even when someone is doxxed here nothing is done. The user gets a slap on the wrist and then goes right back to it so I’m not sure what OP is wanting to see here. You can literally dox someone and get merited for it from merit sources and included into the DefaultTrust network by shady people. That’s the current state of the various networks here.

No. Someone created something great. Using it doesn't give you any special rights. In case you still have your doubts, you should read the MIT software license under which Bitcoin Core is distributed:

While i somewhat agree with your opinion, it's also true information which related with Satoshi already shared publicly either on this forum or elsewhere. I don't think theymos would agree with your interpretation either, so IMO we only can re-telling people to respect Satoshi's privacy.


Since you mention legal right, do you mind tell us which law on which country allow that?

When reading this topic, I got the feeling that we are close to discovering Satoshi's true identity. Could it be you @DooMAD? 

I understand the point being debated, although 99% of the information that is debated is available to everyone on the internet.

It's true, I agree with the argument, that one shouldn't try to doxxing who the real Satoshi is. However, there are two points that must be taken into consideration:
- It is on the forum that you will find much of the information about Satoshi. His comments, his messages, and other information about him.
- Normally, when new revelations about Satoshi's communications (emails) emerge, they are outside the forum, which makes sense to talk about them here on the forum.

In any case, this does not mean that you have to examine who Satoshi is on the forum. But, what I usually see on the topic here on the forum is the debate about a new theory found somewhere on the internet about who he is. So now we can no longer talk about news involving Bitcoin and Satoshi, on the forum created by him?

That's why I think that what happens with Satoshi isn't exactly doxxing. Even though it's very close to that.

Let's respect the individual's right to remain anonymous. Satoshi decided to remain invisible, so why bother with investigations every time? I think if Satoshi wanted, he would have declared himself. But whenever we see people claiming to be Satoshi, this is also not enough for us, and we also do not know how to respect confidentiality.
Satoshi created Bitcoin as a unique invention, and it is enough to be happy that it exists without going into the search for the author and its further existence.

I just don't buy your analogy. The correct analogy is people shooting in the desert where there is no one and after 14 years you come to tell us that there is a danger of someone getting killed.

He is a public figure who decided to stay anonymous for reasons best known to himself but should be respected by everyone. So I don't think that him being or becoming a public figure gives everyone the right to try and find his identity when it was his choice for things to be this way.

Satoshi is not a public figure, he wanted to be as private as possible. Creating a product that people use does not give them a right to know information you did not publicly provide.

There is no legal documentation or requirement when you purchase bitcoins, neither is there an obligation to use Bitcoin. So, why would there be a legal right to know who the author is?

The only right people have is down to an individual level; their private keys. That is the only right that is granted to them when they enter Bitcoin. And it is granted, not by a "creator". The creator of Bitcoin clearly stepped away. It is the protocol that grants them that right.

They do not possess rights to know the creator, the developers, the miners-- anyone. You don't need to trust any person, so why would you demand to know their name?

There have been quite convincing theories if you search the Internet. I myself have ended up to a suspect, even though with insufficient certainty. But, that's not the point. Attempts to dox someone should not be tolerated, and I don't see why Satoshi should be excepted.

The point is that attempting to connect these things to a real-world identity is dangerous, immoral and (in my interpretation, at least) against forum rules.

If you had even half as much BTC as satoshi likely does, would you want people knowing who you are or where you lived?  I'm guessing you don't go around broadcasting to the world how much BTC you have and then giving out your address and telling people how to find you.  It makes sense to keep that info private.  

So, by pointing the finger at people and trying to convince others that there's a chance they might be satoshi, you could be painting a massive target on their back.  

Now imagine someone mistakenly made a convincing case that you were satoshi and people knew where you lived.  You now look like a very tempting target to all of the world's criminals.  Do you think your home security could withstand attempts from determined criminals to break into your home and steal your bitcoins?  Would you want to find yourself in a situation where a criminal could have a knife to the throat of your loved ones in order to coerce you to hand over your private keys?  Or did you not even stop to consider that could be a consequence of revealing someone's identity?  Or even a consequence of erroneously tying an identity to the wrong person?

Now do you see the point?

No LOL
What is your point, sorry I failed to understand.
Satoshi's email, name?
Aren't all these are already public all over the internet?