Topic: Where are you 'Iamnotback'? (Read 35340 times)

If someone is willing to link or quote this in the LN discussion thread, I suppose that would stimulate the discussion points over there. I guess my last contribution.


Also I mostly agree with this post there:


The caveat is that I had explained (but my posts were nuked) some of my reasons in the Limits of PoW thread and his PoCW thread, why my technological understanding is that the potential on-chain transaction volume scalability of proof-of-work (in any configuration such as even sharding) is limited and could not attain IoT scale. He seems to think otherwise, but until I see a research paper with convincing formalization, I believe he is incorrect in his belief.

In the nuked posts I had explained in detail for example elaborating on the analysis of OmniLedger which I had previously blogged about:

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

---

Love that “trolling” (not ad hominem but still time wasting crap) when someone replies but totally ignores the economic point and builds a strawman argument to obfuscate the fact they actually didn’t make any relevant rebuttal.

I didn’t claim that decentralized exchanges will never be used. In fact OTC markets are used by the very wealthy, but they go no bid in times of stress because there’s no possible way to do secure shorting in a non-centralized exchange.

The salient point which he side-stepped entirely is that for payment systems, users have no choice but to be where the liquidity is.

There’s no amount of improvement to the usability of the software that can overcome the economics bottom-line which is that everyone who uses a payment system needs to be on the same system and there needs to be always enough liquidity.

Of course the other bunny rabbits will think he actually rebutted me and carry on blissfully to the woodchipper.

i second this. this blind nuking of all posts in threads started by someone who gets banned, without regard as to the posts other authors make in reply, does a great disservice to the forum and the (supposedly) unbiased information it stands for.

Indeed. It is quite beyond the pale to delete posts of users not running afoul of any posting standards. Offensive, really.

I tried to keep it all in one thread: Why do some people believe that only the nodes miners run matter?

But one of your cohort Core shills @Carlton Banks decided to entirely derail another thread with off-topic trolling about it which forced me to also reply in that thread: BLS signatures (better than Schnorr)

You and your Core shills allege “nonsense” but aren’t able to refute any of my statements. Thus I am of the opinion that y’all are just trolling.

Frankly I am not interested in wasting my time arguing about SegWit with your boyz club tribe. It’s impossible to argue against an irrational religion. Please do keep your Bitcons in Core addresses that begin with a 3 instead of Satoshi real Bitcoin addresses that begin with a 1, so that you will lose all your real Satoshi protocol BTC. Then you will be gone and worth-less as it should be.

I had clearly explained that Lightning Networks will work fine with Satoshi’s protocol once it centralizes as it must because it is a natural monopoly:


Scale = better service (routing, etc) and higher liquidity

Decentralized exchanges have failed because everyone needs to be where the liquidity is. Much more so for payment systems. When someone can’t route their payment because of insufficient liquidity, both the merchant and the customer lose.

The LN Mt.Gox hubs can then leverage this need into entrenched oligarchies, which can dictate terms to users and merchants. Visa and Mastercard here we come again.

Nothing changes. We are right back where we started from.

---

Unfortunately as you know, the affected users received no notification of the deletion so many of the dozens of people affected ostensibly do not know they are and we have no way to contact them because we also do not know who they were. For example, no complete archive was kept for the following two threads and I had some very important posts of mine in these two threads which I can’t reconstruct even on STEEM because I didn’t archive them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4579834.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4462571.0;all

So I would like to suggest a kind gesture on your part would be send everyone their posts from the above two linked threads, including mine on this account or the banned @anunymint account. Or if you want to just restore those two threads (and no others), that would be even better for me. Or even if you restored them long enough for me to archive them, and the deleted them again, that would also be better for me.

---

Indeed we’ve already established that you hate details and pontificate layered on top of derogatory ad hominem about all sorts of shit that you know nothing about.


We’ve already established that you stay safely within the Wall Observer echo chamber for the most part.

You did not for example refute Gregory Maxwell about CoinJoin and many other such far reaching and more “precarious” endeavors.

Stick your neck out sufficiently before you insinuate that you’ve walked in my shoes.


I patiently tried to explain. You (and other Core shills) allege that I am an idiot, troll who spreads “nonsense FUD”. So I am not allowed to respond by stating that y’all are the idiot trolls?


You’re just one giant inkblot.

Your reading comprehension is so faulty, that you do not even seem to realize I’m not proposing that decentralized moderation idea for bitcointalk.org. It is one of the projects I would like to implement. I’m not demanding changes to bitcointalk.org, although if they want to make some changes I am not against them doing so.


I did archive nearly everything in June, but in July I was so busy posting and other work that I thought maybe the moderators were going to leave me alone so I stopped archiving. Then I made the fatal mistake of making my first post in the Altcoin Discussion forum, which presumably caught @mprep’s (or one of my haters in the Bitcoin Killer thread's) attention. Wham! Nuke! Because archiving is very tedious, sort of like regressing to the sneakernet where we used to carry floppy disks between computers to share data. Every edit of a post then must remember to re-archive.

It’s the antithesis of the automation of computing to manually archive. So sorry once again just a huge inkblot from you.

Do you not understand that time is money. I’m probably worth $150+ an hour as a programmer (now that I’m no longer so ill). Do you know how many hours it takes to reconstruct posts and then where to post them? Reformat from BBcode to Markdown and post at STEEM?

I’m amazed how much time you guys waste in the Wall Observer thread posting nonsense:


Even if you’re already wealthy, don’t you have any intellectual or creative pursuits outside of slapstick humor with the boyz. The Wall Observer thread is like boyz who never matured. They’re still into playing pranks with the other boyz. It’s funny for about a day or two. But my lord, you guys have been doing that for how many years?


I did. Even within your Wall Observer echo chamber thread there are several people who appreciate my posts. You ostensibly think the minority doesn’t matter. But remember the minority holds all the wealth, knowledge, and other resources.


Lol. It’s okay snowflake. It’s above your paygrade to understand what cage you are inside.


You feel superior to those slobs who didn’t already buy Bitcoin don’t you? Feeling confident?


And then it is going to be so funny and perfectly fit when you lose all your Bitcoins because you were too proud and lazy to understand what I was explaining, then you are right back in the cage with the slobs you were looking down on. I was trying to share my expertise to those who wanted it. I wasn’t forcing it down the throat of sheep.

But that is the way it is. Not much anybody can do to change it.

You Core shills with your “social consensus” and “non-mining nodes matter” delusions remind me of what a friend of mine recently wrote:

How is it beneficial to derail and cross-talk over multiple unrelated threads that contain useful info?  That kind of behaviour is the exact opposite of useful.  If he has to post a load of FUD nonsense about Theftcoin, start a new thread specifically for it and keep all the drivel neatly contained in one place.  I'm sure it would cause tremendous pain to his ego to have a potentially smaller audience reading his tirades, but not everyone appreciates his profound tendency to completely hijack threads.

He has clearly demonstrated the ability to maintain numerous accounts where he chooses not to exhibit this kind of extreme behaviour straight away, so (unless he is a bona fide schizophrenic) it stands to reason he's being this much of an ass deliberately.

Word.


WordWord.

look, reading and understanding shelbys viewpoints takes a lot of time and homework on the readers part. there are no shortcuts to knowledge. sometimes you just need to put the time in and read the linked info. after all would you just blindly trust someone if he said something with no data to back it up. seems many do but thats not how trustlessness works. you need to show your work when presenting information.

sure many sheep blindly trust with no understanding of the subject (and pay dearly for their folly). but in crypto the whole point is trust is not needed. IOW understand the subject and its workings, dont just assume a particular group is trustworthy and blindly follow them.

shelby never tried to sell anything. he has repeatedly refused my offers of donations, saying to wait till he has a working product.

all he tries to do is help people save their btc investment by pointing out possible problems and to do that he needs to present the data that backs up that veiwpoint. and sure much is technical and the info needed is in many fields.

now sure he can be short, abrupt, and could make a better effort to be polite but reading some of the replies to him, especially those who dont read the links he provides.. well i can see how he could get a bit testy. not making excuses for him, he is who he is.

the laughable part of this ban? there are so many shitposters, scammers taking money, post whores upping their post counts, shillers, sockpuppets etc, they are allowed to stay. but shelby, who shares knowlede, provides interesting insights and conversations, get banned. riiiiiight.

I could give a ratt's ass about reading through the history of anonymint according to his own presentation, unless I were assigned some kind of authority or position with bitcoin talk in which I needed to make some kind of recommendation.. which is not the case.  I have seen some presentations here from admins, such as mprep, that seem perfectly reasonable to me, and I presume that mprep did whatever due diligence research into the anonymint matter.


Has not been my experience.  I have seen some pretty aggressive trolling, shilling and offending in the forum that generally has to cross certain high boundaries before resulting in a ban or a suspension.


What does this have to do with me?  Anonymint needs to figure out his own level of reasonableness, and I saw plenty of unnecessary trolling, irrelevance and provocation from him, so perhaps he needs to work on himself.  Has little to do with me, except that I had a few communications with him, but he seems to have dug his own grave (or whatever you want to call it - he put himself into his own perilous position by going beyond acceptable standards that are forum discretionary.. and there does not seem to be evidence that the forum has been rash in regards to the Anonymint-ban situation)


A banned person is not in a very credible position to be presenting forum rules, but of course, theymos and any mods can consider those proposals in either making or enforcing forum rules, to the extent that theymos has given them such authority.  Seems to be quite a bit f discretion in a forum like this concerning making and enforcing rules.


Well, if you are concerned that your work product is going to get erased, then perhaps it would be a good idea to save it in another secure and accessible location.  There do seem to be some recourses for recovering deleted posts with the forum, too, so there is that.


Well, he is going to have troubles if he does not seem to care about the audience in which he is presenting his ideas.  Therefore, it is probably better that he goes to circles in which he feels appreciated... especially if he has such thin skin.


You make little sense with your assertion of "groupthink."


O.k... you and your butt buddy are very important peeps... And you know a lot too... good for you.

While I was referring to deletion of posts in non-anunymint threads, yeah, you're right on the anunymint thread posts. If they had posted any substantial content that could stand on it's own with a bit of editing, they're free to ping me via PM and I'll send over the BB code.