Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on February 08, 2015, 06:49:38 AM

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 02:31:09 AM

Yup. Bitcoin is not anonymous. Tor is not anonymous either. Are you saying you believe both tech to be anonymous?

What do you actually define as anonymous? But there's no point arguing over semantics and this isn't really relevant anyway. The point is if you don't want an account associated with your other(s) or real world identity then you can have one or several for whatever reasons.

This isn't semantics. Bitcoin is NOT anonymous. Neither Satoshi nor Gavin, or any of the other four core developers has claimed Bitcoin to be anonymous. Just last week an FBI agent testified during the Ross Ulbricht trial in court how he conclusively connected the Silk Road addresses to Ulbricht. A week earlier, a security researcher did the same thing using only publicly available data and published his findings on Forbes.

If you use Bitcoin carefully enough you can essentially achieve anonymity, especially if you keep your trade sizes in smaller amounts. The connection was made to Ross because he was not careful nor was he using bitcoin properly.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

When you sign up to a forum, you ceased to be anonymous. I think this is why admins stopped anonymous posting on Bitcointalk. Your identity can remain private, but you are no longer anonymous.

Not true. You can register for the forum via TOR or via an anon proxy/VPN, the same is true for posting. Someone could potentially buy an account on the darknet and only post via TOR.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on February 08, 2015, 06:49:38 AM

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 02:31:09 AM

My point is not moot at all. You just refusing to see the logic in it. With the barriers raised, significantly fewer people will use alts. Kiddie account sellers will no longer be able to farm 20-30 accounts without large investment, incredible discipline and huge amount of time to burn. When they screw up even once eventually, the account will be locked. I have seen this happen at another forum that was once filled with scammers.

No, your point is moot and there's no logic in it. Alt accounts are allowed and scammers are not banned, so you're trying to create rules and restrictions for something that is allowed. Why make it harder for me to have an alt account? Punish me just so it's a little more tedious for scammers to sign up? Again, when you make it harder for scammers you make it harder for the everyday user. Scammers will do whatever they can to get around the rules no matter how hard you make the restrictions and casual users will just be turned off/away.

Why make it harder for the average users here and easier for scammers? You favor an environment that is conducive to scams, inconveniencing all average users every day, making Bitcointalk a dangerous place. Who is being punished here? This is the tyranny of the majority over a tiny minority.

People need to learn how to defend themselves from potential scams. It is not up to the forum to hold people's hands protecting them from scams. Even if the forum did police scams, a scammer could do something as simply as move a conversation to Skype to pull off a scam.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

My suggestion would make it slightly harder one time (seconds for most) for the average user to sign up, and make it so much harder for scammers, trolls, account farmers, etc.

Linking your social media account would not protect against scammers - they have the ability to create multiple social media accounts - scammers do not need so many accounts that they would likely have difficulty creating additional accounts. In reference to trolls, everyone is entitled to their opinion, just because it is unpopular, or even invalid does not mean they should not be able to voice it. In reference to account farmers - as long as they are posting things that are relevant to the conversation with their farmed accounts (and not spamming with them) then there is no real harm to the community. They are doing nothing more then providing a service to others which there is a demand for. They are embracing the free market.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on February 08, 2015, 06:49:38 AM

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 02:31:09 AM

Again, what are the genuine reasons aside from non-existent 'anonymity'?

I've already stated several times you can have them for whatever reasons you want. What reason are you using a 'throwaway account' now? That's one. Don't want to get into an argument with someone on your main account for whatever reason? That's another. Want one for business and one for personal? Another. Want to post unpopular opinions? Another. Want to sell dildos or erotic fiction you write? Create a new account. Any reason you want an account is valid and we should not restrict those people from doing so by adding pointless things like linking social media that do nothing but annoy people. And how is anonymity non existent? If I create an account through tor how is that tied to this account? If I want an account not linked to this one for whatever reasons I can do so regardless of the semantics of your definition of true anonymity.

I am using this account now because I can. If I can't, then I won't. Simple.

Some may say you using this account to advocate for the kind of change you are advocating for is hypocritical. I would be one of those people.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

How many accounts does an average user need in other forums? How many other accounts does an average user need on Bitcointalk?

Doesn't matter. Some people have no interest in posting/selling/buying/trading anything controversial, these people will probably only need one account (and will probably ever use only one account). Other people may want to trade in controversial things (that are still legal), and may want to even use multiple accounts to trade in the same controversial items to avoid potential controversy in the trading of those things.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

How many erotic businesses does the average users run? How many users are too cowardly to voice their opinion on one anonymous account but not the other?

People have their reputation associated with their various accounts. Anytime someone posts something from their account they are putting their reputation on the line. This is especially important if someone is running a business from one (or more) of their accounts.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

My suggestion would not be a barrier against someone who wants to have two or three accounts. It would be a barrier against scammers. It would be a barrier against spammers. It would make enforcement very possible.

No. You would probably make enforcement more difficult. Your proposal would make it more difficult for spammer/scammer to initially sign up, however the initial period of an account is already difficult. Your proposal would make it more difficult to detect scammers/spammers when they do sign up with multiple accounts. The current system makes it so the admins are able to detect scammers/spammers while not revealing their sources as to how they know they are an alt of a scammer/spammer.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

You are arguing against it because it will cost most posters an extra couple of seconds (once) and because a small number of people who thinks they are anonymous might get turned away from registering?

It would cost more then time. It would cost people the ability to remain anon from everyone including the forum's admins.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: hilariousandco on February 08, 2015, 06:49:38 AM

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 02:31:09 AM

I would argue that more people will sign up because they will feel safer, knowing there are actual people behind an account rather than alts.

I would argue that they wouldn't and I think you'll be in the minority with this opinion. You also seem to be contradicting yourself as how does tying a fake Facebook account make them a real person? You know as well as I do so all this will do is give users a false sense of security so not safer at all. Casual and niave users may feel more secure or have no problem with it but they'll regret it later when their account is hacked and their real world identity is exposed or whatever.

Why is it potentially more dangerous?

If you are doing too many things to make it difficult for scammers then you are risking giving people a false sense of security.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Who gains the most from the current system? That's right. Scammers. Not the average users.

I disagree. The average user does not need to associate their RL identity with their account. You should remember that bitcoin is still frowned upon in most of the world and is outright illegal in some places. Forcing people to associate their social media accounts with their forum account would make it easier for tyrant governments to punish people for being associated with bitcoin.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

How many users publicly post their website, email, Skype and Twitter accounts on this forum? Let's Google it.

With the exception of their twitter account, all can potentially not be associated with their RL identity and even in the case of twitter is is likely not associated with their RL identity. IMO most people posting these things are doing so for business purposes.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

How many of the people above would suddenly leave Bitcointalk if asked to tie the social media accounts to Bitcointalk? How many people would feel sudden need to create a fake social media account to hide their identity from the admins?

Probably a lot for both of your questions.

Quote from: Throwaway_Acc on February 08, 2015, 07:54:19 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on February 08, 2015, 07:05:00 AM

I have a reason why people would want to create alternate accounts that is more valid then any of the above reasons: someone spends a lot of time calling out scammers and stopping scams. As a result scammers don't like him (it would probably be more accurate to say scammers would hate such a person).

A person who spends a lot of time weeding out scammers probably would not want their RL identity associated with their account because scammers would probably try to associate their RL identity with a bunch of BS illegal shit that is not true (just look at Vod - I am fairly confident that he thoroughly regrets associating his RL identity with his account now).

If such a person wanted to trade with people they would likely do so with alt accounts in order to protect their identity.

Why would that need to stop? Linking your social media account to your Bitcointalk account does mean you must post with your real life identity.

I am not interested in your other forums. This forum literally has hundreds of thousands of users and is roughly the 4,000th largest website on the internet. As a result the forum is a prime target for hackers trying to steal information from the forum. The identities of people who weed out scammers would likely sell at a premium then others' identities for the reasons I stated above