Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 09, 2016, 06:09:39 PM

Quote from: btcusury on January 07, 2016, 06:24:00 PM

For now, dump your evidence and/or observations (or even just the case you feel showcases the most obvious shilling) in this thread! Preferrably concisely summarized, though the more detailed and hyperlinked the better.

To my mind, the most obvious case is VeritasSapere. What is the probability that this guy is not employed full-time by a group whose goal it is to destroy Bitcoin? The username itself seems like a clue.

There is no evidence of shilling on either side of the debate, so what is the point in per suing this line of argument? Accusing other people of being shills without evidence is just ad hominem and not conductive towards productive discussion.

The purpose of this thread was/is to assemble the evidence.

Quote

It does the opposite of strengthening your cause since you are just revealing that your rationality is weak by supporting such "conspiracy theories".

In Orwellian slave-think, "conspiracy theories" is a euphemism for "cannot possibly be true, so I'll ignore it".

Quote

Your time is better spent countering my arguments as opposed to accusing me of being a shill, which I am not for the record. Even if I where a shill it is unproductive and even damaging to the discourse here to accuse me of this without evidence.

Your arguments have been deconstructed over and over and over and over, but you just ignore them and pretend that you still have (the same old tired) valid arguments. Hence why it's very difficult to imagine that you aren't being paid to do what you do.

Quote

I could just as easily accuse certain small block proponents of being shills for either blockstream or governments. I will not do that however since accusing people of such things without evidence is wrong and it is more productive to stick to rational discussion, logic, reason and what can be known instead of futilely focusing on the unknowable.

Unknowable, huh? I would not have gone beyond "unprovable". It can be known with some degree of certainty by apophatic inquiry.

Quote

I can explain what my alias means. It is latin, I am also a history buff as well as having a political philosophy background. Veritas means truth and it was also the name of the main character in the movie "V for Vendetta", the mask that he wears has now become a symbol for the cypherpunk movement and anonymous movement as well. Sapere is a bit harder to pin down in terms of meaning, but it can be described as knowledge, or a thirst for knowledge. I took it from an older phrase which is "Sapere Aude". Which means "dare to be wise", which has significant meaning in terms of enlightenment and philosophical thinking. So you could translate my alias to mean something along the lines of "A thirst for true knowledge".

Well, let's then test whether that is true. You obviously have a lot of spare time (or is it work time?), given your posts on this forum, so certainly you have time to increase your "true knowledge" regarding "political philosophy" by researching the information from other researchers who also have "a thirst for true knowledge". So let's start with these two:

Mark Passio Interviews Larken Rose - The Religion of Statism (a very short video)

Apply your "dare to be wise" philosophy so that you can come to understand the true nature of "politics", "government", and "authority", so that you may stop operating under ridiculously false premises such as...

Quote from: btcusury on October 02, 2015, 03:06:58 PM

Quote from: VeritasSapere

Since I do think that the block size limit should be increased, and right now I have to choose between Core or BIP101, I choose BIP101, even if it a choice between the lesser of two evils. This is a case of political realism. In political thought the lesser of two evils is often the pragmatic reality we have to accept in order to even justify the existence of the state, and we should not think that 90% consensus is practical considering how democracies actually and practically function.

LOL! Why the hell would you want to "justify the existence of the state", especially in these terms, unless you are a proud, ultra-dogmatic, foaming-at-the-mouth slave?

... and join the human race.