Quote from: Jannat76 on June 19, 2018, 03:06:09 PM

I Found nursahath07 Another Id ... xwshamim= https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=949159
Here Is Prove >> https://i.imgur.com/4SfuJIe.png

That isn't anything close to conclusive proof of alt accounts... all that proves is how lazy nursahath07 is... Roll Eyes

Clearly, all he has done is copy/paste the post before his and forgotten to change the t.me/xwshamim line.

Quote from: Jannat76 on June 19, 2018, 05:12:43 PM

I Don't Understand How You Didn't Find As Connected, Can You please check The spreadsheet? The spreadsheet?

arnobs007 and Nursahath07 Send Token >> 0x1fdcb0be2bf6c01b83d3a59d8b9373aac77f67bd And posted Their ETH address as prove >> You can check Tx ID>> https://etherscan.io/token/0x6425c6be902d692ae2db752b3c268afadb099d3b?a=0x1fdcb0be2bf6c01b83d3a59d8b9373aac77f67bd

And I don't understand how you don't understand what CONCLUSIVE proof is... the fact that tokens are transferred from two different ETH addresses (apparently owned by two different accounts) to the same ETH address proves what exactly? Huh

It proves that two different ETH addresses transferred tokens to one ETH address. Roll Eyes

There is NO proof that these two ETH addresses belong to the same person/account... I've not seen these two different BCT accounts directly linked to ownership of the same address.

You need to somehow link ownership of the receiving address directly to the two accounts. In other words, you cannot claim that "PersonA transferred tokens to AddressX and PersonB transferred tokens to AddressX... therefore PersonA = PersonB". That's not a valid proof.

However, "PersonA is using AddressX and PersonB is using AddressX, therefore PersonA = PersonB" is a pretty valid conclusion.

Quote from: Jannat76 on June 19, 2018, 04:15:30 PM

It is well understood, each account connected. Each account has been trading in the same address, so we can assume that all accounts are controlling one person Account Trader.

No. It isn't. Roll Eyes