I'm not sure what's more funny, the fact that people think they're entitled to make such a request or that they think that there is a standard for signing messages from multisig. Actually, it's rather sad how ignorant and/or envious you (not directed @you) have to be to do so. 
There was absolutely no proof provided for any of these claims, thus there is absolutely no public proof necessary to counter any of these claims. This is QS shenanigans all over again. Some people never seem to learn.
There was absolutely no proof provided for any of these claims, thus there is absolutely no public proof necessary to counter any of these claims. This is QS shenanigans all over again. Some people never seem to learn.
You don't get the benefit of the doubt. You're supposed to be transparent as an escrow. It is clear that you are acting as escrow for one scam after another, always making sure to have a scapegoat to take the blame for you. Many people are sick of watching this BS. Sign an address and prove the funds.
You can sign a message with multiple private keys and thus have multiple signatures, as with a multisig address. However, that would not map to a multisig address but rather three signatures with each one mapping to the three public keys used in the multisig address.
EDIT: Funny how Lauda is the one who hides other people's funds from them and refuses to show them the 3,000 BTC he has claimed, but now he uses this as a reason to leave me negative trust?