Their behavior, from the public point of view, somewhat resembles a shakedown that would be seen from the public point of view. They might not have been as explicit as they were in trying to extort zeroaxl because it didnt go very well.
Although zeroaxl was not flaunting his money around, it was no secret he had some coins. Similarly, it is well known that OgN is an early adopter of bitcoin, although I have no idea how many coins he has.
Most of the people involved are known to do whatever they want without consequences and to have no morals. It should be noted that there isnt any reasonable basis for the smears these people were saying and there was no claim any of them had any nonpublic information
It's good to see that you don't even pretend to have any sort of consistency in how you evaluate OgNasty's actions vs actions of those whom you dislike. You're just rationalizing anything he does, no matter how petty it is. There was no "shakedown" in eoakland's case. User posts in OgNasty's thread (a favorable post BTW). OgNasty blows a fuse for some inexplicable reason and neg-trusts the user. User
disputes the rating. After some back-and-forth and some fumbling trying to sign a message, the user finally disproves the original excuse for the neg trust (being a bought account). OgNasty finds a bunch of other reasons to be insulted and to keep the neg trust.
Perhaps there is some convoluted way to explain this one instance, but when that happens repeatedly - e.g. when minifrij misunderstood Og's post and instead of "no, that's not what I meant" he got neg trust - you gotta start recognizing the pattern. Well, not you, but anyone who doesn't have their head so far up Og's ass.