[edited out]
Sorry to equate your casual dismissal of something to declaring said thing to be a "farce." How dare I.
Jbreher selective representation of facts and incredible leaps of logic
Like what? Asking for links to the evidence so one is able to reach a conclusion themself? Hardly a seleective representation of facts, nor any leap of logic whatsoever.
I thought trustlessness was one of the core principles behind this grand journey we all share.
Don't trust - verify. amirite?
Well, you _could_ have just verified the information yourself instead of throwing the ball back to the non-SV crowd.
Which is exactly why I was asking for evidence. Your links do not make the case.
Especially after such evidence was presented to you in my post that you overlooked in order to ask for evidence.
Evidence? Okay. Let's examine this together, shall we? Here's your original post:
https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/1187995784957947904?s=20 ?
Nope, no evidence in there. Discussion and allegation, no evidence.
https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/1189678498337574912 ?
Maybe. Not dispositive, however. The total of penalty txs over the probable time interval of the event show less than 1BTC lost through penalty txs. But tell me - why is it assumed that there were penalty claims? If his counterparties were on the beneficial side of a stale closing tx, what is their incentive to issue a penalty? They stand to win more through just letting the mistaken stale tx broadcasts lie as is. Seems we need to at least consider that possibility before closing the case. As at least one scenario.
https://bitcoinist.com/4-bitcoin-loss-on-lightning-network-is-fud-says-community/ ?
Oh yes - "says community". Hearsay is not evidence.
I'm still wanting to see the evidence that leads you to conclude that his claim was a fabrication. Or are you just relying on the conclusions of others?