Quote from: pugman on January 17, 2020, 08:54:11 PM

Timelord has been known to accuse the randomest of people as alts,

...and, in my case, publicly endorsed Quicksellers (!) perennial accusation that nullius is just the latest in a long string of alts. (Protip for Quickseller: Its called projection.)

Below is a draft of a PM that I wrote earlier with intent to send it to Timelord2067. I held it, debating whether what began as a public tag should be taken to private discussions. I see no reason to; and I am always wary of engaging in private arguments with parties whom I do not trust or even know very well, which may foreseeably lead to public misquotes or worse. Now that I see this thread, I realize that its probably better just to post it here. I invite Timelord2067s clarification.

The context:

Based on that, I put ~Timelord2067 on the new trust list I installed yesterday, and left the following neutral trust feedback dated 2020-01-16:

Quote from: nullius

Cited Quicksellers completely unfounded, factually incorrect speculation as the basis for a neutral tag on my account. Although this happened to be harmless to me, it shows exceedingly poor judgment. I leave this note to explain my ~Timelord2067. https://archive.fo/W9BlF#selection-1279.0-1279.12 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4626680.msg41800616#msg41800616

I dashed that off-the-cuff, while busy with exceedingly thorough vetting of trust-list inclusions. (I take trust seriously.*) On further reflection, its not harmless; see below.

(* Wherefore you should not take offence if you were not included, or if I later remove your inclusion without ~excluding you. I spent hours examining the impact that each inclusion would have, and striking the names of people whom I respect for reasons that verge on the obsessive. I expect for my inclusions list to grow slowly, if at all, and for my exclusions list to grow rapidly. Motto for nullius, named of nobody: Trust nobody.)

The following quote is of neutral trust feedback that Timelord2067 left for me on 2020-01-17 (today).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=976210

Quote from: Timelord2067

nullius is reverse engineering his negative trust of me. (and has never communicated his "concerns" with me for "clarification")

You made a public statement on my trust page directly referencing Quicksellers post, which is false from start to finish. That was on your part an exercise of poor judgmentand worse, a false statement by you yourself. So, being then in a lenient mood, I simply excluded reliance on your judgment, and made a statement publicly (just like yours) explaining why.

That was the actual reason for my ~. There was no reverse-engineering. It further shows poor judgment (or worse) that you pretend to read my mind, and insinuate unstated ulterior motives to deny the quite reasonable motive I plainly stated.

I dont know why you are using scare quotes, but I will set that aside. If you wish to clarify, then please explain how it did not show poor judgment (and worse) for you to implicitly endorse the veracity of this:

Quote from: Quickseller on July 08, 2018, 10:21:42 PM

He moved on. The account he was as posting from was not his first not by a long shot and likely wont be his last.

Now, for a contrast just to show how ridiculous is your assertion that I am reverse-engineering my stated reasons...

As you may have noticed, suchmoon outright red-tagged my account with the following negative feedback dated 2019-01-10:

Quote from: suchmoon

This feedback serves as a warning that this user has been inactive for a long time. You should be careful if this account reactivates and attempts to trade.

The feedback was truthful; and the red-tag was reasonable, insofar as this would be a very valuable account for anyone who could compromise it. I did not complainto the contrary! I PMed a PGP-signed statement to suchmoon on 2020-01-01, with outright thanks for red-tagging my account (Good call. I appreciate the prophylactic effect of the negative, in so far as it makes the account unattractive for theft.). If you wish to verify this, I unequivocally consent to suchmoon disclosing that PM.

(And by the way, the tag was not removed for several weeks thereafter; I still did not complain, for I myself had suggested that suchmoon wait and watch to be sure that I am really me. IIUC, another user independently PMed suchmoon and asked for its removal.)

suchmoons negative feedback, and the stated reasons therefor, showed wise judgment. That was protecting the forumand protecting me, too. I would not want for a Craig Wright type of character to break into my forum account and promote some scam as Nullian Vision. It took effort and personal merit for me to build my reputation. In case of a forum hack, identity thieves should not be able to abuse my good name for purposes that I would hate.

Whereas your neutral tag idiotically made it look as if Quickseller knew something about me. Worse, by implication, you, Timelord2067, were telling the world that I float from alt to alt, and now I moved on. That shows much worse than poor judgment.

I never had any conflict with you before, but that made me realize you do not care too much about the veracity of statements you make about other people. ~ exists for that reason. I do not want to see your tags as trusted; and I suggest that others should not, either.

Please be advised, if you want to squabble with me over this, I may disclose PMs on this subject if I think thats necessary to protect myself, or otherwise warranted. I myself will stand by all I just said, any way that may arise; if you so desire, feel free to post this whole PM in Reputation.