Quote from: gmaxwell on February 25, 2020, 07:25:14 AM

Quote from: nutildah on February 25, 2020, 05:51:28 AM

I have an honest question for you: do you believe Gavin wasn't telling the truth when he said there's a chance that Wright may be Satoshi? And by "telling the truth," I mean conveying what he actually believes. He distinctly left open the possibility that Faketoshi is real, and I would like to know if you believe he did that dishonestly.

Both dishonest (how would he expect anyone to fall for this) and honest (how would he fall for it) really don't make a ton of sense in my view.

It's not that I view him as extremely honest-- I recently ran into some evidence that convinces me that Gavin was being wilfully dishonest when it came to the block size drama-- but rather it's too stupid a lie to play along with, and it's not that I think he's totally immune to smoke and mirrors (I think even far more capable people are not immune) but I have not encountered anyone else who knew almost anything about the technology and wasn't explicitly on Wright's payroll that expressed a public belief in it for more than a second. At least to technical experts (and I think many other people) wright is just that transparently a fraud.

Unfortunately, we know relatively little about the scope and progression of his interactions with Wright, because other than detailing a bit about the proof ceremony (e.g. that it was via a computer provided by wright) he pretty much clammed up and stopped answering questions.

So... Sorry, I can't explain the inexplicable. I wish I could.

Some people say that it's not a big deal that he hasn't issued a clear and emphatic retraction, or shared publicly his electronic communications with wright which he claimed convinced him before they met. I might even buy an argument that it was all just too much for him and he can't take dealing with it if he'd disappeared from the public light entirely-- rather than showing up periodically to toss shade at bitcoin and promote competitors. ... but he hasn't and it's really easy to find real people who are being exploited by Wright that cite Gavin's endorsement as a primary justification.

Thanks for the reply, it is appreciated. Perhaps there's an element that Gavin wanted Wright to be Satoshi that clouded his judgment. I would just hope that people who consider taking Gavin's assessment into account also consider the rest of his final words on the topic (I know I've posted this a couple times already but its worth repeating):

Quote

Now that six months have gone past, Im being asked if I still think Craig Wright was Satoshi.

I think there are two possibilities.

Either he was Satoshi, but really wants the world to think he isnt, so he created an impossible-to-untangle web of truths, half-truths and lies. And ruined his reputation in the process.

If he was Satoshi, we should respect his wish to remain anonymous, and ignore him.

The other possibility is he is a master scammer/fraudster who managed to trick some pretty smart people over a period of several years.

In which case everybody except the victims of his fraud and law enforcement working on behalf of those victims should ignore him.

So, either he was or he wasnt. In either case, we should ignore him. I regret ever getting involved in the who was Satoshi game, and am going to spend my time on more fun and productive pursuits.

What's clear is that either way he was telling people to ignore Craig, yet a lot of BSVites just didn't seem to get that portion of the message, for whatever reason...