Quote from: Wind_FURY on Today at 08:58:41 AM

Quote from: gmaxwell on May 11, 2020, 04:10:53 AM

Quote from: irukandji on May 10, 2020, 09:43:58 PM

If he fooled Gavin then does anyone know how he did it?

Gavin stonewalled technical experts like myself that inquired about it after answering only a couple questions, so we can only figure out so much.

I think at the end of the day we should simply consider Gavin complicit in Wright's fraud. From that perspective there really isn't much to explain. Sure, he was probably tricked at the time, but in the time since he's failed to withdraw his claims beyond saying that maybe he was tricked and it shouldn't matter. His endorsement continues to be cited as a central factor in other people's belief.

I say 'probably tricked at the time'; because in spite of my low opinion of Gavin's character and capability I still have a hard time believing that he'd knowingly go along with such a transparent scam-- it just had too low a chance of achieving anything. Wright apparently tried his con on other people unsuccessfully before Gavin.

Zectro posted a set of instructions for how to perform a fake signing that would have worked given what we (little) know about the irresponsible process Gavin used: https://twitter.com/Zectro1/status/1192576225413222405

From the depositions of Craig Wright's case vs. David Kleiman's estate.

I believe that he would have kept some his reputation among some of his peers if he told everyone of his doubts earlier.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.589.3.pdf

I am not sure how much that would have helped Gavin. He is kind of revealing himself as a BIG ASS dweeb with the more passage of time. I know that he has a tendency to present well, but he continues to make a lot of pretty BIG dumbass statements including both ongoing support for shit projects which may or may not be aimed at undermining bitcoin on a regular basis.

I understand that some people say that perhaps Gavin was good, at one point, but than at some later point he might have been compromised by some three letter agency. So the suggestion that he was always good, but he might be purposefully sabotaging his own reputation because he does not want to have to give damaging information to the three letter agency about bitcoin.

Of course, I will concede that we might not always be able to know for sure the deep down intentions of any individuals, but seems that there is enough information out there to undermine some of these theories that try to give Gavin very much benefit of the doubt, either that 1) he had good intentions all along or that 2) he really is a good guy in spite of what appears to be.

Just seems to be a whole hell of a lot more straight-forward to appreciate the evidence for what it is, he is a dweeb, instead of trying to twist the evidence into either giving him benefit of the doubt or making him out to be some kind of purportedly good guy.