Quote from: Steamtyme on Today at 08:26:20 AM

Dealing with the account is a risk. reading what the account wrote is not.

You seriously think that a newbie warning banner on a sticky thread titled, “Newbies - Read before posting” is appropriate?

Please reconsider and withdraw your flag.

Quote from: Steamtyme on Today at 08:26:20 AM

My own neutral feedback also states the value of some of their previous posts.

Wait—so you think that neutral feedback is appropriate, but raised a flag? I issued negative feedback (but left standing my prior positive feedback, for the historical record). I suggest negative trust feedback on the account, with clear wording that it is only effective from today forward.

Quote from: NeuroticFish on Today at 07:49:38 AM

Quote from: Lauda on Today at 05:29:24 AM

no option but to leave the forum permanently.

Quite sad. We've barely interacted, but you were on my trust list for obvious reasons.
It's a big loss for the forum. Maybe you'll "reincarnate" under another user and continue where you left off (one can hope). It would be still a loss, but at least it'll be temporary, until your voice will be strong enough again.

Much though I wish that I could share in that dream, no. Lauda is gone from this forum. She will not be returning. I trust her word, as expressed in OP here.

As Lauda’s admitted fan, I respect and appreciate your sentiment; but please do not sow the seeds of what her OP her so strenuously tried to avoid. This type of speculation could open the way for the scam of a Lauda pretender, in a more subtle way.

Oh, the memories.

The first time that I sort of crossed paths with the cat was, of course, in a thread defending Bitcoin from fork attacks. But she apparently did not notice my posts in the thread.

Quote from: Lauda on November 14, 2017, 10:55:38 AM

Anyone who intentionally tries to deceive newbies that an altcoin is Bitcoin just because it stole the "Bitcoin" name, is an untrustworthy and malicious entity that can't be trusted. Doing something again these scams:
a) Not damaging to anyone (it actually does the opposite).
b) Not hurting freedom of speech (don't mistake acceptance of any kind of scam as a requirement for honoring freedom of speech).

The forum staff must absolutely use more rigorous measures in order to minimize the damage that these "people" try to cause.

Quote from: Lauda on November 14, 2017, 12:54:00 PM

Quote from: theymos on November 14, 2017, 12:24:32 PM

I would consider it if it became a widespread, spammy problem, but I don't think that many people are confusing Bitcoin with Bcash on this forum.

That stance is somewhat vague. As I've pointed out to you recently, there are some users who have been intentionally shilling Bcash with new threads in the Bitcoin Discussion sub-forum. Such users should be permanently banned IMO.

Quote from: theymos on November 14, 2017, 12:24:32 PM

If someone is fraudulently passing off Bcash as Bitcoin, the most appropriate response is probably to give that person negative trust.

I fully agree.

One of my earliest Newbie posts:

Quote from: nullius on December 03, 2017, 08:05:43 AM

So-called “Bitcoin Cash” is neither Bitcoin, nor cash, in the sense that it has neither the unlinkability nor the fungibility of cash. It and its ilk are also generically different from honest altcoins, which at least have the decency to make their own names. I don’t even know what to properly call it—other than a scam, of course; and anybody who does not realize it’s a scam must be one or more of ill-informed, malicious, or incurably stupid.

[—Nullian essay—]

Other than #MeritBrokeMyLife, in which Lauda and I each got revenge-merited +50 in a way that adds new meaning to the term “merit bomb”...

Merited by soniclord (50)

Quote from: Lauda on January 31, 2018, 01:38:51 PM

Quote from: soniclord on January 31, 2018, 01:30:44 PM

I am amazed you people - a group of users decides the fate of people of a lower level.

*Lower level*? Maybe you meant lower intelligence.

[...]

Merited by soniclord (50)

Quote from: nullius on January 31, 2018, 03:15:41 PM

[...]

Add to this that to exonerate himself of guilt, soniclord would need to prove that he has an IQ not exceeding 75. I think that is the functional requirement for innocently awarding 50 merits as a “test” to a random (pinky-swear! random!) post which just so happened to be in a scamcoin airdrop thread. Well, either severe mental retardation—or a state of insanity, replete with psychotic delusions. There can be no other way for someone to actually do that innocently. It is implausible, improbable, impossible.

...one of our first significant interactions was here:

Subject: Re: Merit system vs KYC registration?

Quote from: Lauda on February 04, 2018, 10:37:36 AM

Quote from: nullius on February 02, 2018, 11:11:48 PM

Tor user here. Cypherpunk who remembers that it took an excruciatingly long time to generate 4096-bit RSA PGP keys on 90s hardware. I am strictly pseudonymous. I am so dedicated to encrypting everything, everywhere, all the time,
-snip-

Quote from: Lauda on February 02, 2018, 07:32:24 PM

If you really think that a crypto anarchist / cyberpunk / anyone reasonable/rational/knowledgeable (i.e. any desirable user) is going to submit KYC to become a merit source or even to register here, then you are a nutjob.

I wonder why Jet Cash merited this shitpost.

Me, too.

...you were saying?

You seem to know your privacy stuff. I respect people who work on their opsec.

Laudatory Lore.