Are you suggesting that nullius did not have a kind of staying power?

You can see in nullius's posting history that his posting behaviors has continued to go in streaks...  and gosh we never are going to really know if he might come back for a month or two and bombard us with "interesting information."  Surely in the very beginning of his time on the forum (which coincidentally started at the beginning of the implementation of the merit system) a lot of folks considered that he was something close to a genius (reflected in his earned merits in the beginning as well), but he got into a variety of battles and even controversial support of questionable members, not even referring to his seemingly blind support of Lauda.. which hey, I never really had any problems with Lauda - even though towards the end of her forum membership, she also would sometimes become too personally attached to some of her positions which converted her from being exceptionally right on various topics to being not as much right.. and seemingly drawn into battles to preserve her personal reputation.

Another problematic thing about nullius was that he had quite a few difficulties staying on topic, even if some of the things that he would be saying would have been well within an "interesting" categorization, and maybe a relieving point was that he did tend to neither support shitcoin talk nor any kind of investing into shitcoins - even though his supposed bitcoin position was a wee bit weird in terms of what would have been his suggestions of how to manage/balance finances (such as how much value (short-term, even) to keep in such a volatile asset such as bitcoin.. is it even realistic to be suggesting either to keep 100% into bitcoin or to be deferring gratification so damned much that your wealth is going to your heirs rather than yourself - with questionable situation whether there are sufficient balancing considerations there - even though for sure personal discretionary questions anyhow).