I understand that you are being both a bit tongue and cheek, but you are also attempting to suggest that none of us are completely pure, and surely I have no problems with that, but even when you might be trying to play off of ongoing misconceptions, you still seem to be playing with fire in the various ways that you are poking fun.

On a personal basis, I know that negative brushing of bitcoin existed at the time that I got in, and also that a lot of the negative brushing pre-dated me, and some of t had factual bases to it, too.

Sometimes there was jest too, so it's going to be difficult to impute blameworthy type knowledge - even to folks who might have gotten involved in one way or another with individuals of questionable characters - but just like you were suggesting the other day, sometimes we still might need to figure out if some people might have characters less pure than they proclaim based on some of their prior involvement in certain kinds of businesses or even certain positions that they took in various public forums.

One of the risks for me has been that I have written a quite a few words, over the years, believe it or not.. and yeah, we live in a much more complicated world when we have the various combination choices in regards to various online identities and real life identities and the extent to which those sometimes might get connected, and ev en how much do we need to be traceable if we are just spouting out information on the interwebs versus if we might be wanting to sell a good or service to someone.. a tangible or an intangible?

Surely there has been more and more thoughts in relationship to how internet identities might be connected in somewhat anonymous ways, and surely some folks are going to want to start over if they did some illegal or scammy shit, so it might not alway be clear if there might be work arounds for some of the new systems that are being proposed and developed.
 

Seems to me that people can choose however they like to spin the past, and we are not always going to want to spin matters in the same way that you do, which surely might provide value if there are different ways of spinning similar facts. .. and your contrary way of spinning the matter, D_W, which you seem to be implying is more true, shows that it is quite doubtful that anyone would have necessarily have been imputed with the knowledge that you are proclaiming to be emblematic of the referenced (in this case 2012) period.


Fuck shitcoins and your seemingly holier than thou attempts to inject their discussion in this thread as if the various compare and contrast cost/benefits are as very relevant at all to our discussion in these here parts as you are trying to make them out to be through your implicit denigration of our lil precious too..

Remember.. overall we are not claiming to be a bunch of smarties here, but you seem to want to get us into various in the weeds discussion of bitcoin.. but instead why not take those kinds of promotions about how your various shitcoins and their funding is wonderful to some other thread where you are pumping those kinds of seemingly nuanced / nonsense compare contrast talking points, no?

Recall the default mode in this here thread seems to be "fuck shitcoins, ain't nobody got time for that."  "Take your nuanced criticizing of king daddy pumping of dee shitcoins bullshit to some udder parts."