Dear Nullius,
I waited for an extended period before answering this post, which is probably the first one I am addressing to you, and for sure, the last one.
I will not counter your reasoning on the specific matter of the accusation that I am running a vast operation aimed at stealing everyone's private keys for my personal profit.
This accusation is incomprehensible to me, and you are intelligent and knowledgeable. I am sure you will outsmart me in every possible discussion we have on this topic.
All the intervention of many users who spent their time in this very depressing drama should have made the situation pretty clear to you.
One, in particular, was spot on in explaining my feelings on that two-year-old post.
I won't bother on commenting this drama crap, but I just want to ask nullius: Did you read the whole thread? Later, he says:
I knew from start the possibilities to find something were tiny, but I wanted to try because looking for balances and finding nothing, would reassure me that nobody could do the same with my own bitcoin so jealously held in my cold wallet.
It seems more like a safety-reassured wannabe than a wallet-thief wannabe.
Didn't look that difficult to me, as almost everyone was able to understand the tone of the thread.
So, I think I will leave the answer to these accusations to the more than 10K posts I have written in this forum.
My interactions in this community were always aimed at improving my knowledge of bitcoin and exchanging my knowledge with others.
I made (a lot of) errors writing them, I made corrections, I had thoughtful exchanges with many members of this community, and for sure, I learned a lot.
Many times I have been corrected on many factual errors, inaccuracies, and superficialities in my posts, and I think I was always receptive to such corrections.
I think I never wrote anything where I had an aggressive, offensive or shady attitude toward any member of this community. And I am taking pride in this.
If you had any doubts you could have expressed in the thread, I would have been happy to discuss them with you. I could have even accepted making unnecessary amendments to the thread to reassure you about my intentions.
Instead, you let your action speak for yourself.
Let me have the same privilege.
Adieu.
I remain somewhat confused about the whole matter, and surely I would not presume any of us to be anything close to a saint, including fillippone, yet I have not doubt that he would have been open to suggestions within the thread- but instead what seemed to have had happened was that Nullius was convoluting any attempt to potentially reasonably rectify possible issues (if there were any that needed to be rectified) into either imputing malicious intentions on fillippone or otherwise failing/refusing to help any of us to be directed in terms of how such topics should be addressed - are we just supposed to NOT talk about such topics?
Even though Nullius tends to be decently articulate and presents matters fairly well (with good grammar and all that), but even with such decently good presentations of facts and/or logic, that still does not necessarily mean that he is correct - even if he starts to become dogmatic about it.. and maybe dogmatism causes members to unreasonably get on the defensive when there might have been some possible reasonable ways in which suggestions should have or could have been made.. so as a minimum perhaps if nullius would like to provide evidence that he is not completely cunty, then he could at least convert his negative of fillippone to a neutral and to otherwise stick by his stance (if that's what he would like to do),.... and maybe even maintain reservations to turn the trust back into negative if he has further evidence to support his case that fillippone had actually done some thing wrong or that fillippone may have been running a long con or some other more compelling reasons that fillippone should have not created such thread...
, I had suggested that there could possibly be ways that fillippone might have amended some of his OP in that other thread or even created a disclaimer - although now the thread has been locked - yet I am not even sure if amending or creating a disclaimer would have been able to help matters from Nullius's perspective on the topic.. and then if fillipponne had ended up making a bunch of changes, then the whole matter becomes confusing regarding whether some kind of cover-up or re-writing history might have been happening.. so in that sense, it seems that even if some kind of credibility were to be given to various claims that Nullius had been making, Nullius had seemed to put fillippone into a paralyzing position of being damned if you do and damned if you don't.. .. so personally, it makes it harder for me to give Nullius benefits of the doubt when he is going down a route in which there does not seem to be any kind of meaningful course forward, and he is not even suggesting one.. except that we are all supposed to just agree with him because he is right.. blah blah blah.. and even Nullius should realize that members do have brains here and no one really likes to be told what we are supposed to think, even if we might not exactly know the various nuances of the points that Nullius had been making in his various posts on the topic in that thread.