Quote from: n0nce on Today at 05:07:17 PM

I love how this topic divolged into a discussion on the definition of stealing.. Cheesy

It reminds me of Bill Clinton's impeachment. What is the definition of "is?"

Quote from: n0nce on Today at 05:07:17 PM

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 09:46:39 AM

Quote from: easternklaas on Today at 08:05:56 AM

I guess that's entirely possible. I think I have done due diligence to ensure that doesn't happen.
I'll let you know.

I don't understand why you don't just share the address here, since that remains by far the most likely route to letting the owner of the coins track you down, far more likely than anything which will be achieved by blockchain analysis by this local individual.

Maybe he doesn't trust us.. Wink

There are lot of differing opinions shared here, and I can see how that would be overwhelming for easternklaas. I'm not sure that posting the address is a good idea, but it would go a long way to prove that easternklaas made a good faith effort to find the original owner. If he chooses to cash the funds after waiting some time, that could help him avoid any local legal complications. Obviously other more private and technical methods have been suggested, but if easternklaas were to find himself in a legal pickle, would the courts and the lawyers understand those technical methods and their value in informing the owner? It's a dilemma, to say the least.

Quote from: n0nce on Today at 05:07:17 PM

Taking a mushroom from the forest would most probably be considered stealing, indeed. Even though nobody cares about it, that mushroom does belong to someone and does have some value, so after finding it, by taking it home, you stole it.

I think that's going to depend on jurisdiction more than anything. I live in an area where harvesting mushrooms isn't banned, but trespassing is, of course. As long as the property in question is public property, there are almost no restrictions. There is a small state forest not far from me that does have restrictions on mushroom gathering, but the rule (not a law) is intended to keep that specifically delicate ecosystem in balance.

Quote from: n0nce on Today at 05:07:17 PM

I'd like to emphasize that we could have given detailed instructions on whatever method he decided to go for; and this being a public forum, he could have held any of us accountable (at least by our forum reputation) if we publicly gave him false advice. That's the reason I'd consider instructions on the technical boards here pretty trustable.

I tend to agree with this. As long as everything is kept out in the open, things tend to go smoothly. Any private communication can go sideways in a hurry.

This topic has turned into an interesting study of human behavior. It reminds me of a incident that also unfolded on a public forum many years ago; On a firearms related forum that I frequent someone posted photos of an M14 rifle that he was considering buying, and wanted the opinion of forum members about the value of the gun vs. it's asking price. The gunshop had misidentified the rifle as an M1 Carbine (a much less valuable firearm,) and it was priced way below the market value of a typical M14 clone in similar condition. But that's not all: This was not a commercial, semi-automatic clone version. It was an absolutely invaluable, 100% real government issued M14, which is a machine gun and illegal to poses. It was not on the NFA (legal machine gun) registry, so it most certainly had "fallen off the back of a truck," (or, in other words, stolen from a government arsenal.) The fact that it was a machine gun was plainly clear from the photos, and many forum members were able to identify the small gunshop where the photos were taken. The responses to this post were mind-boggling; many were encouraging the OP to rush back to the gunshop and buy the rifle before someone else who had seen his post does.

Now I am a staunch defendant of the 2nd amendment, and I believe that restrictions on fully automatic weapons are an infringement. Yes, it's extreme, I know, but another extreme belief I harbor is that I am a law abiding citizen and the mere presence of a full-auto weapon won't change that. I only bring this up to make the point that no matter what I feel about a specific law and the premise for it's existence, it is the law of the land in which I've chosen to live.

I guess that was the long way around to say that whatever direction easternklaas takes, it's only his business and the business of the legal authorities in his jurisdiction. Once he's satisfied any legal obligations, he'll only be left to answer to any spiritual authority he subscribes to.