Quote from: BITCOIN4X on Today at 03:39:40 PM

[...]

Here's the comparison:

[...]

Interesting finding. That explains what I've been wondering since yesterday by a lot: how he removed the neutral tag given by actmyname. I initially thought he temporarily distrust AMN, I checked his trust list during the time to confirm this, and [as there were no info of such] I thought he did it for about minutes, just enough to make a screenshot, and then delete his list, so the weekly record didn't archive that.

But editing the upper part of the page [or the lower part] made way much sense.

I happen to have screenshots of profile pages around the same time of that screenshot [in April 2023] in my gallery, and indeed, the forum didn't change layout or the likes, layout shown on the profile page during April should also shows what we see right now: all text aligned between each rows.

Quote from: examplens on Today at 04:35:12 PM

[...]

What we have to clarify is that there is no evidence that the original owner of this account is selling that account. In fact, I am sure that the @Markdoy6 Telegram user is not the original owner, but a scammer who offers this account to naive people.
What if someone like him offered my account for sale, or yours holydarkness?

[...]

I guess there were no easy way to prove the ownership, even if Google+ come and answer here, it'll be a classic he-said-she-said.

I can think of two ways to prove or debunk the allegation, but it'll be quite... inconvenient. One is proving the connection by wallet transaction and see if the scammers wallet of which OP send the fund to is connected to Google+. The other is to debunk it [and it'll be very annoying, and I can understand if Google+ refuses to do so] I guess Google+ can ask for a trusted member to verify the dis-connection between his account and this mess by sending them a PM containing a screenshot of his profile from his page.

The screenshot bounds to show his email address and the member who got trusted with this task can match if the email written on his profile matched with the one being offered. I'll say again that it'll be very inconvenient as Google+ will reveal his email address, so I can understand if he doesn't want to go with this method. Might worth to mention that it is not a sure fire, especially if the email was changed few weeks ago past seclog's data [is there a way to get a log way back for months?].