I believe that it is a bad idea to purposefully make arguments that are aimed at someone's credibility and past conduct at the new of his announcement that he is leaving the forum due to his belief that he does not have much time left on this planet, and we have no reason to believe that Leo is making up his reason for leaving the forum.. even though we likely are not able to completely confirm his claims either - except that he had been considered a reliable and credible person on the forum, and I have not seen any significant and/or meaningful posts to establish that o_e_l_e_o engaged in the conduct that you are accusing him of having had done, including that lying is a kind act that seems to need to establish bad intentions, and largely I came to this thread in order to post my response to the news of o_e_l_e_o's farewell since o_e_l_e_o had locked his thread by the time I had drafted my response that I was going to post in that thread.
Admittedly, I am not very much interested in the topic of your OP, so maybe it is my own mistake to participate in this thread and to mostly ignore your OP... report me for being somewhat off-topic if you must...
That's a fair (albeit long) statement.
Another thing, I think that if you had disagreements with o_e_l_e_o in regards to various posts that he made in various threads then you would have had already likely addressed those concerns inside of those other threads, or maybe you will repeat your claims against o_e_l_e_o in those threads, but based on his farewell thread and even his post claiming that he is not posting any more on the forum, now you know that he is not going to be responding to your posts, and it seems that he is the best person to respond to the claims contained within the specific kinds of posts that you are making that raise issues of his credibility or his bad intentions as you characterize them to be...
You'll notice that I have not referred to any "disagreements" between myself and o_e_l_e_o for proof, in fact, most of the evidence I quoted from o_e_l_e_o was authored before I joined Bitcointalk.
Maybe you are wanting me to read your OP with more detail? Is that what you are requesting, even though I am not really that interested in complaints of past behaviors in regards to a guy (o_e_l_e_o in this case) who is not going to be defending himself, and so his posts likely speak for themselves in terms of how much credibility they deserve. You are suggesting that there are some smoking gun pieces of evidence contained in your OP outline of evidence that I need to review in order to change my opinion (or my historical trust) of o_e_l_e_o and/or his historical representations?
The OP is rather intimidatingly long, so if you want to focus on the "smoking gun", the first two quotes are the ones that reveal o_e_l_e_o was aware that a coordinator spying on Wasabi users is not possible:
TIMELINEMarch 14 2022 -
o_e_l_e_o admits coordinator policy doesn’t affect your inputs, admits to BlackHatCoiner that switching coordinators solves the censorship problem, and admits to BlackHatCoiner that his motivation is simply to fight against Wasabi anyways:Even if this change from Wasabi won't affect any of your inputs, they are no longer an entity which I can trust to fight for my privacy.
Would it be possible for some to start running coordinators?
Absolutely. The coordinator code is open source, so anyone can download it and spin up their own instance. That would solve the immediate problem if everyone switched to a different coordinator, but it doesn't stop these other coordinators being pressured in to implementing the same restrictions and it doesn't change the fact that Wasabi did this in the first place instead of fighting against it.
March 15 2022 -
o_e_l_e_o admits that the data feed is a 1 way street from a blockchain analysis company to the coordinator, and that no data is provided to blockchain analysis:In fact, they need to cooperate with blockchain analysis to obtain information about "taint" UTXOs.
Well, they only need to cooperate in this sense to have the blockchain analysis entity feed them data about which UTXO's to block. But as I said, if they cooperate like this then it won't be long before that cooperation becomes a two way street, with them feeding data back to the blockchain analysis entity.