Quote from: yahoo62278 on Today at 12:10:40 AM

... but I do want to point out that you should have some balls and use your main account when accusing people of wrongdoings. Don't be a coward, it's not like you will get into trouble for posting things like this.

I don't know what your problem is with this. I know you repeat it a lot in these cases but precisely the alts are allowed for things like this. In the original quote from theymos he was referring to alts to say controversial things in politics matters but I think it applies equally here. If it is legitimate to create an alt to say political opinions that you don't want to say with your main account it is also legitimate to try to reveal cheaters.

As for the evidence presented in the OP I find this more relevant:

Quote from: nayib bukkake on April 27, 2025, 11:23:48 PM

However, there are these bounty applications where Jating and Baofeng use the same address:

Than this:

Quote from: nayib bukkake on April 27, 2025, 11:23:48 PM

On February 25, the payment for the Betpanda signature campaign was made in transaction e754321bbd2b4049c3ae2462c048e4fae52c846b16ebcf6015d38289747b9a4b
Kemarit sends his payment to address bc1qnfg74ycx774tkk9d82vh9900t25xjgv08l7kn4
Baofeng sends his payment to address bc1qhp6hq70za7yle52gpnssvekyj9p9vmxnrre8qv
Both of these transfers use the same feerate and are included in the same block.

In the next block, these addresses, along with Jating's signature campaign address bc1qx6qxfksg38jmhjwp0tmdgg3krqtjyw80gcaujz, are included in consolidation transaction
418ce5b28d388e6b3be0f385b5051e5f954953e3982d0c0ecb4c5e4a10d54c88
Looking at the history of the addresses in this transaction suggests they might belong to an exchange,