Quote from: Luke-Jr on June 15, 2014, 05:53:03 AM

Quote from: ShakyhandsBTCer on June 15, 2014, 04:40:12 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on June 14, 2014, 02:23:31 AM

Quote from: ShakyhandsBTCer on June 14, 2014, 02:19:19 AM

Quote from: crashoveride54902 on June 14, 2014, 01:30:57 AM

whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good Cheesy

Yea this is ridiculous.

Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this.

There is sufficient proof to easily hold up in a criminal court case, IMO.

I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.

Quote from: Luke-Jr on June 15, 2014, 05:53:03 AM

I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof.

That is something up to wizkid057 to try to organise and present.
If it were me, I'd consider the effort to try to put it in a form understandable by anyone to be more trouble than it's worth.

Quote from: ShakyhandsBTCer on June 15, 2014, 04:40:12 AM

In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.

I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.

If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC

Quote from: Luke-Jr on June 15, 2014, 05:53:03 AM

Quote from: ShakyhandsBTCer on June 15, 2014, 04:40:12 AM

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.

Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad

If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity.

Have you considered "flagging" accounts/addresses/ipaddresses that have more then x hashpower or less then y luck to be manually reviewed for this type of attack prior to them entering the payment que? IP addresses would probably be best.

Quote from: Luke-Jr on June 15, 2014, 05:53:03 AM

Quote from: ShakyhandsBTCer on June 15, 2014, 04:40:12 AM

If it is apparent that he was doing this on purpose (if this person is who he says he is then he was doing it on purpose) then there is no reason to provide payment at all IMO. Intentionally withholding blocks from pools will degrade confidence in pools, which would lead to a decreased number of people mining in the first place (they would only solo mine and only if they could do it when they have enough hahspower that luck will not be a big issue), which would lead to centralization of mining.

The more he talks, the more I get convinced it was intentional.
But we may never know for sure.

I read something somewhere that said BTC Guild banned a bunch of accounts that were having very bad luck. I don't think it was on these forums (it may have been one of those agitators that pull from the forums - it was defiantly not from the news page on BTC Guild - here, I found it - http://www.bcoinnews.com/btcguild-bans-accounts/ but I am not sure where their quote is from) that said it appeared that those accounts were behind their very bad luck. It mentioned that they were contacted by the owner of one of the accounts and were going over the configuration to check for problems. The quote said they were having 90% and 80% luck, but I think their PPLNS page was showing even worse luck then that. Regardless if this is the same person then I would find it very doubtful it was anything but intentional.