It might be more appropriate to have a separate discussion about the appropriateness of the trust system elsewhere...I tend to agree that the trust system causes more problems than the value of the benefits it provides. Looking back, I believe that misunderstandings and forum members not understanding the norms of the community have lead to members leaving. I might argue that the trust system acts as a way to 'soft ban' members, and these types of ratings are often given with little thought.

While I do understand the desire to have a decentralized system with market-based incentives, I do think modest moderation of the trust system would be better for the community as a whole.

Looking at various marketplace subs, it is clear there is substantially less economic activity occurring on the forum than has in the past. I think part of this is due to the maturity of the bitcoin economy. But some is likely due to the trust system.

I am not very active here anymore, so I won't push for this personally...

---

I excluded pooya87 from my trust list. It seems like I had a positive transaction with him about ten years ago, although I do not remember it specifically. Looking at his sent trust feedback, it doesn't look like he sends a lot of trust feedback, and doesn't appear to be active in terms of trading, so being excluded from the trust network really wont affect him much.

I don't think mods will usually confirm or deny a particular form member being banned, temp or otherwise. This is to prevent impersonators trying to make it look like they are evading their ban.

Given that pirate was prosecuted and sentenced to jail for 18 months, and was sued by the SEC, I think it is probably fair to say that OgN was investigated, and the government declined to prosecute.

However, I think the context of this discussion is more closely aligned with the civil matter of OgN potentially breaching his contract with his depositors. The statute of limitations to sue someone over a written contract dispute varies by state, but tops out at 10 years (except for KY, but I don't think a lawsuit could be filed in KY for this).

On its face, the document appears to show that OgN deposited 662BTC more than he withdrew. Although, it also appears that there are interest payments totaling in excess of 1,757BTC, and it is unclear if these amounts were withdrawn -- if so, it would mean OgN withdrew ~1,100BTC more than he deposited. The interest payments don't appear to affect the balance, while there are other spreadsheets that do appear to affect the balance, which would lead me to believe that the interest payments were withdrawn.

I believe that OgN has said in the past that he was paying an interest rate that was several percentage points lower than what he was receiving from pirate. This arbitrage may have allowed him to cover all deposits when pirate eventually was unable to process withdrawals.

The price of BTC was around $10 in August 2012, the date of the last transaction.

I am not sure if anything that was said is true, or if the image is accurate.

Either way, I am not aware of anyone claiming that OgN did not follow through on his obligations. This is also something that happened over a decade ago, so I really don't think it's appropriate to litigate.

I don't think I quite understand the specific allegation you are making. Here you are saying they are the same person. You seem to repeat that claim here in this thread.

I also don't have any details of any specific transaction. But unless there was a specific promise not fulfilled by RC or OgN, it really is not a scam.

I'm pretty sure that there were posts about asking for OgN to either be banned or for his posts to be removed based on false information. But I am unable to find those posts now. If someone is saying something inaccurate about him, theymos might chime in to correct the record, but I don't think he would censor the posts by removing the inaccurate content.

---

I don't think Rmcdermott927 is the same person as OgN, although I could be wrong. IIRC, Rmcdermott927 ran some kind of casino at one point, which requires a specific expertise that I don't believe OgN has.

I might suggest making the thread that theymos uses to document the changes into its own page, such as 'bitcointalk.org/dt_chage_log' in JSON, or some other standardized format, instead of making it its own thread in meta.

I get it, Vod thinks OgN is a scammer, and OgN denies this. OgN thinks that Vod is a bad guy, and Vod implicitly denies this.

Now that we know each person's position, I really think you both should leave each other alone. There are plenty of other things to talk about around here. I know that others in the community feel the same way.

---

Theymos is an advocate for free speech. He is not going to censor posts based on something benig untrue.

I think it is probably best if OgN and Vod were to both leave each other alone. (this only works if both actually do this).

Both OgN and Vod very clearly dislike each other, and both accuse the other of being untrustworthy. I don't think either are actually convincing anyone of anything, which is the whole point of warning about potential scammers.

I also don't think many people enjoy seeing all this drama.

I can't imagine this drama being good for either of your mental health. There is plenty other things that the both of you can talk about here..

Congratulations to the USA for electing Trump as the 47th president. This should result in a more prosperous nation and world. Trump has promised to end the wars in Ukraine, and the Middle East before he takes office, and I look forward to him making the world a more peaceful place.

This election marks one of the greatest political comebacks in US history.

Thoughts?

Maybe it is an April Fool's joke with hilariously bad timing...

Bitcoin clients can technically store information related to the blockchain in any format it so chooses. From a technical perspective, a bitcoin client will store information related to the blockchain in some kind of database. The important part of the blockchain is the unspent outputs, and there is a limit to how large this can get due to the limited number of bitcoin and the smallest allowable fraction of a bitcoin (satoshi). Even if the blockchain were to become too large to fit on a single hard drive, it could potentially be stored on multiple hard drives, and the majority of the data would never need to be accessed after it is validated one time.

There is also a technical limit as to how large the blockchain can be as a function of the block number, as each block has a maximum size.

Harris will certainly continue crackdowns on Bitcoin-related companies. She is very likely to be far worse. She wants to seize the means of production, and bitcoin will get in the way of this.
Biden's policies have resulted in less investment in US-based crypto companies, and for crypto-related companies to cease operations in the US. This results in other countries getting these investment dollars, and other countries benefiting from innovation related to crypto currencies, including bitcoin.

I am not interested in getting involved in any kind of drama, but would suggest that a type 1 flag might be appropriate for the OP of this thread. If someone wants to create a flag, I will support it, and if no one agrees with me, that is fine too.

If the audio cannot be detected, or if there is no audio device, an exception will be raised.

It appears the script is intended to use the user's audio input as a means of 'randomness'

Harris is also apparently going to make America great again if she is elected. She is even selling blue MAGA hats on her website.

As I mentioned, this thread is in meta, so it is specifically regarding forum rules, not rules of a contest.

I also reviewed the OP more closely, and it does not even alledge that the person involved made multiple submissions in the contest. It merely says that someone is an alt of someone else.

I think it is pretty ridiculous to suggest that someone should be disqualified from a contest by virtue of forum rules soley for the fact that they have more than one account. I don't think someone having two forum accounts entering into a contest is "cheating" by any reasonable defination.

I don't know who airfinex is, and frankly, I don't care. But the OP has not even made an alligation that he has done anything wrong.

lol wat?

Israel is defending itself. It doesn't need to pay reparations for doing that.

Most of the Gaza population supports Hamas, which is a terrorist organization. Gaza also voted for their current government, which is complicit in the terrorist activity. Further, Israel makes attempts to evacuate citizens prior to military action, however, much of the time, citizens will refuse to leave and serve as human shields to the terrorists.

This thread is in meta, so I will answer from the perspecive of forum policy.

For any question about allowing alt accounts doing x, the answer is yes this is allowed. The only exception to this is when someone is banned, as the offical policy is to not create an alt account to evade a ban. In practice however, if you are evading a ban, and are not otherwise causing problems, you will most likely be ignored. The most profilic trolls and spammers will have more resources put into finding and banning any alt accounts when they are banned.

DT is not intended to actually be 'default' for most users who are actually trading on the forum. Forum members are encouraged to curate their own trust lists, and network to include ratings that are the most useful to them.

Being in your trust network (or on DT if you have no trust list) is only meant to affect how trust ratings are displayed. It is not meant to highlight someone's posts, or to signify that someone is more knowledgeable than others.