Wow. That's crazy. Who was upset with him? Sure he posted alot but it appears they allow people to be passionate about A&M and Trump without banning. Dude is just extremely knowledgeable about Bitcoin.

Well I sent a support message for him to staff. We'll see how much good it does.

https://texags.com/terms

A quick bullet list summary:
1. Trolling (possibly)
2. Hyper negativity (possible)
3. Hateful
4. Obscene/Profane (possible for bypassing language filter)
6. Promoting violence
7. Ad Hominem Attack (possibly depending on other users in thread)
8. Too Sexy
9. Invasion of Privacy
10. Rumor/False info
11. Disparaging student athlete
12. Disrespectful poster regarding TexAgs site/staff
13. Thread derailing (possible)
14. Spam / Promoting competitors
15. Wrong Forum (possibly)
16. Copyrighted
17. Illegal.


So just to review, it appears permabans are in play as a result of the below infarctions (albeit likely repeated)
1. Trolling (possibly)
2. Hyper negativity (possible)
4. Obscene/Profane (possible for bypassing language filter)
7. Ad Hominem Attack (possibly depending on other users in thread)
13. Thread derailing (possible)
15. Wrong Forum (possibly)


C'mon. Seems like a bit much to me. I should hope the posters on F16 would agree that overreach is not the answer but there's one in every crowd.

Water we dune hair?!
I guess my money is on TexAgs not having Bitcoin on the corporate balance sheet!

It's ironic that the louder f16 voices don't support Bitcoin as many of those same voices support less government intervention and decentralized currency is one of the best tools to fight it. Admin was great in helping to educate many of us on this.

Use Strike app.

ThreatLevel: Midnight said:

---

NTXAg10 said:

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

administrative errors said:

---

Bump for the people asking for more information from politics board.

---

---

They issued a permaban on AE today for essentially posting about BTC too much. I've seen the emails.

---

You gotta be kidding me!
Tyranny knows no bounds.

---

Honk Honk!

What a bunch of Nancy's, AE only wants to help people see the world as he sees it. I tend to agree with a lot of what he has to say and I would enjoy a long conversation with him on everything from business to psilocybin.

Mods should bring him back.

Free AE!!!!

That's bs if he was truly banned for only posting about bitcoin. turds

as a poster that may have been giving AE the hardest time recently, a ban due to bitcoin-only posting is unnecessary and kinda lame. it may be trolling but there's actually heart. there's no drive-by posting BS. I dont always agree with AE but at least he's earnest. If this was lead by my fellow f16ers, they are just as lame...

Part of the email from moderator@texags.com…

"Kevin,

You come across as 'unhinged' in your posting - the red face, the rants, the slapping at our site moderators. This would fall under 'disrespectful guest' - we don't care that you really love Bitcoin.

We don't care that you think other people should also really love Bitcoin. We don't care that you think it is the answer to all that plagues the world. That's fine. But you're like a hype-beast apostle for something you believe will change civilization and you demean others who disagree or don't want to embrace your big truth. That is how it comes across and other posters flag it for review."

They more or less accuse him of being disrespectful to others in his delivery and discussion of Bitcoin topics. To call this decision inconsistent when looking at it in the lense of what passes on F16 is grossly understating it and doesn't warrant a permaban, IMO. The author seems to be having an emotional response to his content and posting style based on the word choice. I'll let staff post the full email if they'd like to as it's not my work product and I wasn't the recipient.

NTXAg10 said:

---

Part of the email from moderator@texags.com…

"Kevin,

You come across as 'unhinged' in your posting - the red face, the rants, the slapping at our site moderators. This would fall under 'disrespectful guest' - we don't care that you really love Bitcoin.

We don't care that you think other people should also really love Bitcoin. We don't care that you think it is the answer to all that plagues the world. That's fine. But you're like a hype-beast apostle for something you believe will change civilization and you demean others who disagree or don't want to embrace your big truth. That is how it comes across and other posters flag it for review."

They more or less accuse him of being disrespectful to others in his delivery of Bitcoin topics. To call this decision inconsistent when looking at it in the lense of what passes on F16 is understating it. The author seems to be having an emotional response to his content and posting style. I'll let staff post the full email if they'd like to as it's not my work product and I wasn't the recipient.

---

FREE AE!!!!!!!!!

NTXAg10 said:

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

administrative errors said:

---

Bump for the people asking for more information from politics board.

---

---

They issued a permaban on AE today for essentially posting about BTC too much. I've seen the emails.

---

Seriously WTF? That's some straight up stupid s**t. Time to drop my sub.

It only comes across as offensive if you get personally offended by the fact that he may not agree with you. If you don't like what he's saying just ignore him like a normal person would and let everyone else continue to benefit from his takes.

Madagascar said:

---

It's ironic that the louder f16 voices don't support Bitcoin as many of those same voices support less government intervention and decentralized currency is one of the best tools to fight it. Admin was great in helping to educate many of us on this.

---

I'd imagine a lot of those voices based their beliefs in what their pappy told them and not because they read any foundational writings on classical liberal thought. They don't necessarily want liberty, they just want it all their way. Let's not confuse liberty and self-reliance with nationalism.

Bitcoin is something new to them and presents change, and therefore it's a threat to their world.

It ****ing sucks that tribalism has reduced some of us to have to associate with them politically.

And I agree...bring back AE!

AE has been extremely helpful and knowledgeable. Embarrassing that they banned him. Bring him back!

"Hype-beast apostle" …..WTF? Who types like that? #FreeAE

NTXAg10 said:

---

Part of the email from moderator@texags.com…

"Kevin,

You come across as 'unhinged' in your posting - the red face, the rants, the slapping at our site moderators. This would fall under 'disrespectful guest' - we don't care that you really love Bitcoin.

We don't care that you think other people should also really love Bitcoin. We don't care that you think it is the answer to all that plagues the world. That's fine. But you're like a hype-beast apostle for something you believe will change civilization and you demean others who disagree or don't want to embrace your big truth. That is how it comes across and other posters flag it for review."

They more or less accuse him of being disrespectful to others in his delivery and discussion of Bitcoin topics. To call this decision inconsistent when looking at it in the lense of what passes on F16 is grossly understating it and doesn't warrant a permaban, IMO. The author seems to be having an emotional response to his content and posting style based on the word choice. I'll let staff post the full email if they'd like to as it's not my work product and I wasn't the recipient.

---

That is total BS. That is dripping with condescension and is very unprofessional.

What a bunch of Mary's.
Sack up men.

What a crock of BS to ban AE. What the heck did he do or say that warrants a perma compared to some of the stuff spewn daily on f16?

Chipotlemonger said:

---

What a crock of BS to ban AE. What the heck did he do or say that warrants a perma compared to some of the stuff spewn daily on f16?

---

I'm a F16 advocate and probably agree with a lot of the people you don't but to ban AE is ridiculous. He's single-handedly changed my views on a lot of things and, at the very least, at least made me pause and contemplate my own world view.

His "problem" is he is staunchly advocating for something that is new and relatively misunderstood. But those that strongly advocate for things that aren't well established suddenly become trolls.

NTXAg10 said:

---

Part of the email from moderator@texags.com…

"Kevin,

You come across as 'unhinged' in your posting -

---

Pretty sure that's all of us to some degree. If staff doesn't want to look like tyrants, they need to consider the star-to-reporting ratio as well.

Their response email was completely condescending.

NTXAg10 said:

---

Part of the email from moderator@texags.com…

"Kevin,

You come across as 'unhinged' in your posting - the red face, the rants, the slapping at our site moderators. This would fall under 'disrespectful guest' - we don't care that you really love Bitcoin.

We don't care that you think other people should also really love Bitcoin. We don't care that you think it is the answer to all that plagues the world. That's fine. But you're like a hype-beast apostle for something you believe will change civilization and you demean others who disagree or don't want to embrace your big truth. That is how it comes across and other posters flag it for review."

They more or less accuse him of being disrespectful to others in his delivery and discussion of Bitcoin topics. To call this decision inconsistent when looking at it in the lense of what passes on F16 is grossly understating it and doesn't warrant a permaban, IMO. The author seems to be having an emotional response to his content and posting style based on the word choice. I'll let staff post the full email if they'd like to as it's not my work product and I wasn't the recipient.

---

This email shows the same level of condescension as every thread posting about bitcoin, and AE, that are posted on F16. They belittle both bitcoin and AE constantly, then get mad when AE responds in kind? He will spend 3 pages explaining to someone who is just trolling for stars, and then as soon as he takes the same tone as everyone who doesn't agree with him, they get the mods to attack. That's some Eddie Haskell BS.

New day. Another post to say...BRING BACK AE.

That being said, does anyone know his real name? Does he post somewhere else? Like I mentioned, I thoroughly enjoyed his posts and knowledge and want to find out if he posts elsewhere so I can follow him there.

barnag said:

---

New day. Another post to say...BRING BACK AE.

That being said, does anyone know his real name? Does he post somewhere else? Like I mentioned, I thoroughly enjoyed his posts and knowledge and want to find out if he posts elsewhere so I can follow him there.

---

How do we contact staff about this? I've never done this, but want to do so in this case. He is a wealth of info on BTC.

In fact, his posts have been so helpful to me, I have been back on Texags much more lately as a result.

IMHO, if the standard were applied evenly, trysker should have been banned as well. FWIW, I don't think either should be banned.

I'm guessing moderator@texags.com but that's 100% speculation. I know that box sends emails and assume it can receive.

Can someone explain to me how BTC works as more than a speculative gamble or a volatile store of value if merely owning a given amount of the total available doesn't in an of itself generate any type of return, and yet it comes with transaction fees and possibly even ownership maintenance costs if you take possession in an exchange that requires a subscription?

It the increase in value as an investment purely reliant on the speculation on increase in demand driven by wider adoption and ownership, and that is supposed to offset interim transaction costs?

This is entirely outside of the various uses for the technology itself regarding security and secure transportation and transactions, which are circumstantial value adds.

I am looking for some simple academic explanation that there are economic mechanisms that would give a reasonable value proposition that the cost of initial investment will be offset and more by future activity as Bitcoin matures.

There may be something about it I am missing. I am not a big gambler or risk taker, so I look at it as a probability of return versus risk proposition.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Can someone explain to me how BTC works as more than a speculative gamble or a volatile store of value if merely owning a given amount of the total available doesn't in an of itself generate any type of return, and yet it comes with transaction fees and possibly even ownership maintenance costs if you take possession in an exchange that requires a subscription?

It the increase in value as an investment purely reliant on the speculation on increase in demand driven by wider adoption and ownership, and that is supposed to offset interim transaction costs?

This is entirely outside of the various uses for the technology itself regarding security and secure transportation and transactions, which are circumstantial value adds.

I am looking for some simple academic explanation that there are economic mechanisms that would give a reasonable value proposition that the cost of initial investment will be offset and more by future activity as Bitcoin matures.

There may be something about it I am missing. I am not a big gambler or risk taker, so I look at it as a probability of return versus risk proposition.

---

Inventing Bitcoin by the founder of Swan Bitcoin is a good place to start. The Kindle version is free. Anything by Tomer Strolight is also good. I like Marty Bent as well. I just started a thread about this a few minutes ago.

Find some of Greg Foss' appearances on various podcasts. He explains it pretty well, I think.

Bitcoin is not something you expect a dollar return on. It is a reliable store of value because it's truly decentralized nature allows it to not be prone to the manipulation that fiat currency is. It is likely the most true physical measure of value that exists. Bitcoins price fluctuating is not a representation of Bitcoin as much as it is a reflection of faith in the US Dollar - which should scare everyone. Bitcoin being cheap in dollars is actually good for everyone because it means that the world still has faith in us as a country. People buy Bitcoin as a hedge in case that changes.

Hth. If not, message staff and ask them to bring back admin errors because he explains it much better.

Quote:

---

IMHO, if the standard were applied evenly, trysker should have been banned as well. FWIW, I don't think either should be banned.

---

Now I'm curious what I have posted that would be considered bannable if "standard were applied evenly"


edit to add: FWIW, I'm fully aware that this is the B&I board and not F16 and try to tailor my posts accordingly. I rarely post on the board mostly because I work in the industry and as Scimitar and I used to chat about, besides the regulatory issues and possible conflicts of interest, it often isn't worth while discussing matter with posters not in the industry and without the same frame of reference

from the Bitcoin Standard

Quote:

---

The market demand for a bitcoin token comes from the fact that it is needed to operate the first (and so far, arguably only) functional and reliable digital cash system

---

My argument is still that its unclear if BTC is a 'functional and reliable' product that individuals and institutions actually want to use.