[betwixthewires]

No, I'm not. When I say "I'd love to see" I'm of course being facetious. Of course I don't want these individuals (including yourself) to be held liable personally to him. But if he did win, he wouldn't get the coins, and it would demonstrate that bitcoin cannot be forcibly regulated.

[nullc]

Yeah, I'm with you. Sorry for the defensive response!

I confess I replied something through a lens of personal irritation: For years the Bitcoin ecosystem has treated wright like a troll "he just wants attention, ignore him" -- but in doing so it's really enabled his fraud to grow and become a big problem.

So you triggered thought of people switching to a "oh it's good if he obliterates these people, it'll prove Bitcoin is anti-fragile!" ... well, sorry for being cynical. :)

Bitcoin absolutely would survive his attack here, whatever happens. Though it may be a setback, e.g. if it creates a big incentive against people of high capability, integrity, and experience to contributing to maintaining the software.

[betwixthewires]

No need to apologize, it is perfectly understandable. I can imagine how frustrating it is to be personally at risk from this and see what look like callused, detached humorous enjoyment of what is going on. It is funny how ridiculous this is when you can detach yourself from it and observe it externally, but not very funny when you stand to be held personally liable. I'd probably get short too if I were having to go to court over ridiculous bullshit and people were laughing at the ridiculousness of it, even if I could see the humor in it myself.