[atombender]

Why would they believe that someone in the future would be tracking their mailing list post history and correlating email timestamps with real-life activity? There's no motivation to take steps to hide one's tracks (by setting up a remote email send while one is were away) unless one thinks that is going to happen.

[jeffgreco]

As the article says, Back was very interested in methods of covering one's tracks.

[atombender]

Parent poster was talking about Hal Finney, not Back.

What the parent is suggesting is that Finney covered his tracks by leaving digital fingerprints (as Satoshi, supposedly) while he was actually out running. This requires that he not only thought someone was tracking Satoshi's email activity, but also tracking his own whereabouts. I can see someone trying to hide their digital identity, but intentionally setting up false alibis seems insanely paranoid to me, which is why I don't buy it.

But regarding Back, the article also points to periods where Back goes dormant while Satoshi becomes active or vice versa. That's not the behaviour of someone who is particularly devious at constructing false alibis.

[Sargos]

Satoshi took many steps to conceal his identity and very much values anonymity. Why is this step one too far?