He had promised to do the impossible -- cryptographically prove he had access to early coins which he did not in fact have. He had carefully developed two scam-proofs of this.
One scam proof was deployed on his blog where he claimed to sign a Sartre text with a key from bitcoin block 9. He carefully did not give the exact input text, only a supposed hash of the text. The hope was anyone trying to replicate would assume their problem was an incorrect source text. And there was proof that the given hash value was signed by the key. But that did not survive internet scrutiny; it was noticed that the signature came from an old bitcoin transaction. Instead of signing the hashed Sartre text as claimed, it signed the old transaction.
The other scam proof was presented in private to reporters and bitcoin developers Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. Here Wright supposedly demonstrated the ability to sign arbitrary messages using keys from bitcoin blocks 1 and 9. This scam succeeded: both Andresen and Matonis were convinced. But they were not allowed to keep copies of the evidence, to prevent the trick from being exposed. One speculation is that Wright was able to substitute a doctored version of the Electrum software used for the verification. But without evidence to examine outside of Wright's control, the exact details of the scam are still hidden.
But now Wright is out of ideas. His public-consumption scam failed, and his private controlled-scenario scam can't be more widely replicated.
So this message is his way of backing out, trying as much as possible to save face and keep open the possibility of claiming the Satoshi Nakamoto identity again later.
As someone mostly in the dark about bitcoin and the community around it, why does this matter at all? Why do people care who created it at this stage, and if that person should come forth, what would the impact be? What could such a person realistically do?
I had not cared that much about this, but his actions are exactly what I would have expected from bitcoin's creator. There are some guys who simply do not want to be found. The guy who created Bitcoin is one of them. Making things develop like this simultaneously repairs much of the damage to his anonymity while minimizing the damage to the two guys who put their reputations on the line for him. By acting the way that you are acting, you are acting exactly like he intended for you to act. There is simply insufficient public evidence to say whether he is or is not. He is in that pesky excluded middle that gives rise to pseudo-Boolean logic.
That being said, people should realize that the creator of Bitcoin does not want to be found and honor that.
Apparently, he was able to prove, but did not allow others to keep copies of the evidence. At best, you can suspect. But how can you conclude so strongly that this was a "scam"?
This is not an apology or admission of guilt for conning people with his ridiculous stories. This is an enigmatic exit, complete with him still tacitly claiming to be Satoshi. Quite pathetic.
They make promises about what will happen in the future.
When it (doesn't) happen in the future, they don't say that they let you down or that they were in error or even admit that they agreed to something ahead of time.
In drawn-out cases there will be many deadlines, the narcissist never owning up to missing prior deadlines.
When challenged, the narcissist will create an emotionally hostile situation to cause an immediate distraction, again promising something soon, and never return to the original claim.
"This is an enigmatic exit, complete with him still tacitly claiming to be Satoshi. Quite pathetic."
Agreed. "I won't prove that I'm Satoshi anymore, but I am". It's getting more and more like religion -- we don't get to know for sure, we have to believe now.. And I'm sure a herd of idiots will do just that.
As I said on the other related thread[1]:
Given his history as a prolific liar, I find his post to be utter bullshit. Note how he's still lying about things he was caught at: "When the rumours began, my qualifications and character were attacked. When those allegations were proven false". NO - it was established (with confirmation from the schools in question) that he lied about having a PhD from Charles Stuart U. and he definitely does not possess 8 masters degrees. Not to mention other lies about having super computers and partnership with SGI to build more with fake reference letter (all clarified by company as false), etc.
Now, because he knows he can't successfully claim Satoshi's identity and in light of possible charges based on ongoing police investigation (fraudulent use of tax credits), he wants to dramatically disappear. I hope the authorities have his passport(s). His thirst for fame is unreal.
Serious question, but why are we all so serious? Maybe he's a pathological liar; maybe he wants fame; maybe he's just a conman. Does the bitcoin or tech community gain something from hoping for his arrest?
The home page of http://www.drcraigwright.net/ currently just displays this image. Linked straight to it so that it wouldn't get flagged as a duplicate submission.
I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.
When the rumors began, my qualifications and character were attacked. When those allegations were proven false, new allegations have already begun. I know now that I am not strong enough for this.
I know that this weakness will cause great damage to those that have supported me, and particularly to Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. I can only hope that their honour and credibility is not irreparably tainted by my actions. They were not deceived, but I know that the world will never believe that now. I can only say I'm sorry.
Just to save anybody else the effort of pulling times from the jpg:
20160503T16:00:03Z First Internet Archive snapshot of extraordinary proof post [0]
20160505T10:57:08Z homepage.jpg created [1]
20160505T11:13:52Z homepage.jpg saved
20160505T11:35:21Z homepage.jpg saved
20160505T12:11:46Z First Internet Archive snapshot reflecting change [2]
20160505T13:30:26Z Image replaced with text [3]
20160505T13:52:40Z homepage.jpg is now an html file
I wouldn't be very concerned about this being a suicide note, I don't think it is common for suicide cases to make bandwidth saving changes to the note hours after the the initial release...
Sounds like a suicide note from a distraught individual to me, leaving aside the lack of Satoshi's grammar. I do not know enough about his background to contact the police for a well-being check; does anyone here?
At face value, I would agree. But given that he's clearly lying about being Satoshi, and therefore also lying in this note, I figure it's likely that the "suicidal" tone was deliberately chosen. It's just another attempt to stir up controversy.
If he is not Satoshi and just wanted the attention:
Narcissists have an incredible high rate of suicide, because when they fall from their high horse, the floor is quite some way down and the landing is too hard for them. Rather than being found out as fake, go with a bang... I fear the bang coming...
This note kind of worries me a little bit... no matter what he did wrong, I hope he will be okay.
At this point, this is bordering on performance art.
(For what it's worth, I'm torn on this note: on the one hand, it's deeply upsetting that someone is writing that they're feeling such torment; on the other hand, should it turn out to have been written insincerely, he's just made it a tonne more difficult for anyone else who does legitimately express feelings like this. No winners.)
Honestly, I'm shocked anyone is taking it seriously. Every shred of evidence (from the past few days, and from last year) suggests he's a con artist.
I certainly believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt, but it's laughable to think this guy is actually Satoshi, and therefore impossible to see this note as sincere.
Forgive me as I'm a newbie to bitcoin and only ever seen it from the outside and watched a few things. I only know who Satoshi is because of the mass amounts of people wanting to know who this mysterious man really is. But my question is, why does it matter if Craig Wright is or isn't? I mean I can understand being upset that he lied about it if he really isn't for attention, but what if he is? The dude is literally being ripped apart left and right by everyone and anyone.
Whether Satoshi is finally identified or not, what difference will it make? I honestly don't understand the deafening attacks at Wright at first for being "outted" as a potential to be Satoshi and now when he says he is.
The worst part about this is he is playing so loose with words that it gives no closure at all. For years there will be people, especially newbies, that will believe Craig and will treat circumstances surrounding the whole affair, like the "leaked" and "hacked" documents alleging his involvement, as at least potentially true. In my view, anyone or anything that lends any legitimacy to Craig as far as bitcoin goes should not be trusted at this point.
For that matter, I believe most public people involved with bitcoin should not be trusted at all either, but that is incidental.
Bitcoin definitely attracts fraud, but it's also teaching many people an important lesson in trust. Trust code and math as these things are ultimately verifiable.
It's amazing to me how everyone is drinking the koolaid here on him being a fraud. I really don't think Gavin got duped. And I'm pretty sure they had enough private email discussions over the years that there were things they discussed/shared privately over those years that could be used as a reference point for Gavin to be sure he was talking to the same person. People are more willing to believe that Gavin was hacked or suddenly forgot how bitcoin worked.
I understand the technical proofs put forth have been spurious. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig had an under-qualified underlying who didn't really understand what they were doing who was responsible for some of that. People are forgetting the human part of this equation though. His interviews with the BBC don't strike me at all as someone looking to cash in. I think he is a bit of narcissist and wants to claim some credit for inventing bitcoin, but I also see a very deep fear of being in the public eye that comes through as well. Perhaps because he has done quite a few things he's not proud of and doesn't want to have people publicizing those. But the idea that he's a scammer looking to cash in here just play doesn't out at all. What's the end game? Where's the pile of money he's after? People aren't thinking through the motivations here thoroughly enough. He's risking quite a lot by doing this with the absolute certainty that he would be found out if he was a fraud. You could say maybe he's an idiot and doesn't understand that. No one could watch that interview though and believe the man isn't intelligent though. Why talk about the negotiations with Australian tax authorities when those authorities could very easily come and say that he was lying. None of this makes any sense from the scam angle. There has to be something else going on here.
> What's the end game? Where's the pile of money he's after?
He made multiple tax refund claims to the Australian authorities - including one for $54 million as part of a program where 45% of each dollar invested into R&D are refunded. Another was a $3.5 million refund on sales tax.
The funding source in these transactions were Bitcoin. It adds up to over $150 million invested. The tax authorities asked Wright where this money came from, he told them in an interview that he was Satoshi Nakamoto.
His explanation didn't work, they rejected the claim and penalized him for another and were investigating him further. He fled to London.
Why he continued to press on with the Nakamoto identity nobody knows - but based on character assessments from multiple people I know who have worked with him and know him well he is a person who strives for recognition and has a history of deception (see his LinkedIn profile).
It was 2 years ago that he started showing up at Bitcoin conferences and left strong hints that he was Satoshi - he wanted people to come to this conclusion on their own (and some did). Watch these videos from a conference in Australia:
He is after the hundreds of millions of dollars of bitcoins that the real Satoshi Nakamoto controlled.
When Craig Wright first came to public attention last December, there was a stash of "leaked" documents relating him to Dave Kleiman. Many items associated to the leak were shown to be backdated. One leaked item claimed to describe a 1.1 million BTC loan from Wright to Kleiman.
Wright apparantly believes that Kleiman, who died in 2013, had a large stash of bitcoins and he wants to establish a claim on these. If he could be accepted as Satoshi Nakamoto, it would lend credibility to his claims on the supposed fortune.
If the real Satoshi is still around, he musst be cringing at all this. The man can't even accurately describe how SHA256 works, yet claims to be the mastermind behind all this.
Geee Craig, stop playing silly games. Sign the message or simply stfu.
The only scenario wherein Craig Wright could actually be Satoshi is if Satoshi had burned his bridges -- in the process of abandoning the Satoshi identity, he had deleted all cryptographic evidence of the identity; all private keys and credentials for online accounts.
In that case, if he later (now) decided to assert the identity, then he might be tempted to cobble together fake proof to get his foot in the door far enough that he could begin to assert various forms of social proof with people that he had interacted with while using the Satoshi identity.
It's worth noting that the "scorched earth" elimination of the Satoshi identity is another possible theory as to why nobody has credibly claimed the identity -- because even the individual (or group) that assumed the identity no longer has the ability to cryptographically assert that identity.
People have suggested it's possible that the real Satoshi could have destroyed or not kept the original private key, or it belongs with one of the other, now deceased team members. Is there anything to gain by not admitting to it if this were the case?
Even if a message were to be signed with the original key, people suggest that it would still not be proof as it could have been stolen or extorted. It seems there is no way to prove anything at this point.
CSW's backing by "experts" suggests he is not an ordinary conman. Surprisingly, none of the experts have so far backed down on their support of CSW. Even GA's statement does not withdraw support, only expresses regret for posting support too soon. Also CSW's boldness to assume that the real Satoshi would not out him at this point makes it likely that he was involved with the Satoshi team and has some knowledge about his identity (deceased or otherwise). Or, he is gambling.
CSW's writing style in his blogs and elsewhere suggest it cannot be the same person as the author of the white paper, and yet I've heard another say that his academic papers contain a writing style close to the white paper (I have not verified myself).
All of this is obviously bizarre - the backdating of evidence, fraudulent cryptographic proof, etc. Either he severely underestimates his audience, or he wants to be be discredited.
There has been a suggestion that CSW wants to discredit himself to throw off extortionists (reported 6 months ago).
How is this not the first thought people had? Poor guy, with a lot of signs of mental instability. The amount of animosity people have had towards him on HN (and elsewhere) isn't tempered by how obviously imbalanced he is. I think it's because of the disproportionate amount of media attention he's received for something he didn't earn.
Given his character and previous form I would be more inclined to see it as another false trail, perhaps a prelude to faking his own death to avoid his tax problems.
It does make me feel like Ian Murdock tweets a little. I find the whole Satoshi comedy a bit sad but not to the point where he would quit earth. Even in the case he made himself suffer. Hope it's just words so far.
"They were not deceived" -- yeah, that's the ticket! [1]
Nice use of passive voice to obscure the subject of the sentence. He just couldn't bring himself to say "I did not deceive them." It's technically true that there's somebody in the universe who didn't deceive both of those people.
Cryptography, a transaction system that tracks the flow of money around the world, coming out a few years after money laundering measures were on the security agenda, working under a pseudonym to keep their identity secret, not looking to convert much of the hundreds of millions to cash when the price went up, total silence on whether or not somebody else is Satoshi...
... something makes me wonder if Satoshi has the initials GCHQ.
Of course, on the other hand, it'd be ironic if it turns out the real Satoshi just didn't expect it to turn into such a big thing, lost the keys on a USB down the back of a sofa, and is hiding out of the sheer embarrassment of it all.
[+] [-] dzdt|10 years ago|reply
One scam proof was deployed on his blog where he claimed to sign a Sartre text with a key from bitcoin block 9. He carefully did not give the exact input text, only a supposed hash of the text. The hope was anyone trying to replicate would assume their problem was an incorrect source text. And there was proof that the given hash value was signed by the key. But that did not survive internet scrutiny; it was noticed that the signature came from an old bitcoin transaction. Instead of signing the hashed Sartre text as claimed, it signed the old transaction.
The other scam proof was presented in private to reporters and bitcoin developers Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. Here Wright supposedly demonstrated the ability to sign arbitrary messages using keys from bitcoin blocks 1 and 9. This scam succeeded: both Andresen and Matonis were convinced. But they were not allowed to keep copies of the evidence, to prevent the trick from being exposed. One speculation is that Wright was able to substitute a doctored version of the Electrum software used for the verification. But without evidence to examine outside of Wright's control, the exact details of the scam are still hidden.
But now Wright is out of ideas. His public-consumption scam failed, and his private controlled-scenario scam can't be more widely replicated.
So this message is his way of backing out, trying as much as possible to save face and keep open the possibility of claiming the Satoshi Nakamoto identity again later.
[+] [-] dandrick|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ryao|10 years ago|reply
That being said, people should realize that the creator of Bitcoin does not want to be found and honor that.
[+] [-] vph|10 years ago|reply
Apparently, he was able to prove, but did not allow others to keep copies of the evidence. At best, you can suspect. But how can you conclude so strongly that this was a "scam"?
[+] [-] ablation|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danielweber|10 years ago|reply
The narcissists never do that.
They make promises about what will happen in the future.
When it (doesn't) happen in the future, they don't say that they let you down or that they were in error or even admit that they agreed to something ahead of time.
In drawn-out cases there will be many deadlines, the narcissist never owning up to missing prior deadlines.
When challenged, the narcissist will create an emotionally hostile situation to cause an immediate distraction, again promising something soon, and never return to the original claim.
[+] [-] kbart|10 years ago|reply
Agreed. "I won't prove that I'm Satoshi anymore, but I am". It's getting more and more like religion -- we don't get to know for sure, we have to believe now.. And I'm sure a herd of idiots will do just that.
[+] [-] tzaman|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Geekette|10 years ago|reply
Now, because he knows he can't successfully claim Satoshi's identity and in light of possible charges based on ongoing police investigation (fraudulent use of tax credits), he wants to dramatically disappear. I hope the authorities have his passport(s). His thirst for fame is unreal.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11635471
[+] [-] biswaroop|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] daturkel|10 years ago|reply
edit: Here's a mirror of the image, in case it comes down: http://i.imgur.com/7lhU0mr.jpg
And here's the OCR'd text: I'm Sorry.
I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.
When the rumors began, my qualifications and character were attacked. When those allegations were proven false, new allegations have already begun. I know now that I am not strong enough for this.
I know that this weakness will cause great damage to those that have supported me, and particularly to Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. I can only hope that their honour and credibility is not irreparably tainted by my actions. They were not deceived, but I know that the world will never believe that now. I can only say I'm sorry.
And goodbye.
[+] [-] daturkel|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kilre|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] woodman|10 years ago|reply
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20160503160003/http://www.drcrai...
[1] http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=c37a7368be70afd35ef...
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20160504140906/http://drcraigwri...
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20160505133026/http://www.drcrai...
[+] [-] comboy|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spdustin|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] teraflop|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SeanKilleen|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coldtea|10 years ago|reply
And I call BS, with BS on top.
How convenient...
[+] [-] racoonear|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cisstrd|10 years ago|reply
Narcissists have an incredible high rate of suicide, because when they fall from their high horse, the floor is quite some way down and the landing is too hard for them. Rather than being found out as fake, go with a bang... I fear the bang coming...
This note kind of worries me a little bit... no matter what he did wrong, I hope he will be okay.
[+] [-] mootothemax|10 years ago|reply
(For what it's worth, I'm torn on this note: on the one hand, it's deeply upsetting that someone is writing that they're feeling such torment; on the other hand, should it turn out to have been written insincerely, he's just made it a tonne more difficult for anyone else who does legitimately express feelings like this. No winners.)
[+] [-] TillE|10 years ago|reply
I certainly believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt, but it's laughable to think this guy is actually Satoshi, and therefore impossible to see this note as sincere.
[+] [-] joshmanders|10 years ago|reply
Whether Satoshi is finally identified or not, what difference will it make? I honestly don't understand the deafening attacks at Wright at first for being "outted" as a potential to be Satoshi and now when he says he is.
[+] [-] tcoppi|10 years ago|reply
For that matter, I believe most public people involved with bitcoin should not be trusted at all either, but that is incidental.
[+] [-] mbmott|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] michael2l|10 years ago|reply
I understand the technical proofs put forth have been spurious. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig had an under-qualified underlying who didn't really understand what they were doing who was responsible for some of that. People are forgetting the human part of this equation though. His interviews with the BBC don't strike me at all as someone looking to cash in. I think he is a bit of narcissist and wants to claim some credit for inventing bitcoin, but I also see a very deep fear of being in the public eye that comes through as well. Perhaps because he has done quite a few things he's not proud of and doesn't want to have people publicizing those. But the idea that he's a scammer looking to cash in here just play doesn't out at all. What's the end game? Where's the pile of money he's after? People aren't thinking through the motivations here thoroughly enough. He's risking quite a lot by doing this with the absolute certainty that he would be found out if he was a fraud. You could say maybe he's an idiot and doesn't understand that. No one could watch that interview though and believe the man isn't intelligent though. Why talk about the negotiations with Australian tax authorities when those authorities could very easily come and say that he was lying. None of this makes any sense from the scam angle. There has to be something else going on here.
[+] [-] nikcub|10 years ago|reply
He made multiple tax refund claims to the Australian authorities - including one for $54 million as part of a program where 45% of each dollar invested into R&D are refunded. Another was a $3.5 million refund on sales tax.
The funding source in these transactions were Bitcoin. It adds up to over $150 million invested. The tax authorities asked Wright where this money came from, he told them in an interview that he was Satoshi Nakamoto.
I go through some of this in a blog post:
https://www.nikcub.com/posts/craig-wright-is-not-satoshi-nak...
His explanation didn't work, they rejected the claim and penalized him for another and were investigating him further. He fled to London.
Why he continued to press on with the Nakamoto identity nobody knows - but based on character assessments from multiple people I know who have worked with him and know him well he is a person who strives for recognition and has a history of deception (see his LinkedIn profile).
It was 2 years ago that he started showing up at Bitcoin conferences and left strong hints that he was Satoshi - he wanted people to come to this conclusion on their own (and some did). Watch these videos from a conference in Australia:
https://vimeo.com/149035662
https://vimeo.com/149115042
(specifically skip to 9:30 in part 2)
Also see this panel discussion, which is now well-known:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE
[+] [-] woodman|10 years ago|reply
Like he did with the unearned degrees, the nonexistent business partnerships, and key signing slight of hand?
[+] [-] ledude|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dzdt|10 years ago|reply
When Craig Wright first came to public attention last December, there was a stash of "leaked" documents relating him to Dave Kleiman. Many items associated to the leak were shown to be backdated. One leaked item claimed to describe a 1.1 million BTC loan from Wright to Kleiman.
Wright apparantly believes that Kleiman, who died in 2013, had a large stash of bitcoins and he wants to establish a claim on these. If he could be accepted as Satoshi Nakamoto, it would lend credibility to his claims on the supposed fortune.
[+] [-] vizzah|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kennell|10 years ago|reply
Geee Craig, stop playing silly games. Sign the message or simply stfu.
[+] [-] andrewla|10 years ago|reply
In that case, if he later (now) decided to assert the identity, then he might be tempted to cobble together fake proof to get his foot in the door far enough that he could begin to assert various forms of social proof with people that he had interacted with while using the Satoshi identity.
It's worth noting that the "scorched earth" elimination of the Satoshi identity is another possible theory as to why nobody has credibly claimed the identity -- because even the individual (or group) that assumed the identity no longer has the ability to cryptographically assert that identity.
[+] [-] hatmatrix|10 years ago|reply
Even if a message were to be signed with the original key, people suggest that it would still not be proof as it could have been stolen or extorted. It seems there is no way to prove anything at this point.
CSW's backing by "experts" suggests he is not an ordinary conman. Surprisingly, none of the experts have so far backed down on their support of CSW. Even GA's statement does not withdraw support, only expresses regret for posting support too soon. Also CSW's boldness to assume that the real Satoshi would not out him at this point makes it likely that he was involved with the Satoshi team and has some knowledge about his identity (deceased or otherwise). Or, he is gambling.
CSW's writing style in his blogs and elsewhere suggest it cannot be the same person as the author of the white paper, and yet I've heard another say that his academic papers contain a writing style close to the white paper (I have not verified myself).
All of this is obviously bizarre - the backdating of evidence, fraudulent cryptographic proof, etc. Either he severely underestimates his audience, or he wants to be be discredited. There has been a suggestion that CSW wants to discredit himself to throw off extortionists (reported 6 months ago).
[+] [-] emmet|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pboutros|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] celticninja|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] agumonkey|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m52go|10 years ago|reply
http://www.drcraigwright.net/
[+] [-] serg_chernata|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lettergram|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DonHopkins|10 years ago|reply
Nice use of passive voice to obscure the subject of the sentence. He just couldn't bring himself to say "I did not deceive them." It's technically true that there's somebody in the universe who didn't deceive both of those people.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkYNBwCEeH4
[+] [-] 4e1a|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cooper12|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gedrap|10 years ago|reply
But holding the proof and then such a dramatic exit, playing the victim? Wow.
[+] [-] wbillingsley|10 years ago|reply
... something makes me wonder if Satoshi has the initials GCHQ.
Of course, on the other hand, it'd be ironic if it turns out the real Satoshi just didn't expect it to turn into such a big thing, lost the keys on a USB down the back of a sofa, and is hiding out of the sheer embarrassment of it all.
[+] [-] zaroth|10 years ago|reply