[BluffTHIS!]

Let's say there was this often annoying poster on an internet site, though one capable of making good points from time to time. And let's say he is obsessed with donkaments and reads every thing he can about same and the donks who play and win them. And let's say he decides to play sherlock holmes and pieces together a series of seemingly unrelated facts, which are openly available to all in published sources, because he really doesn't have any inside info. And let's say he reaches the conclusion that someone *might* be evading taxes in some fashion on winnings from staking arrangements.

Assume you give a rat's ass about all of this stuff and obsess about donkaments too. Do you think this often annoying poster should just name names in an internet forum and say who are the players in his own little detective adventure? And do you think the often annoying poster is some detective genius to have figured all this out, or is he just someone with too much time on his hands reaching conclusions based on at least one flawed premise? But let's say he's right about all of this and names names and someone gets arrested for tax fraud. Will that someone track down this anonymous and often annoying internet poster and break both his arms and cut off his balls?