Bitcoin Forum

Hello everyone, I really hope Admin reads this post once, it would be really "HELPFUL" to make the forum "BETTER".

My suggestion is to have some system which "DISABLE" Signature on important sections like "META", "SCAM ACCUSATION" and some others anyone got in mind.

Right now, people are "PROMOTING" by creating scenes on such sections by keeping their signatures and acting all good.

Here are some Examples - (NOTE) - I have removed the text, as I simply wanted to show the Signature, all these are in "SCAM ACCUSATION" and "META" section.

And the below examples are just "FEW", the whole section is only filled up with these Promotion.

https://i.imgur.com/KBBusAm.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/X6BFHBT.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/XeGeNAm.jpg




I know writing this is easy and doing it something very very hard, but probably IF "ADMIN" can look into it and see IF this is possible. I believe it will make those sections "BETTER" and will help beginners getting targeted "LESSER".

Let see what others feel about this suggestion?

I feel you're going full Thule. Stop spamming this nonsense, it's not gonna remove your red trust.

When did I asked to remove my red trust? I have given a suggestion whether it's useful to "DISABLE" Signature for such sensitive sections or not?

What is non-sense in this?? Is giving suggestion consider "NON-SENSE"? Or spamming?

IF You dislike the suggestion, that is fine no one can force you to "LIKE", the forum is for EVERYONE to give their suggestions.

There are boards and threads that signatures are hidden, like on serious discussion board (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=250.0) and its sub-board, also in Wall Observer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.0). Now if you don't want to see any signature you can disable it on your profile -> Look and Layout Preferences (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1719030;sa=theme) then check the Don't show users' signatures..
Note that it will disable all signature on any board of the forum, only on your part.

You are right, so why not apply it on some more sections?

Obviously it's not about me not wanting to see Signature, It's about stopping people from using those "IMPORTANT" boards from getting "USED" for personal purposes. I am sure it won't HELP Bitcointalk getting better by letting people do promotion on sections which is created to make things better.

So don't you agree on that part?

This suggestion has been brought up previously, coincidentally by a red-trusted individual. It didn't go anywhere and I doubt this time will be different. If you're interested in making the forum better you should search/read more and post less.

Because those signature-free sections were created specifically to address the spam problem in the Off-topic board. But there is no spam problem in the sections you specified, so nothing needs to be done. You're not seriously suggesting that the users who tagged you did so simply so they could spam their signatures, are you?

So you judge suggestions based upon whether it's from "RED" trusted or "GREEN" trusted individuals? If so that's pretty sad, especially given this "SECTION" itself disable people to see trust, so that every suggestion has "SAME" value as it would be for anyone. But sad to see your bias mindset. But anyway, it's okay.

I was not aware that it was previously brought up, but I guess there is nothing wrong IF it's brought up again, I don't think these are type of suggestions that can be done "OVERNIGHT", so who knows Admin MIGHT be working on something? The world runs on hope, and I hopeful Admin much like has done in other sections will "APPLY" it for some more sections as suggested, rest it's only the Admin who decides.

I prefer making it better this way, and I hope I don't need your permission to do so. As whatever I am doing is "WITHIN" what the rule says. I have only given suggestion, it might be liked/disliked, it's entirely a person's own view but everyone is "FREE" here to give their suggestions. As ultimately ADMIN is one who decides IF it's worthy or not.



Why don't you kindly leave me alone? There is "NOTHING" I have written about "ME" here. I have only "GIVEN" suggestion, and majority of the people you see on the "SCREENSHOT" are ones that are "NOT" Capable of leaving tags (feedback), so why would I bring them into it? BTW, What's your views on all of them using "SAME" Links? Anyway, I simply meant the section should be "FREE" from such activities and for a moment, forget them but will not in FUTURE someone try this technique?

Because everyone is interested in supporting the person who "CREATED" the thread, and appreciation but no one looks much into whether the allegation was correct or false, so is this not the "EASIEST" route to promoting?

Like I have said, this is just MY suggestion much like "MANY" might have given theirs. If people dislike it, I am okay because everyone is FREE in their thinking.

I don't find advertisements on Bitcointalk too intrusive. But if you're bothered with it you can disable avatars and signatures in your profile settings in "Look and Layout Preferences". Not sure if it's a feature that depends on the user's rank, I noticed it long ago, take a look at it.

You're not asking for it directly, just like you're not making this thread because you're disgruntled with the trust system...right? 

Come on, what you're doing is transparent.  And it's also kind of passive-aggressive, which I can't stand on the internet along with not being able to easily interpret someone's tone anyway.  Just be upfront.  You're angry about the negative trust you got.

Yep, and again, if OP had ever visited Meta or Scam Accusations this thread wouldn't even exist because he wouldn't have plagiarized a whitepaper--or would have expected the consequences.  And he'd know this suggestion is old territory.

I already replied to same suggestion above. I think there is "NOTHING" to lose with the thing I suggested, at least there is no "PERSONAL" benefit in this for me. So it's just for the FORUM.


But see tell me, how do you know I have red trust? You won't know IF you are looking at this "THREAD" only. But IF you go on my profile then only you will be able to know that. And nowhere in the post I have mentioned "TRUST" or "FEEDBACK" system. In fact, the question is FAR away from that. It's purely based upon "SIGNATURES", so again where did the trust system comes in?

You are right that it's transparent, but only for those WHO are "FOLLOWING" me. So just imagine, you just opened this thread today, and got NO CLUE about the stuff around me. So, will it be so "TRANSPARENT" for you? No it won't be because you "TRUST" is "DISABLED" here, so the ONLY WAY you know it when you actually "KNOW the HISTORY" of me.

And just for ONCE tell me what's wrong with my suggestion, is it going "BENEFIT" me? And also what's wrong with applying this suggestion? I believe it can only make forum better? If people on their good great intention then why will they bother IF this change happens?

We already have a section that has signature ads (actually all signatures) disabled. It is the serious discussion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=250.0) section. Anything is allowed there except advertisements and posts requesting a response from the administration.

Sections like meta and scam accusations are important and this is why they are moderated less strictly than the rest of the forum.

Although, I was not aware of this but anyway this is already mentioned above. So, I feel it shouldn't be exactly a major task to have it applied on Scam Accusation and Meta Section.

Do you think it's not required? Especially when you yourself say it's "Moderated less strictly", so will this not help?

Again what's to lose IF this happens? I mean when the "INTENTION" is to decrease scams, then does it really matters whether Ads are ALLOWED or not?

Signature campaigns are an important part of the forum and disallowing signatures in multiple boards will not benefit the signature campaign that is being advertised. Will they come to advertise their service on the forum knowing their advertisement are banned from the multiple sections of the forum? No. Just because you have a red tag doesn't mean others should suffer.

Multiple boards? My suggestion is "SIMPLY" about SCAM Accusation and META boards. How exactly does this make "OTHERS" suffer.

This is GIGANTIC FORUM and I "BET" only 5% people would be visiting "THOSE SECTIONS" for posting. So HOW does it make "OTHERS" suffer.

It will only make "THOSE" suffer who got WRONG INTENTIONS and use those boards for their "OWN BENEFITS"

And do you really are trying to say "Advertisers" are interested in "THOSE" sections? As I thought these 2 sections are purely based to help the forum, not to help "PROMOTIONS".

BTW, how does "RED TAG" tag comes into this?

The whole suggestion is about Signatures, nothing else. So whether I have "RED", "GREEN", or "PURPLE" tag, it's irrelevant!

I see no benefit to removing ads from these sections. If anything removing ads would give people with paid signatures to not post there, which in turn will cause less people to visit these sections, which is not a desirable outcome.

Disabling signatures is a kind of moderation/restriction.

IMO, your motivations are transparent but I prefer to attack the suggestion and not the messenger.

Ok now I have a question for you. Do you want to make people post there? There are long list of sections on this forum, where people are "FREE" and should be posting to keep the forum going. So do you want "FORCE" people to post on these 2 sections, which are sensitive?

If you say that, No, it's better that people post and that even if is a "RANDOM" post on those section, just so that there is "MORE" activity on that forum then fine, I have no issue as that's your personal view. But from what I "UNDERSTOOD" was that those forums are "PURELY" to "IMPROVE" the forum, it's not about asking everyone to post, as that makes "NO DIFFERENCE".

I repeat it again for you, it's "NOT" possible for you or ANYONE to see "MY TRUST ZONE" unless you specifically "VISIT" my profile. So how exactly would I be creating it to "SHOW" that? The topic is "ENTIRELY" about signatures.
 

In your case, it takes a not insignificant amount of time to find all the different sources you plagiarized from, take screenshots of your plagiarized whitepaper and match it to screenshots of the source material, crop and upload all these screenshots to an image hosting site, and format a post with all these screenshots linked. Suggesting that people are making Scam Accusation posts as a way of displaying their signature is utter nonsense - if I was trying to meet a posting requirement for a signature campaign, I could easily make 5 or more reasonable posts in the time it takes to make 1 scam ICO thread.

---

Is anyone else reading these random quotation marks as someone saying something really sarcastic and making air quotes while they do it? Makes it really hard to take anything he says seriously.

What a sensible individual will do is to make use of either the search option on the forum or make use of google. This issue regarding signature blocking have been discussed numerous times to the extent both the forum and some skillful members of the community have provided us with some solutions:

Forum solution: [Guide]: How to disable signatures without using scripts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5102949.0)
Other solution:

I don’t necessarily want more people posting there but I do want people to read those sections on a regular basis. If this is what it takes to achieve this goal then I am okay with more people posting.

My CASE? Do I need to put "BIG LABEL" that this is not about "ME" "MY CASE" or anything. I have given a suggestion, just give your VIEWS on that IF you wish to give.

If you think it's not a good suggestion, just say it "INSTEAD OF DOING PERSONAL ATTACKS".

It's EASY to do what you said, but those type of posts "DONT" Get the attention, the posts get on those 2 mentioned sections.


Yes, but is the problem IF those two sections have Signature "DISABLED" will it really "HURT" anyone? Especially when keeping the logic of those sections in front, those are purely to make the forum "BETTER", not anything else.



Ok so you mean people "ONLY" read those sections where there is "SIGNATURE" allowed? If so then why "SERIOUS DISCUSSION" thread activity did not decreased? While there are a lot of things that goes into category of it will "WORK" or it will "NOT WORK", but with the thing I mentioned, we "ALREADY" got LIVE and LIVING example of that section, I see at no way the activity decreased there.

Ultimately, those sections are based upon making the forum "BETTER", they are not there to force people to look into.

People I believe are "SMART ENOUGH" to visit the section purely based on "QUALITY" of it instead of "FORCED" advertisements on their heads and minds.

There is not very much activity in the serious discussion section and threads are often not responded to. This makes me believe not many people visit this section.

So do you think it's because Signatures are disabled there? I personally believe because people don't have "TOPICS" that matches the requirement of the section followed by the Moderation strictness. More so, even for a moment it make "SENSE" to have ads allowed there, as the end of the day, it's a lot more beneficial.

But seriously, how do you think it "BENEFITS" anyone with Signatures allowed on 2 sections like Scam Accusation and Meta, which are in ACTUAL more "SERIOUS" issues than the "SERIOUS SECTION" itself!

       Quite a few signature campaigns are also avatar campaigns. Some of the avatar campaigns will still pay for posts made in sections/threads that don't display signatures. (Not all though.) Is the OP recommending that we also don't display avatars in meta or scam accusation either?
       Furthermore, there are  a few people who post in the scam accusation sections that use the signature space not for an ad but to direct them to links to a service they are providing or the cause that they are fighting for.
      It does not appear that there is overwhelming support for this idea, at this time. Maybe the administrators will consider when it appears both of these boards are overwhelmed with signature spam, and it becomes a nightmare to moderate.

Look like OP want to divert attention from their project. Sometimes posting about trust system, merit abuse and now posting about signature campaign. If really you want to make better forum then first you should avoid make multiple duplicate post. Because this topic has been discussed multiple time on multiple thread.

Can I ask why lot of suggestions are coming out from you after got red tag? Where was your suggestion before you get red tag? Its seems you are only around Meta and Reputation after got red tag.

I am suspecting this account is alt of FutureICOs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1187801) who have got multiple negative feedback's from DT members including me for promote scam ICO.  Because seems OP just got one merit from that user to become Jr. member.  However its just suspicion. Lets come to the point,

Do you know how much efforts need to create a scam accusation thread. How much time spending for investigation? Sometimes its take 2/3 days. I know because I made lot of scam accusation. Those time I have spent for single scam accusation, same time I could make hundred post on Bitcoin Discussion board.  I strongly believe no any signature spammer will spam on scam accusation board and meta. Whoever there they are from beginning, not just for signature spam. Yes its true sometimes few spammer coming both board like you come. So it can't be prevent like we are unable to prevent you from spamming.  

Absolutely not. I believe Avatars should be "ALLOWED" because it is OFTEN used as personal image as well plus AVATAR don't have "LINKS", which SIGNATURES have.

So my suggestion is "PURELY" for "SIGNATURES" not Avatar at all.

Yes, but how do you know those are really the LINKS to SERVICE that actually intent to help? Can't this be judge as promotion too? Also, I hardly found ANY such Signature which was "ACTUALLY" for such purpose you mentioned.

One MAJOR reason why you see "SUCH" support here about the idea is that it's created by "ME" and in more specific way, a person who has "9 (NINE)" RED TRUST.  Although, I am not saying it's 100% due to that, as there are obviously people who genuinely are "AGAINST" the idea, not me. But by large, it's to do with me presenting this.

Had this done by some "HIGH RATED" people, I bet things would have seen a "DIFFERENT" angle.

But anyhow, that's how life is.


Lol, I was waiting for you :)

Where did the "PROJECT" comes into this? There is not "SINGLE" word said about that or anything like that? The thread is SIMPLY based upon suggestion on whether the Advertisement (signatures) should be allowed on those 2 mentioned thread or not.

So what's hurting you so much? Are you worried that how will you be able to "HELP" the "COMMUNITY" if Signatures are "STOPPED"?

Lol, so now we become another account of someone else.... Right.

You talk about efforts? Do you know HOW MUCH effort it takes to create a PROJECT, as big as ours? It takes "MONTHS" if not years to create it, not DAYS. But you can't understand because you level is to do "CHEAP" things in order to get "ATTENTION".

I am repeating MYSELF, the thread is "SIMPLY" for suggestion of my IDEA.

IF you don't like it, please proceed with letting your "VIEWS" but kindly do not "CHANGE" TOPIC for sake of your OWN PURPOSE.

Yes, and because posts there don’t add to post counts. If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree on the topic, but in any case, you don’t have my support.

Personally I think signature advertisement isn't a odd looking thing to anyone without you. Advertising has already been a part and parcel of modern life. There was a time when it was hard to find digital billboards on streets but now its been so much popular. Every legal companies should get a proper opportunities to use their advertisement on our forum where its not spoiling forums reputation but increasing. We have to keep it on mind that if any company or project showing their interest to use their ads on our forum then its a sign that bitcointalk forum has a great value on their business. Increasing forum values is always a better option for forum users too.

You have already got the way to get decided about seeing signatures or not but if you want to make it same for everyone than its honestly unfair. Worlds most of the online sites take this as their own promotion method by showing others advertisement on their sites. Its really hard to find who are not agree with that. As a forum member I have my dream that one day worlds most famous companies and organisation will compete to put their signature or advertisements on our forum. Because its a matter of measurement how much value this forum got on their mind.

Well, tmfp (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=351569) is using the signature space just to convey a message. No links. Also, you need to read a few more of the scam accusation threads, rather than just the ones that pertain to you. You will find other examples, such as JollyGood. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1016855)

Like I already mentioned, there are couple more factors than just Signature. But again, don't you believe IF any place that really "NEED" to have Signature disabled is "SCAM ACCUSATION" and "META" section?

While you are absolutely "FREE" to give your opinion, it's fine if you disagree as not everyone is going to agree with everything.


That's true advertisement is part of modern life, but let's be specific. And let's focus what I have mentioned.

I believe "ADVERTISEMENT" "SIGNATURES" are precious to say the LEAST not for this forum, but overall.

So anyone will be "FOOLISH" to say that it shouldn't be "ALLOWED", but that where it's "IMPORTANT" that my suggestion is understood "CORRECTLY".

I believe those 2 sections mentioned (Scam Accusation and Meta) are sections where it's built for making the forum "BETTER", it shouldn't be "AVAILABLE" for self interest or promotion. There is NO ONE, who can "GUARANTEE" the intention of any individual but it's logical to know this way it's creating conflict of interest, if something like "EXISTS".

While I might not be using Bitcointalk for years, but I have "CLEARLY" understood that Bitcointalk and Admin mindset is "NEVER" about benefitting himself, as if that was the case then there are MULTIPLE ways available to do so. Hence, his IDEA (MY VIEW) is to make the place "WORTHY" and that is ONLY possible IF those 2 "CRITICAL SECTIONS" are used correctly instead of getting "MISUSED" for personal interest.

So just again to close it out for you, please just read my suggestion again, as it's VERY IMPORTANT that you understand I am talking about just those "2 SECTIONS" not the whole forum. But yes, if you STILL disagree, then it's fine.


Yeah, you are right there are "SOME" but how many? I believe I can count them easily through my fingers, while the ones that I pointed are "MAJORITY", so when those 2 MENTIONED people CAN LIVE without signatures, why can't the other Sherlock Homes lovers can do the SAME?

Ok. I have adjusted my post below to make it not at all about your case, and instead just speaking in generalities:



The average fake ICO Scam Accusation thread gets around 150 views. The average of the first 100 topics in Bitcoin Discussion is over 1200 views. The average of the first 100 topics in Altcoin Discussion is almost 4000 views. If someone was posting purely for attention, why would they spend 10 times as long creating a Scam Accusation thread which will get 10 times less views? Purely in terms of attention, this is less than 1% as efficient as just opening new topics in Bitcoin and Altcoin Discussion.

I'm afraid your argument holds no weight.


Months or years of effort, but you can't be bothered to take a few hours to write your own whitepaper? Please. ::)

Your calculation is fine but did you consider the "ACTIVITY"? On those sections, you are unlikely to see your thread getting the type of attention you get. But anyway, it's your opinion if you disagree then like I said it's fine, everyone have their own views.

Again, we DONT want to talk about something, the thread is "NOT" created for. But still just answering. The whitepaper got no issues, the only issue is that there were no "REFERENCE" given of the sources we used. And we were ready to talk about that but OP was not interested. But again this is not the topic.

Those figures are not an opinion, they are a fact. On average, threads on Bitcoin Discussion and Altcoin Discussion get 10-30x more view than a scam ICO accusation thread.


Copying text without providing a reference is pretty much the definition of plagiarism. Despite you trying to play it off as not being an issue, plagiarism is dishonest, untrustworthy, and potentially illegal, especially when you are doing it for your own financial gain.


I'm only replying to something you brought up.

There is really no disagreement what you said, it's fine.

The thing that is not understood is that we "AGREED" about the part but the problem was that there was no confirmation IF that was the issue.

Again this is not the TOPIC. I simply asked the question IF signatures should be "ALLOWED" or "NOT". So if you agree fine if not then also fine.

In our body we have many organs, and we don't cut it out when we get an issue with an organ, as an example headache. Instead, we try to figure out a solution - in this case a pain killer med.

Now in your case, you are having a problem with ads to the boards you mentioned, maybe some more are also having the same problem. So what's the solution? The solution is what bL4nkcode said.

But the majority is not having problem imo, if the majority of the members having the same problem then Theymos would have disabled ads in those boards a long time ago.

Now lock this thread and go to your profile to set your ad preferences.

I checked scam thread and I can see that there are too many bestmixer's signature participants in it. I blame DarkStar_ for not sending mass message to chipmixer's signature participants to kick bestmixer out of that thread.

My suggestion is to implement new system, if number of bestmixer's signatures in one thread is higher than chipmixer's signatures, every chipmixer's signature participant should receive message with link to that thread and warning, something like "if you don't post in this thread you will be banned". We can also run ICO for bitcointalk automated message system to make things easier. There you go, problem solved, there is no need to make restrictions.

Actually, I am not having problem. I am just suggesting this. Like I have said it before, IF you disagree with me on this it's obviously fine. But I just wanted to hear your view. It's completely fine with what you said. Anyone is capable of ignoring ads themselves, but my view is just simple if section like "SERIOUS DISCUSSION" can be done that way then those 2 mentioned sections are much more sensitive, but again if you disagree, it's fine.


Lol  ;D

Would have been a good April Fools joke  :D

Do you know that you can report all offtopic post by using "Report to moderator" button.
People are able to create the scene there because  some users in forum are still promoting scam.

Ps: Did you like to create one more topic for admin , requesting to show the trust on all boards and to the guest users also?

but sir! how are you going to promote  plagiarized "Maya shitcoin " then ?

Yea, its take too much efforts for create a project. I checked with Fivrr with your website. They asking me only $350 to create similar website including smart contract. And they are agree to delivery within 15 days. So is it take too much efforts ? On the other hand your whitepaper is free because it's just only copy pasted. If you order with whitpaper then you need more extra $100 and they will provide you unique whitpaper. You are not believing me? Just open an account on Fiverr and look on their gig. Even someone agree to create website for $50. Just use search button on fiverr.


   https://i.imgur.com/w1BYlg0.jpg   (https://www.fiverr.com/wedowo/create-your-ico-website-and-erc20-token?context_referrer=search_gigs&context_type=auto&pckg_id=1&pos=4&ref_ctx_id=394fe654-88de-4f17-b22c-f00b21be76b1&funnel=dc3a37df-9b89-44ca-a3e4-c0cfa14a575a)

I have only "SUGGESTED" if it's not worthy, it's up to the admin to discard it, there is pretty much nothing wrong with it. Why do you think I would be requesting something like that? If you "DISLIKE" the suggestion, that's fine, no one is forcing you to like.


Least interested in replying something that's irrelevant to the thread. If you got something worthy to say it will be replied. Btw, it's far better than the "BESTMIXER".


Firstly, that's "NOTHING" to do with what the topic is for since you purely "WISH" to prove you are so so "GOOD" whatever you said is set on stones, then obviously you got nothing but to come up with "OFFTOPIC". Anyhow just for sake of replying. You probably are "SUGGESTING" people the way to do it. And basically saying that anyone using that way is "SCAMMER", while whatever you do got "CERTIFICATE" of honesty!

It's not even "WORTHY" to explain you the effort that's required to create a project, like MAYA. I am going to post some "SCREENSHOT" on the main thread, there I would love to hear your "VALUE" judging thoughts :)

However, I would no "FURTHER" reply to off-topic discussion here. If you have views on the "SUGGESTION" you are welcome to give.

Yes I brought up some very valid reasons why meta should be for real enthusiasts who are discussing/promoting "good " ideas that operate for the benefit of the entire forum not be from a bunch of people obviously motivated by personal financial enrichment. Real enthusiasts will contribute wearing no sigs would they not? why would their motivation be dulled by the lack of their paid2post sigs ? surely not just posting to spam4bucks are they?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5116691.0

I am pleased though that more people are starting to notice the glaring same sigs plastered all over meta by the same DT and merit sources. Not easy to miss though is it.

Ban sigs here and drain the swamp.

Bitcoin is money.  You're saying a real enthusiast of money (or of a forum that's devoted to the discussion of money) wouldn't be motivated to earn it?  That idea makes so little sense that it could only have come from you.  Signature campaigns are a fantastic way for bitcointalk devotees to earn some spare bitcoin, and I think all the excellent posters here ought to have the chance to take part in a sig campaign--there's nothing wrong with campaigns, per se.  It's only when the shitposters start piling into them (which they have) that it gets problematic.

Wow, a scammer who got tagged is siding with cryptohunter.  Who would have thought?  You're in great company, CH.  Keep up the bad work.

Here we see the the damaged misfiring mass of junk huge black woman aka the pharmacist classes as his mind spewing forth entertainment.

Let me break you apart in public once again.


1. you created a nice strawman there that you may not even know exists. I never said that. You highlight a statement and mutate it into something a greedy servile loser may read from that, not an objective and balanced enthusiast of this movement who is hugely successful.

a/ they may be motivated to earn money but will still put the interests of the board and this movement ahead of their own selfish desperate dreams of moving out of a cardboard box under the flyover. It depends how desperate people are. I mean someone who is so sneaky and greedy to create a sock puppet to racist sig spam of course would certainly be likely to put their own selfish interests ahead of the boards interests. They may then be tempted to influence board politics to create an environment that favours them and gives them unfair powers over competition.. As explained per my post of the year thread. A real enthusiast will still post in meta regardless of the sig they can spam.

b/you also view this board from the angle of a confirmed loser who has been here years and is still a broke bum. What about most of the other people that are far more adept and skillful individuals that may well be worth 10's of millions of dollars? of course they may well be willing to post without a sig to support the movement that made them extremely wealthy? do you realise that? money just becomes numbers after the point it far exceeds what you will spend. I mean sig spamming/airdrops are fruitless work unless you hit a few good ones like me and get paid millions of dollars for them. Trading is the key to real money here if that is all you care about.


Please don't cast off topic accusations. This post is about removing sigs from meta.

I don't think you are the worst of this bunch but still your supporting outright and proven liars, scammers, trust abusers and considering your own history demonstrating  greedy and being sneaky behaviour ....then perhaps don't cast stones at others without cast iron proof. I am not sure what you are getting at with that last attack anyway. I fight for the fair and equal treatment of all persons here. You do not. Remember that. If that is bad work to you then I can see why you feel I am the enemy.