Bitcoin Forum

Voting time.

What i am asking here is should some minimum requirements be added for posting a new coin ?
So for example no more scrypt coins can be announced unless they have been reviewed and offer something new.
And would any of you older members here be willing to moderate the ANN section if needed ?

Also would older members here be willing to volunteer their time to be on a panel to inspect and certify new coins ?
For example software and hardware gets reviewed on the internet all the time and they often give a review and an award level.
Like a new graphics card is released and one or more people inspect it and post a review then rate it on a scale say Gold, Silver or Bronze (or what ever)
I like this idea myself and would be willing to help do it but i would want it setup so that no award can be handed out unless it has been reviewed by others
AND we agreed with the majority the coin is approved etc. AND i would only do it if we did it all for free.. no kickbacks, bribes or bounties or fee's !

Off hand i would like say Kelsey, BCX, Zack and many others should be asked to be involved..
these are the kind of people i think that would do an honest and blunt review.
And they have also been showing a LOT of frustration with coin spammers here lately.
Also i think who gets on the panel should be a vote with some panels guys too.

I am not concerned with if i am involved or not i just want to see things improved.
What i have suggested here is in my opinion a constructive way to help improve the situation over all.

So what do you all think ? and please vote too :)

edit:
Looks like i screwed up the Poll lol
Oh well it should still work anyway.. i am curious what you all think.
So if you think MAYBE ? then i guess click vote for both yes and no.

edit:
For my Poll question i want to clarify that i am not saying how it should be moderated.
If Bitcointalk itself wanted to setup its own criteria for the idea then fine no problem.
Or if you all out there had your own idea for how it should be moderated differently than it is now then great lets hear what ya think..
Who knows maybe staff will see this and one of your comments people and decide to make some kind of change.
I just hope that if some of you have a problem with me you will set that aside and look at what i asked objectively.
I wanted to put it out there and see what you all say / come up with.. This is not a platform to push my own agenda or bicker with you all.
I will try and avoid turning this is into an argument fest lol ;)
Everyone is fully entitled to their own opinions and i value them all.

Yes I have put this idea forward before so I support your proposal 100% as long as the alt panel are not scammers.
Would be good to have a mix: 25% Technical (code, algo, innovation etc), 25% investor, 25% miner, 20% marketing, 5% translations on the panel IMO.
It would only really work well if bitocintalk (and maybe cryptocoin talk) shutdown their ANN page and opened up a new altdoor where the panels at,
through which all new coin proposals must pass through first before launching.

Why are people around here so obsessed with imposing their will on others?

Why do you have such a problem with the free market?

I'm against shitcoins and scamcoins.

Voted No

A better idea would be to have a poll 'thread' where coins could be voted on before being approved?

no. reason being free markets blah blah blah

You really think you and your fellow extortionists are going to get into a position of power just like that? Fuck you an fuck your centralization.

Your Tux has an AK  ;D

Why vote no if you want more weeding out of the shitcoins?
Fuck the free market. You want to copy capitalism go buy USD.
Seems most here are simply devs scared about losing there shitcoins earnings.

Ya tokyo i thought i'd have your vote lol
you all got what i meant right yes for some added new rules and no leave it as it is right ?

and lunatic i have never been involved in the slightest with any thing extortion related and i find that offensive to say the least.
your other comments and topics are are tsunami of lies and bs. your such a clown lol

i am surprised but maybe there is far more shell accounts here than i realized and i knew there was a lot lol
one or two of these pro coin spammers could prob login to TONS of accounts to vote :(

You guys think it's fine the way it is or should there be a bit more of a criteria to post a new coin ?
You think i should be able to literally ctrl c and ctrl v a folder and then make a new topic changing the icon and name non stop everyday and that is fine ?
free market blah blah blah ?
by the way there is no such thing as a free market and we ALREADY have rules in every way imaginable so modifying what they are is what i am talking about.
wanna talk about rules ? how about the fact there is a scammer tag rating system many of us are held accountable to
and yet coin scammers are free to hide and create accounts non stop dodging it.. explain that free market crap to me.

You guys realize that if gets too far out of control i bet they will make these changes anyway..
they have already added new restrictions not long ago to the Altcoin section based on user posting what they deem as spam.
and the reason why is because it bloats the database.. something selfish brats and scammers couldn't care less about.
keep adding a grain of sand to a pile and that pile will one day pretty damn big !

I voted yes because i don't think all rules should be abandoned. As a society we need them to function or society would collapse instantly.
Remove all stop signs and stop lights and road lines and markers and see what happens.. Take away every cop on earth and see what happens.
As i said already i think scam coin supporters sound like NAMBLA members.. they demand they have the right to diddle little kids.
So if you all say there should be no rules then i have no choice but to assume you agree with molesting little children or raping women or or or..
A fully free market with no rules is fully free.. you can't go and say oh well i support ripping people off with pyramid schemes but i don't agree with fucking little boys.
It's black or white freedom or not.. you can't have your cake and eat it too, it's not even possible.
So either you support freedom to exploit victims through any means necessary or you don't.. and all i know is i don't support pedo's lol
or taking advantage of the vulnerable and then saying fuck em.. Lambo'z ya'll  8)

edit:
Is the scammer tag rating system still here now ???

edit2:
My avatar was the icon posted on the Ubuntu page when some guy with the same name as me hacked Ubuntu's forums last year.
It was not me and i have no idea who did it, i regged my name way before i knew about the other guy.. for example i regged my Steam account name back in like 2005'ish
It was my way of trolling on people to get them to think i was the hacker but it didn't work.. i never met anyone ever that heard of the hacker or the incident LOL

What if all the devs will go to another forum ? People will follow them because mining for BTC is too hard and they want to play the pump&dump game in order to make a quick buck.

ya a new forum.. i have thought of that too, it's something we should consider i think.

Doubt that is the issue. If you look at the shitcoin killing thread, there were probably more people against it, than for it. There may be people who dislike junky coins, think there are too many, but do not think centralization is a good idea.  Nor think many of the ideas in that thread as a whole were a good idea -- extortion, forking coins, and the thread itself was started by someone who makes their own shitcoins (hypocriticial to say the least).

And I'm not saying you are for extortion, although more than once I believe you are fine with people forking/wrecking other people's coins. And I don't think anyone here has that right. Why should we let someone else decide for us if we want a coin, or don't want it?

And that is why people vote no, and why I voted no.

If you want to educate people about which coins are worth investing in, knock yourself out. It's a forum, after all.


Completely insane argument. Just let people vote, no need to say nutty things like that.

I must admit, there are too many coins right now which confuse the miners and don't bring any improvement to the world of crypto .
These coins are created with one purpose in their lifetime: pump and  vigorous dump.
I think the "evolution" will select the valuable ones: VTC, BC, DarkCoin etc. and will discard into oblivion the others.

@poornamelessme

i have the right to fork coins it's free market.. why is it ok for you to add some scam coin but i am not allowed to stop them ?
you are being a hypocrite.

and even some minor rules would help things and that is far faaar away from this so called centralization you keeping claiming we are demanding.
No on has asked for that at all and you and one or two other guys keep saying that because your twisting around what we are saying because you refuse to see what we actually said.

A free market is fine but it works both ways.. you can't say well it's only applicable for me to steal money from people but if some guy who gets ripped off kicks your ass
your going to call the cops and say he broke the law attacking me..
I honestly think you supporters are so full of shit your eyes are brown lol
and your going to get tripped up in your broken logic again and again i can assure you ;)

edit:
@crocko
Market saturation.. imagine if we focused together to support a smaller group of coins.. just imagine how much better those would be :)

No

So much for valuing all opinions and not bickering, I guess?

Your completely idiotic and your analogies are completely idiotic. And on a side note I'm sure you'd love a society with no rules so you could go around  extorting people with no consequences.

you were free to address what i said but you chose to make this personal in the reply i just quoted.
If you disagree then say so.. i'm not stopping you.
i caught you being a hypocrite and pointed it out.. You can post garbage but it's against the law to stop the garbage ?
tell me how that isn't a situation where you demand no rules until i want to stop your coin then you want rules..
then you ignore responding to any assertion i made and change the subject and go after me..

stick to the topic please.

how many coins have you posted here ? None ?

well then what coins have you mined or traded ?

your behavior makes you transparent i think.. you must be making a living on flash mining every scam coin that gets posted hourly..
otherwise you would not be on a mission to discredit anyone that opposes your view and guess what ?
My views stand on their own solid it doesn't matter what i think or do or say.. they stand on their own.
As Gavin Anderson said before about Satoshi.. he doesn't care whether the person is good or evil if they got a good idea then fine.. great.
So yeah by all means keep bending over backwards *trying to attack and discredit me all you want guys i laugh my ass off at you and carry on..
you Trolls are insignificant.. your follow along on every topic and try as you might, attack me or others and create diversions etc but
since you refuse to actually debate any of the topics at hand you contribute nothing what so ever and there for are not effective in any way at all in stopping us.
your spinning your wheels going nowhere while i convince more and more people to stand up to you scammer bullshit.

The only thing personal I said was that you agreed with those who wanted to fork and wreck coins. I didn't say a word about you personally, troll or insult you.

And I am not a dev. I haven't even been here very long ... I'd be considered a newbie by you, someone who needs protection from evil scam coins.

And if someone posts what you perceive as a scam coin, you can stop them. Post about it, post in their threads, educate people. Also keep in mind that your perception of what a scam coin is, may be simply wrong too.

ok well sorry then.
can we just carry on with the topic and not about me please.
i usually picture like an American presidential debate on forum topics..
that is my perspective.. i chose to post my view or an angle etc and then i hope other will do the same.
i am dead serious when i say if someone comes along and posts a piece of info that is compelling enough i will as always flip flop on my opinion on the spot.
i highly value everyones input and what makes me any degree of smart is the fact that i am willing to relearn anything and try and listen objectively to people.
so.. by all means convince me ..change my mind on this issue guys.

edit:
In case some of you don't know i was last year butting heads with BitcoinEXpress way back when he had made some statements about forking some coins..
I thought back then he was out of line. Over some time i came to the conclusion he did and agree with him and ever since.
So yeah guys i sure as hell see what your saying .. i used to be one of you !
But my almost one year in crypto has drastically changed my view on things.

i also have been an voracious advocate of file sharing in P2P circles and defend the right to share files (aka piracy)
Other names i use online often have a Pirate Party of Canada logo lol
I mention that because i have been butting heads and debating piracy with copyright trolls for a decade or two.
I see a clear difference between some healthy debate and just mud slinging..

So long as we remain civil, I'd be happy to have an actual discussion. One thing that I find very odd here is how people use the word scam. Normally, I'd apply the term if a dev offered an ipo, then kept the money and ran off. Or if there was a premine meant for promotion, and the dev pocketed it. Those are scams.

But very often people here shout out 'scamcoin', and apply it to almost anything.

A meme coin with a reasonable 1% premine. Scam! The coin has no unique features.

It's a bad idea, and probably a waste of a coin, but to me it's not a scam.

Nation coins -- which to many here are complete scams. I will agree that the devs certainly could pocket the premines and walk off. But I disagree calling them scams until an actual scam is committed. By deciding to ddos pools/wreck the coin, it's the same as saying -- hey, my neighbor looks shady... he has a lot of nice stuff he shouldn't have... let's burn down his house just to make sure he's not stealing anything!

So to me, the word scam is overused here. Where it does apply, however, and where it is a problem, is with exchanges.

Junk coins,  scamcoins, or whatever you want to call them, are not the reason btc has decreased in value. It was Gox. The more exchanges that go under and steal/lose coins, the less confidence people will have in crytpos on general. What did we lose in the past month or so, three alt exchanges in a row? Along with people's coins, and probably many won't bother investing in cryptos again. That is the real problem.

wow interesting the votes have been evening out.. when i posted it was was more NO than yes.

if you guy missed this can you vote please ? I am curious what the community thinks overall.

I voted yes because I think there should be tougher rules in regards to the coins to be added. I do disagree with intentially causing damage to coins because you don't like the way it was set up.

Coins I would consider as a low quality coin would be POW only coins which are really just clones trying to pass themselves off as self sustainable coins. Other dangerous coins include extremely random rewards and extremely quick distributions.

If you want a real solution... Proof of Stake with sharing of transaction fees across the network. All transactions, buy or sell are charged a fee which goes to all the other holders of the coin.

Some obvious scam coin should be banned!!

I voted Yes, because lot of these new shit coins is acting like a deterrent for the newbies.
For the community to grow we need more adoption by new people and as a community we should do what we can
do to protect them from scammers.

well said and thank you, few people show any concern at all for new guys.
i myself first came here and was overwhelmed with so much info to learn and read.
and my first experience was basically i tried to mine Litecoin and realized quick that i was getting nothing.
i then started looking around and seen FTC and i admit i just got here and their talk had me convinced..
so i started mining that because it was easier to get going and making something even if it wasn't much.
later i realized it's not just a clone of LTC but its not really going to go anywhere and the devs are good at hyping people up to make you think otherwise.

new users need to know how much deceptive smoke and mirrors activity goes on.
and how hard coin cloners want them to support their coin(s) ..they will say anything.
like the guy trying to scam me on Localbitcoins other day.. the guy fed me all kinds of bs trying to rip me off and failed of course lol

the longer you are involved in the altcoin the more you will in time how much people are completely full of shit around here..
from coin cloners hoping to sucker people into getting involved in their clone coin(s) to bagholders bullshitting you about their predictions.

First of all Bitcointalk should ban Spoetnik for being a pathetic loser. :)

I'm kinda new. I'd vote no, but I dont mine I just invest and learned how all this works (hype and smokes n screens) in maybe less than a few weeks

Spoetnik wants Bitcointalk to turn into a fascist place

Good luck with that Spoetnik

Seriously?  OK, let's start at the beginning...

One (and many people would say the only) legitimate purpose of government is to protect freedom.  Rape victims do not choose to be raped.  Molested children do not choose to be molested.  Their rights -- their freedom -- is being taken away.  That is why there are laws against those things, and why those laws are a legitimate function of government.

Now, Spoetnik, how much have you been forced to invest in scam coins?  Zero.  No one is forcing you -- no one is forcing anyone -- to invest in these coins.  The investors are exercising their freedom of choice.

You want to take that freedom away.

Normally, the counter argument is that the authoritarians just want to "protect" the people from themselves.  The authoritarians are elitists who see themselves as superior to the masses, so they should be the ones deciding who deserves which freedom.

And in some cases, they actually believe they are serving the public good.

So what's the problem with that, if they actually are the experts in the market, and if they are trying to serve the public good?  Well, look back to the central tenant of capitalism: People act in their own self-interest.

The "review committee," in this case, will make decisions based on what is best for them personally.  This can't be solved by finding "good" people.  It's not a character defect.  It's simply human nature.  "Where you stand depends on where you sit."  Our point of view on any issue is ALWAYS colored by self-interest, even when we truly do not believe this is the case.

Politically, the elegant solution that the framers of the US Constitution came up with is to recognize that self-interest is going to be central to every decision and to pit interests against each other set up a system of checks and balances and oversight to protect the rights of the minority.  

But how are you possibly going to have any oversight in a situation like this forum?  It's not going to happen.  Oversight of the decision-making committee is not part of the proposal, and even if it were, it would be cumbersome, expensive, and very likely completely ineffective.  No one is going to be on the committee if it means they are subject to financial review.  But how else are you going to catch members cheating the system?  So the effects of self-interest are magnified.  For example, the people on this committee will receive lots of bribe offers.  What makes you think that they won't take them?  Blind trust?

Economically, Adam Smith postulated that the "invisible hand" of the market arises from competing self-interest.  "The theory for the Invisible Hand states that if each consumer is allowed to choose freely what to buy and each producer is allowed to choose freely what to sell and how to produce it, the market will settle on a product distribution and prices that are beneficial to all the individual members of a community, and hence to the community as a whole."

So what you are proposing is taking away freedom of the many for the benefit of a chosen few.  Is it any wonder that people aren't eager to go along with your plan?

No.

Let us decide what coins we want to mine/buy/sell/hear about/blah blah blah.

Free market blah blah blah...

I get that the shitcoins create a lot of noise. It's a real pisser. But I'd rather have noise than a sanitized version that probably would end up throwing out a few babies with the bathwater.

Why should the majority of this Bitcoin forum care about the proliferation of garbage in this section of the forum? As BCX stated, this section just serves as a garbage collector to keep the latest shitclone propaganda out of the main Bitcoin discussion.  Besides, this isn't the only place on the entirety of the internet that the newest scam can be announced, and if this section does receive harsher moderation, the scam will move elsewhere.  I think iGotSpots stated the answer to this thread eloquently.

Yes, let's give a small group of people advanced notice of promising coins.

There is some validity to that argument. A simple thread detailing what new people should look out for, would suffice. Although I do question how useful it may be, seeing as everyone here has a different definition of a shitcoin/scam. Same goes for coin moderation ... what the moderators deem unworthy, others may deem acceptable.

And as for protecting newbies from these evil scams -- how long did it take you to spot worthless coins? Or scams? I started 3 months ago, and it's not like I'm getting ripped off anywhere... most scams are easy to spot. Most junkcoins are easy to spot. I should also add, a person can still make money from what you deem junkcoins, so long as you are smart and know when to get in, and when to get out.

If you see an IPO from a weird coin, with no assurances, it's probably not a great idea to give them any money. If someone puts up an ann for taxicoin, or some revolutionary coin based on a meme, it's probably not a great idea to invest your life savings. It's common sense. Having a select group of people choose which coins people can even read about, isn't the answer.

Again, the big scams are the shady exchanges.  And no amount of forum moderation will improve that. Although I do suggest that if enough exchanges pop up, perhaps a poll/rating on trustworthiness of specific exchanges could be useful to people.

Gavin sums it up pretty good in this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=42465.0) thread pinned to the top of the Alternate cryptocurrencies section.  The same common sense that applied in 2011 applies in 2014.

+1

I think this is something often overlooked and the majority of people will simply invest in things just because it's going up which in itself is a problem. To add to this you should also find out about the community itself, does it have long term plans and goals? How well does the community get along and are the leaders of the community readily accessible and can answer all your questions? How do they handle negative situations and conflict resolution?

Community in my opinion is the make or break of a currency, without strong leadership nothing can get done. Innovation is also a big key in long term viability as it is no longer about just making a coin and watching it go to the moon, if you can get the community behind you, there is no restrictions on the changes that can be made and with proper planning and testing, you are free of all restrictions that the code represents.

Thank god people vote against moderation (which often leads to censorship).
Faith restored!

In my opinion, should be given the opportunity to develop new coins. After the coins will be popular enough, they become self-reliant. For example, DOGE have a great community, and they have to communicate only on reddit now.

power control ?

Although we strongly oppose all the scams going on, and the devs who are just keep making new coins under different accounts, we believe they should not. Cryptos are all about decentralization, and this is a free market. It is all up to investors and miners to choose the right choices, which can be very difficult.

BTCTalk should stay out of things unless a criminal act is taking place. <however, the recommendation to post in their threads is tricky. The scammer will often make a self-moderated thread.

Elitecoin did that, as did Smartcoin (the latter actually stole its giveaways!).

BTCtalk should ban self-moderated threads. There is no need for them, and they are inevitably used to present an untrue perspective of a coin.

that is a REALLY good point !
The self moderated topic powers should be revoked on coin ANN topics i think !

and i can see how picking and choosing / rules for ANN's would be a nightmare i guess..
who would decide and based on what right ?

i don't think ANY of us like the idea of a council of sorts no matter Who is on it !
i dunno i'd like to say something should be done "rule wise" but in reality i have no idea what exactly or how :/
and i guess leaving it alone would be far better than putting in place bad rules right ?