|
Its the reasons above why threads created in the altcoin announcements and bounties should be restricted to full members and above. There should probably be a restriction on those who can open campaigns on the services board too.
|
|
|
|
The only reason I can think is that some managers are paid daily/weekly with real btc/eth and if this is true there is no point for them to report a scam even if they find it since they will get money anyway.
NOTE: This is a personal supposition, I don't know how they are paid.
Going by this anyone proven to be doing this should be negged to oblivion. They are purposely not telling the community and potential investors that it's a scam for their own personal gain. If you see anyone doing this then send this information to some default trust members and see what they think. |
|
|
|
I see this situation, that's why i offer this. It is a bit tiring to open and read so much worthless topics in most of forum brunches, isn't it?
It is just laziness. If everyone had this attitude there would be no posts merited to be able to filter out because they would be relying on others finding good quality posts. If you aren't reading the whole thread then your part of the problem. |
|
|
|
Suchmoon did the right thing in my opinion and I think it goes to show the trustworthiness that Gleb shown to give it to suchmoon. @Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow, has the account gone back to Bruno?
I have made only one post from that account to confirm that I control it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211133#msg40211133And have not used it since, nor will I. It has not gone back to Bruno. Ok that's good. I was considering you controlled it still and then checked back somewhere else and thought it went back to him but wasn't sure. $600 was quite a small amount compared to the value of his account (though it already had negative trust so)... Quite fast to raise it also so that's good. I do not see why the amount received or quoted has any factor in any of this. If it was sold for $1 or $10000 it would not matter. |
|
|
|
As much as I appreciate his consistency, I would argue there's a difference between a green trusted Legendary selling an account and a Newbie selling his dozens of farmed accounts. The latter is less likely to cause massive spam, although I think the account should have a neutral tag stating the date of the sale. But tagging sold accounts won't be possible as long as sellers are being tagged, and sales are an undergrounnd market.
If accounts sales would be public, the buyer would know his account will be scrutinized, and he'll have to be very careful not to spam from his "investment".
I never considered this and I think thats a real good way of looking at it. Though should the seller release the information about the account they are selling? Otherwise they are protecting a sold account. If that is the case there is no difference between tagging sold accounts and the seller. |
|
|
|
|
This is not justified at the moment because theres only like 1 post merited in like 20 threads. Once there is more merit sources and they are actively distributing it then this feature would be useful. In the current state of the merit system its not though.
|
|
|
|
Everyone saying that every account selling accounts get tagged is wrong there is currently a legendary member trying to sell an account in the auction board but not one really cares about that because it's not someone who is as well known as Gleb. I am not going to argue that the tag is not justified but to anyone claiming anyone would of got this treatment is wrong. Only The Pharmacist seems to be consistent in tagging people who sell accounts. Everyone else is just looking to slay a giant. Here is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4441505.0 |
|
|
|
Dear OP
Did you used any translator please confirm it.
phantastisch has already confirmed that it wasn't translated through a automatic translator like google translator but it was marked as a false positive which is what sparked this ordeal. Okay, well here is my side: We get an extra ordinary amount of spam in from bad or google translated threads and he went under a false positive.
Well the case here is, I banned him from posting translations and before I had time to answer to his pms he posted again.
I'm a bit in a bind here since he went behind my back because he wanted to get paid.
He probably felt hard done by maybe his behavior was not perfect but I can see why they would be frustrated even if it was a mistake. It is an issue that both of you are going have to sort out yourselves but I don't think it's that much of a big deal in my opinion. If he translates good and that is all you want him to do them he fits the job. |
|
|
|
|
If the link is posted on this forum you can hover over it and if it's green it belong to this website but if it doesn't go green then it's redirecting you to another site. If you ever come across a site which looks like Bitcointalk but you have been automatically signed out and they are asking you to sign back in then that's a red flag right away.
|
|
|
|
What is better to do is to charge a fee for posting, only allowing copper members to open a topic in certain sections and increasing the amount of copper membership purchase.
Charging a fee especially with Bitcoin and it's fees would be just in practicable and wouldn't really stop people from purchasing copper membership just to bypass it as copper membership isn't that expensive. Having copper members only being able to create threads is a better idea than allowing everyone to though. |
|
|
|
|
He's copying and pasting which I think will result in him getting a perma ban if you report him. Probably best to do that and at least he won't be spamming any more.
Spammers are trying their hardest to earn merits and it was only a matter of time before they started copying posts which have already had merit given to them.
|
|
|
|
I agree. Many called Bitcoin as gold 3.0. Bitcoin is like a gold that every year the value is rising up. The difference between bitcoin than gold is bitcoin is more profitable because of its very limited supply with a very high demand. Also bitcoin is very volatile, this means huge profit for traders.
I'm not sure why Steve Wozniak even compared it to gold by labeling it as the "digital gold". Bitcoin is completely different to that of gold and is it's unique system that doesn't follow the fundamentals that determine golds value either. Yeah rarity plays a factor but there's so much more to Bitcoin like the Blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
What I normally recommend is to convert your savings into Bitcoin and hold it for the long term and use another crypto such as Etherum to do your trades and buying low value items because generally ETH has lower fees when sending regular transactions unless you use segwit but not a lot of places actually accept segwit at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
Habbear actually explains it pretty well in terms of supply and demand. But you can not count out the news/propaganda that the news reporters churn out which can dramatically effect the price. When mtgox was hacked the value fluctuated a lot.
|
|
|
|
- when Lambo?  If you don't have this yet you need to buy more Bitcoin! I like this article from the great and powerful Woz. It's nice to get the perspective of someone who has led or been at the front of technology innovation for 40 years. There's credibility that comes with his comments that can't come with most other interviewees. He was successful in a very different field though. He was involved with developing personal computers but nothing with cryptocurrencies. He's no more qualified to speak about it than the economists that you see spouting their bullshit every day to manipulate the market. He's got credibility but that doesn't really mean he knows what he's talking about in terms of cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
Yeah, Bill Gates is not worried about anything. It's a joke to think that Billionaires who naysay Bitcoin feel threatened by it. They don't feel threatened, at least not yet. Once/if BTC starts gaining more traction for everyday purchases, then they may feel threatened. But right now, to these anti-BTC billionaires BTC is just a highly speculative cockroach.
Even then they could just convert their earnings into Bitcoin. If it ever came to Bitcoin rising and fiat currencies losing their value extremely quickly then they could get out at the first sign of this. These guys have financial advisors and who are analysing the market constantly. I think it's silly to assume these guys are concerned about anything related to money. |
|
|
|
I'm glad that he's at least not changing his opinion about Bitcoin a whole lot, unlike some other people.
I think it was Bill Gates who kind of flip-flopped his position on whether Bitcoin was a good or bad sort of technology.
I also wonder how much Steve Wozniak has actually used Bitcoin, I'd bet he's probably made a few transactions at the very least.
Because Gates is a government supporter, a rich snob that is afraid of depending on himself. He was always working closely with the government and has depended on it to protect his rights and his money. Now as an older man he's afraid of changes, of his fiat money losing value, of the power of the government weakening. People thought that smart people are pioneers, working for the better society and freedom. Unfortunately gates was working for himself, for better invigilation and control. Maybe that's why his company is so hated by the very people who once were his clients. I don't think this is a realistic opinion I do doubt very much that bill gates is worried at all about his fiat money losing value. He's one of the richest people in the world and at this point money is meaningless to him. What are you referring to when you said he's working close to the government? Sources? |
|
|
|
I'm glad that he's at least not changing his opinion about Bitcoin a whole lot, unlike some other people.
I think it was Bill Gates who kind of flip-flopped his position on whether Bitcoin was a good or bad sort of technology.
I also wonder how much Steve Wozniak has actually used Bitcoin, I'd bet he's probably made a few transactions at the very least.
Yeah with a lot of the celebrities endorsing Bitcoin as soon as it hits a bump and the price starts falling they'll throw it under the bus. Steve does seem to care about it even when it's not doing so well. I think he deserves a little credit for that at least. |
|
|
|
It shouldn't be a defined amount of time and should be when you can. You should be able to constantly be learning about Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general. Researching could just mean looking at this forum and taking in the knowledge of other posters here.
in fact there is no required time and you can be able to know it when you are focusing on making study about in bitcoin if you are may have a lot of time of making it you will never find oit the time that you already spent here. That's also true of course. I like passive research because it's something I would of been doing already. For example looking at the charts regarding the economy of Bitcoin and then reading comments on peoples inputs. It really does help and you become better at identifying when to invest and when not too. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
