Guys, I kindly ask you to refrain from making any posts / comments here excepting the nominations. Having the topic containing only posts with votes will help a lot at vote counting. Debates about the contest / rules / eligibility etc. can be held in the appropriate topic:


Besides, please make sure you read the rules.


alani123, I hope you realize that this vote will not be counted. Nominees should be mentioned based on their current activity, not the one from years back.

This kind of topics --



Always remind me of wolwoo's topics:

He has 0 left tags now. Practically you are trusting someone for 0 feedbacks left.

How could I? That picture is pure gold


Of course! Remember this?


 

By the way, PytagoraZ confounded us with Clowns Cartel, but I reminded him quickly forum Police is

Thanks for your input, hilariousandco! So reports from Archival board have no special rule for being automatically set to "Bad".
I just reported the post again. Let's see what happens now

Thanks for this reminder, joker_josue!

I think we already have a good template from last year. It was suggested by Upgrade00. Is this what you had in mind?


As for enforcing a rule... I don't know if that would actually work. Since many nominate events / fails like "FAILED TO EARN AND HOLD 1btc", "Situación Actual", "Cancel Culture on social media", "Some exchanges are at war", "Get Your Funds Out of Exchange", "BUY THE DIP AND HODL" -- which make no sense (LOL!) -- it would probably be even more difficult to enforce a posting rule, although for the one counting the votes it would be helpful. If we'd enforce such a "voting etiquette" then perhaps even less votes would be eligible...

However, we can make an appeal to users for following a template

I don't think there's a rule stating that reports from Archival board are set by default to "Bad"...

Avem concurs nou!

[FREE RAFFLE]540th - ฿ECAUSE I AM STILL IN A GOOD MOOD-CYPHER HODL LOADED BALLET
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5476398

Se pot castiga urmatoarele: un card Cypher Hodl incarcat cu 0.0005 BTC.


Organizator: krogothmanhattan

Poate participa oricine, daca s-a inregistrat inainte de 1 iulie.
Modalitate de inscriere: se alege un numar de la 00 la 99 (care nu a fost deja rezervat).
Transportul: gratuit in SUA; pentru restul lumii se va discuta cu minerjones.

Concursul este identic cu cele anterior realizate de OP.

Heads-up about Ratimov / Symmetrick's situation:

- He is no longer a merit source. This was common sense, since he had no respect even for his Merit Source application thread, which he trashed as well. In fact, I actually stated this is what should happen, due to such lack of common sense..
- The number of those which trust him decreases week after week. At same time, the number of those distrusting him grows week after week. At the moment 45 users trust him, while 54 distrust him.
- During past week Coin-1 stopped trusting him while sokani added him to his distrust list. Thank you for your involvement!

Ladies and gentlemen,

For this year's event we decided again to take into account the feedback received from various users, at the previous events, and apply some fine-tuning to the existent rules. Additionally there will also be some new rules. All these will -- we hope -- bring even more accurate results!

Therefore, the following rules will apply for Bitcointalk Community Awards event 2023 edition:

1. Votes for inactive users will not be taken into consideration anymore. The event is related to the activity made by users during current year and not for the past. As a consequence, votes for users like Satoshi, Lauda etc. (with all due respect for all good things they did in the past) will not be counted. Of course, this does not mean that a user's vote will be entirely not counted, if he nominates an inactive user. Only the vote for the inactive user is not counted.

As a sum-up: if a user makes nominations of both active users and inactive ones, only the mentions of inactive ones will be not counted (in the contest's final results there will be no Satoshi, no Lauda etc.).

2. No merit sending is allowed from nominees to users which nominated them. This should improve dramatically the accuracy of results and offenders will have to support a penalty. For each merit sent, 1 vote is deducted. So for example, if in the voting topic Alice sent 5 merits to those who nominated her in any category, then we will not count these votes (but the rest of the votes that are addressed to other nominees will be taken into account). In addition, if a user voted for Alice in two categories, then the votes for each of the categories will be unaccounted for.

3. You must have 50 earned merits to vote ➥ Note.

4. Copy-pasted votes will not be counted and they'll be reported for plagiarism. This rule was added after some incidents from the past, which led to having a particular user reported for plagiarism.

Other changes:

Prizes were decided based on community feedback.

Please make sure you express the nominations in a coherent manner. Here I'm mostly talking about votes for Event / Fail of the year categories. It's difficult to understand what someone means if nominations have a form like this: "FAILED TO EARN AND HOLD 1btc", "Situación Actual", "Cancel Culture on social media", "Some exchanges are at war", "Get Your Funds Out of Exchange", "BUY THE DIP AND HODL". (For more information about these examples please check this post.) Besides, please make the difference between what an event is and what a fail is. In the past, some posted same nomination at both categories which is not correct.

Mister BitcoinTalk category was not added, as it would mean to have fillippone winner all the time (on all three places  )

Remember, the contest is about having fun, not a duel for seeing who's da baws Therefore, we are encouraging you all to act honest -- in the end, this is what brings the joy of participation, right?

From this point forward, the official announcement of the contest will be made VERY soon!

Cheers to all

Yes!  fillippone will pay 10000 BTC for a pizza! More than laszlo, which paid 10000 BTC for two pizzas

It's curious how you changed your mind since your previous statement.

The current state of the topic and its current placement are not an answer to my question.

Hello,

I have a small question for the mod of Archival board: on Dec 2nd I reported a post made by FIODNederland, with the following comment: "Breaking rule 32. Posting multiple posts in a row (excluding bumps and reserved posts by the thread starter) is not allowed.".

This post was the second post in a row made by the above mentioned user. However, my report was flagged as "Bad":



Just curious: why was it flagged as "Bad"? In the past I reported hundreds, if not thousands, such consecutive posts and my reports were flagged as "Good" and the posts were deleted. However, now the opposite happened. I would appreciate if the mod in charge will explain me this resolution.

Oh, okay... If I'll ever go through this unfortunate incident I will remember what you wrote here Thanks!

Dear cygan, can you elaborate a bit, please? I'm not sure I understand what you mean...

Just curious... will that do any change of the current situation...?

Hey Loyce! Thank you for these monthly updates, which bring visibility over the DT changes.
I was also wondering if you could add to your lists the DT strength of the new added DT users? (In case you find this feasible.)

I think we will be allowed to do that, but it is possible to have this thread moved to Archival board. At least, this is what happened with Sinbad topic...

Although the recent announcement does not look good at all for mixers advertised on the forum, I believe that we can still give a hand of help to UniJoin until the end of the year, in trying to get rid of its copycats. We should bear in mind that, by doing so, we are helping users, in fact, not just the company. This is because we can help others from not being scammed by phisihing websites.

I know that the news came as a shock for some which really depended on the money paid by mixers signature campaigns but this should not stop us from trying to protect other people by reporting fraudulent, imposter websites.