The idea behind the development of science is both progression in the knowledge acquired using the scientific instrument and progression in the meta-scientific process: you have to improve the tool you are using to uncover knowledge.

That's why something like the Dunning-Kruger effect arises: people who lack the metacognitive skill to determine that their process is not working reliably.

Part of it could be shame. Part of it could be delusion thereof: when you're at the point where you're continually gambling when it's not in your best interest, your mind has to find a way to create a rationale - a justification to make sense of the situation - resulting in the cognitive dissonance slowly breaking down your orthodox logic skills. After all, most people will get addicted to the randomness, the near losses, the chasing of the jackpot: while you're losing, you want to distract yourself from it and focus purely on the wins... problem gambling reaches very deeply and the worst part is that heavy gamblers only stop when they hit zero, almost getting catharsis out of the bankruptcies. 

I'm not going to take any sides here. I am usually quite skeptical of casinos, especially when the common practice is to use their Terms of Service to fuck over players under the guise of KYC or AML regulatory/anti-exploit measures. I mean, I've seen some sites include a turnover for deposits... is that seriously meant to stop money laundering (a small percentage of their player base) when it affects literally every single person?

For now, things are very inconclusive but Bitcasino does need to show some substance to their claims. It would be silly to always give casinos the benefit of the doubt when they make claims without direct evidence - that would make the GTO move to always scam.

Why not just use the [self-moderated] Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source thread in Reputation?

We can direct attention to quality posts rather than sending the merit to the posts themselves: this fixes the problem of abuse and still brings forth attention to good replies when you don't have any merit to shower. If anything, merit sources might take a look here and there if they aren't already doing so and may create a backlog of sorts when necessary.

---

theymos did say that abuse wasn't a huge thing to worry about but I imagine this change would be a little too drastic.

Volume of threads that are not going to be deleted is much higher than the volume of threads that are going to be deleted. Rather than do something that affects the entire sample space to satiate only a subset within that field, moderation can instead be focused on reported topics. From an efficiency standpoint, I don't see the point of any Newbie jail equivalents.

From an administrative standpoint, it's not going to happen because theymos doesn't like those restrictions.

Sometimes, I wonder if these topics are created by people that are genuinely asking questions or if they are created by people who are trying to just facilitate a topic for generic discussion. It's similar to those vague or general questions that you see which spawn spam megathreads (i.e. when to buy bitcoin?) so I'm a bit hesitant to add to the flame.

Beginners & Help is one of those sections where you think to yourself, "precipice of a spam board," if the questions continue down this path of very-searchable threads.

The key is information density: the problem with many long posts is not with their length but with the content that the replies host. If it takes multiple sentences to say one general piece of content (i.e. spam megathreads) then the information density is very low, when it should be maintained at a steady level.

Most of my replies, when they get into multiple paragraphs, tend to expand and elaborate on points and thereby produces something that's worth reading rather than someone just repeating "the bitcoin" and buy high/sell low a few dozen times in a variety of forms.

Don't you at least have some information regarding these double-spend attempts? If we assume that the users did in fact attempt to double-spend, then there should be a record of of some transaction that was dropped from broadcast with the same txinput as the one that was confirmed. Or, if the successful deposits that they had on their accounts were not the double-spend attempts and they actually went through with the act, then it would be great to have a record of those double-spend transactions.

I can hardly see the problem with providing some substance for your claim, considering their accounts are closed because of it.

I've always considered gambling addiction an affliction that is much worse than substance addiction. Whereas you have a limit to how much you can slam into your body and whereas your finances are depleted for the substances, there is only so much damage that you can do in one moment with substance addiction unless you're dying from it.

Problem gamblers, though... I bet their stakes go up in correlation with their external wealth, and there's no stopping it. It's pretty difficult to spend 30K on heroin in one day, but to spend 30K on a couple bets in a casino in a few minutes? You basically get rid of the buffer zone for any regret. Everything can happen instantly, and if you find yourself stealing from others to gamble... you get situations like this.

Think this is different. The user has had 28 posts deleted from their account (which accounts for almost 10% of their posts!) but it could have been a mass clearing of insubstantial replies. If you take a look at their post history, there is a plethora of one-liners (example) and I can presume that someone went to report their post history.

Sometimes, I do the same thing when I encounter egregiously bad spammers - it's better to root out a high concentration of spam via users rather than via boards and threads

Theoretically, each halving should have diminishing returns given that the change is in the rate of inflation rather than a drop in total supply anyway. From 100% to 50% is pretty big, but from 50% to 25% and so on means that you should be a lessened impact with each step of the exponential decay.

After all, when the mining reward goes from 2 satoshi to 1 satoshi, are you seriously going to say that the price of Bitcoin should double regardless of the circulation?

---

If you want to get real pedantic then it could be argued that we needn't use any status quo object for evaluating the value of given items, especially given shifting values depending on environment, both physical and mental, physically and internally.

Though, I'm not going to tell you that the next time you're buying bread from the shop to pay them in the ratio of 45/3 donuts per quarter inch screw.

Regardless of what someone does or posts (in 99% of cases) you will seldom find restitution for unsavory behavior. Unless a troll pushes it to such an extreme level that the administration deems it inappropriate (i.e. nudity), you'll barely see any action. Just think about how much spam you get in Reputation and Meta when someone flips out due to a DefaultTrust drama, or when someone gets banned and they blatantly post "from their friend's account".

The only thing rarer than a troll ban is an altcoin being added to a payment method for the forum.

This pretty much contains all the relevant information about the system itself.

One thing I recommend all Newbies to do is to start using the trust system to send out their own feedbacks, especially negative ones. Relying on the DT network to exhaustively flag and tag all users who are scammers means that there is a large buffer zone (perhaps even infinite) between when someone does a shady action and when someone responds to it. Moreover, it's always better to trust your own judgment in lieu of others' especially when it comes to transactional trust: since the DT network is so vast now with the 100 DT1 cycling monthly, you will most certainly get a number of false positives and false negatives.

What do you define as success? It is difficult to formulate an answer when your only question is the very vague "how can I achieve success at work" which is an incredibly subjective question.

You seem to post a lot of one-liners. It would be preferable if you could expand on your thoughts rather than creating these fragmented discussions, especially when you're asking questions.

Why are you attempting to get to Sr. Member rank in the first place? Unless you're after the signature campaigns - which would be bad if you were hoping for an easy "job" - there isn't much benefit to ranking up apart from lowered post times, which are usually low enough when you get into Jr. Member status or when you buy a Copper Membership.

If your aim is to rank up to join a signature campaign, let it be known that you should maintain your post quality. No one wants someone who is only here to spam the forum for their own benefit.

If you read through the thread and you add your post to it, think to yourself the following question from a general perspective: "Did that additional post add anything to this thread? Did I gain something from reading that?"

If the answer is no, it is likely that you have either repeated similar ideas or you have not created anything constructive with your reply. If your answer is something vague or in the general realm of knowledge (i.e. buy low sell high), it's probably a great post.

Needs some revision with the grammar to make it so that the answer isn't just the one that fits grammatically. There are also some inconsistencies with the capitalization of the answers and questions, though this is more a nitpick than anything that significantly reflects the quality of the quiz.
Also needs some contextualization (i.e. question regarding discretion of staff) since multiple answers can fit some of the questions.

Wow, that's a prodigal revelation, on par with the philosophies of the greats. How did you come to such a conclusion, such a process, that the OP clearly was not already engaging in?

And how you create a response in such a short amount of time, only taking two minutes after your most recent post ere this reply!

---

I think it's great that you learned how to write so much but say so little.

What are you saying? Bruno has passed - the original account owner - for someone to have bought the account after the fact would probably mean that someone related to Bruno sold the account. Though the question that arises is the very obvious "why?" since you couldn't do anything with the account after everyone knew that the original account-holder had died.

I don't know... I certainly wouldn't react very kindly to someone if I was sold an item and then they immediately turn around and sell it for much less than what I paid for. Leaves a sour taste in your mouth, almost like you got conned out of a higher price than the item's value: when you as a seller decide to adjust the price to lower levels after a sale, it dilutes the value of the previously-sold products and the value of future products, as one is unable to tell if the price is actually indicative of its intrinsic value.

Supply goes up, demand goes down.