Danke für das neue Tippspiel.
Also gibt es schon 2 Gewinnspiele; eines, das vielleicht mit ein wenig Glück noch die Chance auf etwas wertvolles BTC bietet und ein anderes, welches mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit die Chance auf etwas wertvolles BTC bietet. 

Spannend ist das auf jeden Fall, weil man nie weiß, wann der Kurs jetzt um 3.000 USD fällt oder ob er noch einmal umdreht. 
Besonders heikel wird es ab 31.07.2023, wenn der Preis bis dahin nicht um 3.000 USD gefallen ist.

Das ist wirklich sehr fein.  

Die Regeln gefallen mir sehr gut, da man damit auf jeden Fall eine Chance hat, etwas wertvolles BTC zu erhalten.
Dass Bitcoin im Jahresverlauf mal irgendwann um 3.000 USD fällt, wäre doch sehr wahrscheinlich.

Hiermit

ist der 31.07.2023 gemeint oder der Zeitpunkt, zu dem BTC das aktuelle Jahreshoch um 3.000$ unterschreitet?


Mit einer Tippabgabe warte ich noch, denn das Tippspiel ist schon ziemlich trickig. Da muss man wirklich gut überlegen.  
Bis 31.07.2023 haben wir ja auf jeden Fall Zeit.

---

Das ist ebenfalls eine sehr gute Regel.
+1
Mal sehen, wie groß der Topf wird (vielleicht verlinke ich das Gewinnspiel im internationalen Forenbereich ^^)
Und vielleicht tue ich selbst noch etwas in den Topf. Zeit ist ja noch und wehe Bitcoin fällt dieses Jahr nicht mehr um 3.000 USD.  

Danke für die Info, hätte ich lieber mal 2 Minuten gewartet mit meinem Beitrag.  

---

Kuckst du Regeln:


Wo hast du es denn nachgesehen?

---

Also als der Faden hier eröffnet wurde, gab es bereits etliche Bitcoin-Signaturkampagnen, unter anderem liefen Ende 2017 bereits ChipMixer, Bustadice, FortuneJack, Bitsler und diverse kleinere Glücksspielseiten.

Zu den frühesten Bitcoin-Signaturkampagnen hatte ich mal hier etwas geschrieben, die gab es bereits 2013 und damals waren die Belohnungen pro Beitrag deutlich geringer aber dafür wurden viel mehr Beiträge pro Woche belohnt (was durchaus problematisch war).

Considering how many first offender accounts are still not banned, even if there's crystal clear evidence, like here, here or here, banning HedgeFX after his alt P2Pfinder got already banned, would be very inconsistent. Even first offenders don't get banned if there's crystal clear evidence.

Basically, P2Pfinder / HedgeFX got his initial punishment already by getting P2Pfinder banned and after that, HedgeFX learned from that mistake.
In my opinion, there's enough punishment already by banning P2Pfinder.
I'm not a friend of this ban evasion rules anyways, especially because it has been enforced on a very irregular basis and it's pointless for this autoban bullshit anyways.

And with all those first offender accounts still not banned, banning HedgeFX and basically giving a double punishment to OP, would be very inconsistent in my opinion.


My position: no ban for HedgeFX.  


Just my 2 sats.  

Ui, spannend, spannend. Mal schauen, wie viele Teilnehmer durchrotiert werden und wie sich die Konditionen verändern.
Diese Woche also noch normal und nächste Woche dann mit Änderungen. 

Was mir ein bisschen auffällt: diese Kampagne unterscheidet sich doch deutlich von den Standardkampagnen, die Hhampuz sonst noch leitet. Insgesamt sollte diese Kampagne ja ähnlich wie die ChipMixer Kampagne aufgebaut sein. Daher würde ich annehmen, dass die Vermutung von Buchi-88 tatsächlich nicht allzu unwahrscheinlich ist: alle Ränge haben die gleiche Belohnung, zumal sich in der Signatur von Sr. Member zu Legendary eh nicht viel verändert. Ich hoffe nur, dass das 1miau Profilbild erhalten bleiben kann. 

Wenn es nicht so ein dreister betrug wäre, müsste man mal darüber lachen.  

Bella Italia, Bundesministerium der Finanzen.  
Was haben sich die Betrüger dabei nur gedacht? Italiener sind immer pleite und stets auf der Suche, wo man etwas Geld auftreiben kann?
Weil ansonsten die Mafia vorbei kommt?


1Bund...

Extra eine Vanity-Adresse erstellt aber dann in der Mailadresse "Excellent Italia" verwenden. Ich bin enttäuscht.

Prinzipiell ist das möglich und wie Lafu bereits geschrieben hat, hat sich z.B. Chainalysis darauf spezialisiert. Die haben auch schon größere Fälle aufgeklärt.
Selbst wenn auf der Adresse einige Beträge eingehen und zu einem Kundenkonto einer Börse gesendet weden, dürfte der Betrug vermutlich zu gering sein, als dass da eine größere Ermittlung eingeleitet wird.

Wenn die Betrüger überhaupt etwas auf ihre Adresse bekommen (hoffen wir mal, dass niemand etwa drauf sendet).
Merkt hoffentlich jeder, dass das Bundesminiterium der Finanzen nicht die Mailadresse mit Endung "Excellent Italia" besitzt...  

Der Vollständigkeit halber hier noch mein Beitrag von drüben:

KI wird die Difficulty und das Halving genauso punktgenau "berechnen" können, wie die KI den Bitcoin-Preis zu einen beliebigen zukünftigen Zeitpunkt "berechnen" kann: gar nücht.  
KI könnte die Difficulty schätzen aber abgesehen von einem, mit bekannten Parametern hochgerechneten Wert, wird da nichts an zusätzlichem Erkenntnisgewinn dabei sein. Denn die Zukunft lesen kann die KI nicht. Und mit der Vergangenheit die Zukunft zu extrapolieren dürfte ziemlich brotlos sein, weil nicht aussagekräftg.
KI ist gut darin, bekannte oder berechenbare Dinge akkurat auszuführen.
KI ist schlecht darin, irgendwelche Dinge vorherzusagen, deren Eintritt mit vielen Variablen verbunden sind, denn das würde vorraussetzen, dass KI hellsehen könnte. KI könnte hier maximal Szenarien skizzieren aber auch da dürften je nach Komplexität der Angelegenheit so viele Varianten in Frage kommen, dass die Szenarien der KI sich in ihrer Bandbreite enorm unterscheiden.

Ansonsten stimme ich d5000 bei den weiteren Punkten zu.  

Wow, just wow! You are the one lying here, pitiful troll.  
Instead of admitting your mistakes, you are doubling down and you keep spreading your lies against me.
Really looks like hope for betterment is wasted, for your case.
You will continue to be a liar, deranged troll and abusive imbecile.

---

Your projections into my replies about a thing, which was never written there, are exclusively yours.  
Nothing contradicts my description of events.
When you've PMed me, I've always tried to stay as polite as possible but you can expect that when you are constantly asking nonsense questions, at some point, my reply will be similar to the quality of the questions you are asking me.
And when you are asking me that I should review and give my personal opinion on the following trusts, you've left:


Timelord2067's left feedback on GazetaBitcoin account (untrusted because to Timelord2067 got removed from DT).

Of course I'll point out that your judgement is completely flawed and that you are a disgusting perv. What do you expect, when you submit a feedback, where you call GazetaBitcoin a "RACIST" on it's account for no reason???
Honestly, how braindead are you?
You are sending me repeatedly bullshit PM's and then are you complaining, when the 4th or 5th reply back from me due to your repeated PM's hurts your feelings?
Maybe you should stop sending unsolicited PM's to me??
But no, you are even accusing me of sending you "paranoid PM's", while you are completely making up the story because we all can see the true version: you sent me several unsolicited PM's, I've been very friendly but at some point you are getting butthurt because I disagree on your deranged viewpoints?
You are truly a deranged clown.

And you should re-read and understand my past posts here properly before making up your own, wrong version.  

---

LMAO, a PM is still unsolicited even if you are sending it to more people.
You reasoning makes no sense at all - include more people and a PM is automatically solicited - seriously?
A PM stays unsolicited, no matter how many people it is sent to. In addition I can add: mass unsolicited PM's are even more unsolicited.

---

LOL, how detached from reality are you? Or are you lying so confidently that you really expect you are getting away with it?
You should have realized that basically the whole Reputation regulars disagreed on your deranged trust ratings, where you called GazetaBitcoin a RACIST for example:


Timelord2067's left feedback on GazetaBitcoin account (untrusted because to Timelord2067 got removed from DT).

Even LoyceV disagreed with how you are acting.
How obvious do you want it, that you realize how wrong you are?  


What do you expect when you ask me if your "racist" feedback on GazetaBitcoin's account is accurate?
Of course I will call you out for that sort of abuse.
My reply was very polite by just calling it "inappropriate, wrong and / or completely misleading". A perv like you should act a bit more discreetly. [LOL, insiders know where this reference comes from  ]
But when we are at it, let me express it once more, a bit less polite but more based on facts:
Your feedback is completely baseless, it's a braindead defamation, it's disgusting and needlessly offensive for no reason but I'm not even surprised because you are a deranged and pitiful troll who's incapable of admitting he's wrong.

---

---

I don't need to apologize for anything because your accusations against me are straight out lies. You are the one who's at fault for sending me your unsolicited PMs, for you repeated lies, unjustified feedbacks on various accounts due to your recent trust abuse and now you are even doubling down on your misbehaviour.
Everyone can see that now, due to you publishing private information, one-sidedly and that's an anti-privacy offense as well. I might leave you another feedback for this abuse because doubling down on your lies shows, you have not learnt anything, neither you are willing to improve and now, you are even one-sidedly publishing PM's, which is a serious offense because people answering your PM's are of risk to get their privacy seriously violated.  
That's a really big abuse.

---

LOL, you just admitted that you've sent mass unsolicited PM's to all of the above members?
Thanks for exposing yourself that you are the one here, who's guilty of what you've accused me of:


You are the one, who's sending mass unsolicited PM's to forum members.  
Hopefully you'll get reported for this because you truly deserve to get banned.  


In addition, you should stop littering my topic with off-topic lies!
And learn to quote properly!
You are througout disrespectful by typing such illiterate off-topic spam in my topic, in addition to your repeated lies against me + publishing private messages.
Shame, shame!


tl;dr
Adding


to our trust lists is a good idea.  

Ist manchmal schwierig ChatGPT von echten Texten zu unterscheiden und im Zweifel würde ich immer erst einmal annehmen, dass der Text echt ist, wenn auch einige Teile im Text nach ChatGPT klingen. Daher spiele ich hier mal Teufel's Advokat.

Z.B. im folgenden Textabschnitt würde ich von ChatGPT eher nicht erwarten, dass Worte wie "scheinbar" verwendet werden oder sowas wie:




Zudem sind im Text einige Rechtschreibfehler, die ChatGPT wohl eher nicht hätte:

Müsste alles klein geschrieben sein.

Aber das könnte auch ein Teil sein, der nachträglich angefügt wurde.

Was die Hitze angeht: viel trinken und nachts gut lüften wären meine Favoriten. Man könnte auch nach Island oder auf die Südhalbkugel in Urlaub fahren. ^^

Das sind in der Tat gute Möglichkeiten, hier unnötiges Denglisch einfach zu vermeiden. "Diskussionsfaden" oder "Gesprächsfaden" würde vermutlich dem am meisten ähneln, was aktuell vielfach verwendet wird, nämlich "Faden". Auf jeden Fall sieht man sehr gut, dass es viele Möglichkeiten gibt.  

---

Meinetwegen könnte man auch "Fred" schreiben, was zur Not auch noch geht. ^^
Ansonsten könnte ich mir auch vorstellen, dass "Gesprächsfaden" oder "Diskussionsfaden" eine gute Alternative ist, wenn man nur "Faden" nicht so toll findet.

---

Ich würde mich zudem sehr freuen, wenn mein originaler Diskussionsfaden dazu genutzt werden würde.  

I've updated my list of translations because Chilwell has translated my topic and presented it in our Nigeria (Naija) forum section.  
Many thanks @Chilwell for your translation.

Language	translated by	Title
___________________________	_____________________	_______________________________________________________________________
Nigeria (Naija)	Chilwell	List 4 interesting Bitcoin statistics

KI wird die Difficulty und das Halving genauso punktgenau "berechnen" können, wie die KI den Bitcoin-Preis zu einen beliebigen zukünftigen Zeitpunkt "berechnen" kann: gar nücht.  
KI könnte die Difficulty schätzen aber abgesehen von einem, mit bekannten Parametern hochgerechneten Wert, wird da nichts an zusätzlichem Erkenntnisgewinn dabei sein. Denn die Zukunft lesen kann die KI nicht. Und mit der Vergangenheit die Zukunft zu extrapolieren dürfte ziemlich brotlos sein, weil nicht aussagekräftg.
KI ist gut darin, bekannte oder berechenbare Dinge akkurat auszuführen.
KI ist schlecht darin, irgendwelche Dinge vorherzusagen, deren Eintritt mit vielen Variablen verbunden sind, denn das würde vorraussetzen, dass KI hellsehen könnte. KI könnte hier maximal Szenarien skizzieren aber auch da dürften je nach Komplexität der Angelegenheit so viele Varianten in Frage kommen, dass die Szenarien der KI sich in ihrer Bandbreite enorm unterscheiden.
Außerdem haben wir doch schon einen Faden zu KI: KI/ChatGPT im Forum, im Internet und im Alltagsleben

Man beachte diesen Regelpunkt:




Warum gibt es diesen Regelpunkt?

Das Forum speichert standardmäßig immer nur den Originalbeitrag ab, welcher dann auf Ninjastic.Space oder der Seite von LoyceV archiviert wird. Editierte Beiträge werden auf diesen Seiten nicht festgehalten.
Wenn jetzt der Teilnehmer seinen Beitrag editiert hat, die genannte Zahl aus dem editierten Beitrag in die Tabelle aufgenommen wird und der Teilnehmer seine Zahl später wieder abändert auf einen Wert, der näher am finalen Preis liegt, steht Aussage gegen Aussage.
Im obigen Beispiel wäre dann kein Beitrag eingetragen, der standardmäßig auf den einschlägigen Seiten archiviert ist.

Um solch ein Szenario zu vermeiden, werden nur uneditierte Beiträge aufgenommen.
Denn wenn ein Beitrag dann zu irgend einem Zeitpunkt editiert wird, ist er ungültig.

 

Back then, I haven't encountered any issues with him and I didn't want to be harsh to him replying something like "I don't want to answer your PM spam" / "what are you bothering me with it, just ask it in Reputation, no need to spam my inbox".
Or leaving his PM's completely unanswered.

In general, I'm always trying to be nice to everyone, who's sending me PM's as long as it's not an outright troll.
I've even answered numerous shitposters, who sent me PM's and asked me to remove my negative trust that they've received due to signature campaign related abuses. And I'm trying to stay friendly for most of the time.
So, I just want to be a nice person and address all legitimate PM's even sometimes these PM's are just unnecessary. Being friendly is always recommended.

Well, now I know better. I won't reply to any PM from him next time and report it as unsolicited PM spam right away.  

---

Maybe he starts realizing that his current approach to DT isn't appreciated by the community. Most likely, it's my personal wishful thinking but even trolls can improve.  
I'm sure that if he's apologizing for what he did, maybe some DT members will remove him from his distrust list.  
But that's not up to me to decide. After what he has done recently, he truly deserves to get a ton of more distrusts and if he continues, he might get even more.

---

+1
Important point.  

---

+1
Looks like we've encountered the same issue.  
And your reply was a little bit faster. ^^

I didn't "sue him" in this thread. Timelord2067 spammed my thread in Meta with off-topic nonsense.  
And even added lies later...
(edit: sorry, misread his and this)

Everyone can create a thread to support / oppose / suggest to research any sort of potential abuse about any member. But people need to back their claims. And when shitposters are complaining about a generic neutral trust, it's happening quite often, that these shitposters are involved in more abuses because DT will do more research. Their attempt to get rid of a justified neutral trust is backfiring frequently, no surprise at all.

Yes, unbelievable. 
A mixture of bad luck and bad pit strategies.

Ferrari pitting early, while Russell kept his soft tyres far longer wasn't a good decision for Ferrari and Leclerc, who pitted first, and Leclerc was really slow on hards. Still, Ferrari put Sainz on hard later as well. 
Doesn't Ferrari had a look at how slow Leclerc has been on hards? Going medium + soft was definitely the fastest strategy.
Of course nobody could predict the Safety Car but Sainz on hard tyres getting overtaken by 3 cars in just one lap was peak Ferrari disaster. 

Congrats @MoSala and @ILuckyGuyI for your yellow cap. Overally very close predictions and putting Hamilton on podium after Mercedes had a weak Friday and Saturday morning was a risky move, but payed off.

+1
That's a very valid point in my opinion.
As we all know DT is a decentralized network and everyone can participate.
If someone likes / doesn't like someone's judgement / feedbacks, just customize your trust list and vote members in / out.

Everyone can create topics in Reputation as well, where he's describing his opinion and tries to get support for a certain issue. But don't expect, that everyone will agree to you. DT is decentralized and some people might oppose your viewpoint on DT issues.
It's normal, so @Learn Bitcoin, don't worry. I don't know about your issue but blaming DT like how you did it, is not really accurate.

I'm a bit surprised about the headline because unjustified positive trust seems to be the bigger issue these days (nice guy feedbacks should be neutral, not positive trust), so "Should we hand out positive trusts like candy?" is a nice additional question.  


Regarding the initial question (and as I'm listed as well in your list):

While there might be some controversial cases, I'm not in favor of DT being more lenient. Most of the cases presented in the OP are justified trusts.
I just want to outline 2 of it:

My topic about Timelord2067's lies against me: I've created the topic because my topic in Meta is not intended for off-topic reputation discussions. Timelord2067 has littered my topic in Meta and that's just not necessary.
I've addressed Timelord2067's lies in my topic. I don't know where I should be at fault for addressing these claims.
Everything is explained in my topic in Reputation.

The topic about deadsea33 and the allegedly inappropriate feedback from hugeblack: after reviewing the topic, hugeblack's neutral trust served as a warning and from what hugeblack stated in the neutral trust, it's pretty valid.
The feedback from hugeblack is a good use of neutral trust in my opinion. DT did the rest and is in the process of exposing the bought account.
It's also nice to see that many members of this forum are doing a good research and dedicating time for that.  
That's very important for DT to be vital.

---

There have been many cases where DT did a good job and acting too lenient is never a good idea because it's emboldening abusers. Here's a similar case, where I've presented evidence and together with DT, we exposed an account buyer in 2019. (bought account in question was St4yInTh3D4rk)
After being called out, the account buyer still tried to get away with it, although in one of his earlier (shit)posts, he was well aware that buying accounts will lead to negative trust:

LOL, he wrote it earlier himself...  

Still he tried to get away with it.  

And there are far more accounts, where I didn't had enough time to compile the evidence and therefore did not tag yet. Most likely, jrrsparkles is a bought account as well, likely owned by the same person, St4yInTh3D4rk account was owned.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124012.msg50353545#msg50353545
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124012.msg50399294#msg50399294
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124012.msg50390330#msg50390330
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124012.msg50388489#msg50388489


jrrsparkles is still active today. Maybe it's time to finish off these accounts. They have been making a shit ton of money by spamming the forum from stolen accounts for far too long. While new members need to earn Merit, these abusers are just lazy to buy an existing account with 500+ Merit. That's extremely unfair for new members who are required to make good posts to rank up.

---

Therefore I'm a bit confused, that while reading OP I'm more getting the impression that abusers are getting defended and abuser hunters are getting criticized, while there's not really anything to criticize in how DT is exposing abusers. Quite the opposite: I'm very grateful for acive members exposing shady activities. It's always very time consuming to research and compile the evidence. We also need to spend more Merit on these researches.
DT is giving out trusts only if there's really a reason to leave it. And shitposters complaining about neutral trust are just ridiculous. Most times, complaining will even earn them more accusations, when DT starts digging. Why are these shitposter accounts always involved in so much shady stuff?
You can almost bet on it that when a shitposter complains about a neutral trust, he will end up getting even more neutral trusts or even a negative trust.  


Finally, DT is a decentralized network where different views are welcome but in my opinion, DT has worked very well so far to keep scammers, account sellers and other abusers at bay. DT getting more lenient these days is somehow concerning and not a good idea in my opinion. Tagging scammers, acting against abuses and bought accounts has worked very well over the past 10+ years.  

Dear icopress, many thanks for sharing your insigths on the issue.
It's really surpsrising to see that Timelord2067's reaction to that incident has many similarities to the issue mentioned in my OP.
First, we didn't had any issues with Timelord2067.
Then, Timelord2067 does some questionable things (leaving unjustified feedback on webtricks account) / (PMing me with unsolicited PMs), then, our reaction to Timelord2067's action (your (rightful) opposition to Timelord2067's trust on webtricks) / (my PMs back to Timelord2067) where he obviously can't deal with, gets aggressive and doubles down on it. 
And in the end, Timelord2067 doesn't even admit any mistakes when getting exposed. 
It's so similar.

I'm really sorry that he bothered you as well but after all we have learnt our lesson that Timelord2067's judgement is very flawed.
Many thanks again for sharing your insights here.
And yes, from an objective point of view, you did absolutely the right thing by opposing Timelord2067's negative trust left on webtricks account. 

---

At this point, I don't know where he made it up first.
It might be in one of those PM's where he asked me about his trust issues and if there's a "perv police" on Bitcointalk.
But it might be already earlier as Timelord2067 was called out by GazetaBitcoin for this.
Obviously, he got butthurt, when he got exposed for his perv activities on Twitter, where he over-reacted as well. He's also involved in a useles shitcoin, called Sexcoin and maybe he didn't want to comment on the fact, that this coin is a useless shitcoin and he's promoting such shady stuff.
I call this sort of coins "special purpose coins".

These "special purpose shitcoins" serve no purpose other than being used (or not being used because it's really somehow useless) for a special (more like trivial) purpose). Like there are coins for travelling, the music industry, the farming industry, the car industry, the lifestyle industry and other "special purpose" coins (which is just a stupid excuse to launch an own coin, where devs are in control of the coin and often have a big chunk of pre-mined coins.  ).
These are useless shit coins have no additional usefulness compared to existing coins and Sexcoin is not even listed on Coinmarketcap...  
It's so ridiculous.

In the end, the only ones making money from such shady shitcoins are the devs and everyone will be left with worthless bags of shit coins...

Again, you are openly lying.
I've explained in detail, that you've sent me unsolicited PM's in two acts, where you spammed my inbox and asked about your petty trust issues. Next time, I won't bother to reply to your unsolicited PM's as it's a waste of time anyways and now, you are also ungrateful for it, that I took some time to reply to your bullshit PM. 

At least everyone can see now that my feedback is true and you are indeed a malicious liar.


Yes, really sad that I've given you the benefit of doubt far too long. At least it's now clear to me that your judgement is totally flawed, that you are a disgusting liar and a stupid clown.
That's what people are getting from you if someone tries to be nice and helpful...

Nice from you, to show that for everyone what an ungrateful, trolling clown you are. 

~Timelord2067
and
~Timelord2o67