Vanity-type incentives are likely the best ones to provoke people to do something. However, I wouldn't necessarily think of a rank as that would potentially add some trust issue-type problems, of people thinking that they're more reliable than others.
I disagree with this. There is no zero reason for the (e.g.) contributor rank to make people think that "they're more reliable than others". Similarly, being a donator or VIP shouldn't cause that either. IMHO the best way to proceed is with something like a rank. Would an icon work?
So you're thinking that there are people who would report thousands of posts just to receive a small icon? I don't even notice those anymore. |
|
|
|
I'll offer you 2 cheezburgers for the cat.
The cat does not accept this offer at this time. We will re-evaluate it in the future. Your cat has a........ remarkable moustache.....
She sure has, hasn't she? 
There should be another update regarding the listing of the coins once I work it out with minerjones. Hopefully we can help more people complete their sets. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Begging.
|
|
|
|
Update: Thread is now obsolete and supplanted by a new one. |
|
|
|
It's fair to assume the majority of such accusations are merely failed personal attacks.
You shouldn't make such assumptions IMHO since we practically have zero data regarding this in the Bitcoin ecosystem (as far as I'm aware of). Keep in mind that "paid shills" go back to the early days of the internet (I also recall a smartphone company doing this not long ago, not sure which one it was). You're trying to say that Central Bankers wouldn't be interested in either controlling or neutering Bitcoin? :\
They most certainly would be. The people participating in the ecosystem are the most vulnerable part. That's highly organised strategy, if the Frankies aren't getting paid money, they're working pretty hard for nothing.
Indeed.
Generally I'd say that it isn't easy to tell who may actually be a shill, but there are definitely many spread among the community. |
|
|
|
Wrong. The trust system is pretty decent and there isn't a better alternative (at least not proposed here). It seems highly likely that you do not properly understand the trust system either. And I think you are stupid
This could have been left out though. and I think you are stupid...
Telling people that are trying to help you that they're stupid isn't a smart move. |
|
|
|
You can call yourself the police from HK and they will confirm you that.
Then go call the police again and report the theft yourself. Additionally, if you are affected by this you could (or should) consult with a lawyer. their activity is illegal. Now they are millionaires and destroy many lives
Exactly what part was illegal if they have truly been hacked? Keep in mind that there is a possibility of this being an internal job although that is currently just speculative talk. The people need to keep in mind that what they are proposing for recovery is much better than filing for bankruptcy. |
|
|
|
Am i the op of any of those threads?
After a quick check the answer is no. Yet neither literacy nor understanding Bitcoin appear to be requirements for joining a signature campaign, which is the problem in the first place.
I'd safely say that the majority has a very limited knowledge regarding Bitcoin or none at all (although they know how to use a wallet and generate addresses). This is quite unfortunate to see on a forum dedicated to Bitcoin. I've long said signature campaigns could help improve the post quality of the forum but that would only happpen if every campaign only accepted quality posters and didn't just pay anyone and everyone regardless of post quality and ways to force campaigns to do that is being discussed also.
This is far from what we have in reality. We could set up regulations that require better quality control though. |
|
|
|
Once a thread is taken over by spammers, there's not really any easy way of recovering it. I have not really ever seen that being done either.
Again, there are internal discussions regarding this matter. I have compiled a nice list of threads that need locking and trashing (preferably). Once there's some consensus on the matter, it will be (hopefully) handled. The "farmers" that you refer to whom I was talking about are mainly of a lower rank so they may be looking at making many posts to get accepted into a signature campaign once the account matures.
Not necessarily. It is not rare for me to see Hero member accounts (with or without signature) who almost have no clue about Bitcoin (i.e. their posts lack in content and quality). |
|
|
|
They don't care and the ones that don't listen even after repeated warnings either need some sort of punishment or not be allowed to advertise here in such a way and that's another thing we're discussing.
I think it has gone beyond the point of discussing 'whether to punish them or not', to 'how to punish them exactly'. Quite a few campaigns deserved it. It may be difficult for the moderators though. How can they work out what is spam?
I disagree. I can (usually) easily asses whether you're a spammer or not. Sometimes even based on a singular post (although for a conclusion a deeper analysis is required), and most often based on your last post page. There are certain behavioral habits that can be identified in addition to the linguistic skill of the user in question. Hint: "I'm not native to English but should be allowed to post useless & faulty posts in every section" is not a valid argument. It's not a question of new staff but making sure everybody is on board and on the same page about what is acceptable or not.
I don't think we're lacking manpower. If anything, the moderation may be imbalanced in times where there may be a lot of unhandled reports. Generally, my report list is empty or quickly emptied (as a patroller & 2 section moderator). Even a constructive thread can be taken over by shitposters so do we trash that as well?
IMHO: If the thread itself is pointless, then everything should be trashed if it gets flooded by spam. If the thread initially happened to be constructive then either: a) Try to clean it and punish the 'shitposters'. b) Lock and archive it. Its interesting to notice that the post quality of people in and out of campaigns is very similar to me.
No. You're looking at the wrong place and potentially encountering account farmers without signatures. There's a usually a distinct difference between genuine posts and spammers regardless of whether they have a signature or not. |
|
|
|
I mean
Revealing “documents or personal information” about a person, without their permission, with the intent to Threaten, Harass, Intimidate, Shame, Humiliate or Place at Risk…. is illegal in my jurisdiction.
Exactly how is an investigation falling under any of those verbs? Unless you think that this places them *at risk of jail time* (I doubt that this is what was meant by that). There is also a fair amount of sources claiming that doxxing is legal. Generally, I'm pretty sure that this is not illegal around the globe. Where you find it is immaterial.
No, it matters a lot.
Update: Fair point ndnh. Jurisdictions aren't my strong suite, but I'd say that if it were generally illegal that it would be disallowed on the forum. |
|
|
|
Yup. Tough to think of anything other than monetary rewards. What could be done is one mod's pay subdivided among good reports (beyond a threshold).
Generally the problematic with monetary is going to be the accuracy. If something like this would get implemented, I'd strongly advise a minimum of 95-96% accuracy and a minimum count of a few thousand post (trivial number). After this threshold has been met, only then would the user in question get any kind of reward. I guess it could also be something in the lines of: a special rank (similar to Donator & VIP, e.g. contributor) after X amount of posts and also somewhere later maybe throw in a one time user-name change. These are just arbitrary thoughts as I'd like to avoid monetary rewards for this. |
|
|
|
Huh?
Right from Wikipedia
Doxing (from dox, abbreviation of documents),[1] or doxxing,[2][3] is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting personally identifiable information about an individual.
I am sure that is not legal in my jurisdiction.
I'm not sure why it would be illegal to (e.g.) summarize your information taken from a social network and post it here? There is information that may be illegal to post (e.g. social security number), but I wouldn't consider details that can be found via google to be illegal. It might be helpful if some people would volunteer to act as mediators in these cases, and then I could list them in a sticky.
Are you already looking for mediators or was this just a thought? |
|
|
|
Lauda, why don't you be very clear, and tell everyone the purpose of you receiving 1 btc was? This way you can be on the record!
The purpose was to provide legal counseling for escrow scammers.  Do not let the TRUST system destroy this forum. The DT trust system created ambition in many members, no matter what methods to use, this becomes a DT that's fine.
He even attempted to use you as an 'argument' since you've excluded me from your trust list. LOL @ all this stupidness.
If you can get a good laugh from reading this, it isn't a complete waste. Lauda has no sense of ethics. Lauda does not care if money she receives is stolen. Why should anyone trust Lauda if he is willing to keep money he knows is stolen?
Again, there is zero proof that they are stolen. There is some speculative proof that they may be tied to TF (this still doesn't make them stolen). Also, it's nobody's business where the money comes from and what it gets used for (excluding law enforcement). |
|
|
|
Is there a wallet that pays less than 0.0001 BTC ?
You can set any fee that you want, it's just generally not recommended to go under the recommended satoshis/byte. I am using electrum which usually pays 0.00020 BTC per transaction, probably the reason why i don't get to wait hours for the confirmation.
Then increase your fees. This will in effect allow blocks to hold 2 to 4 times the number of transactions etc.
That's the "potential maximum". On average, considering the current usage in the ecosystem, we can expect an increase of about ~180%. Bitcoin confirmations always go quicker in the mornings, around 15 mins for me with a standard TX fee...
It doesn't matter what time of the day it is if you pay the appropriate fee. |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.
|
|
|
|
No, it has zero impact on your activity level. It only increases the counter on your number of reported posts. I think it should, but I don't ever see a boost from it.
I tend to disagree. Would it be possible to implement to incentivize more users to help out the moderators
People shouldn't need an incentive to be helpful. |
|
|
|
I totally agree, however it speaks volumes about your character when you are knowingly accepting donations of stolen BTC. Knowingly accepting stolen property is a crime in most countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods though in your case this would be a grey area due to the low value of the property, however if you were to knowingly accept stolen donations of a value over $5,000 that is likely a very serious federal crime.. That's not entirely correct because: a) I did not ask anyone to deposit to 1Lauda. b) There is only speculative proof that they may be stolen coin. There's no conclusive proof as to the origin of the Bitcoin. People need to stop claiming that they're stolen just because they originate from 2013 and may be tied to TF (in my case). In Mitchell's case it is even less likely that they are stolen as they originate from a completely different input (not the 2013 one).
Which comes back to: Unless contacted by law enforcement
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
