This is obvious to pretty much any non-shill and reasonable member. Even after it was initially a bit confusing to some, the community tried to clarify wherever and whenever possible.

They don't have anything. This account was created for the sole purpose of attacking people. Do you really expect reasonable arguments from such?

Another shill account created in order to spread FUD. Isn't this just classic?

---

Luke-jr handled the situation decently especially considering this part:
Isn't it amusing how the /r/btc parade wants to burn luke-jr on a stake (even though he has done nothing wrong here) but ignores the fact that it was already violated by another party?

This thread is as useless as it gets IMO. Such threads are bound to be flooded with useless posts from people participating in signature campaigns in which there's very little quality check.

I'm not saying that they've handled the situation correctly, I'm saying that there needs to be no panic.

I disagree. A website is a centralized structure that is not correlated to the decentralized structure of Bitcoin and as such it can not impact the integrity nor the reliability of the network itself. Also, there is no such thing as "main Bitcoin website". I'd call it the 'most popular Bitcoin website'.

What are you talking about? "Critical for many thousands of people"? I don't think I've been to that website more than a dozen of times, and it is usually when linking information for someone new. There are other resources that explain Bitcoin properly and give adequate links to wallets and service. I don't think there's a need to make a big fuss about such short downtime.

Interesting conclusion by Carlton that franky1 is either a superhuman or there's franky2. However, the thread went sideways. Time to get back to some relevant input.

This is correct for the majority of old people.

It is quite rare that older people are 'decent' with smartphones.

That is the case, especially for people who are not involved in IT. I'd say that modern computing has become very simplified for simple tasks and inexperienced users.

Maybe the design could be 'modernized', but aside from that I'd say that Bitcoin Core is a pretty simple wallet. Of course it has some advanced features, but regular users don't need to use those (the same applies for other wallets). If I were to recommend a wallet to someone that I know right now (who isn't tech-savy), I'd definitely take them on a route with SPV wallets first. Telling someone that they have to wait XX hours (for synchronization) and spend a lot of bandwidth and storage just to start using Bitcoin might turn them off.

Do you need a tinfoil hat? How about you just relax? Every website goes down occasionally, e.g. it could be a problem of the website itself, a problem with their hosting provider and such. The downtime was very short.

Calling them "clowns" doesn't make you look like a genius either.

That's doubtful at best. You can always download them from somewhere else (a few people compile each version) or compile them yourself.

These things can not be predicted accurately. If you lose money in any of these, the only person that you should rightfully blame is yourself. You get led on by greed and fall into 'suspicious services' in no time, 'just a fool and his money'. This is why you should stay away from cloud mining, ponzi's, web wallets and such.

I don't see why anyone in their right mind would want to do something with those.

Well, one shouldn't necessarily generalize it for all but the probability of another one running is always high (especially if they have gathered a lot of money).

How about doing some research instead of posting here? Any user should be aware of how the fee system works and any decent user would know better than to use online wallets.

Yes, transactions get 'delayed' at times because their priority is low due to the low fee.

No. Adding a fee that equals the recommended fee (in satoshis/byte) at the time (or even a higher fee) will make your TX confirm very quickly.

Wrong. Custom fees are also a way of paying more and gaining higher priority. What you should not be doing is paying some sort of 'standard fee'.

You really have no clue what you're talking about.

The developers have no role in that assessment. Zero confirmation transactions are acceptable for negligible amounts I'd say.

I'd advise you not to change your trust list randomly, or at least not if you aren't completely sure what you're doing. You're manipulating your own trust score for yourself (and people with the same trust list). It might be worth reading up a bit more on the trust system. Most of the people are going to see this when they check your profile:

I'm very well aware of how the trust system works. I'm telling you that it does not matter and that it does not have an influence on your trust rating (as seen by most people) on default.

This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Cracked accounts.

As far as DT is concerned (i.e. the default trust list that people have), everything is fine on your end. This is what I see:

---

Fake feedback is really unavoidable (aside from DT members) here.

I would be interested in hearing from the people who were part of that agreement. The other Core developers do not have to voice themselves as they're not part of it.

They shouldn't have a say in it, unless they're actively contributing indeed. They are free to decide whether they want to run those changes or not.

I've noticed that. They usually have no contributions in any way or form.

Someone understands it.

It matters quite a lot if you can see the bigger picture.

So in the case that a Bank or government ever manages to 'takeover' Bitcoin with their own controversial HF, then the right thing to do is stay? Stop with this ignorant bullshit.

---

Most of these 'I'm staying no matter what' bullshit posts are just spam (there are too many to quote). If you had even put any real thought in the situation you'd never have such a simplistic opinion about it. Of course it matters whether Bitcoin is subject to political coercion or not.

You need to re-read the post again as you haven't clearly understood it. He's saying that the campaign is not removing spammers, i.e. is indirectly endorsing spam.

This is not how the staff currently deals with the spam. Usually it is the members themselves that get punished if they do spam. It is quite unfortunate that there are no consequences for the campaign itself if they let a lot of spammers remain 'enrolled'. It would help if you posted examples of spammers.

It is like most of these people forgot the values and the initial ideas behind Bitcoin. This is truly sad to read. Stop being led on by greed already, how can you be so blind?

---

Where did the idea of a revolution go to? Ditching the corrupt financial system and centralized banking? The idea of a global, decentralized, censorship resistance and immutable form of global money is why Bitcoin matters. I pity anyone who can't get over their own greed and does not value these (and similar) aspects.

These Brexit and Bitcoin articles are really getting tired already. These people are just speculating and writing whatever they can to 'fulfill' the needs of their jobs. Some claim that there are directly connected and that it has an effect on Bitcoin, the others claim the exact opposite. I'm not seeing it. Although, there were some 'acknowledgements' that Bitcoin is a safe-heaven due to the 'panic' in financial markets everywhere.

Most likely, yes. I wouldn't be surprised to see nonsense like "Bitcoin is the reason for Brexit".

Someone had a thread about empty blocks that had actual data and statistics, unlike this one. Maybe you could present some nice date when making your case (e.g. empty blocks mined vs. ordinary blocks per pool).

False. This would very much continue.

Of course it would be impossible since the network would effectively be broken.

Segwit was never intended to address 'this issue'.