Typically, yes. There are a lot of things considered when moderating posts like that. A lot of it has to do with intention. To a certain extent, having a post deleted is a punishment and a warning. Posts are only deleted when 100% necessary. For example, if someone poses a question, and two people answer with similar responses within seconds of each other, rather than that being spam, I'd see it more as confirmation that the information first posted was correct. By that I mean, if people are intentionally just rephrasing, or adding no additional info, it is indeed spam. Its typically very obvious whether or not people are spamming from a moderators perspective because we see it so incredibly often. Don't worry about your accuracy. If you are >50% you are doing the moderators a favor, if you are accurate 1 in 10 times, you are wasting more of our time than helping.

While I haven't been watching development lately, Epochtalk isn't Bitcointalk. Epochtalk is the generic name for the new forum software Bitcointalk commissioned. For an apt comparison, Epochtalk is like Default SMF. Once the work is done creating the backbone, Bitcointalk will be built onto it. What you are seeing there is the default that anyone will be able to take and customize to make their own forum. The orange isn't a theme, its just a placeholder. Styling work will be done last or near last.

They are all terrible, but for different reasons. In short it comes down to a few actual candidates, and the others are just sort of along for the ride. Hillary, Bernie, Trump, and Jeb. Hillary is the worst option. Her policies are scary. During the whole confederate flag debate, she was the one to say flatout that they should be banned, even for private residences and such. Not that I support or understand the symbolism behind the flag, but banning things like that scares me. I actually support some of Bernie Sander's idealogy, in the sense that he means well, but socialism flat out doesn't work in larger countries. Every country with a successful socialist system has ~30 million people or under. It has just never historically worked for larger countries. Trump is interesting. I don't support a lot of his views, but he wouldn't be quite as terrible as a lot of people think. Hes outspoken which is refreshing, and not in bed with other politicians. Bribes and corruption wouldn't effect him nearly as much. The worst I can see him doing is giving his own companies some tax breaks or something. People that think hes going to go start world war 3 aren't considering that in order to become a businessman that is as successful as himself, you need to make deals with representitives from other countries. Hes not going to start insulting people from other countries, any more than he would when doing a business deal. The man knows that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, he just doesn't care to catch Rosie ODonald or reporters, etc. Jeb is more qualified than George Bush, but, that isn't necessarily saying much. Some of his policies make sense to me, but I definitely wouldn't say I support the man.

Long story short, its a losing battle. People get caught up in nonsubstantial issues and party loyalty. Pushing to be more "progressive" completely overrides the real issues, and it just becomes a popularity contest. The people that vote don't care about the economy, civil liberties, or the fixing the real issues that come up. They want to be protected from terrorists, support or not support abortion, and prove that they aren't racist or misogynstic. Chances are good that Hillary will be voted in solely because we need to prove that we are ok with a female president.

But remember, a vote for Trump means a vote for the Trump dome. Start collecting leeches just in case!

If Trump would just say, "I don't know about these things too much, I'll hire some of the best advisors in the field to help me figure these things out" the Trump dome would be sooooo much closer to being a reality.

No. Thats really all that needs to be said, but I suppose I'll elaborate. If we wanted to enforce (or misinforce) scam prevention measures, it would be done by full staff members, not giving regular members the ability to ban. Regular moderators can't ban, Global Moderators can only perma ban, and Admins are the only usergroup that can temp ban.

The only way for people to wise up about the obvious scam/scammy alt coins is to figure it out for themselves. Removing them will just cause greater issue, as what is scammy and what isn't is completely black and white. As someone who has dabbled in Alt coins, I'd imagine I speak for a fairly decent percent of people here, but things such as premines, quiet releases, etc set off my scam alert. However, there is nothing actually scammy by the definition of what is a scam. If the creator could somehow take control of all of the coins at any time, or has a way to literally steal from you, its a scam. But bad creation policy is just bad policy.

Real scam altcoins such as ones with malware built in for the purpose of stealing your coins are deleted, but besides that, what is and isn't a scam is up to individual perception when it comes to coins.

Banned. People are not allowed to intentially imitate others. If the name was like Bitcoinguy vs Bitcoinguys or something generic, its fine, but pcfli and pclfli shows malice and intention.

I'm sure Trump is making a deal with the republican party for some very strategic deals, or possibly a vice presidency spot. He's the #1 republican to beat based on polls, but he won't get the nomination. So either he splits the vote and assures a democrat victory, or the republican party offers him something. I'm not sure what Trump could possibly want though at this point.

Nope, I've seen multi paragraph posts that have said nothing, and 1 sentence posts that have had great impact. I'd probably advise against single word posts, as more often than not they don't work well, but I've seen certain cases where 1 word posts have been alright.

A high quality post is when you are respond to a thread with a topic you are passionate about. Fully articulated thoughts, adding to the discussion, a post that describes your opinion and why, or is persuasive and something that someone can respond to.

A poor quality post is typically what results of someone who doesn't care about what they are posting, or just posting for the sake of posting, or to irritate people. People ask moderators how they can be fair and subjective over what is a high quality post, a low quality post, what deserves to be deleted, etc. Its generally blaringly obvious. Just ask yourself if you have furthered the conversation, shown a different point of view, added your personal 2 cents to the thread, or if your post does nothing for the conversation, or worse, if its disruptive.

From what I've seen (and my own mentality) no one wants to spend Bitcoins. There is a hassle to obtaining Bitcoins, and therefor there is a premium. The cost of paying for a $10 thing with cash, credit card, paypal, whatever is $10. The cost of paying with Bitcoin is substantially higher due to the time you put in when trying to obtain the Bitcoins. The only time I see people buying a lot of things with Bitcoin is after a price surge.

Its like if a store accepted Cash, Bitcoins, and Gold/Silver. No one would pay with Gold/Silver unless they had to, because $10 worth of silver will actually cost something like $12 or better due to the minting premiums. Same idea with Bitcoin, though it has more to do with difficulty of obtaining, so why not use your useless cash?

There are two important factors with the Trust system. Trust, and Feedback. A lot of people get these two things confused.

Feedback is exactly what you think it is. Someone leaves you a remark on your feedback page that describes deals you have done with them and for what Bitcoin value. You can leave a positive, negative, or neutral feedback. If you look through the market sections, you will see people have numerical scores and colors next to their name under their trust. I'll get into that in a second.

Trust comes in depths, 0,1,2,3, or 4. By default, users will see up to depth 2, but that can be configured by each user. I will come back to the depths in a moment.. As a fresh account you will trust Yourself and Default Trust which is a list created by Theymos, and is a suggested list of who to trust. You can add any individuals you would like to your trust list. The main point I want to get across is "Trust" is not who you trust to do transactions, that is what Feedback is for. "Trust" in lamens terms is in charge of showing you feedback from people who's word you trust.

Heres an example:

You and I have done a trade for a 1TH miner for 1BTC. We are both happy with how things went down, and we each leave each other positive feedback for the amount of 1 BTC with a description of the deal. As I said before, you will always trust yourself so you will see that feedback you left for me as "Trusted Feedback"

On the flip side, I do the same deal with GenericUserA who you don't have added to your trust list, you will see the feedback details in the "Untrusted Feedback" section. If you have GenericUserA on your trust list, you will see their feedback as "Trusted Feedback" in the same way you would if you left it yourself.

Back to the depths, essentially it is just a hierarchy tree. Lets say you trust GenericUserA. You would be on depth 0 and GenericUserA on depth 1. GenericUserA adds GenericUserB to their trust list, then You would be on depth 0, GenericUserA on depth 1, and GenericUserB on depth 2, and so on and so on.

Major point here, keep in mind that each and every trust list is independent of each other. Each user will see feedback for others in different ways based on who they trust individually. The only time when trust lists interact is when you trust users who have their own trust lists. Going back to the last example where you were on depth 0, GenericUserA was on depth 1, and GenericUserB was on depth 2 for your trust list. If I add you to my trust list, my trust list will then show Me at depth 0, you at depth 1, GenericUserA at depth 2, and GenericUserB at depth 3. Its a bit confusing at first, but once you realize that its all just hierarchical views of inherited trust it simplifies a bit.

Its nothing personal, its just that I don't believe you. I could be mistaken, but this would probably be on the order of the 100th time someone gets banned for something then claims its something other than it is. Seeing as I removed about 30 sets of instructions on how to get yourself banned by posting one of many autospam links from the last thread, your tf_banned account may have melted in with the other 5 throwaway accounts. Though I still feel as though some posts are missing, I'll have to get all posts restored in order to see who it was that got banned for posting the link, I was under the impression that is what got your main account.

The Facts:

• Theymos' identity has been openly discussed on Bitcointalk in the past. I've participated in a few of the conversations. If you wish to file through my 200 pages of posts, you will find it
• People are citing the fact that they get autobanned for posting a link as active agression against posting Theymos' dox
• 

If you are claiming that you got manually banned, then thats slightly different, but still addressed by the post below.


Which is exactly what everyone is getting all butthurt over. They are posting his dox just for giggles, which equates to spamming/trolling. If there was ever reason to post Theymos or another Staff member's dox, it would not yield a ban.

These things you keep saying that are speculation aren't. They are answers to specific questions. Why you were banned is highlighted above. If you ask a question without presenting all information so that my answer is incomplete or incorrect, you can't blame that on me. I have no specific ties to any of this, so if you don't want any answers, you are welcome to talk to yourself in an empty thread. It is part of my job to try and address Meta threads though, but if you don't wish for me to answer your questions, thats one less thing for me to do.

Regardless, no matter how your story changes with each answer, I wish you luck in finding out what you are trying to find out.

I still don't follow what you are saying. Nothing I said was incorrect. You are arguing that you shouldn't have been auto banned for posting a link that you knew caused you to be autobanned?

*edit* Bringing this over to this thread for context

Pretty sure I was right. Are people posting Theymos' dox to help in their accusation against him, or just to be annoying? Though I classified it as spam instead of trolling.

The major reason it isn't done often is the time it takes to manually change a name. That and if it was a common thing, people would expect to be able to have their names changed. VIP members can change their names themselves. I've seen Theymos change names for people that have asked for a name change, but like you said, don't get your hopes up, and don't expect a short timeframe. If you are lucky he will happen across your thread and have a free couple minutes to spare.

Its a no win situation for me, I can post the links, and then you or someone else will go spam in that thread until the thread is deleted or you are banned, furthering your "cause". You can choose to believe me or not, I don't especially care. I've pretty much elaborated on anything that could be construed as a constructive question or debate, so its up to you to either get it or not. I'm not the morality/policy police. Not my job to make you happy about the policies here. If I can help you understand why they are in place, great, if not, no point in beating a dead horse.


Generally I'm a case by case sort of guy, but being around here for years you start to see trends.

There is a link blacklist tool used for a lot of the common advertising spam links. It just needs to be annoying enough to add it to the list, and its added. Id imagine the link that people keep posting was flagged enough as spam to be added. If Theymos has scammed you and post his dox, you won't be banned, nor will you be banned for posting anyone's dox with the exceptions given earlier in the thread.

The only reason I care about this thread is because I see this every day with a different cause and it bothers me at the core. Something is corrupt or wrong because every time someone posts it it gets deleted! But it keeps getting deleted because people keep posting it, and it becomes spam. "Hey guys post this just because" is a good way to make something spam. Like I said, "Bananas are vegetables" if people decided to run with it, I wouldn't be surprised to see "Bananas are vegetables" to become something people are auto banned for as well.

Not at all, I find it funny that people think that they can mass spam something and think that they wont be banned or at least have their posts deleted for spamming. As I said, there are a few threads in meta discussing Theymos' dox as well as where to find it and links, etc. Its not a secret, he has posted a lot of the info himself. If we all start posting "Bananas are vegetables" and people start having the post removed or are banned for repeating it, does that mean Bitcointalk has an agenda against lies about Bananas?

The results would be the same if the link was about an Alt Coin, Bananas, or Theymos or anyone else's dox for that matter.

*edit* just like the person who was just banned for having their message deleted 3+ times and they kept reposting it. It has less to do with the content, and more to do with the spam.

You are saying what would someone's motivation be to falsely accuse someone, I was addressing why would anyone ever post incorrect dox. If I scammed someone, and they posted the dox of Sally from Latvia (not me by the way) I'd be tickled that they are blaming someone else. So as far as IDing the wrong person, I mean there is no reason why anyone would do that intentionally. No one moderates false claims, it again is up to individuals to clear there own names. So in the case above, you post your counterstory, if I'm falsely claiming that I should get my money back, I lose my credibility. Your argument could be said about scam accusations and all other things. It is the cost of doing business pseudononymously. It comes back down to what recourse people have. Hurting people's means of personal investigation means there is no recourse for anyone.


Thats why they call me "Salty"Spitoon, but really I try not to call names, what I meant is that just because you couldn't find the threads, doesn't mean others couldn't.

You are the people I was refering to.


While account buying/selling is sort of off topic, its not about whether people get scammed buying/selling the accounts, it truely is about it being unenforceable. People could buy/sell accounts on site with PGP or whatever else. Those that would be at greater risk of being scammed, are those that believe account buying/selling doesn't happen because it is against the rules, and trades blindly with those they have traded with before.



Why should I be responsible for fact checking and what makes me reliable enough to do so? What if someone pays me off to remove their info whether its correct or not? What if I remove information that is correct and it leads to further issues, am I responsible? These issues can all be removed by having people do their own work.


Dox gives accountability to the person behind the name, not a pseudonym.

Lucky for us, this is an online forum and running over someone in a car is difficult. My point is, when people dox someone, there tends to be a reason. If they post the wrong dox, they have personal motivation to correct it. If you had scammed me, and I blamed John Doe from Uruguay, posted their info, and it was proven to be incorrect, why would I not try and find your true info and remove the false info? Theres no rational reason to post false dox intentionally, its completely counterproductive. If someone makes a mistake in doxing and its proven wrong, I would think they would try to correct it immediately if not sooner.


I found three or so mentions with basic keyword searches, Theymos, Theymos Identity, Theymos Dox, Staff/ Staff Member Dox etc. You can also try google if you would like, there are a couple threads that come up that way too. There is also a false dox on Theymos accusing him of being a senator or something like that (skimmed but didn't read). You must not have been searching very hard, as I wasn't.


Again, read what I said earlier. No one wants to post false Dox. There is no rational reason to post false dox. If a mistake was made, the person posting it would want to correct it asap. There is absolutely no logical reason to post false dox and stand by it. If I scammed you and you posted my dox, would you take my word for it if I told you it was false?