I like that idea. I wasn't very much in favor of the whole "rank limit" suggestion if this was included in the new forum, because rank really doesn't mean anything. A points system, though, would make it so that it wouldn't be so abusable.
the reputation system itself can be abused. I think rank limit is a must in order to prevent abuse. |
|
|
|
I can fulifil this loan sir but i need more than 1 account to be collateral ?
edited. please pm me i can do it
OP is offering all of the accounts listed on the first post as collateral. |
|
|
|
now market very stable at 240-250 (~245) i think in next week we can stable 250-260 before we reach $270  LOL, Yeah we are closer in the price 250, i think just need a couple day we reach $250 after that $300 it will be easy you make it sound like the price will only go up. not that I would mind if it happens. |
|
|
|
This one can be fixed.
But tx malleability is not major problem of bitcoin.
then what is this problem that makes bitcoin "too weak for our lifetime savings"? |
|
|
|
Why the member who love bitcoin is trying to break its network or working system? Is it only for security test or just to get bitcoin down? Everybody here i think loves the way bitcoin work but why all of these test or attacks going on by the people who love bitcoin.  it will only make it stronger, if anything. any kind of system will improve every time it faced and survived an attack. nothing is broken. and these attacks will not break bitcoins. if bitcoin can be taken down by just one man then it should be considered a failed system. |
|
|
|
|
if you used an existing email (not a fake one) on that account AND never changed the settings on "Personal Message Options", you should get an email every time that account receives a PM. try sending a PM now.
|
|
|
|
No, defenately not... I mean he could use the account to do "bad" things just before it's in the escrow's possession... That way, it might still look clean when the escrow locks the account, but it might be -ve'd while it's locked... Unless the escrow leaves a neutral comment that this account is taken as collateral, and asks the DT member giving out -ve to contact the escrow before giving -ve to the collateral...
ah I see. but leaving a neutral saying that the account is being used as collateral will not prevent anyone from leaving negative feedback. also leaving feedback to the account collateral will cause problems because (1) the neutral need to have a referenced link in order to prevent people from leaving a fake feedback on their own alt. this will lead to (2) privacy issues, the referenced link will contain a post of the borrower's other account. |
|
|
|
Isn't this dangerous? If you only tag the account that applies for the loan, and not the account in escrow, you are running the risk that the lendee used the account currently in escrow to do some nasty stuff a couple of days before handing it over (take non-collateral loans which haven't been payed back, scamming, trolling,...). In this case, the account might seem clean when you take it as collateral, but somebody on DT -ve's it after it has been locked down for a couple of days...
I don't understand this. are you saying that the borrower might use the account collateral while it's still on the escrow's possession? that shouldn't be possible because the escrow will change the password. |
|
|
|
This's a first for me. I have two transactions that instead of showing confirmations it says these transactions are "Conflicted".
What on earth does that mean?
Thanks,
not sure what "Conflicted" means exactly (some say it happens when there's a double-spend or malleability attack.). but in this case it's probably caused by the ongoing malleability attacks. for your reference https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1200678.0 (about conflicted transaction). read the second latest post) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1198032.0 (about the ongoing malleability attacks.) |
|
|
|
|
so you're basically asking "should I buy it?"
well yes, my friend. go ahead. there's always a risk of getting scammed, but I think the chance of that happening is fairly low on this one.
|
|
|
|
|
IMO any kind of posts which is made just to spread FUD about bitcoin should be deleted on sight or at least moderated to some degree. but I might be biased.
|
|
|
|
|
yeah. borrower sounds good. using the words lendee or loanee doesn't feel right lol. OP may change it back if he wishes, but imma use the term borrower for now.
|
|
|
|
|
at the moment I don't think there's anybody online that can see your reports (admins, GMs, or Blitz).
|
|
|
|
Lender | | | Borrower | | | Amount | | | Repayment Date | | | Reference | | | | Example | | | Example | | | 0.00 (0.00) | | | DD-MM-YYYY | | | Reference | | | | Vod | | | letyouearn | | | 0.1 (0.11) | | | 10-10-2015 | | | Reference | | | | BeGoods | | | jacee | | | 0.05 (0.055) | | | 15-10-2015 | | | Reference | | | | Zazarb | | | Panzzer | | | 0.045 (0.054) | | | 17-09-2015* | | | Reference | | | | Zazarb | | | Josef27 | | | 0.125 (0.1425) | | | 25-11-2015* | | | Reference | | | | Zazarb | | | Waterpile | | | 0.4 (0.45) | | | 15-10-2015 | | | Reference | | |
- Bold indicates that the borrower provided a collateral.
- Red indicates that the loan is overdue
- asterisks (*) indicates that the collateral is the borrower's bitcointalk account (not their alt but the one taking the loan). please think twice before leaving a negative feedback as the account is in the lender's possession.
- all three signs can be used together.
I'll add more later when I'm not so lazy. right now I just want to present this table. feel free to use, modify, or trash it. edited too many times. |
|
|
|
I don't care, but I already had 910 of activity since the beginning of October and ended down with 868. I wonder if this is related to the glitch.
( proof) <- 882 instead of 910. but that was from 10th september. that or some of your posts were deleted recently. also note that you don't get a PM notification when one of your post get moved to the trashcan along with someone else's topic. He has posted many times with his avatar after the fix was implemented so maybe it is possible he is the only one still with one?
I know there are at least 4 of them. but there should be others that we missed. I don't think those avatars are going to get removed. it's not like they're doing any harm with it. |
|
|
|
Too long topic to read full, I would just find out , or this proposal (to 30 users will be suggested)
already have effect, or just stayed proposal?
regards
-zz
theymos decided not to replace it (for now). read the colorful quote above. |
|
|
|
|
most of the core devs use their own name as username. and most of those users use their photo as avatars.
some users did post their own dox. but I won't mention their name here.
|
|
|
|
hrrmmm... I might have found something that will make my own idea have bad consequences in the long run. basically, my idea requires the lender to remove their feedback once the loan has been repaid. but I forgot to take inactivity into account (a lender might suddenly go silent and never remove their feedback) for some reason I didn't think of this until now. 
but this can be neutralized to some degree by providing a reference link on all of your feedback so that lenders can check the latest "loan" feedback reference to see if the loan has been repaid or not. in this case, lenders may leave those feedbacks as they are rather than removing it after the loan has been repaid. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
