Your impression is absolutely correct. I have had this happen to me a ton of times when I visit the same page of a spammer's post history and accidentally hit the report button.

---

Handling complex cases is important and significantly more valuable than handling spam posts. I, for sure, have dedicated less effort than someone who solely seeks out the former case.


We need both sides of it, really. I'll take the grunt work

This thread is still going on, huh?

That's a false equivalency, actually.

Though both alcohol and gambling addiction are prevalent in society, the former has a significantly higher toll on the physiological health of the user. The latter would be a financial toll however depending on what kind of gambling you're "teaching" your pupils can actually perform better in terms of risk management and control.

Think of it like this way: a guided experience through gambling is almost certainly better than someone stumbling into their first gambling experience without any precautionary measures. /derail

---

In my opinion it's been steadily more difficult to start constructive topics in the Gambling and Bitcoin Discussion boards. Over the past year, I'd only thought up a noteworthy thread (that wasn't redundant) once, in regards to Bitcoin Discussion. In that sense, it's more of a survivor bias where you are finding solely spam posts because those that care about their posts seldom stoop to that level.

Probably not. Most people wouldn't find value in the coupon.
Good collateral is easily-liquidated if there is a default.

I notice that the Sportsbet.io campaign has the min/max switched. Making that alteration along with the WolfBet change.

Pastebin

---

Ironically, your fragmented sentence is less grammatically correct than AverageGlabella's sentence.

You can lock it yourself. Bottom-left of the thread, and click the "lock" button.

Just to attest to this, I'm the exact opposite. I ignore all the quality sections to scour for spam. Altcoin Discussion and Trading Discussion are goldmines if you want useless replies!

Like I said: Anyone who is unwilling to read the context of the post isn't posting for the sake of the discussion. Rather, they are posting for the sake of the signature.

I'm surprised nobody quoted the rules:

Hi. On behalf of h4ns I am willing to pay for the defamation damages. Please provide your lawyer's contact information so we can arrange this.

You do have one, right?

this ain't BATcointalk

@The Pharmacist is this your cousin?

This makes me think that game-protect types the names out one-by-one (prior to their copy-pasting) which makes me think they're even more insane than I originally thought. TwitchySeal's theory might make some sense here.

Nice. Outside of the law, huh?

Let us follow how reports work in this sequence:

Post #58: Old Post
Post #59: Necrobump
Post #60+: Future replies

---

Post #59 is reported.
Post #59 is deleted.
All posts 60+ are decremented by one.

Now the flow looks like this:

Post #58: Old Post
Post #59: Necrobump
Post #60+: Future replies

---

Hence, any irrelevant necrobump reply that is not of enough substance to justify the bump should be removed, period. Anyone who is unwilling to read the context of the post isn't posting for the sake of the discussion. Rather, they are posting for the sake of the signature. Why else wouldn't you read? Honestly.

See? Feign ignorance, diverge conversation into split parts, and then deflect the smaller parts and hinge off meaningless trivialities.

It's all part of the manipulation of this discourse.

This addresses the point:

Moore's Law is cool but what happens in the case where the data exceeds the download speed of the nodes?
How about when the uncapped block sizes result in too much data for the central locations to store?
Oh... high transaction fees will prevent that, is that right? Is that not what the point of large blocks was? To prevent high tx fees?

All I will say is that people who will jump to death threats quickly will usually not have the type of character that I'd judge as "trustworthy".

Unfortunately, the abstinence of civility only increases as the volume of negative feedback does, and in many cases when users open up threads vocalizing their discontent and indignant treatment, it ends up being the reverse of what they want.

Not all civil users end with removed negative feedback but most users with removed negative feedback have remained civil throughout.

Wrong. Think about exactly what this proves:

It proves that all the videos on one account are with a female voice and all the ones on the other are with a male voice. Nothing more, nothing less. You cannot use extremely circumstantial evidence to cryptographically separate two individuals.

---

I won't derail the thread further as this is already 3 posts deep. Create a new topic in Reputation.

I have a theory.

GP is a scammer, first and foremost.
These threads are bad for building a con but it is still possible, especially if you try to obfuscate the truth and justify your wrongdoing.

By diverging the topic from anything substantial and by repetitively stating, "all of those who oppose me are inherently flawed," game-protect is attempting to pawn off the scam as a misconstrued situation.

GP has already laid the foundation for their scam system and thus to discard it so easily without attempting to vie for some more victims is the least logical thing to do.

---

Think like a scammer and you will understand GP's mentality.

How do you prove that each person is only using their account?

How do you prove that any of these people are the original owners of the account and not some random people?

---

Unfortunately these are intangible conditions that are nigh impossible to prove.

I ask any BSV supporters to answer this question which was ignored in their main thread: