Is it really Saturday for qualifying? It's a little bit confusing because as far as I know, F1 is planning changes where a sprint race weekend will look different now:

Friday
FP1
Qualifying for race
___
Saturday
Qualifying for sprint race
Sprint race
____
Sunday
Race

For normal weekends, it's FP 1 and 2 on Friday, FP3 and Qualifying on Saturday and race on Sunday for weekends, where no spring is taking place and last season,
For previous weekends, it's FP 1 and qualifying for sprint race on Friday, FP3 and sprint race on Saturday, where sprint races will determine grid positions for the race and and race will be hold on Sunday for sprint weekends.

It's not sure which format will be applied, as far as I know, teams are voting tomorrow (and it's likely to be a new format described above (Qualifying for Spring and Race will be different)).
It's a little bit confusing but I believe we will see qualifying on Friday evening, where FP2 is placed normally.  
Teams want to intruduce a separate qualifying for race and sprint race because if a sprint race determines starting grid positions, it's always a procession as drivers won't risk much to crash out and start the race from behind. By separating sprint and race, drivers can risk more to avoid a bad starting grid position due to a sprint race crash.
I assume, SuperBru is not updated yet but make sure to get your predictions in early.  

Game 1:  49, 25'
Game 2:  49, 27'

Hat hier auch jemand die Vermutung, dass sich die Betrüger da gleich drauf schmeißen werden und zahlreiche gefälschte Bots erstellen (lassen), um unbedarfte Nutzer damit abzuziehen? 
Gerade, wenn es darum geht, dass man dort wie auch immer eigene Coins "draufladen" kann, werden das die Betrüger direkt unter Beschuss nehmen, dort gefälschte Bots mit Adressen einzuschleusen, von denen sie selbst die privaten Schlüssel besitzen. 

Auf Telegram tummeln sich mittlerweile eh so viele Betrüger, dass ich mich manchmal wundere, ob die sich nicht laufend gegenseitig anschreiben. 
Da muss Telegram dringend was gegen tun, der Betrug wird da immer schlimmer und es gibt kein Konzept dagegen. Perfekt wäre sowas wie Bitcointalk's DT System gepaart mit Rängen, wo man direkt erkennen kann, ob ein Account neu oder etabliert ist und falls er etabliert ist, ob dieser in der Vergangenheit in Betrug involviert war.
So wie es jetzt ist, ist es das komplette Durcheinander...

Dear mikeywith,

while 1miau really appreciates your high quality posts on Bitcointalk, it needs to defend itself here against untrue, unproven and outrageous speculations against itself.


Because (luckily), such a speculation against 1miau is wrong in 2 different ways:

We are currently in digital space here. Digital space is much different from anything else, before digital space was created.
Digital space has very distinctive characteristics, quite different from physical space, where cities, nature etc. do exist.  
And we can't commit serial killings here, maybe just murdering by words.
So, such a speculative suggestion can't be true.
Bitcointalk is a digital space.
1miau can only exist here, on the internet. It's just an imaginary, digital entity.
If digital space ceases to exist, so do we, dear mikeywith (and Bitcoin as well). It's really sad to think about it but we can't change it, dear mikeywith.  

I'll quote Lauda, in addition:


This fate will also happen to 1meow one day.  
But this day is still far away, hopefully.  

---

Second, such an assumption is an unproven and completely fabricated claim, based purely on speculation.
1miau doesn't engage in serial killings.  
Such a claim is an outrageous defamation against 1miau and damages 1miau's great reputation here on Bitcointalk.  

---

---

Engaging in account sales, where a ranked acccount is losing "its digital identity" (selling), is creating a situation, where all achievements are (or should be) meaningless.
It's not just against our digital ethics, it's also about fairness.  
Therefore, the account is losing all credibility, all achievements, as a new account should have been created.
In addition, it's causing spam and enables account sellers / scamming by account sellers.
Even if his story is true, DT needs to decide if that's still acceptable.

I have tried to give martyns a chance to tell his story but even then, his outright lies are obvious.
He should just create a new account, write good posts and earn his Merit as everyone else does.

---

---

Exactly that and the screenshots from his Binance WhatsApp guy are also wrong way round.
So, both guys (his brother and his random Binance WhatsApp guy) just made screenshots from their conversation with martyns, sent it to him and martyns posted that as a proof here on Bitcointalk.
How likely is that? Not likely at all...
As you've said, martyns messed up and screenshottet his fabricated conversation from the wrong side.  

1. Verstappen 
2. Verstappen
3. Perez 
4. 7 seconds

Your excuse doesn't make sense at all...
I'm not hating you, I'm just giving you the benefit of doubt.
But how should I treat your screenshots considering the fact that you've said you've screenshotted your conversation but you are the one giving him that account (which is wrong way around according to your story). I have WhatsApp as well and you are the one having double checkmarks (sender) and you (sender) are giving him account details + advice how to start shitposting participating in a campaign.
So, in your screenshots, your chats are wrong way around, dude.

Can your indonesian brother come here on Bitcointalk and write an indonesian post?

Do you realize your chats are wrong way around?
In these messages, you are the one giving him that account and he's asking questions about obviously directly joining a campaign, what you recommended him to avoid (waiting at least 50-70 posts, LOL)
Not suspicious at all, dude. 

Can your indonesian brother come here on Bitcointalk and write an indonesian post? 

Come on, please don't give him pre-fabricated stupid excuses. 
I really want to read one more unique shitposter apologist story and you are endangering that from coming true. 

So, plz, Sir! Give this shitposter a fair chance. 

---

Yes, let's wait for his reply.
I'm very eager to hear it. 

Hallo auch, wie immer vielen Dank für euren Einsatz inklusive Bilder und Dokumentation hier im Forum. 
Ich habe deine neueste Aktualisierung ebenfalls übersetzt und im internationalen Forumsteil platziert (siehe hier) und auch wenn die Spendenbereitschaft dort bisher ernüchternd war, so stirbt die Hoffnung bekanntlich zuletzt.

Gerne sende ich euch wieder ein bisschen was an die Katzenadresse, wenn ich die Woche das BTC griffbereit habe.
Wenn jeder wieder ein bisschen was spendet, ist das unterm Strich vielleicht doch eine schöne Sume, die euch etwas hilft. 

derBowler has provided a new update, where he helps Ukrainians via Bitcoin donations:

After the situation has calmed down a little bit for him, it’s also no secret that he and his team are still trying their best to help Ukrainians. According to derBowler’s recent update, their main focus is currently on organizing drinking water treatment plants and medical facilities for hospitals and homeless shelters in Odessa and Kherson and planning their transports. Unfortunately, the purchase of such systems and also the transport is not quite as cheap as derBowler’s team has expected. Total funds are amounting to around 10k euros, so derBowler and his team are still dependent on support.
He welcomes all sorts of support, no matter if real donations in BTC of just a nice comment to bump his topic and he also confirmed, that his main investor is still there and they can still exchange any Bitcoin without fees to use it directly for humanitarian help.
So, derBowler would be happy for any donation to continue his mission.  


I've sent him once again a small donation, too.


Here are some pictures from his efforts (he promised to send more pictures soon):

So kann man es natürlich auch sehen. Scheiternde Shitcoins zeigen immer wieder gut auf, dass das Geld in Bitcoin sicherer aufgehoben ist.  

---

Das ist das Ziel, allerdings ist es natürlich immer schwer, da den perfekten Einstieg zu erwischen und dann ist es noch bei vielen Shitcoins so, das diese nie wieder ihr früheres Allzeithoch erreichen, je mehr Zeit vergeht.
Da riskiert man, einen wertlosen Klumpen Shitcoins zu besitzen.
Selbst, wenn man hier über viele Shitcoins streut, wäre meine Vermutung, dass man einfach zu viele Shitcoins erwischt, die langfristig scheitern. Denn bei Shitcoins ist es leider so, dass diese immer weiter absacken, wenn ihre vermeintlich innovativen Ideen immer mehr als Klamauk enttarnt wurden (und die Besitzer der Coins das auch realisieren), weil die Coins einfach nicht den Versprechen gerecht werden, die in der Hype-Phase versprochen wurden. Die Ziele werden immer weiter in die Zukunft verschoben und irgendwann dann ganz abgesagt.
Dieser Zyklus is bei vielen Shitcoins ähnlich.
Daher werden nur die wenigsten Shitcoins wirklich wieder hoch genug steigen, um die Verluste bei den anderen Shitcoins ausgleichen zu können.

Abgesehen von dem großen Mehraufwand, den man durch Kauf, Aufbewahrung und Verkauf so vieler Shitcoins hat, verglichen zum einfachen HODLN des BTC.

Als riskante Beimischung zur größeren Gewinnsteigerung als durch HODLn, können Shitcoins durchaus dienen, auch wenn das natürlich sehr riskant ist.

I really don't know what Bayern management's idea has been, when they sacked Nagelsmann.
After doing that move, Bayern can only lose in such a crucial phase and it happened like that.
It would have been pretty easy to finish the season under Nagelsmann and part ways after the season.
If Bayern feared that Tuchel signed for any Club else in the meantime, they could have told him to hire him for the new season.
It's very unlikely to have an open coach seat at a top club during the current phase of the season anyways.

In addition, Nagelsmann was hired to be a long-term solution.
His approach wasn't certainly bad, just lacking a bit of luck.

And now, Tuchel's start at Bayern is already looking pretty doomed.

Changing your coach can work if your team is already in trouble (like relegation candidates) but it's definitely an immensely risky decision to change the coach for the situation, Bayern has been in when Nagelsman got sacked.
Next game is against Hertha BSC at home, should be pretty easy for Bayern to get 3 points...

Results are final now:



Result 1: Bitcointalk members don't want to change the rating from Blockchair, as 6 people voted for our current 8 points rating and 4 people voted for an 9 points rating.
Result 2: Bitcointalk members want to have updates provided for our old table layout (7 vs. 1 votes)

A total of 11 voters participated in our survey.
We'll apply the voted outcomes accordingly.
Many thanks @everyone for your votes. 

You should know that DT doesn't like account ownership changes.
And then, your story is completely unproven and we need to trust your word (which is a very weak reason to remove tags from your account).
You should just have started a new account as everyone else did here.

---

While I'm really trying to give you the benefit of doubt, your story is very unlikely and there are so many coincidences:

Your brother stayed in Indonesia with his family but you are in Nigeria and are well aware of Nigerian politics and culture?  
And he is gifting you that account?
Cool story, bro.

Are you born in Indonesia or Nigeria?
Is your brother born in Indonesia or Nigeria?
And the other account (BlackViruse) tied to your account?
Soo many questions...

---

I understand your situation and your explanation is not impossible.
I’ve currently issued a neutral trust on your account but what I don’t like at all are lies.
I'm interested to give you the benefit of doubt if you can prove one of these 2 points:

- Sign a message from before your posting gap. You can ask your brother (legitimate owner of these addresses) to do so because you need it for your Bitcointalk account.
OR
- Tell your brother to come on the forum and write an explanatory post in our indonesian local board. Indonesian members of Bitcointalk will review that post if it's really from an indonesian person and asking him questions to make sure you are not just using Google translate.

If you can prove that your story is true by proving one of these 2 points, I won’t change my current neutral trust to negative.
You would just have a neutral trust from me stating your account ownership change.
Of course, I can't speak for DT as DT is a decentralized network.

But I'm giving you the benefit of doubt here.
Now, it's your turn to convince me that your story is true.

Gute aber auch schwierig zu beantwortende Frage.
Je nach Krypto-Thema ist es denke ich sehr stark von jeweiligen Autor abhängig, welche Kenntnisse dieser über das jeweilige Thema besitzt, da viele Sachverhalte doch sehr komplex sind. Dann kommt es noch darauf an, wie viel Wert der Autor darauf legt, die Sachen wirklich zu Ende zu recherchieren und nicht die erstebeste, plausible Vermutung als endgültiges Ergebnis präsentiert. 
Vielleicht sind bei Heise.de einige fachlich versierte Autoren nicht mehr tätig aber die genauen Details kenne ich nicht.

Ich versuche immer, verschiedene Quellen miteinander abzugleichen (was natürlich auch nicht immer hilft, vor allem wenn jede seite gegenseitig die Texte kopiert). Oftmals sind einige englischsprachige Seiten da genauer aber auch nicht immer.
Je nach Thema ist das natürlich auch immer verschieden.
Am besten ist es immer noch, die Originalquelle zu finden oder dieser "so nah wie möglich" zu kommen, wenn diese irgendwo zitiert ist.
Z.B. in diesem Fall der Gesetzestext, welcher bei meiner Recherche dann am akkuratesten auf einer einschlägigen Anwaltsseite (Mayer / Brown Lawyers) zitiert und analysiert wurde. Das werden auch Quellen verlinkt, was man leider bei diversen Klatschseiten sehr vermisst.
Die anderen Klatschseiten waren da leider alle ziemlich wenig akkurat und in besonders üblen Fällen hauptsächlich auf Klicks aus.
Das hilft natürlich niemandem. 

Pauschal eine Seite empfehlen ist also schwierig und kommt immer auf den Sachverhalt an. 

Yes, doing so would just make the trouble bigger for him.
We can argue about signing an old address, which might not work in certain cases (I'm not going into detail here to avoid giving him an excuse  ) and signing an address can also be technically challenging for him but after making 400 post in indonesian laguage, it should be quite easy for him to make only 1 indonesian post again to debunk our research. 

If he refuses to leave a reply here, he wouldn't do himself a favor to get rid of the accusation, which doesn't seem to be in his favor at all, reviewing the evidence presented here.

If martyns is not a hacked or sold account, debunking our research here will be an extremely easy job for martyns.

I've now also issued a neutral trust and will wait for martyns to address all evidence presented by lovesmyfamilies.
In my opinion, signing one of the addresses presented above by _BlackStar or making a post in Bitcointalk's indonesian local board, where native speakers will need to confirm if his text is native indonesian and not just Google translate, should be easy for martyns to prove that his account is not hacked or sold.

If he can't prove any of these easy solutions, it can be assumed that it's a sold or hacked account.

Absolutely, Bayern's management looks like clowns, even more today after Mainz defeated Bayern 3-1. Truly a horrible 2nd half from Bayern München, where Bayern conceded 3 goals in 15 minutes and despite the urgent need to score, Bayern didn't get dangerously close to Mainz05's goal in the last 25 minutes.
Of course, great performance by Mainz05 to come back after Mané scored an early lead for Bayern.

Yes, Dortmund won decisively (4-0) against Frankfurt today, now leading the table.
Only 5 games remaining for each team:

Bayern: Hertha BSC, Bremen, Schalke, Leipzig, Köln
Dortmund: Bochum, Wolfsburg, Gladbach, Augsburg, Mainz

Looks like we are in for an exciting title game.  

Good catch, OP.
It's very likely that martyns is indeed a sold or hacked account.
I haven't checked all his post history but his indonesian posts seem to be submitted 2018 or earlier, while his nigerian posts all seem to be submitted after his last indonesian post. While I've not checked every single post, it seems to be a very clear case, if proven right.
In addition, the 4 year posting gap is making it even more obvious.

For such cases, a negative trust is totally appropriate. Selling / buying accounts is one of the most famous reasons for negative trust. If it's a hacked + sold account, too.
But we need to have a valid proof to give him a negative trust for being a bought account.

I would say, that it's up to martyns to prove that he's still a native indonesian speaker. If he is still the old account owner, it should be quite easy for him to prove it, considering that he has done more than 400 post in Bitcointalk's indonesian section.
My favorite strategy would be to send him a PM, that he needs to prove that he's still a native indonesian speaker to avoid getting tagged, as hundreds of accounts have been tagged for selling / buying accounts before.

I'm bumping our survey topic for visibility.
Today is April 22, 2023, the day when our survey will be finished:


Only few hours left to get your vote in!
So, feel free to vote if you didn't vote so far. 

I'll publish the final results tomorrow.