They can't, and the best scams are the ones which aren't obvious. If someone genuinely believed the project they were promoting was legit, and there was no evidence to suggest otherwise, then I don't think it would be fair to red tag that person (situation dependent).

However, as OP has shown in his screenshot, when a project is discovered to be a scam, usually someone posts in their ANN/bounty/campaign/whatever thread in big red letters stating it is a scam, and giving everyone time to remove their signature or stop posting their bounties. If you heed this warning, you aren't red tagged. If you ignore this warning, you are. I think that's fair.

Everything that has been said so far in this thread is correct, and people should absolutely keep an eye out for warnings and scam accusations posted about projects they are interested in or are helping to promote. But having said that, you shouldn't be relying on others to point out if the project you are involved in is a scam.

Do your due diligence. A lot of these ICOs and bounties can be discovered to be a scam with minimal effort. Go to their website, look at their team members, visit their LinkedIn profiles, read their whitepaper. Be on the look out for fake team members, stock images, fake profiles, stolen ideas or images, plagiarized whitepapers or roadmaps, etc, etc. Spend some time getting to know a project before you either throw your money at it or agree to advertise on their behalf. Don't rely on others being your safety net.

Artemis3 is right. SMS is a very poor method of 2FA, as there have been many cases of attackers fairly easily hijacking phone numbers and intercepting your messages. It would be much better to swap to something like Authy or Google which provide printable back up codes and recovery methods should your phone be lost or stolen.

Spammers wouldn't read it, let alone take part, same as they don't read the rules, the stickies, the news, or even the thread they are posting in. The people who would take part are the people who were already motivated to learn anyway. The people who already know the answers will ignore it.

A knowledge score would result in a small cohort of junior members farming high knowledge scores, while everyone with actual knowledge (see: Technical Support board for examples) would have a score of zero. It would be a useless metric.

I voted to leave it as it is.

Untrusted feedback generally has too small of a signal-to-noise ratio to make a worthwhile score. Plenty of scammers would have great scores since they leave themselves fake positive trust from sock puppet accounts. Users who are interested can view the untrusted feedback, or even show it by default on their profile if they wish. Newbies who don't understand the difference between untrusted and trusted feedback probably shouldn't be shown a second score, which in many cases will be the exact opposite of the trusted score, and will only serve to confuse and obfuscate. Once they understand the system, they are free to turn it on by default for themselves if they so choose.

Yup, like that somehow makes it better. "Oh, we weren't actively trying to deceive anyone, we are just so incompetent we didn't know any better!"

The underlying issue is the same though. If you were scummy enough to plagiarize your whitepaper/website/ANN thread, or scummy enough to steal people's identity, or scummy enough to please ignorance about the whole thing (whether true or not), then who knows what else you are scummy enough to do. Exit scam? You bet.

Agreed. The fee it gives pretty much guarantees inclusion in the next block, but you can also get in to the next block with a much lower fee. I like to eyeball Johoe's site to get a feel for how the mempool is looking, and I also use this site for a good estimation of the required fee: https://www.coinb.in/#fees

Even if you don't really understand or know what inputs or outputs your transaction will have, you can just read the Sat/Byte suggestion at the bottom of the blue box and key that in to your wallet. That's usually enough to get you in to the next few blocks, but even if you adjust up a bit, you still end up with a must cheaper fee then recommended by bitcoinfees.earn.

You purchase a subscription to VPN provider which supports mobile devices, preferably one with an iOS app. Here is a list of ones you may want to consider: https://www.privacytools.io/#vpn


No. A personal hot spot allows you to connect the internet with a WiFi capable device through your phone's mobile data. Simply put, a VPN encrypts all your internet traffic and routes it through another computer to improve your privacy and security.


The Nano S still works just fine, and will do for years to come. At present, however, there are no plans to make it compatible with either iPhones or iPads. Your options are either to use the Nano S with a computer, or buy a Nano X to use with your Apple devices.

Totally agree with you here. I'm more than willing to remove any red tags I have left for ICOs or other projects in the team in question can provide evidence that I was wrong. Most of the time they just disappear after being red tagged. The closest one got was to claim that a third party had written their plagiarized whitepaper for them, it wasn't their fault, and that they would sort it all out. They sorted it out by just deleting the whitepaper altogether and not having one at all.

This was after a report was made automatically, and it had reloaded to Bitcoin Discussion front page. So yeah, it seems to not be picking up the referrer correctly.

Edit: Wait wait wait, I think I know the issue, and it's got nothing to do with your code. Gimme 5.

Edit 2: Yeah, got it. So as part of my Firefox set up, in about:config I have network.http.referer.trimmingPolicy set to 2, which means it only sends the origin rather than full URL. Changing it back to 0 solves the problem.

Firefox, no, yes. I had figured out as much - the URLs on my browser are correct, but the tabs don't close.

On looking at your code further, I see the new tabs are supposed to close after auto-submitting. On mine they don't, and my rusty JavaScript knowledge isn't allowing me to figure out why.

One small error I've found.

In bct-content.js, on line 63:

But your CSS file uses:

I've turned the buttons red and aligned them to the right, nestled nicely above "Report to moderator". Thanks again!

Edit: Actually, I didn't like the red either, so I've opted for a more familiar color scheme:

Love this, and if I had 50 sMerits to give you I would. Reviewed the code, installed, works perfectly. Much better solution than the quick one I came up with given the queuing function.

Don't like your color scheme or position of the buttons, but that's easily fixed. Thank so much for taking the time to extract and share. I'll play around with it for a few days and let you know if I stumble across any issues.

So, I've come up with a slightly different solution using a program called AutoHotKey, that I use for a number of other tasks.

Basically it will open the report page in a new window on my second monitor, fill in the relevant comment about the post being spam, send the report, close the report window, and then refocus on the original window so I can continue to scroll with the mouse wheel without having to click back. This all has the added advantage of me being able to read the next post while the script is reporting the previous one.

Thanks for the inspiration. This is going to make life much easier. Also sorry for going off topic @eternalgloom.

I'm pretty sure you're actually looking for the term googol, which is 10¹⁰⁰, and not the Russian author.

Also, you never specified chicken eggs. We could be talking about quail eggs here. On a weight-by-weight comparison, 50 quail eggs would only be the same as about 9-10 chicken eggs. Easy peasy.

I realized that immediately after clicking your name after posting, and deleted the post, haha. You were both too smart for me and too fast with your reply! But yeah, the "u=xxxxxxx" is unnecessary.

Maybe it isn't - I don't know what others think of these kinds of posts. Certainly it's not on the same "level" of spam/shitposting as most of the altcoin/bounty spam, but when you get to page 16 of a thread like that there is pretty much a 0% chance that any idea is original and hasn't been posted in that thread before. You just get the same ideas on repeat, just phrased differently - in this case "be patient", "keep holding", "no one can predict", "market is moving sideways", "bull market soon", etc.


Yeah, exactly. Short of reading the last page of replies for every post, which I can bet 99.99% of bounty managers wouldn't do consider the utter trash they are willing to pay out for. I think the simplest solution would be to just refuse to count posts in any spam threads, which many BTC signature managers already do, but again, good luck getting them on board with that without some top-down rule enforcement.

Ledger Live works just fine for me on desktop via my VPN. I'm just away to go download the Android version - I'll let you know if it works via VPN on my phone too.

Edit: Works just fine via VPN on mobile. Was very easy to set up - open Ledger Live desktop, go to settings -> export accounts, scan QR code with app, set up password, done. Also, the Android app supports biometrics to unlock, if that's your thing. If not, it is password protected same as the desktop version.

It depends on your definition of "safe" and your interest in privacy, anonymity and security.

I take this kind of stuff seriously. I wouldn't even connect to a public WiFi without VPN, let alone do something "harmless" like logging in to my emails, and certainly not logging in to an exchange account, online banking, or something similar. With a public WiFi you have absolutely no idea who or what is watching or accessing your data - not just the WiFi owner, but since most public WiFis have awful security, many times anyone else using the same WiFi can intercept your data with fairly minimal effort.

But having said that - do people do it? All the time. Do they get hacked and lose everything? Rarely.