great, we've already established that.

if the "community" tries to UASF on a recklessly hasty timeline like BIP148, i certainly won't support it. next time someone tries to UASF on a 2-month timeline, i say fork them off. people who prefer to risk a network split because they can't wait some additional months for safe implementation are like impatient children. we shouldn't be caving to their demands.

lol, this will probably land me on one or two more shitlists.


are those standards now set in stone? trust abuse and witch hunts are rampant, but do they have to be? maybe not. maybe TECSHARE is onto something.


he did. see "core tenets". the standards are very clear to me. ie no red tags based on opinions and unproven accusations + defend people from trust abuse in the face of unproven accusations.

i support the core tenets. i've seen countless people run off the forum by rampant trust abuse and petty reputation drama. it's getting old.

i can't give up my avatar or signature but i can put a short link in my personal message. something like "Objective Standards Guild: https://bit.ly/2P79Dxh"

nevertheless, BIP148's timeline was dangerous and conducive to a network split. it may have been proposed on the mailing list a month or two prior, but the UASF campaign essentially began ~2 months before flag day. that was very little time to amass full node support and thus pressure miners to prevent a network split.

i'd like to see a 1+ year timeline for a UASF. miners can activate earlier if they want to, but that seems like a reasonable minimum given the risks.

thanks for the info!


so it was just empty posturing by the trump administration!? music to my ears, tbh. the longer we can maintain the current AML/KYC status quo (vs submitting to the FATF overlords) the better.

segwit specifically broke bitmain's covert ASICboost scheme. is there a similar parallel here? i don't think so.

i think segwit established that BIP9 is an inferior activation method. miners should be able to accelerate activation but not block it. a BIP8-style flag day activation---done on a reasonably long time frame vs BIP148---seems appropriate.

i do hope we can avoid another recklessly hasty fork like BIP148.

correct.

the blind structure is pretty slow too (3000 starting stack, 12 minute levels, 40/80/0 blinds after 1 hour of play) so you'll probably still have a healthy stack when you sit down.

an important upgrade to be sure, but most people take deterministic wallets for granted. segwit was far more memorable due to the block size debate reaching a fever pitch w/ the UASF movement. segwit activation and the launch of bitcoin cash was the culmination of several years of bad blood in the community. we've never seen anything like it before or since.

hey guys, we're playing poker again this sunday, this time on SwC. 2.5 - 5 mBTC added, depending how many people show up. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217547.msg53859036#msg53859036

anyone who is interested in playing, shoot me a PM me for the password.

we're having a private bitcointalk forum tournament next sunday (february 23rd) on SwC Poker.

0.001 BTC buy-in. join us!


an additional 0.0025 BTC (0.005 BTC total) will be added to the prize pool if we can get > 15 players.

PM me for the password, otherwise check this thread on game day: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217547.0

FYI for new SwC signups: BTCgrinders.com seems to have the best rakeback deal---15% better than anywhere else i've seen. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4615373.0


there is a p2p transfer function, yep. we can sort it out if/when we get 15+ people registered. there's just 2 of us for now!

SwC told me they can only directly add money to the prize pool if it's a freeroll, not sure why. so i planned on just manually paying people (either bitcoin or on SwC) afterwards.

they've always peddled that line so they can keep dumping XRP on naive greater fools.

the funny thing is, even if china did control bitcoin, that would still be better than ripple. ripple (a small company) controls the ripple ledger. they control the majority of validating nodes, they control the majority of the XRP supply. it doesn't get any more centralized than that! https://medium.com/swlh/is-the-ripple-centralized-or-decentralized-e774706871de

@buwaytress has offered to add another 0.0025 BTC to the prize pool if we get > 15 players. thanks dude!


the password has been sent out by PM. anyone who is interested in playing and hasn't received it, post here or PM me. the password will also be posted here the day of the game.

running list of SwC poker handles:

we might be building up to another BTC-E event---possibly right down to the timing, considering the bull market.

FINCEN's guidance last year rendered lots of altcoin exchanges non-compliant. when the FATF rules get implemented, that will become even more apparent. i have no doubt the DOJ+FINCEN (possibly in conjunction with the CFTC or SEC) will eventually make another example of a non-compliant exchange.

i worry about platforms like kucoin---they allow unverified accounts (including from the USA), they offer derivatives to USA traders on kumex, and they've added fiat-to-crypto services that USA customers can use.

the next bitcointalk forum tournament is now in the lobby at SwC POKER! https://swcpoker.eu/



"chips" at SwC = uBTC. so a 1000 chip buy-in = 0.001 BTC. they are not charging us a tournament fee, which is pretty sweet!

later today, i'm gonna load my account and register to make sure it's working right, then i will PM the password to everyone on this list: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5217547.msg53845473#msg53845473

remember, SwC requires only an email address to create an account. no KYC, no banned jurisdictions. so everyone is welcome!

i am adding 0.0025 BTC to the prize pool manually. 1st place gets an extra 0.0015 BTC and 2nd place gets an extra 0.001 BTC.

if your SwC handle differs from your forum handle, please post your SwC handle in the thread so we know who's who!

um, your conclusion still doesn't follow from your premise. you didn't bother to address that at all. sort of important in matters of logic.

merely posting a response doesn't change the fact that i showed your accusations to be completely baseless and meritless.

since marlboroza is trying to pass off baseless accusations as fact, i urge people to read why his accusations are complete and utter bullshit:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853263#msg53853263
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853648#msg53853648


lol! that's the best you can come up with? i'm "cherry picking"?

oh, you just happened to be randomly reviewing your own posts from 2018? and then you came across a joke i made and thought, "to the public-accusation-mobile!"

right, we all believe that, coming from someone whose entire forum existence seems to revolve around investigating other peoples' accounts.

the timing of your accusations was also interesting considering what i was in the middle of saying about DT2 trust abuse.

anyway, you're the one pathetically pulling my posts from years ago, desperately trying to contort them into wrongdoing so you can publicly malign me. you're the one initiating meritless public accusations out of nowhere, for no good reason, and with zero basis in reality.

what did i ever do to you to deserve that? what have i ever done to anybody on this forum to deserve that?

i may think you're a piece of shit marlboroza, but do you see me quoting years-old posts from you in an effort to smear your name---in an effort to convince people that everything you say is a lie? that's what you did to me.

i have done nothing dishonest and i have not shown poor judgment, but since i say things you disagree with, you will continue attacking me---this much i can gather.


cool story. so you completely glossed over the fact that you---unprovoked---are investigating my account and trying to publicly discredit me. and, amazingly, you are now claiming to be the victim?

seriously---you publicly attack other people (pretty much constantly) and then you cry because one of them accused you of "playing dumb"?

i'd tell you to grow some thicker skin, but we both know you are putting on an act. what you did---publicly lob baseless and unprovoked accusations at me---is so much more deplorable than what i did---defend myself.

i hope your attempts at false equivalence will not go unnoticed.

edit:


amazing, it only took you 90 minutes to prove me right.

lol, says the guy who literally just pulled up years-old posts of mine in a specific effort to publicly discredit me. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002

why are you using my posts from 2018 as the basis to publicly attack me? perhaps you could answer that before calling me paranoid.


and what have you proven? absolutely nothing, except that you are extremely petty and vindictive. you publicly attack people who disagree with you, and you do so with extremely weak arguments.

i suggest you pick on someone else who can't shit on every fucking argument you make.

and sorry, but you haven't begun to prove anything about "flawed judgment". it's cute how you threw that in there though.


wtf? you leveled public accusations at me! how is responding to them "random"?

this is yet another dishonest insinuation on your part.

right, so i was just imagining this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002


no. you've misconstrued the facts and made totally illogical conclusions. i ripped apart your accusations here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853263#msg53853263


you literally just pulled a post of mine from may 2018 and used it to publicly discredit me. this happened today!
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002

why are you playing dumb?

i suspect you unearthed this post while investigating my account, particularly because you posted it long after the discussion was over. it's curious why you felt the need to include my nested quote ITT when it was 100% irrelevant to the point you were making. it's almost as if you wanted to imply some connection between quickseller and i:


my suspicion is based on the fact that you regularly engage in this behavior, and also because you specifically targeted me here. however, since i can't substantiate that suspicion, i won't push the issue further.

the Astargath example alone should suffice to show you are being petty and vindictive towards me. remember, only one of us is digging through the others' post history to try and publicly malign him. i believe the way you misconstrued an "innocent joke" for "dishonesty" suffices to show deceitful behavior on your part too.


how does your premise---"figmentofmyass made a joke 2 years ago"---establish your conclusion that "whatever [figmentofmyass] said in this thread...the truth is extremely likely opposite"?

the claim is so fucking absurd that it really casts doubt on your motives.


um, i directly responded to you and quoted that post. that's the opposite of hiding anything.

um, all i did was defend myself against your meritless public accusations. are people no longer allowed to defend themselves or confront their accusers?

you publicly attacked me, claiming everything i say "is extremely likely opposite the truth" and you based that on the fact that i told a joke 2 years ago! all you've done is make meritless accusations against me. please refrain from referring to that as "truth".

and what did i do? i responded by pointing out how you dug through years of my post history in a pathetic attempt to discredit me. sorry to break it to you, but that was obviously "petty and vindictive" of you.  i pointed out how you purposefully misconstrued a joke as a serious judge of character. and yes, that was obviously "dishonest" of you.

my accusations towards you are 100% factual and logic-based. i invite everyone to read the post you linked to see that. the same cannot be said of your accusations against me.

and please remember, you publicly accused me first. i merely responded to your accusations by 1. utterly discrediting them and 2. showing that if anyone engaged in immoral behavior, it was you. you are the one who is constantly digging through peoples' post histories to try to publicly malign them. you are the one initiating baseless public accusations. not me.

your public attacks show you obviously have a bone to pick with me, but tbh the feeling is not reciprocal. i am merely reacting to your attacks.

it is so exhausting trying to fight against this sort of blatantly deceitful behavior. they can't disprove what you're saying today, so they attack your words from years ago, hoping to distract and confuse everyone in the process.