It is impossible to send merit to yourself. If you try, you will be met with an error message stating: "You cannot send merit to yourself".

If you are asking whether you can merit posts in a thread you started, the answer is yes, that is allowed.

If you are asking whether you can use alt accounts to merit your own posts, although not against the rules per se, you may end up with negative trust on your account if you get caught.

Anyone who was paying any attention at all saw this coming a mile off. Hell, I made a post in this very thread 3 months ago predicting a huge dump when they finally liquidate their remaining bags. If you are still holding either of the BCH forks at this point, then you either have been ignoring the entire crypto-world for 3 months or you are a moron. There is no reason to still be invested in either of these scam coins.

Pretty hilarious on the part of Jihan Wu, really. Bitmain were dominating the ASIC world - all he had to do was to keep releasing a new miner every few months and he could have been set for life. Instead he threw all his weight behind a shitcoin and now is facing mass terminations and possible bankruptcy.

Exactly. Microsoft aren't going to phish your private keys. They have a marketcap of $750 billion. They would lose far, far more money if it was discovered they were doing this than they would gain from stealing a handful of bitcoin.

Having said that, although they almost certainly won't steal your private keys, usernames, password, etc. you should be very concerned that Windows 10 very much could steal all these things, if they wanted. It collects all of your data, including everything from your name, relationships, contacts, hobbies, etc, to your browsing history, keystrokes, microphone and webcam input, and online purchases. By using Windows 10, Microsoft also have the right to share any of this data with any third party, without your consent. They have a complete profile of you and everything you do. So although Windows 10 might be relatively safe, it is a privacy nightmare.

Of course using bitcoin would be better for the users, but Facebook don't care about the users at all. As far as they are concerned, users are a product to be, well, used. All they care about is profit. They banned crypto and ICO advertising under the guide of "protecting their users", when obviously it was actually because they want to launch their own crypto. Facebook don't want their users using real cryptocurrencies - they want users to use their private and centralized crypto so they can make a profit from it and gather your data to sell.

Wow. How the tables have turned in Manchester. Turns out United players are quite good and they can actually play football. That build up to their second goal was beautiful (https://streamja.com/a23a), and just as nice as the build up to their 3rd goal against Cardiff last week. I've never been a United fan, but I always loved Solskjaer and am super happy he's had such a dream start to his temporary position.

Just because you started the thread doesn't mean you are magically immune from the forum wide rules, one of which you will have broken to have that post deleted.

The fact that all your other nonsense ramblings haven't been deleted is proof enough that no one is "in" on anything.

In these cases, the affected user opens a thread, and there is usually a lengthy discussion that either results in:

1 - removal of the red tag
2 - addition of more red tags
3 - countering of the red tag with a positive tag

If a DT member is found to be constantly leaving inappropriate feedback which the rest of the community disagree with, then they will likely be removed from DT before long. In cases like Anduck's and mdayonliner's, don't be fooled in to thinking that they are victims of some "rogue" DT member. Given their continued vocality the majority of DT members are well aware of their situations and have actively chosen to either reinforce the red tag or to not counter it.

theymos also agrees that the DT system is not perfect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5080581.msg48500915#msg48500915), and he is very interested in any ways to improve it. In the short term, I think there is a very strong argument to be made for a handful more DT1 members, and by extension many more DT2 members, to keep things as decentralized as possible.

Can we please not derail yet another thread in to Anduck's mdayonliner's personal beef.

This just wouldn't work unfortunately. The scammer could easily delete his posts, and then the system fails. Or post a scam thread and immediately lock it - then no one can post in the thread and therefore no one could leave feedback.



Many scammers try to avoid detection and tagging by sending their scams out in PMs only. Then there are no posts and no links for verification.

I don't mean to be discouraging here, but there are just too many holes in this system for it to work.

You are right, of course, but if they don't use the words "blockchain" or "cryptocurrency" in their new product somewhere, how else will they convince idiots to throw their money at it? All you have to do is add blockchain in your product name somewhere, and your product will surge in value, even if it actually has nothing to do with blockchain.

No. The Constantinople fork is an upgrade to Ethereum, which plans to implement 5 Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs). There will be no new coins, and you do not need to do anything with the Ethereum you are currently holding. The hardfork will occur at block number 7,080,000, which is projected to be on 14th January. Very simply, the aim of it is to make several processes more efficient and therefore less expensive to run, as well as continuing to allow the progress towards moving from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake. You can read more about the 5 EIPs here: https://github.com/ethereum/pm/wiki/Constantinople-Progress-Tracker

We do get incorrect feedback being left by DT members - they are only human. You can't expect 100% infallibility from anyone. However, when people open threads appealing their red trust, we also see lengthy and reasoned discussions amongst both DT members, non-DT members and the accused, which generally either results in the red trust being removed as the consensus is against the DT member in question, or the red trust being reinforced as the consensus is against the accused member. It isn't some grand conspiracy, and the people who suggest otherwise are invariably those who have had their red trust reinforced after an unsuccessful appeal.



1 - Who is going to verify that every link is accurate?
2 - So if a scammer just ignores that thread, they can't be tagged?

I'm afraid your suggestion would essentially remove the ability to pre-emptively tag a scammer before the scam takes place. If someone is offering a ROI of 50% a day or advertising a bitcoin doubler, you don't need a trade to take place to know they are a scammer.

Can we please not derail yet another thread in to Anduck's personal beef.

Enthusiasts from the crypto community, as you put it, should be all about privacy, security and anonymity, which are pretty much the antithesis of everything Facebook stands for. Facebook collects all kind of information about you, including leaving tracking cookies which let them know which websites you visit and what you do online outside of Facebook. They even collect data about people that aren't signed in or even signed up to Facebook. This data is obviously sold to advertisers and whatnot, but is also sold to much more shady companies like Cambridge Analytica. No one who is an enthusiast of crypto should be an enthusiast of Facebook.



Exactly. These coins would be crypto only in name. Unfortunately, I have no doubt idiots will flock to these centralized scams in hope of making a quick buck as and when they are launched, as has happened many times before.

A nice little accumulator to be had on the top teams today. Liverpool, City and Spurs should all be fairly easy wins, with combined odds of 2.15. United, Arsenal and Chelsea are a bit more risky. United should win fairly easily if their game last week wasn't just fluke and they keep up their new form under Solskjaer. I can see an upset in either of the Chelsea or Arsenal games, though. Combined odds for all 6 games are 7.6 though.

United games have had a minimum of 4 goals for the last 5 games in a row, and a minimum of 3 goals for 15/18 games this season. Given they are against 19th place Huddersfield who are on a 5 game losing streak, I think Man Utd >2.5 goals is also a fairly safe bet.

Exactly. The last thing we need right now is experienced users giving up on reporting, even if your numbers are on the low side. It is much more sustainable to have hundreds of users reporting 5 posts a day than it is for 10 users to be reporting hundreds of posts each. Every little helps.

If every report you make is "good", then it probably means you are only reporting the most obvious of the obvious and are not reporting many posts that you should.

Merry Christmas to all who celebrate it!

I'm not religious, but at this time of year I think it is always nice to look at life from a different perspective. Remember what is really important in life - it's not money, it's not bitcoin, it's not this forum. Spend time with family and friends (new and old), share good food, good drinks and good laughs. Toast to good times and good health.

We can all get back to being upset about the price, reporting plagiarizers, and arguing about merit and DT soon enough!

Again, only if you advertise that you are using one. I have a hardware wallet for cold storage, but it has never left my house. No one knows I own it. I would never dream of using one in public for that exact reason - it is drawing attention to yourself. Hardware wallets are small enough that you could hide them in a million places around your house that a burglar would never find, even if they knew exactly what they were looking for. If you are very paranoid, then you can always set up some hardware wallets with a "plausible deniability" second wallet.

You are right in saying that have not been ignored, but not all reports will eventually be marked as good or bad. Some are left unhandled indefinitely. For example, if a mod agrees with whatever you wrote in the report, but think it isn't severe enough to be marked as "good" and delete the post in question, it may just be left unhandled forever. As stated at the top of the report page, you can think of unhandled as a "soft bad", as your report was correct, just not strong enough to warrant deletion.

I thought I had done poorly with only 9 points this week, but turns out I was joint second highest scorer behind tokeweed on 11. Lots of low scores because lots of crazy results, and very few 3 points for exact scoreline being handed out.

As our leader slaman29 only scored 4 points, LFC_Bitcoin has closed the gap and is now joint first with 199 points, and the next 5 or 6 places all also closed the gap by a point or two.

Remember the next set of matches are on Boxing Day, so probably wise for you all to get your predictions in before you get too drunk over the next day or two!

A lot of things that are reportable are subjective. Many posts that are reported for things like spam, trolling, low value, pointless, etc. don't have a clear and obvious "yes or no" answer like there is with plagiarism. If the mod who handles them disagrees, then your report will be marked as bad or unhandled.

I've had a handful of bad reports, and a larger handful of unhandled ones. That hasn't stopped me, and it shouldn't stop you. It would be far too time consuming for mods to explain their decision making on every report. Don't take it personally - just move on.

This would essentially achieve the same thing as increasing the merit requirement for a signature to 10, but yes, I would agree. Being able to earn money from displaying a signature should be an earned privilege and not available to any spammer who can beg, buy, trade or plagiarize their way to a single merit.

I would also support a change to increasing the requirement to 1 (or ideally 10) earned merit, regardless of rank. There are still plenty of spammers who only have a signature due to their airdropped merit.