You want to change the logo, go ahead. You think the logo is what made bitcoin but what made it bitcoin is the value people placed in it. In the corporate world, a company does not just wake up and decide to change their logo, there are some salient features that is put into consideration because it goes beyond symbols or acronyms but its the true essence of their identity among which has it outlived the reason why it was created in the first place and that is why they rather go through remodeling or improvement rather than an outright change.

Let me join others to welcome you to the forum and since you have a direct objective in mind, there is no too much stress in achieving it. What you need now is to focus and that goal and not be discouraged. There are several topics and materials with valid links for further consultation if need be. Also, there is need to inform you that as much as the community are willing to support, help, guide, tutor and answer your questions and curiosities, they could also be very brutal in their judgment anytime you are found wanting in any moral behavior which is why you need to acquaint yourself to the sticky rules and most importantly the unwritten ones. I wish you a wonderful stay.

In the US alone, there are more than five thousands high institutions of learning with no one affecting or disturbing each other. While I agree on the need for regulating body to establish some sanity, legalizing only a few is not what is expected. Let everyone flourish to the best of their ability the market participants should be the determinants of those that will go long term or fizzle out of the space.


Your argument at this point sounded one sided and show that the reason why you are clamoring for regulation is so that market share can be decimated to the most popular coins thereby limiting initiative which would frustrate alot of people out of the market. This is not what is needed now


I strongly believe in decentralisation and that involves a level playing ground for everyone while a regulating body is just there to ensure we all play according to the rules. My opinion.

Giving bitcoin to people who will then covert it to fiat to get his daily need is not different from the normal social intervention program that is being done by governments of most countries to citizens who are the most vulnerable. But to teach them to earn bitcoin then means we need to start considering the level of education that they have. Not every physically challenged individual are illiterates or lazy but rather they are constrained to not work due to the nature of the course they study in the institutions and more importantly, there is dignity in labour rather than waiting for airdrop at the end of the month. I think its really a good idea to put that in play but we also need to consider what is the stand of the government against bitcoin as such move will not be encouraged in countries that have made a statement against crypto currencies.

Most times when actions are taken against certain behavior of people, there is need to understand the basis for such action. Some people will do some things and would be ignored while some others would be tagged. The reason for that is because the facts surrounding case are different. Why does the community goes against account selling some of the reasons are

1. It encourages spamming of the forum because of those people who just want to earn something so they choose the easy way to buy account without learning the rudiments of unwritten laws that applies.

2. Another is the case of scams which is made possible as newbies are quick to trust people with higher ranks not knowing its equally a newbie hiding behind such rank to commit such atrocity.

In the above case, its possible this account have change hands but the evidence you provided is largely circumstantial and can be easily refuted because the user can claim he decides to change his pattern of posting because of avoiding ban which is possible if it can be proven based on his historical posts as we have seen before. Then the discussion goes to him being able to sign from a wallet address and it goes on and on.

It has some elements of legality here which makes it something worth discussing on this board of the forum as well.


The simple truth is that times are changing and the anonymity that crypto currency promises is being abused by people which then gives no other option for bodies whose objectives is to ensure that there is no anonymity the opportunity to make their case. Just last week we read about how some individuals kidnap someone and ask for bitcoin as ransom. We have read about how people move funds because it cannot be traced, hide bulk of their funds in crypto so as to avoid government reach in case they are being tried for impropriety etc.

This is the new reality and there is not much that can be done. For gambling sites, I think its mischievous for them to start asking for KYCs after receiving deposits while for the bounties, I would want to be more careful before dropping my details for those people as most of them dont have enough infrastructure to ensure the data are safe.

I use Coinomi too but on android but the data is not as much as this. When I checked to see how much I have used after seeing your post, its was a little below 30MB which I feel its still Ok to a large extent. The app is a cool one though because of the simplicity in sweeping a wallet whenever there is need to claim a fork listed on the app. I want to suggest maybe you copy out the keys and every details needed, then you uninstall and start all over again and if that didn't work, they are more active on Twitter than the forum to respond to queries raised by users of their app.

Crypto currency itself is not by default decentralized the reason for such misconception is because the term is always common among crypto currency and any currency that would want to claim its rightful place had to be decentralized in nature or claim to be one. There is really no defined line between centralization and decentralization. Today even though bitcoin claims to be a decentralized crypto currency, we have centralized exchange sites, we have centralized wallet services where you can exchange for any coin or sell directly.

And most importantly, despite what we are made to believe that mining is decentralized just like what @bitmover illustrated, the moment any of the major miners merge, they can conveniently control the direction of price and nothing anyone would be able to do about it because there wont be any regulator to forestall such move just like the case it would have been in the business world where merging of two firms is likely to cause any form of monopoly of the market they operate.

In my own opinion, I think if you have another convincing evidence to connect the two accounts aside for the merits transfer, it would go a long way in proving your case against such individual because just as DT members wants to act decisively in making the forum better or safer, threads like this needs to come up with hard evidence to make their job easier and defendable because if it happens that the merit is an honest mistake, it puts their own reputation at risk as well.

Maybe in the future, if some can be implemented whereby merits from someone who has certain amount of negative trust won't count just like the person who has been tagged by two DT members, things like this won't be reduced to a certain level but until then, there is need for more evidence.

People who abuse merits forgets that they can only use it once and when it gets used up, its either to conform to the rule of the forum on getting merit legitimately, or they are stuck in one position and because opening a new account won't come with merits, that won't be an option to consider which is why I agree with this submission entirely. The earlier we start following the rules the better for everyone. Most times people who are of the lower ranks always believe they are subject of targets when some rules are made rather its meant for the betterment of everybody.

A banking system that have shut out a large percentage of the population is a failed one. What they need is a complete overhauling of their entire banking system and this approach is just a cosmetic one. I can't even believe such archaic banking system still operates in that part of the world. There is nothing wrong in having bank accounts for the high net worth individuals but there should be several options for different category of people in the country. Over here, banks have gotten to a position of them coming to you not the other way round where banks would have agents go and collect money from the low income earners who are either too busy to go to the bank or too shy to go there and deposit for them and also withdraw if need be.

What I see here is a change the entire frameworks and leadership of the overseeing agency there but bringing in the effect of blockchain would make an impact but not effective if there is no change in that policy.

You know the fact is most of the ICOs are only following the band wagon that since this particular ICO does not allow US investors, then its better we don't also allow not because they know the reason but because they trust what make ICO A not to accept this, we also should not accept and I think this is a good question because even me, I don't know the real reason but confident that its going to be about regulation issues.

I will want to take an holistic view as to why they don't accept US investors which is not because of the rule but the enforcement of it (for the ICOs that knows the rule). They know that if they allow US citizens, the relevant government agencies have the power and resources to go after them if they so wish. Unlike other countries that have equally made a position against investment in ICO but their name is not part of the terms and conditions you have to specifically tick that you don't belong too before being allowed to participate.

I think this is a discussion that is more of technical discussion for those who are more technically inclined can contribute better for a better understanding. Phones sometimes are known to have some security issues depending on the model and the country where its coming from and for this to be a refurbished one, there is high probability that there could be some back end security issues that have been compromised in that regard. I had read a news of US military banning military personnel from using some particular phones because they believed its being used to monitor their movements which then exposes them to danger. If your app is not allowing you to install on it, I guess you should just not install it by force to avoid stories that touch about how you lost all of your coins because of that.

When it comes to learning, for finding your way to the forum, you have made a great progress the next is to discern what to read and when to act. The market is one place that humbles the wise that when it seems all is going on fine according to your plan, you are taken aback overnight. The best time to enter the market is when things are down like we have now while the time to exit is when you have made decent profit rather than maximum profit which a lot people always wait for only to be caught up in another round of volatility of the market.

Holding for long is not something general. For some people one week is too long for them and to others its six months. For other coins, I wouldn't consider just holding long period without bothering to check the status of the market especially coins that are not popular the next thing you would see is by the time you want to check what is going on, the coin has been delisted and if you had a huge amount kept, you have just lost a huge chunk of money. But for bitcoin and the some of the high volume coins, real long-term always pay off no matter how one spin it. When I looked back the amount of btc I have sold when I get the transaction history of my wallet, I imagine how rich I would have become if only I had been strong enough not to have sold at the time when I did. In all we all need to establish when "Long-term" begins.

This is a highly delicate matter though but in my own opinion, its not one way. At some point of our development through various stages in our lives, we then get choose which path we want to go even though parents have a role to play, at times it turns out that they can only influence and not the determining factor. In this case, I think its a combination of two and most times the one to choose to teach the children is largely dependent on the position of the parent.

For me, who I don't have a company or manufacturing business for my kids to have the chance of inheriting and build to a global company, there is no point of enforcing entrepreneurship but the same cannot be said of someone who has such a company and wants to handover to his kids. Again, everybody cannot be business inclined other would have the dream, and they would needs other people to drive it. The richest man in the world is who he is because of the employees working everyday to ensure that his wealth stays high.

Do you really know the implications of borrowing to invest in cryptocurrency. I don't see any financial or investment institution ready to give you money for that purpose the moment you disclose that is what you need it for even if you have a worthy collateral. The reason is not because they don't want to make money or they don't like their clients to succeed but because of the amount of risk involved which is highly tending towards the direction of defaulting and no insurance firm would cover for that.  When that happen, and your collateral is liquidated, you then become poorer, they lose on customer and the amount of income from your end, while you become a burden to the society.

The sounding message is simple which is not different from what others have said, despite the fact that there is need to investment now and make more returns, its not wise to do it being cornered into an impossible choice because even though we believe the price of bitcoin would rise, its better to hope for that without any pressure of someone pressuring you for repayment of loan or you lose your property.

If this is true then its a confirmation to my earlier suspicion that not everyone having account on this forum are human beings because I can't imagine someone having 49 accounts. How can you even manage the amounts, to post on all of those, log in then log out several times in a day and to then be able to cheat with it is another high level multi tasking that can be channeled into productive engagements and I think there should be a maximum account that one person can be entire to and I am sure that is the direction we are heading to with this kind of behavior.

I can't imagine I just read that as a requirement for a campaign and to imagine that a manager would pay for such a participant is what is even more disgusting. Reading through is posts, just show some people are not willing to learn or change to add value. I don't see anything stopping him from just contributing but I guess its going to be a bought account. I have known about shit posters but Hero Member is way out of it and should be discouraged not only him but the manager of the campaign.

The problem I see here is not the minimum amount to post at all, I have seen someone made over 80 posts in a week and not one was spam. Short, concise, straight to the point and meaningful at that.

I don't understand why people cannot just learn to separate issues around here. You create a posts around merit, its castigation, you don't get merit, you don't rank up. You agree with people their opinion, you are tagged slaves among other things. I really don't see anything wrong in what he is doing. People should be free to do what they want so far they believe they create value and someone who is impressed by it merits it. I don't think anyone is force to give it merit and as at the time of reading this, no one has given him a merit. I have given someone a merit simply because he gave advise on how to earn merit in a decent way and this is only highlighting how some people who have 0 merits and worked the way up as form of encouragement to those who complain about how unfairly skewed the merit system is from the way I see it.