While the number of members that make ten posts a day hasn't changed and a few fresh accounts is actually bringing it up, the second number dropped to...16!!!! From 52 members making more than 70/a week to 16! Who would have thought the accounts that woke up to get paid only post to get paid  Loycev, do you have any stats related to the number of posts made in the altcoin section? Sorry, I don't keep track of the boards, only posts. And I can't get the board without scraping one page of each thread again, so I'm not going to do that. But I have active topics on Bitcointalk.org in the past 7 days, which still has a bounty-topic with more posts than the Wall Observer thread, and many of the top-topics are about some useless altcoin. |
|
|
|
When I did it, I found that the userid of @Andreas Schildbach (userid = 3696) is missing from the list of userid that I took from the loyce's club. Which list did you use? The account is included in the full list, but missing from my Merit-lists because there's not a single Merit transaction on that account (just like 2.7 million other accounts). |
|
|
|
It's annoying because:
~
- I now have to spend time on this drama. Sorry for that  Many financial experts would even further argue that it's the sign of a competent treasurer if he can make the assets entrusted to him multiply with reasonably risk-free activities  ... Really? Multiply the assets for himself, or for the one who has entrusted him with the money? It would indeed have looked much better if a forum treasurer managed to give back a few percent more more than he owed. |
|
|
|
Me too. I don't want them, feels like cheating  I kinda expected something to come out of the caption voting from the way theymos put it, I just had no idea what it would be. |
|
|
|
Did any one experience something similar or have an explanation for it? "(Bitcoin Forum)" is theymos correcting stuff. I called it "deMerit" because I've only seen it take away Merit until now: I'm curious to know why this happened now!Update: I received 11 Merit from "Bitcoin Forum". Now I'm even more curious!
This answers your question: Thanks to everyone who participated! If you voted in this event, you received 1 merit; if your caption appeared in the first table above, you also received 10, and if your caption appeared only in the second table above, you also received 2. |
|
|
|
If I got this correctly, there is cca 10 BTC not claimed by Theymos and cca 7 BTC claimed by OG? ~17 btc doesn't sound like it is "not big deal", but whatever  That's not all, that was just one of the Byteball airdrops. Soon after the one I mentioned, the value started dropping hard though, and the airdrops stopped, but it was fun while it lasted. The Stellar Lumens airdrop gave around 975 XLM per Bitcoin, the value since then has been anywhere between 300 and 6000 satoshi. I think it was around 1200 sat/XLM when the airdrop happened. You do the math no mate think the GBYTE was much more, let me look at some numbers and ask people who bothered to claim - i know real money was made by some The earliest airdrops (which I missed) handed out much more (but the value was lower back then), the later ones airdropped less. (I had my airdrop claiming service back then) |
|
|
|
As a reminder: theymos responded already: I didn't know about that. I don't see it as a violation of the treasury agreement, but it's... a bit tacky, I guess. I suppose an analogy would be a fine-art storage company selling selfies with famous artworks. I learned a new word (tacky), it's a clear view on the matter, so I don't think this leaves anything else to discuss. How about the other forks, the shittier ones than BCH? There's like Bitcoin Gold, Diamond, Private, etc., and they aren't worth nothing by any means. Not that this is any of my concern. I'm just mildly curious. When all of these forks happened I had zilch for bitcoin holdings and thus wasn't entitled to those ass nuggets masquerading as cryptocurrency. See this post. |
|
|
|
If OG simply had to sign a BTC message from HIS keys it is debatable if the airdrop value should be his or not anyway, because they are OG's keys.. The amount of GBYTE airdropped was based entirely on the Bitcoin holdings on the address. So if someone joined by signing a message from an empty private key, he got nothing. Is an exchange a scam if they claim airdrops on their keys that are full of customer funds and not disperse these claimed values to the customer? Some exchanges have indeed done that. But what if it's just their local system administrator who claims it for himself instead of the company? |
|
|
|
How about userid and rank (bi-weekly or monthly update)? That would require scraping all 39,148 profiles each time, on top of the many pages I scrape already. So I'll skip this one. |
|
|
|
I didn't get a reply to my PM, so I'll post my findings here: A follow up on my post: on Crash, BC.game is rounding each winning in SATS to whole SATS. This can be exploited: overnight, I won around 400 SATS using this Auto setting: base bet 1
payout 1.5
On Lose: Return to base bet
On Win: Return to base bet My proposed solution would be to stop rounding, and show exact amounts in SATS (so instead of 416.000000 SATS, show for instance 416.051039 SATS). I don't like cheating, and even though it's just 400 SATS: please take them out of my account, or tell me where to send them. Alternative: if there is a "white hat" bug bounty, take the 400 SATS from there. I haven't checked if this can be abused in currencies other than SATS. I'd like to post my findings in your thread too, but only after you've had the time to fix it so it can no longer be exploited. As an update on the 400 SATS: I lost it already (shortly after I reported this). |
|
|
|
UPDATE!I'm replacing one weekly updated file. This was requested by tranthidung: UserIDs and earned Merit machine readableSample0:0
3:2110
4:13
10:1
11:2
12:1
13:13
14:4
24:6
26:4
29:1
30:232
33:1
35:6287
37:6
40:1
42:4
49:3
143:345
163:11
182:0
183:0
198:55
203:92
206:1
217:8
224:27
241:4
262:1
267:1
270:6
271:1
284:6
295:1
325:10
336:1
338:4
369:2
378:5
381:11
392:6
413:5
430:1
454:0
462:31
464:1
489:2
490:7
491:7
525:3
.......
.......
.......
2714564:1
2715350:2
2715564:1
2715585:2
2715691:3
2715744:18
2715756:1
2715793:1
2715856:2
2715989:57
2716064:32
2716068:13
2716274:1
2716297:1
2716303:1
2716885:2
2717148:1
2717159:1
2717179:2
2717427:10
2717644:1
2717702:5
2718042:1
2718140:35
2718161:57
2718183:5
2718363:1
2718720:2
2718725:56
2718783:5
2718796:3
2718916:12
2719002:2
2719007:1
2719096:1
2719128:1
2719158:4
2719170:2
2719490:1
2719495:1
2719608:1
2719647:3
2719680:2
2719687:7
2719867:1
2720576:1
2720746:1
2720781:2
2721431:2
2721556:5
(1 MB) The above file (loyce.club/Merit/userID_merit.txt) will no longer be updated. It now shows:This file is no longer updated. The new version is:
http://loyce.club/Merit/userID_sent_received.txt
The new version shows:
userID:sent Merit:received Merit If you're using this file for weekly data collection, please update your records. The new version is this file: http://loyce.club/Merit/userID_sent_received.txt (which will be updated weekly): UserIDs, sent Merit and earned Merit machine readableSample0:-104:0
3:0:2110
4:0:13
10:0:1
11:0:2
12:0:1
13:2:13
14:0:4
24:0:6
26:0:4
29:0:1
30:186:232
33:0:1
35:11812:6287
37:0:6
40:0:1
42:0:4
49:0:3
143:0:345
163:0:11
182:1:0
183:9:0
198:2:55
203:53:92
206:0:1
217:0:8
224:0:27
241:0:4
262:0:1
267:0:1
270:0:6
271:0:1
284:0:6
295:0:1
325:0:10
336:0:1
338:0:4
369:0:2
378:1:5
381:0:11
392:0:6
413:35:5
430:1:1
454:5:0
462:0:31
464:110:1
489:0:2
490:0:7
491:0:7
525:0:3
.......
.......
.......
2714564:0:1
2715350:0:2
2715564:0:1
2715585:0:2
2715691:0:3
2715744:7:18
2715756:0:1
2715793:0:1
2715856:0:2
2715989:27:57
2716064:0:32
2716068:0:13
2716274:0:1
2716297:0:1
2716303:0:1
2716885:0:2
2717148:0:1
2717159:0:1
2717179:0:2
2717427:1:10
2717644:0:1
2717702:0:5
2718042:0:1
2718140:0:35
2718161:1:57
2718183:2:5
2718363:0:1
2718720:0:2
2718725:22:56
2718783:0:5
2718796:0:3
2718916:0:12
2719002:0:2
2719007:0:1
2719096:0:1
2719128:0:1
2719158:1:4
2719170:0:2
2719490:0:1
2719495:0:1
2719608:0:1
2719647:0:3
2719680:1:2
2719687:0:7
2719867:0:1
2720576:0:1
2720746:0:1
2720781:0:2
2721431:0:2
2721556:0:5
(1 MB)
|
|
|
|
|
Username: Loyce
Lucky Number: 4
|
|
|
|
There is a case I would like to break a lance in favour of: Paxmao (Sr. Member). I've seen his posts, and indeed, this is well deserved, so I've sent him the required 28 Merit to become Hero Member. Thanks for this, I was behind in sending enough sMerit to empty my source by December 13. This topic helped a lot  |
|
|
|
I didn't know about that. I don't see it as a violation of the treasury agreement, but it's... a bit tacky, I guess. I suppose an analogy would be a fine-art storage company selling selfies with famous artworks. Thanks! I never participate in these things. They're a series of risks & headaches for a chance at some profit. In this case, the only "risk" was having to sign a message, and the expected profit was (more or less) known up-front. According to the website you linked, 0.00625 Gigabyte/BTC was disbursed, so your calculations are off by a factor of 10. Suchmoon is correct: that was for the later airdrops. If the fork coins were property of the forum, any treasurer would owe the fork coins back to the forum, not the value of a hypothetical trade years before if there was no request to liquidate the fork coins at the time. That is indeed what happened to the Forkcoins, but I wasn't talking about Forks. I am unable to substantiate the 0.0625 GBYTE/btc rate on July 9 as stated in the post made by what appears to be a forum user unassociated with the GBYTE/Obyte project. I followed the airdrop back then, and the quote is correct. I don't really want to dig up all the details because I remember I checked some of the numbers of the airdrop back then, and they were all correct. My guess would be the amounts of Bitcoin that are now shown in the transition log were taken at a later date, for a later airdrop. You'll have to look up the funds on each address on the exact date if you want the exact amounts. It appears likely that OgNasty received GBYTE from 5 distributions. That could be, I didn't look any further as one airdrop was enough to ask for transparency. |
|
|
|
Sure, I could start a list of data dumps - static files updated on a regular basis, as long as it doesn't duplicate efforts from LoyceV. I don't keep track of which accounts are active, so don't let me stop you |
|
|
|
Important questions to related to this giveaway:
- How many blocks are generated per hour?
- What does mining difficulty mean?
- What’s a mining difficulty adjustment?
- When are such adjustments done?
- How is BTC price affecting miners and therefore also mining difficulty and block generation process? Although I could try to answer all those questions, there's a much simpler way: extrapolation! During the past month, the exact same questions were valid, but they've already been answered on the blockchain. The only real variable that's left is the Bitcoin price: if it goes up a lot, the hashrate will go up. But I don't expect it to change much in just a month. My guessWe're in the same timezone, so that's easy. There are 30 days and 2 hours left. The current latest block is 606211. Going back 30 days and 2 hours, we're looking at November 1, 20:00h. Now all I have to do is find the closest block: 601943. The difference: 606211-601943=4268 blocks. My estimate: 606211+4268=610479 My guess for the first block of 2020: 610479.I don't think it's very likely to be correct though: 4268 blocks is less than what's expected in 30 days, 2 hours: (30*24+2)*6=4332, and at increasing hashrate miners are usually a bit faster than what's expected. So it could be the hashrate dropped in the past month (due to the price drop), and if that's the case, the hashrate has to continue dropping for my prediction to become true.
I love educated guesses Unless this was for Beginners only? The title makes it look that way, but the rest of the topic doesn't look like it. |
|
|
|
I checked the top of the list to see if I could rank them up. The first candidate was a Merit abuser. The second candidate just ranked up already. The third too. The next one posts in Russian only, so I can't read it, followed by someone posting in Arabic, and the next user got inactive after receiving negative feedback. That leaves only 2 Hero Members who need quite a lot to rank up, so I'll take theymos slightly out of context again: But undoubtedly some people got screwed by this, and if they have decent posts, by all means, give them the 250 or 500 merit that they need to rank-up. Those 2: hatshepsut93 needs needed 32 and figmentofmyass needs needed 38. Update: done! I don't want to spend the rest of my evening reading posts, so I've just re-merited many of the posts that I already Merited (and this could be a long time ago). Welcome to being Legendary! /just Merit source things |
|
|
|
I want to continue to work on the forum! You still don't get it. If you think spamming this forum is your "work", I'm glad you're banned. Now, if you want to be unbanned, start by creating a long list of all the good things you've done for the forum: If you think that a ban should be ended, make your case in a new topic from a "good for the forum as a whole" perspective. |
|
|
|
everything I have done is within the rules of this forum, please correct me if I'm wrong. Correct. But the negative feedback and flag you've received, are also within the forum rules. I never said I was Richard Heart. You must understand that's not obvious for people who know a Richart Heart in relation to crypto. My real name isn't Loyce, but if someone else claims to be Loyce Valenzuela and is related to crypto, the confusion is not unexpected. My name is simply a promotional name. I never said I was from the HEx team but I do support Richard and his project strongly and I'm a big financial supporter of HEX. Great! Now if you want to pay up to 0.25 BTC per week for running a signature campaign, you can easily prove you're for real by getting a reliable forum escrow to hold the funds. Hex is not a scam. if you actually researched the project you would realize that. I don't know, but that's not the point of this thread. This is about your fake signature campaign, and it's not the first time this happens. I am handling payments myself, No one is forced to join the promotional campaign and people are free to join or not. True. And forum users are free to give you negative feedback if they believe it's justified. So basically you have 2 options: prove you're reliable (by using an escrow), or have nobody trust you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
