I doubt it.  Seems to be more about your kind of dumbass and petty perspective

Admin already decided what they were going to do, and of course, members would send out more smerits if they were to have them, but that is the point.  Smerits start with sources, with the initial distribution on 1/24 and half of an smerit for any merit that you receive from another member.  In other words, you are not really saying much of anything with your suggestion that members should get more smerits.  Your point does not address any issue, and seems to be the opposite of what the merit implementation attempts to achieve.



Why can't you show your appreciation by making a responsive comment to the supposedly "deserving" post?  Why do you need smerits in order to show such alleged appreciation?

I did watch the video (it's about 1 hour long in which Tone Vays interviews Craig Wright).  Sure, it is a bit irksome to listen to CSW, at all.

When I decided to watch the video, I considered that Vays is a sufficiently focused person and that he would attempt to research into matters and to ask probing questions of Wright.  Surely, Vays did a sufficient job to allow Wright to make his various points and also to show some of the nonsense and evasiveness of Wright's points, without getting too distracted by confrontation.  

Surely, your choice.  Whether you truly understand the risk (which I presume that you do) that goes along with the upside of personal bitcoin promotion, when you publish such practices on the forum, you do end up opening up the topic of personal opsec for comment, and in some sense, the topic evolves beyond  you personally - because you have already made such choice.

Furthermore, if you want to advocate that others engage in similar kinds of behaviors (whether wearing hats, or getting tatoos, or driving lambos with personalized BTC related license plates or other markings), that is your choice too, but such advocacy is also likely to spark a decent amount of push back on the forum, too, regarding best practices.. whether on a personal security level or from a bitcoin advertising angle.  I personally know someone who was contemplating marking his boat (that was acquired completely with bitcoin profits) with a marking that says something like:  "gotten from bitcoin," but I discussed the pros and cons of such markings, and the person came to his senses and decided to be more discreet in regards to his own finances.


Yes.  A personal choice about what is most important, especially when it comes to your own decisions to wear labels and in what circumstances.


Seems that you are considering this matter too personally, if you are considering the topic of gams and the topic of wearing of BTC markings to be related.



I made this related comment larger because it seems to deserve a comment, too.

As you likely realize, there is going to be a lot of variance in perspective in terms of when and how much one person or another will consider lines to be crossed.


O.k.  have fun.

Not only is bitcoin a 24/7 dynamism, the issues (and even differing perspectives) are never quite resolved, even when, temporarily, they might seem so.

I've kind of been thinking that the more clear it is that bcash is a shit project, and if it's crash comes clearly and unambigously, then that would be quite bullish for bitcoin, at least in the short term and perhaps in the longer term.

On the other hand, if the fork remains ambiguous with additional pumps and bullshit shenanigans and lack of clarity, then that will likely drag BTC down with it, or at least hold off bitcoin from raising in price.... which actually seems, currently, like the most likely scenario (though I would love to be pleasantly surprised that another outcome plays out).

For example, if Bcash only dumps from here, and even has a decently large dump before 11/15 - but maybe a blip of a pump on 11/13-11/14 (at some point peeps are going to stop trading and even exchanges will stop the ability to trade bcash too), I would consider ongoing dumps in Bcash and even a kind of resolution to dump after 11/15 to be a bullish sign for bitcoin... seems like a minority scenario, maybe only 30% or lower to play out as such.

I am pulling your chain a bit, and largely my suggestion remains that people cannot really know, with any degree of certainty, the extent to which the online personality of any of us matches with our in real life personality(ies).

My practice has not been any kind of attempt to hide behind the pseudo-anonymity of my on-line personality; however, I have become a bit more comfortable with the passage of time, to play around with such dynamic - so there has been some evolution of my approach, rather than my starting out in a particular way and sticking with it.

Actually, I do appreciate the variety of personas in this space, including the pseudo-anonymity of most of the forum accounts, the public outedness of other persons in the space, even while there is a certain value to looking someone in the face to figure out whether to trust that person more or less with personal information.

The longer that any of us is in the bitcoin (or crypto) space, the more likely we have a combination of relationships, and even discretionary privacy, and my go to answer for people, in real life, who ask me how much BTC I own (upon their first finding out that I am interested in bitcoin) is to ask them a similar question about how much gold they have and how much money they have in their bank accounts.  Usually, the common sense of the inquisitive person will "get it" after just one response from me (in form of a question), but a few of them are stubborn and say that they are ready, willing and able to be transparent about their bank accounts and their other assets. 

My subsequent response, without actually asking the inquisitive person to reveal any of their personal financial details, is that likely they do not have very much to lose if they are willing to disclose such personal financial information (implying that it should be private).  For the most part, I have not had to pursue such conversations of sharing personal financial information beyond that point, yet my general disposition, at that point, becomes to outwardly acknowledge that I am dealing with an inquisitive person who cannot control his/her own level of snoopiness about a topic that they should respect as being private.  So even, if some people want to disclose their own personal finances, seemingly because they want you to reciprocate, to some degree I may be willing to listen to so of their personal information that they want to disclose, and usually, I put a certain level of skepticism in their degree of openness which causes me more skepticism about sharing any of my actual personal information with them (whether financial or otherwise), unless I want the information to leak (which seems likely when dealing with that kind of person).

I think what happened around September 15, theymos both added new merit sources and he tweaked the quantity of the smerits of already existing sources at the same time, which caused a resetting of the smerits of the already existing merit sources (and therefore a kind of lump sum of smerits got airdropped into the smerit accounts of sources). 

Likely the merit sources front spent their smerits, and therefore ran out of smerits just prior to the 15th of the subsequent month (which would have been October 15) and therefore this month as well running out of smerits prior to November 15. 

It could take a few months to flatten out the smerit replenishment, unless theymos throws everyone monitoriing the system for a loop and tweaks smerits again... hahahahahaha.

Perhaps another indication of 50/50... which supports the uncertainty until 11/16-ish thesis that I already mentioned?  and some progression towards willingness to be bullish and that the btc bottom is already in?  I am not opposed to any contra-indicator thesis, though.

That's a pretty strong assertion, right there.

I suggested a greater than 70% chance that a Bcash hardfork(s) would occur, and you are asserting that such outcome is closer to 100%.  Sure, I am willing to come up a bit, and maybe I lack information and lack confidence, but I also know that there are a bunch of trickster fuckwads who are playing around, and likely a lot of the decision to fork or not remains in the hands of only a few players (perhaps dimwit Craig Wright and a few others on that particular team could decide, yay or nay.  You really put it past those scammers to NOT be playing the situation?  and pull some last minute resolution (or temporary resolution) out of their hats (or asses?)?


Yes.  The better scenario for everyone would be that the fork happens, and the totality of dimwits get sucked into further irrelevancy - but the world usually does NOT pass by with such rosie and clear outcomes.  Sure, it could happen, and maybe decent odds for such, but far from clear from my perspective, anyhow.


This is getting more into the 50/50 territory, as far as I can see, even from your description, and when I am seeing anything approaching 50/50 then that has an air of uncertainty, at least regarding the way I see things.  So, I conclude uncertainty in the market and even uncertainty in which way the BTC price goes, as well as the rest of the market.  Maybe in terms of the affect on bitcoin there is a kind of bullish bias in me and a bit of a bearish bias in you which kind of replicates how we had already been inclined prior to the nearing of this bcash hard fork battle matter?

Surely a puzzling situation, and that's why we cannot have nice things.  

Some supposed "trusted source" is going to screw things up, and hopefully the amount lost (and/or the lesson learned) did not cost too much?

Yeah... I don't think it works like that.

You cannot receive both the Bcash and the Bitcoin from prefork coins unless they are sent in separate transactions.  The guy still has the bcash in his old account, and he has to send you the bcash separately for your seemingly devious little plan to work.  Somebody want to say that I am wrong?

Difficult to keep up with you fucks.

More or less the article seems to be saying that BAKKT is proceeding without complete regulatory approval because BAKKT is of the tentative believe that it does not need regulatory approval based on its plan to 100% back any BTC that are put into the daily bets and settled at the end of each day.

Surely, you are not knocking "chuckle criteria" since you have mentioned chuckle as one of your own smerit sending criteria on at least a couple of occasions, if my memory serves me well (which usually it does serve me sufficiently decent when it comes to stalking the jbreher... hahahhahahhaa)

Yeah... don't let greed get in the way of prudence, because you never know which way any of the nonsense is going to go in the shitcoin space, either short term or even medium term - even though chances remain pretty decent that the vast majority of shit coins will go near or close to zero, but it could take 20years to play out such recognition of their fundamental quasi-vaporware bullshitness.. which is not the amount of time or energy that you should be spending on such bets.. when you have much more positive and solid energy in bitcoin and the various projects built around bitcoin.

Let's just say hypothetically that the BCH fork(s) takes place on November 15, as anticipated.  Surely, that is not a unreasonable hypothesis, and it seems to have greater than a 70% chance of happening, based on current posturings (I am kind of assuming that there is enough backing of faktoshi to actually follow through with his bombastic nonsense).

Then, if such fork really happens, then wouldn't bitcoin actually experience upwards price pressures, rather than downwards based on a kind of resolution of some of the uncertainty - especially seeing how it plays out. 

On the other hand, if the fork does not happen, the such nonhappening might not bring as much certainty, unless there is a clear indication that such fork(s) have been cancelled rather than postponed.  Then also such nonhappening of bcash forks might cause pompening of bcash - as if, all of a sudden bcash has acquired some street cred and actual fundamental value - beyond enduring as a mess of an amalgamation of effervescent disgruntles.

I am kind of thinking that without necessarily creating different forum accounts, each of us has an ability to create our on-line persona, and maybe even to start over? 

Of course, each of us has our personal predilections, too.  For example, quite frequently I receive suggestions about how I should or could modify my online personality in one way or another that might be more satisfying to some others, and other readings into my online persona as if my online persona is equivalent to my in real life persona. 

Of course, there is going to be some overlap, but there certainly can be abilities in the non-meat space, when not distracted by the actual meat.   

You referring to alts or to bitcoin, or to both?

I would not mix up short term dynamics with long term bitcoin prospects and if we stick with bitcoin, things seem to be looking good, even with some of the various ongoing short terms shake ups, including our ongoing current correction down from $19,666 to our current location bouncing around in the supra $6k price area.

Why not both?