if the thread is from 2011/2012, there really isn't any point in reporting it, unless its still an active thread. If people are still posting in it as of late, then I suppose it can be moved, but if its burried on page 50,000 of the wrong section, its not really that imperative that it is moved, so it probably wont be moved.

If the thread is a few months old, check the activity, if no one has posted in the thread for months, the same thing applies. If it is still being posted in and not hidden by pages and pages of other threads, it can be moved.


Yes, necroposting is against the rules, and those replies will be removed. Necro posting is when you post in a very old thread for no good particular reason.

Yep, tis a bit confusing. Having a green trust number is completely relative. If you use the default trust list, if you have trust from someone on it, you will have green, however another user who doesn't use the default trust list wont see your score as green.

As an example, if Theymos gave you trusted feedback, and I didn't have Theymos set to my trust list, I wouldn't see a green number.

I have moved this thread from Gambling to the scam accusation section, while you don't seem to be yelling, "Scam" this is the most correct section, and the section you would want to be in if anything escalates. I dont know the details, so it might be an honest mistake/issue that both parties are in the know of, I'm just posting this so btcrock.biz doesn't get upset to see this thread in scam accusations if you two are already working something out.

Bitcoin.com was registered in early 2008, and Bitcointalk wasn't registered until 2011, I'm pretty sure there is no special significance to the name Bitcointalk, other than its a place for people to talk about Bitcoin. Bitcoinforum is kind of long and doesn't sound quite as good.

Resolving it or ignoring it are your two options, the trust system isn't moderated as Diamondcardz said. Moderators can't do anything to trust, only admins, and admins won't make any changes to it, as that could lead to abuse quickly.

I think the only time feedback has ever been removed, was when someone was creating bots that would leave everyone negative feedback. They were banned, and that feedback was removed.

I think D&T summed it up pretty well

That doesn't fix the rest of the issues though. And having two categories of accounts creates tenfold more issues. Being allowed to have more than 1 account is here to stay. We are smart enough to realize you can't create a rule that is unenforceable.

This is something that has been beaten to death. Limiting sockpuppets is an impossible task. People always say, OH! But I'm a member of "insert forum name" and they limit people to one account! Well yes and no, people can get around any sort of account limiting restrictions if they have the knowhow. With the Bitcoin community, the majority have the knowhow, so putting in standard, or even some new advanced multi account fighting methods would just be deluding ourselves, and giving people a false sense of security from scammers with multiple accounts. There is also the fact that many users here use proxies/Tor because that is the mentality of a large portion of the users here. Going by IP doesn't really help when people can just change IPs in a blink of an eye, and then we end up banning others from using that same IP that are not involved. Thats why the "pay to unban by IP" feature was added, not to generate revenue, but so that people could pay an insignificant single fee but not insignificant for people creating thousands of accounts; to unblock a proxy that they use. Another factor, is that we don't necessarily want to restrict speech. Some people have professional accounts where they have to withold a certain standard, for example if you own a business and have strong political opinions, you wouldn't want your opinions to effect your sales, so that is a reason to legitimately own another account.

Its a double edged sword. People with tons of accounts can use them for nefarious purposes, but punishing everyone for something the few do is something we at least try to avoid. The restriction on not allowing newbies to vote doesn't really hurt many people. It is slightly inconvient for some, but not something major, and the benefit far outweighs the cons.

The problem with completely transparent definitions as to what will or wont get you banned, is that people are then able to play the system. If it was a temporary ban, then I can guarantee it was 100% deserved, as there are limited moderators who are able to do temporary bans, and the ones that can are the forums most experienced.

As far as remedying the situation, Theymos is the only one who can handle Ban Appeals, and frankly speaking, it does not happen often. There is a fair bit of oversight that goes into the banning process, with accounts that aren't newbies especially, mistakes are very rare, and your own misinterpretation of the rules tends not to be a great defence. While there are very few hard rules written, most go without saying. A 30 day ban leads me to believe that it was either not your first mistake regarding the same subject matter, or it was way outside the realm of what a reasonable person would expect of you to post. The fact that you were banned twice for "spamming" whatever that encompases, means that you were given consideration or that double standard, as you weren't permanently banned after the first warning ban.

Obviously I don't know what your post was, and it was deleted I'm sure, so without that I can't try to point out specifics to what I believe to be your offense, but perhaps consider what I said, if it makes sense to you now more than before, in 30 days perhaps you will have understood what happened, and can avoid it in the future. You are very lucky to have got a 30 day ban actually, those are rather uncommon. Short temporary bans are the standard (3-7 day) and after that, you are gone.

Correct, you are fine.

Sean's Outpost is a good one that has been running for a while:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=295211.0

or try talking to Phinnaeus Gage, he does a lot of Bitcoin Charity work, and runs Bitcoin100 if I'm not mistaken? Or has had some sort of affiliation with it.

What alternative solution do you have to prevent people from registering hundreds of accounts, getting all of them banned and continuing to make more accounts through proxies/tor? The Fee to unban the IP isn't to allow people to buy their way out of bans, nor to raise revenue, its to prevent just what I said previously.

No, not at all, MPOE-PR was banned for receiving a formal warning to stop spamming, and then insulting Maged in response. You don't get banned for insulting mods, just like how mods are allowed to insult members. Its a two way thing. You can however get banned for disregarding a warning.

Inaba yells and insults everyone, but they are also yelling and insulting him. You can get banned for excessive personal attacks, however in Inaba's case people attack him and he attacks them back. I'd call that an argument.

It has not been handled, thank you for the offer, but I'm going to have to decline. Quite frankly I have no need to sell it, other than that I tend to make the most BTC when moving them from form to form (BTC/Metals/Cas Coins/etc) I sort of just let this thread go dormant for a few months not because I was no longer interested in selling it, just that I don't have any desire to sell or not to sell it. I guess I mean to say that I'm indifferent as to whether it sells or not. Its sort of a, if someone offers me 2.35BTC I'll take it, otherwise, I'll just hold it for a while and see what happens.

I don't mean to use my situation to hardball you or anything, just letting you know my position, and why I declined your 2 BTC offer, but I do thank you for it.

Thanks for the bump, If Mike is allowed to continue producing Cas coins, I will definately do a group buy or two.


I've also still got the 1 BTC All Silver Cas Coin pictured for sale at 2.35 BTC.

One word posts are sometimes fine. It really has to do with context, as to whether it is a complete answer/thought in reply. For example

OP: Hey guys! I'm here looking for a 10 BTC loan, I have no credentials, no reason to pay you back, and no trust, anyone want to give me a loan?

You: No

In this situation, you are directly responding and giving a straightforward on topic answer in one word.

Vs.

OP: Hey guys! I'm here announcing my new service, I take your Bitcoins, invest them in my own secret ways, and then return the money 100% Guarenteed. If you aren't satisfied, get 100% of your money back!!! Fully insured deposits, you cant lose!

You: No

While it is somewhat on topic, and we could infer that you were saying "No..." with implied extra meaning, that is an example of a post that may or may not be deleted. If the thread is 50 pages long and people have already explained that the OP in this situation is a moron, your "No" reply probably isn't needed. Plus added other situational things, and depending on who is reading it, etc etc.

I suppose my point is, post one word replies if you wish, just try and make sure that your one word reply is completing an idea or thought. It is however more easy to do with multiple words.

I live around a huge homeless population, and sadly I can say, there are a huge amount of scammers. I've made it a policy not to give out money, but instead, give out food if I see someone begging. I met a guy begging for money one day saying that he hadn't had anything to eat in two days, when I handed him a sandwhich, he said, "I don't want that, I want money." It sucks that homelessness is such an issue, and it sucks even more that people are willing to exploit the homeless even more by pretending to be homeless for a quick buck. I met a guy in New York on the subway asking for money, and ended up talking to him for quite a while. He said that he will sometimes make $90k per year (untaxed) begging on the subway. He was genuinely homeless at one point, but then pan handling became his job.

Keep in mind, I'm probably one of the most Pro Altcoin people here, however it is getting rediculous. Truth be told, we can't handle the Alt Coin traffic here. All of the issues people have and the bitching and moaning brought on by Alt Coin topics, as well as the spam that leaks to out of the Alt Coin section, not to mention the scams (I'm not talking about coins that you disagree with) but I mean the people that just throw money into anything, and then complain to me after they have been ripped off... Its exausting *catches breath from my e-rant*

I don't want to tell all of the Altcoin people to go away, I want them to take the Majority of their Alt Coin discussion elsewhere. We can take the Alt Coin announcements, important announcements by the developers, major breakthroughs, new services, etc, but with everything else piled ontop... its, well, exausting.

The solution is not to get rid of the section, or to ban altcoin conversation, its to suggest that people create their own forums for their own dedicated coins, and take as much conversation there as possible.

You look alright to me  

*cough cough* one of the first times I can say that the default trust system is working in a positive manner.

Well the tricky thing is, a lot of it isn't technically spam. A new coin has as much right to be in the section as any other coin. And then service announcements also aren't spam. Both of those things bring a substantial amount of content, so those threads are for the most part, good threads. So you have 500 coins, and each of them have 10 services, it gets cluttered very quickly, but its not spam. I dont see things changing much until the new forum software, but hopefully we will have a better system then.