This is a weird thing to say....

Perhaps you can document or otherwise backup this....or is this something you are lying about?

You are crazy.

I don't think anyone was ever claiming the US was going to denuclearize, and I am not aware of any compelling reason why we should.

There is a report that North Korea recently filed a "new tactical guided weapons firing test" today. This is according to North Korea's state run media.

North Korea has previously not conducted any ballistic weapons tests since late 2017, as Trump had successfully deescalated US-NK relations that appeared to be heading to war.

Talks to fully denuclearize North Korea broke down during the last summit between North Korea and US President Trump, when NK wanted sanctions removed in exchange for something less than a full, verifiable denuclearization.

The US military had not detected any kind of missile launch recently, however this alleged test is likely meant to send a message to the US of NK's capabilities.

What will this lead to? Will the US ease on economic sanctions, while getting less than a full denuclearization? Or will the US pursue a regime change, covert or otherwise?

There has not been a war between two counties that both have nuclear weapons, and if NK is able to develop a working missile that a nuclear bomb can be attached to, going to war with NK will become very complicated.

Paywall: https://www.wsj.com/articles/kim-jong-un-sends-message-to-trump-with-military-visit-11555497814?mod=hp_lead_pos4

Update:
May 3, 2019
North Korea just fired a short range missile according to the South Korea defense ministry

I don't think it is even clear the OP is associated with the project.

It also looks like the project is offering some kind of sweepstakes giveaway that doesn't require any kind of purchase/investment. I don't see any measurable losses to participants if they don't end up paying out the $500k.

As an FYI, the ANN thread of the coin is here, and I believe this to be the contract address for the ERC20 token. I am not an expert in looking at ERC20 contracts, but I believe this to be the contract creation address, that, according to etherscan, at one point held ~5,900 ETH in July 2017.

I am not sure where the above ETH went, but it was presumably used for general operating expenses, possibly exchanged into USD. I would not put it out of the realm of reasonableness the project has at least $500k

This would not be a good idea.

Take a look at my thread and see how much merit I received just for opening the thread— a lot, and the same is true for you and LoyceV.

IMO, at least one reason for these types of threads is to get merit, possibly to rank up.

I don’t think the forum should regulate who can open which types of threads. Although I think the merit system has caused some people to create a lot of “guide” threads with the hope of earning merit — in some cases the information is useful and informative to newer users, and this beats the alternative of people posting a bunch of garbage.

Perhaps one solution would be for someone to create a single merit giveaway thread in serious discussion (no signatures so no sig spam will be there), that anyone with sMerit can use to award what they believe to be good posts that are (self) reported in the thread. All/most other merit giveaway threads could be disallowed, with few exceptions.

^^I don’t think the above should be implemented until the issue referenced in the OP gets worse than it is now.

I find it unlikely that he will repay on time, but IMO he is trying to offer the best terms for a lender without considering the possibility he won’t have the money in time. I don’t think he would have difficulty getting loans with similar interest offered but with repayment dates when he actually repaid instead of the due dates he initially said he would repay.

I also doubt the lenders had a pressing need for the money immediately after the original due dates. The consistently in what I see to be disrespecting lenders by telling them he will repay earlier than he actually does it what turns me off about these loans.

I don’t think he will default on a 0.03 loan, although he may be trying to repair his reputation and when he realizes he cannot, he may eventually default on a loan this size.

There isn’t even an option to say he will repay on time.

I have had my own poor experience dealing with the OP and would recommend against dealing with him.

With the above being said, I don’t find his concerns to be unreasonable. If anything can be learned from this thread it is that lesbian cow doesn’t like criticism and his friends are willing to help prevent criticism.

It is generally frowned upon to change terms of an auction after it has started.

I would suggest providing a unique address for each loan, so there is no question who a payment is from if two people owe you, say 0.05BTC exactly. I have found that many people tend to withdraw money directly from exchanges to my address when they are paying me. You can provide a signed message with a repayment address so the borrower can prove they paid you.

Good luck!

I didn’t see where he said definitely that CH was not banned.

Perhaps you should consider to stop twisting others words to fit your narrative...

I think there is a good chance he is temporarily banned, but this is speculation.

Regardless of if he is banned, he appears to want to improve his standing with the administration after this thread and after theymos warned him that he is close to getting banned. It was transparent in that thread that someone is/was putting in effort into trying to get him banned  

It doesn’t surprise me that he is trying to lay low. IMO, he doesn’t want to be excluded from the forum.

---

Considering CHs post history is public, someone impersonating him could continue prewritting a number of posts until there are sufficient similarities between what is written and how CH writes.

If CH is being impersonated, it wouldn’t be the first time someone tried to impersonate someone to make them look bad.

The anti spam campaign managers thread you referenced is very content heavy and IMO, meets the criteria for having an ad based on the current rules. The thread in the OP has only basic information fairly easily obtainable.

Theymos was apparently asked if it is acceptable to host an ad in the thread referenced in the OP, and I would presume theymos either gave permission or didn’t respond— even if the OP were to ignore a denial to host an ad, theymos would have been aware of it and could have removed it.

The rule says to ask if you are not sure if your thread is content heavy enough. The rule doesn’t say that you need to get permission ahead of time.

---

I would say if a lot of these types of threads start to pop up, then the rule should be reconsidered.

Oh the irony in this post.

By my calculations, he has given out 1/2 the number of merit he sent, which means he has unspent sMerit totaling however he received from the initial sMerit airdrop. I am not sure how much sMerit the lower ranks received from the airdrop, but it looks like he was either a Full Member or a Senior Member when the merit system was implemented.

I looked at some of the under-merited posts you cited, and I would have to recommend that you try to find some posts that meet the following criteria:

The posts you are citing are examples of the types of posts you would be giving merit to if you were a merit source. I think a lot of the posts you are citing are really just low effort posts that would only receive merit if the sender was friends with the person posting, or something similar.

Two of the posts you cited stood out to me:

I am also not 100% certain about this, but it appears you have not even exhausted all your sMerit. It also looks like you have given out 36% of your merit(317 merit) to only 5 people, I don't know what the circumstances are surrounding these merit transactions, and your merit giving habits may have changed.

I don't have any issues with micgoossens, but IMO if he wants to have any realistic chance of becoming a merit source, he needs to find better posts for his application.

I am curious to know how many people bothered reading any of the cited posts before vouching for him.

Here is the actual rule:

I would have to agree regarding the last few posts cited in the OP.

I would suggest that Coolcryptovator find 5 more posts that are deserving merit to replace the last half of his application.

If a merit source gave merit to any of the last 5 or so posts, people would probably be (rightfully) criticizing him.

I would second this idea.

In addition to adding liquidity, it would reduce the number of seats outstanding, making the donation/seat increase, all else equal.