O.k.  Thanks for that basic explanation because I was not really clear about the parameters of DT1 and DT2. 

Can I receive one more point of clarification, since the topic seems timely... ?  Since SaltySpitoon just added Lauda to his trust network, does that mean that Lauda is back on DT2?   In other words, how many DT1 trust lists does Lauda have to be on in order to qualify for DT2?  just one?

I hardly know shit about the trust system, except that I see that it is a link that I can click on in my profile.

And I can understand if you did a trade (or planning a trade) with someone why a trust rating might be helpful, but perhaps in the end, a more decentralized system of trust will be transformed into the merit system, which like you imply could cause the trust system to become less and less relevant because it seems that the way trust is set up has become a bit of a clusterfuck of gaming and drama.. and hardly anyone wants to get involved with inside politics, except perhaps scammers who are attempting to game the system, and even those negatively or positively affected by insider politics will frequently get worn out and frustrated by how complicated and dramatic systemic relationships of relative power can become and difficulties for laymen and even insiders to attempt to sort the accurate information from the misinformation.

I agree with everything you say Lauda, except your trust in cats.

Seems to me that dogs are much safer because if a cat has a opportunity, it is going to eat you.    If trained properly, a dog will just be sad.  You cannot train a cat not to eat you.  

There is nuance, no?

Seems that getting kicked off of trust is not the same as negative.  Sure you can do both, but if a regular hammer works to pound in a small nail, it seems to be a bit overkill, and perhaps unnecessary to use a sledgehammer to attempt to accomplish the same.

Another example.  Let's hypothesize that we had a demerit system that supplements our current merit system.  There would be three levels that are each different. I could consider that you post deserves merit or I could refrain from giving merit or I could give a hypothetical demerit.  Just because I chose to not merit such post does not necessarily mean that it rises to the level of justifying employment of a demerit.  Probably not the best examples, but I attempted to answer your suggestion that removal from DT would necessarily rise to the level of negative trust.

In looking at your posts, you had absolutely zero posts before January 23, 2018 - therefore you earn no activity points for those several earlier activity periods in which you had zero posts.  

You have to have at least 1 post in a two week activity period in order to earn activity points for that period.  

Your activity level is currently maxed out at 28 because you have only posted in the two activity periods proceeding our current activity period, and in those two activity periods you posted 70 posts, which earned you the maximum of 14 for each of those two activity periods.  

  As long as you post at least 1 post in our current activity period, which you already have, you will receive another 14 activity points in 2 weeks because you have more than 14 additional posts that you have already made so currently, you do not have to post any more in order to receive 14 activity points for this current activity period.

Therefore, in two weeks, your activity will go from 28 to 42, and at that point, you will become Jr Member (because your activity will then equal or exceeded 30)


Edit:  You received another 14 activity points within a short period after my initial response post - going from 28 to 42.  Therefore, it seems that I miscounted your active activity periods as being 2, when you had 3 activity periods.  

Anyhow, problem seems to be solved, even though I remain a little confused about when activity points show up on the account.

Part of the reason for my previous post was that I assumed that activity points were largely awarded by the system to all members at the same time, which I thought had already taken place, yesterday.  Accordingly, my 14 activity points had been added to my account yesterday, about 24 hours before your 14 activity points were added to your account.

I will like it when page count parity becomes support parity... but patience is going to be necessary.

Bitserve.. don't get distracted by toknormal's nonsensical assignment. 

S/he/it has the burden to show this kind of information if s/he/it believes the information to be relevant to his extraordinary proclamations.... otherwise, s/he/it is just playing hide the ball and/or making claims about information that does not exist.

  S/he/it is making an assignment for us to run around and to find supposed proof to rebut when s/he/it is making the nonsense arguments... and likely such information is really not available anyhow because it is very difficult to show exactly the amount of BTC traded across so many exchanges, and OTC and if s/he/it had such information, then s/he/it should present such evidence to us and describe how it is supposedly relevant to the claims being made.

Whatever.  I don't need any homework assignments to be running around trying to disprove your nonsensical theories.  You are the one trying to make a nonsense claim about supposed bitcoin impending perils.. when we already had our regularly scheduled in the middle of a bull run 70% correction.

 Further, you already provided a link to a scam article, and like I said the dead horse beaten subject has been floating around for more than 6 months, and you also provided a link to BTC market cap versus Tether for your supposed nonsensical proof, and you failed to meet your burden to show facts and/or logic to convince me (or probably many others) that there is any major issue involving a Tether scam that is jeopardizing the whole of our lovely honey badger beyond your assertion and the ongoing assertions of your FUD spreading bear shill doom and gloom associates.

You recall when BTC prices were in the lower $1 - $2k territories .. or was it our early 2017 correction down to $890, and you were calling for an inevitable fall to below $500? 

You were wrong then, and you are most likely wrong here, again, with your ongoing unsubstantiated, party poop negativism and exaggerated BTC fragileness assertions.        

We going UP, no?      I'm seeing a spurt from $8,900 to $9,200.. looking good, looking good.   

O.k.  Mr.(s) brilliant.  

You do recall the chart of the size of tether as compared with all of the cryptos, correct?

I don't have the link right now, but anyhow tether is a very small fraction of this total crypto space, and don't act like you are the only fuck that happens to be woke, because like I said those dumb ass theories about Tether supposedly artificially pumping and supposedly bringing the whole thing down have been spouted off a lot by FUD spreaders, and the fact of the matter is that it had little to no effect on our current state of correction, which still seems to fall within the realms of normal market movements (even if a bit extreme in having had retraced down 70%, so far).





Get the fuck out of here with that.  There is all kinds of trust when we are dealing with a lot of exchanges.

We have no fucking dominant decentralized exchange system yet, and since MTGOX, began trading in 2010, there have been varying number of third parties who have been entrusted with private keys, and today, there are more than 200 exchanges that are mostly using custodial type models.. so get out of here with your strawman bullshit.



Sounds like you are exaggerating a bit here, buddy (and don't even attempt to proclaim that we are not buddies     ).



Who fucking cares?  You really believe that $2billion number is propping up the whole crypto space, or merely bitcoin?  I don't buy your premise (and the other nutjobs that are focusing so much on this supposed calamity waiting to happen).



You are denying the fact that this has been beaten to death, and trying to suggest that the problem is getting worse.. .. and I am having difficulties seeing either your facts or your logic that support your FUD propagating bear wishing claims.    



What Harry berry said = myditto, and I wished that I would have said it like this.   

Hasn't this horse been beaten to oblivion in the past 4-6 months?  Fuck, I seem to recall the beating of that horse further back, as well.  

We gots ourselves all kinds of stupid ass theories regarding the supposed bitcoin bubble, and yeah, it does not surprise me that you, toknormal want to include some of those exaggerated and FUDster talking points, since you seem to kind of specialize in those kinds of doom and gloom talking points.        

Actually the comparison of the late 2015 is not a bad a bad comparison, even though that particular surge kind of demonstrates the whole beginning of this bull run, and now we are either continuing in the bull run or ending the bull run, and I think that the case for continuing the bull run is stronger, even though we could experience a 3 to 12 month delay.... and hopefully, more on the shorter end of this consolidation period... so yeah, considering the bull case scenario, which seems to be the more plausible one, we could experience quite a few ups and downs within a $7k to $18,500 range  for several months, and it seems that ups and downs within that range would not undermine the ongoing bull case scenario.

The bear case would likely involve a break below $7k which would have a pretty decently high likelihood of cascading us down to $5k and even dips down to $3k.. so that would be a more bearish scenario, and surely any bearish scenario would likely need to be accompanied by decently sized FUD and perhaps spam attacks and alt coin pumping that fools folks into some kind of belief that bitcoin is not king..... Another bearish scenario could come through a very large level of ICO/Alt coin collapse and/or crack down that could drag bitcoin down with it... yet the bull case does continue to seem as the more plausible one, at least currently... and even if such bull case drags out several months before returning to ATH striking distance.

I don't want to forget about the last surge past $10k and up to $19,666.

I feel that I made pretty decent money on that because I was selling on the way up, and such price upsurge allowed me to generate a decent level of fiat in order that I have more bitcoin this time around (on the way back up).

Another reason that I don't want to forget about our last upward price surge is because such upward surge is likely demonstrating a more bullish upwards BTC price path than had previously been considered.  So the fact that BTC prices went up so fast and nearly effortlessly from $10k to $19,666 in a matter of a few weeks, showed a decently bullish upwards BTC price potential that clearly goes to $19k again, and also supports a case of $50k and $100k, when prior to passing $10k, talk of $50k and $100k was considered as too much fantasy.  No longer the case.

From where do you get your trade volume information?  daily candles?  hourly?  are you accounting for trade volume from last week in your consideration of what is happening right now?

Most frequently, you need to look at longer time frames to assess trade volume to be low, and merely because trade volume has recently come down, that snap shot assessment of trade volume is going to be inadequate if not viewed in proper context, and last week we had one of the largest volume bars ever, especially in terms of USD... .... in other words, consideration of context is surely important when assessing current trade volume.

You ageist!!!!!! 

I'm still not giving you any merit, you fuck, even though you supposedly went long (in your little fictitious troll painting of fantastical facts) and you do (kind of) illustrate a valid point about the disutility of ignoring posts (and publicly stating that you are ignoring some posters), because after such ignoring information is known, then you "the ignored one" has the ability to retort whatever the fuck you want about the ignoring party, and to more or less have the last word... ... hahahahahhaha   ...   gotta find a little tiny bit of humor in that, even though you are not going to get any of  my smerits, merely for your one-time clock is stopped trolling-ass wit that happens to make a decent point.  

Lookie Uie Rochie Poachie attempting to project himself/herself/itself as a part of some kind of broader and meaningful "royal we" movement, when the fact remains that s/he/it has difficulties getting permission to leave grandma's basement, even though grandma does allow the drinking of slurpies.    

Ibian does not give a ratt's ass about the point, especially if the point involves any kind of meaningful bitcoin discussion because s/he/it has a one track agenda to proliferate nonsense by either bringing up bullshit off-topic racist and elitism distractions or to reiterate stupid-ass superficially unjustified BIG BLOCKER talking points.

I looked at the linked youtube video, and it is about 1 hour 44 minutes, and it is about the third industrial revolution.

Are you suggesting that there are some specific parts of the video that mentions crypto or bitcoin, because if it does not mention crypto or bitcoin at all, then wouldn't it be harder to make any claims that it puts crypto into any kind of historical context.   

Can you provide a bit more of a description or some time marks so we would not have to watch the whole thing to attempt to figure out how it might be relevant to "crypto's place in history"?

Of course exaggeration, or word choice can have a variety of effects, including serving as a means to joke, but there can also be other inferences, besides joking that causes an impression (whether intended or not). 

It seems that this whole merit system was meant to be implemented in a fair way and to approximate a kind of fair transition and to address some spamming and account farming issues, yet hindsight can be 20/20 too, and allow for analysis of ways that "it could have been" implemented more fairly. 

Nonetheless, having said all of that, there is always going to be reluctancies in going back and redoing an implementation such as this, so most realistic remedies would be tweaking of the already implemented system, if any, and there may also be a considerable reluctance to tweak anything prior to allowing it to play out for a few months to see how smerits are deployed by status quo holders of smerits, by sources and by members who receive new smerits through from other members.