|
While due to privacy concerns in regards to the PM reporters I'm going to have to be rather vague on the details, you were banned for sending one or more PMs to users, offering them to join one or more campaigns which you were involved in, which were then reported by multiple users as unsolicited. Other campaign managers have been banned for the same thing in the past.
As for thresholds, there are no hard ones besides it being reported by more than a single user (past reports of previous unsolicited PMs also count towards that number) and the usual ban for the first offense is 7 days (though if the unsolicited messages are of a non-commercial nature or there are other circumstances, the moderator might reduce it to 3-5 days). Really, the punishment is usually decided by each moderator on a case by case basis and as such I can only highlight the trends.
|
|
|
|
We are thinking about doing a bounty campaign. Is there a post where is explained, what is exactly allowed in a giveaway?
See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3953664.0: Accepting signups or requiring proof of participation for tasks requiring substantial effort (e.g. signature campaign signups, weekly social media campaign reports, media (videos, images, articles, etc.) bounty signups, etc.) via a thread posted in Bounties (Altcoins) is allowed though. I'd recommend checking out the other pinned thread on the Bounties (Altcoins) board. |
|
|
|
If an AI is able to consistently create content that doesn't break any of the forum's rules (good quality, on-topic, not just a padded word salad, no plagiarism, etc, etc), I, for one, welcome our new machine overlords. Otherwise, content that violates the rules, AI or human produced, can already be dealt with with our current rules and policies in mind. So, in theory if someone somehow managed to farm, let's say 5 accounts up to Full member and Senior member and somehow implemented an AI for those accounts to interact around here while joined a signature campaign or a bounty, so the single person behind those accounts can get all the economical benefits, that would be acceptable as long as the quality of those posts are good enough and on-topic? Right? All that matters is that those users don't break the rules. If they don't, then yes, there's nothing against them operating several AI powered accounts though at that point, I'd be more worried about that AI doing things outside Bitcointalk as opposed to farming signature campaigns. Just posting something on-topic , semi-correct and coherent doesn't necessarily mean the post isn't low value. That quality is what I feel a lot of AI generated content is gonna lack (and yes I'm aware of the recemt developments in that area). |
|
|
|
If an AI is able to consistently create content that doesn't break any of the forum's rules (good quality, on-topic, not just a padded word salad, no plagiarism, etc, etc), I, for one, welcome our new machine overlords. Otherwise, content that violates the rules, AI or human produced, can already be dealt with with our current rules and policies in mind. |
|
|
|
Hi there, I used some of your work few years ago, I think it was about coin icons for this forum, nice work btw. got a question, do you have a site of your own design?
Ps, you are one of the most decent forum members.
My personal website (the pages of which are linked as examples of my work) was designed by me using a Bootstrap theme. Overall, I tend to focus more on the development side of things and most of my designs tend to be rather simple / functional. However, if a client has a more complex idea of a website design, I can use a template / design provided by them as well. |
|
|
|
At the moment (and in the foreseeable future) no centralized stablecoin is safe. Period. Unless you have no other options in or outside crypto, do not keep money in stablecoins for any amount of time beyond what you need the stablecoin for (trading at an exchange that doesn't accept fiat, paying for goods to a merchant that only accepts stablecoins, etc.). By keeping money in a centralized stablecoin you are getting the downsides of the traditional financial system (intermediaries can easily control and freeze your money) without any of the protections afforded by battle-tested regulations of that financial system (your money is not insured and if something goes really wrong, as it has several times already, your "dollars" are gonna be worth as much as the Zimbawean dollar). Now what I stated is a theoretical statement based on (IMO) a rational assessment of the pros and cons of stablecoins. However, if that has not convinced you, let's look at some examples. Starting with the biggest elephant in the room - Tether / USDT. Let's just check their Wikipedia page for the thing that matters the most to any stablecoin holder - whether their stablecoins are backed by real US Dollars: Tether claims that it intends to hold all United States dollars in reserve so that it can meet customer withdrawals upon demand. It was unable to meet all withdrawal requests in 2017.[40] Tether purports to make reserve account holdings transparent via external audit; however, Tether never produced an audit showing it had the purported reserve.[21] In January 2018 Tether announced that they no longer had a relationship with their auditor.[41]
<...>
On September 19, 2022, due to an ongoing lawsuit in New York District Court, Bitfinex and Tether (referred to in court records as B/T), were ordered to produce documents showing the backing of USDT, the outcome of which is still pending.[43]
<...>
In September 2017, Tether published a memorandum from a public accounting firm that Tether Limited claimed showed that tethers were fully backed by US dollars;[46] however, according to the New York Times, independent attorney Lewis Cohen stated the document, because of the careful way it was phrased, does not prove that the Tether coins are backed by dollars.[17] The documents also fail to ascertain whether the balances in question are otherwise encumbered.[40] The accounting firm specifically stated that
This information is intended solely to assist the management of Tether Limited ... and is not intended to be, and should not be, used or relied upon by any other party.[46]
Tether has failed to present audits showing that the amount of tethers outstanding are backed one-to-one by U.S. dollars on deposit despite repeated claims that they would.[47] A June 2018 attempt at an audit was posted on their website in June 2018 which showed a report by the law firm Freeh, Sporkin & Sullivan LLP (FSS) which appeared to confirm that the issued tethers were fully backed by dollars. However, FSS stated "FSS is not an accounting firm and did not perform the above review and confirmations using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles," and "The above confirmation of bank and tether balances should not be construed as the results of an audit and were not conducted in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards."[7] Stuart Hoegner, Tether's general counsel said "the bottom line is an audit cannot be obtained. The big four firms are anathema to that level of risk. We’ve gone for what we think is the next best thing."[47]
(I've specifically left the source numbers in to make a point that these statements were sourced from external publications) If this is not giving you massive warning signs, I don't know what will. If you're looking for a more in depth perspective of what USDT is and who its run by, I'd recommend Youtuber Coffezilla's " Exposing Tether - Bitcoin's Biggest Secret" as a starting point. While I do find him a bit too clickbait'y in his style, the points he presents are solid and it's a great tl;dr, even if you're not interested in researching the topic further. Moving over to Binance's BUSD, while it seems to be less risky than USDT (which is a very low bar), it's important to not just look at what BUSD is, but what Binance is. While it seems to be one of the largest, if not the largest, cryptocurrency exchange offering a product whose security relies on a strong regulatory environment, the company is established in the Cayman Islands, a well known financial offshore territory. They did open a separate entity (Binance.US) for their US customers (after Binance was banned from operating in the US) " which nonetheless is banned in six states: Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, New York, Texas, and Vermont". Furthermore, according to a Reuters special investigation " How Binance CEO and aides plotted to dodge regulators in U.S. and UK", it seems like Binance isn't really a big fan with having to comply with government regulations, sometimes even (allegedly) through legally questionable means such as backdating documents intended to avoid new laws. Stepping away from all the regulation stuff, we have Binance's Binance Smart Chain, which the exchange seems position as part of decentralized finance in its marketing (e.g. Binance in its article " Binance and BNB Chain: What’s the Difference?" states that "BNB Chain was originally initiated by Binance but has since grown to become a community-driven, permissionless, and decentralized blockchain ecosystem.") yet, according to a Messari researcher, it seems that Binance Smart Chain and its accompanying Binance Chain seem to be effectively centralized. Now to be fair, it's indeed true that BUSD was founded by Binance in partnership with Paxos with Paxos holding the reserves (as per the their Wikipedia article), I'd still be skeptical as in large and complicated systems with a lot of moving parts, there's still ways those systems can collapse on their own, let alone if any malice is involved (e.g. something going wrong with the Binance issued Binance-Peg BUSD) And now we've reached USDC. Ironically, of all the big centralized stablecoin players I consider USDC as the least questionable player. While I don't know the credibility of the claims that USDC is in trouble (as cited by OP), if those allegations are true, that should tell you everything you need to know about how trustworthy any stablecoin is, let alone the less reputable ones. P.S. While some users might jump in and suggest DAI (or similar decentralized stablecoins) as alternatives, do keep in mind that there's been reports that more than half of DAI's collateral is comprised of USDC. So if there are any major centralized players, decentralized collateral-based stablecoins might be subject to similar pitfalls to their centralized counterparts. And if we were to turn to algorithmic stablecoins, I think most of us remember the UST death spiral. P.P.S. If you want to keep a substantial amount of money in USDC or in any other stablecoin for those high (and usually completely unsustainable and / or incredibly risky) returns in an attempt to avoid inflation slowly eroding your assets, I'd recommend checking this post of mine out for ideas. |
|
|
|
I believed I have seen the name mprep in the moderators list on Altcoin Discussion board and also on some quality posts in the forum.
It is nice to meet with you here. I have been looking for someone to teach me how to design or develop websites. Mostly free service but here I know that I must pay money to learn. So when I am ready to learn I will pm you and if there is no fund for me to learn I will leave it but really like to learn it. If I will have the opportunity to recommend you in a service listed above, I will do that straight away. You have a nice job. keep up.
Appreciate the recommendation. I don't really do teaching, but website development is one of those fields that you can definitely start off learning online on your own. There's plenty of free (both written and video-based) resources that can teach you step by step on how to design and develop a wide variety of sites (and they most likely do it much better than I ever could). Try googling whatever part of web development interests you and start reading through guides and tutorials, trying to write small samples of code, doing various suggested exercises, etc. |
|
|
|
I tend to clean the Archival section once in a while.
So there is no backup of any kind for topics deleted and cleaned from Archival? I noticed a lot of topics with Delete title and simple dots (.) topics that are not deleted for years and they stay in Archival. If I report some topics like that will they be deleted/purged from Archival or not? Here are few recent examples I found not deleted: .
Deleted
D
AFAIK any content you edited and previewed should be saved in the aforementioned drafts. As for what I delete from the Archival board, well, it depends on a number of factors - are there any substantial replies (as opposed to something as "move this test to archival", "please delete", "lol", etc) from other users, is the post merited, is it self-moderated (dunno if I seen any in Archival though so not sure if they keep their self-mod status when moved there), etc. Essentially, I tend to delete threads that seem to be testing BBcode / thread designs or contain absolutely no information whatsoever (no content in the OP, no content in the replies and the topic itself doesn't provide any info in it of itself). While I did say that I "tend to clean the Archival section once in a while", it's usually more of a casual sweep up - look through several pages and delete the more or less obvious test threads, making it easier for anyone who makes new test threads to find theirs as well as for other users to dig through retired threads. The "once in a while" isn't particularly frequent either - from once a year or so to maybe once every few months. It just so hapenned that Casino Critique's thread was posted semi-briefly before I started my occasional sweep. As for reporting these threads, I wouldn't bother unless it's something that shouldn't belong on the forum in the first place. Maybe if it's a clearly abandoned test thread or a deleted thread that is truly and utterly devoid of any info or data (old, no content, no merit, no self-mod, no other user replies). |
|
|
|
|
I tend to clean the Archival section once in a while. Any use of the board to test your BBCode or thread designs should be treated as just that - tests. You post a topic, a few posts, look at how they look and then consider the topic as gone / no longer important. One shouldn't rely on the Archival board (whose main purpose is to archive / retire regular topics) as storage (short term or long term) as test topics may be deleted at any point in time.
I'd strongly recommend using the PM preview feature for continuous / iterative previewing of BBCode. If you need the old topic recovered, I can message theymos - just let me know.
|
|
|
|
Woah I didnt know this thread gonna blow up, I got a bit confused how can I give it away? it doesnt matter if its in LTC/BTC/ETH I can do top 10 coins without a problem so please quote me after this what I should do thank you all <3
- If you want to give away LTC or some other altcoin, start a thread in Bounties (Altcoins), say you only accept entries via PM (and that entries posted in the thread are invalid). Make sure the warning can be clearly seen so a moderator doesn't mistakenly delete your thread.
- If you want to give away BTC, post it in Games and Rounds (a sub-board under Gambling) and accept entries how you want (post in the thread, PM you, via Google forms, etc)
The "no low effort tasks" thing is meant to prohibit attempts at bypassing the "no altcoin giveaways" rule. And, naturally, anything that's not prohibited or restricted is allowed so yeah. In that case, to avoid potential problems to yourself and the participants, the best thing to do is just host the altcoin giveaway away from the forum like you mentioned in one of your quotes. No on-forum signups or reports. The giveaway can be announced in the bounty section with clear instructions that those interested HAVE TO sign up elsewhere or show their interest over PM, social media, etc. The thread could even be locked to prevent those who can't read two sentences from registering and asking for free coins. @mprep would that be allowed? Yes. |
|
|
|
The "no low effort tasks" thing is meant to prohibit attempts at bypassing the "no altcoin giveaways" rule. And, naturally, anything that's not prohibited or restricted is allowed so yeah. Thinking out of the box here: how about 50 pushups? If the participant can prove he did it in his entry, sure. Couldn't really call doing 50 pushups AND creating as well as uploading proof for it low effort. |
|
|
|
So asking a single retweet isn't allowed, but spamming Twitter 50 times is okay? Maybe theymos just really hates Twitter and Facebook  The "no low effort tasks" thing is meant to prohibit attempts at bypassing the "no altcoin giveaways" rule. And, naturally, anything that's not prohibited or restricted is allowed so yeah. |
|
|
|
You can't do an altcoin giveaway and call it a giveaway, but you can call it a bounty, post it in the bounty section, and have the applicants complete a meaningless task like following you on Telegram/Twitter or something like that. Bounty reports are also allowed, so you can ask them to post proof in your bounty thread that the task was completed. After that, it's up to you to decide who gets the Litecoin bounty.
Not really: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3953664.0. |
|
|
|
If you're OK with accepting entries via PM or off-site (e.g. via Google Forms) as opposed to posting them in one or more threads (which isn't allowed), yeah, you are. Post it in Bounties (Altcoins).
I've just looked it up and from what I see: * In Bounties (Altcoins) one of the pinned posts tells "Giveaway threads are not allowed" * OP has tried to start a giveaway, but ** somebody has ignored OP request (for PM) and answered with address ** the whole topic got removed (found topic 5412920 in modlog) While I understand that the rules are there to avoid mindless spam, I also feel for users like OP and maybe we can do something about it. I mean, look at the sheer number of (nice!) raffles in collectible section. Maybe we should somehow find a solution for this? AFAIK I didn't remove that thread. If it were up to me, I would've just deleted the post with the address (as well as any subsequent posts of such nature). |
|
|
|
|
If you're OK with accepting entries via PM or off-site (e.g. via Google Forms) as opposed to posting them in one or more threads (which isn't allowed), yeah, you are. Post it in Bounties (Altcoins).
|
|
|
|
If they want to give away USDO, they should do so without requiring users to post to claim it (e.g. accepting entries via PM) and post it Bounties (Altcoins).
It's compromise solution, but I still don't get it why they should post giveaway in Bounties-Altcoins section for something that is not actually altcoin Maybe because 100$ USDO equals 100$ us dollars (and other stable coins) if I understand correctly, and I don't really know how exactly they are calculating real value for 1 USDO. This looks like a grey area so maybe we need special board for posting stuff like this.... anyway I think it's good they got unbanned quickly. Because beyond vague unproven statements, there's little evidence for me to treat USDO as a non-transferrable token. If owlgames can prove that their multi-chain casino records USDO balances and other data on a centralized database (and said centralized database doesn't interface with any smart contract) as opposed to on a blockchain, they're free to post the thread in Games and Rounds provided that they don't require users to post altcoin addresses (so just usernames or emails) and that they refer to the thing being given away as game credit as opposed to USDO. |
|
|
|
The linked article mentions that it's a "token that works as game credits within the OWLDAO casino ecosystem" and that you should "connect your credited wallet to Owl.Games casino" to claim the USDO. This doesn't explain anything in regards as to how the token is recorded on a regular database and seems to imply the exact opposite. However, if they can explain as to how USDO is recorded on a centralized database and how that interfaces with their multi-chain casino dApp, I'll unban them and restore the thread.
To make it more easier I have to say that It is not tradeable, is not exchangeable, it can only be viewed inside the platform. For example if you give them your wallet address they will credit you xxx USDO, But you can not see any transaction on blockchain. It only visible inside the platform when You will log in through email password/ connect your wallet. Btw If it’s not enough then I will ask the info from owlgames team. What will be procedure then? Should I post it here? Or suggest me a way please. Thank you. Hmm... While I still have my doubts about whether this is a token as per the altcoin definition, I've unbanned them. While you could claim USDO is a token (I'd still need some technical details to confirm or deny that), it doesn't seem to resemble a cryptocurrency (or a currency in general) in function. I've also messaged theymos for a clarification and if he gives the go ahead, I'll restore the thread as well. If not, I'll post here about it as well. EDIT: I've received a response from theymos. He did not give the go ahead for the giveaway and as such the thread will remain trashed (although the ban will not be reinstated due to this being a borderline case). If they want to give away USDO, they should do so without requiring users to post to claim it (e.g. accepting entries via PM) and post it Bounties (Altcoins). |
|
|
|
Ask them to send you exact information about USDO game credits, and than post all details here.
You can see the exact info about USDO here - https://blog.owldao.io/?p=302The linked article mentions that it's a "token that works as game credits within the OWLDAO casino ecosystem" and that you should "connect your credited wallet to Owl.Games casino" to claim the USDO. This doesn't explain anything in regards as to how the token is recorded on a regular database and seems to imply the exact opposite. However, if they can explain as to how USDO is recorded on a centralized database and how that interfaces with their multi-chain casino dApp, I'll unban them and restore the thread.
Today, Owl.games told that they are banned for running the giveaway. So what's the solution? They were not run an altcoin giveaway. Mods can you please explain the reason of the banned?
It's obviously Owl mistake, however I think they should be unbanned or permaban should be changed to temp-ban, but they should be very careful with making any giveaways in future, they should do it in correct board following forum rules. In the same time we have people who are not banned for obviously doing multiple ban evasions and other offences, so there should be some common sense here. The ban isn't permanent. |
|
|
|
|
If the game credit data / balances (even if it isn't transferable to other users) is recorded on an existing blockchain (e.g. Ethereum), then IMO no, it's a token and it's not allowed. If the game credit is recorded on a centralized database, then it's allowed if users can without exchanging to other altcoins, exchange them to BTC. From the looks of things (based on the Ethereum addresses being posted, mentions of the casino being "a Multi-Chain DAO" and an "iGaming solution for Web 3.0", referencing their casino being a "blockchain-based engine", being able to sign up with EVM coin wallets / the usual dApp "Connect" functionality, etc.), it seems like the casino is a dApp and thus I assume the game credit would be recorded as non-transferrable tokens.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
