So, curious. Why, in your list are some of the price guesses red?
Are these the median, or average guesses?
But good idea
Then I have the next question ... can our names be marked in red? So that no one else comes close to our four) Lol  53,082 ETFbitcoin
53,210 bitmover*
53,333 icopress*
53,458 malevolent* Wanted to highlight there prices to attract as many as possible to join there range I see! I am glad I asked as I did not anticipate that as a possible answer at all. BUT... I have 2 sats to pitch in on this discussion. I think there should be NO RULE limiting ANYONE for picking any price at whatever granularity you choose for the game to employ. Partly because this is actually a strategic aspect. It puts strategic bits into the timing of your selection for example. Being the first to predict in a game has benefits/costs as does waiting until the last moment. I think it makes it fun to see people either be aware of these issues, or not, or as in my case, not care. If you ever DO try to limit close together guesses (if you keep doing these!) I would suggest just making the granularity chunkier. Like saying "to the nearest $10". The only downside is the ability for players to collude to put another player at a disadvantage. For example a miserable BSV shill can pick something like, say, 33,333, and two other players can pick 33,332 and 33,334 thereby limiting the chances he will win significantly. But this is self limiting as you then need TWO people willing to basically throw their vote. It's fun thinking about the theory behind a mic-game! Oh, and thanks again! indeed cAPSLOCK, but there where no limits, he just asked for a red colour, if someone wouldn't pick a spot inbetween its completely own choice, cause from when the game is released and prices are chosen, then NEVER EVER a rule would change cause its dishonest, when the flop is presented, then we can't change a card anymore right, IRL you know all the problems that follow when a misdeal occurs  Before we had some different games don't remember anymore? with the 25 or 50$ up and down space watch my previous topics, we had some different games with different rules, but for this one and the long time past between this and last game I chose a classic style I was thinking for who guesses the date of new ATH as well, maybe pity I didn't went for that one though... Totally agree of not adjusting the rules while in play... I think I have been somewhat unaware of the rules, and have missed several recent games. I was glad to have an opinion in time for this game, however it was before the the giant meltdown.. or downmusk... or whatever it may have been. I wonder now if I would have been as bullish as my prediction now is closer to a 2x that I would probably pick. I do think we still have a chance for a tremendous recovery... but I feel less confident in my pick than before. |
|
|
|
Chartbuddy Yes
If this post has more merits than the Chartbuddy No post by 5PM Central today, I'll turn Chartbuddy on for 72 hours.
I'll have Chartbuddy merit everyone back on both posts (up to 200 merits total)
Wait a minute, ChartBuddy. I am in Central time too! Somewhat south of OK. |
|
|
|
I'll have Chartbuddy merit everyone back on both posts (up to 200 merits total)
Don't merit back... this kind of merit "trading" is usually frowned upon since merit is supposed to be used for good posts, not to pay someone back. Come to think of it, even voting via merit is kinda sketchy but at least those yes/no posts could arguably be considered "good". Don’t need them back.... thought the yes no is a good idea.... not many More yes needed if the no isn’t merited .... :-) But imo some positive previous history of the thread shouldn’t be ignored but embraced, it’s just a part of the thread Agree. And I do not think counting multiples from a single source is fair. Just an aggregate of unique posters. I did give 10 merits. So I am speaking against any advantage given by that. But I also see it as worth 10 merits. I understand not everyone feels it, but I thin CB is a strong net positive. |
|
|
|
Only a mom could love a bot like that.
Hi mom!!!!... aka cAPS
I can't wait for you to get to my latest JJG imitation post. It was a pretty good one, I think. |
|
|
|
So, curious. Why, in your list are some of the price guesses red?
Are these the median, or average guesses?
But good idea
Then I have the next question ... can our names be marked in red? So that no one else comes close to our four) Lol 53,082 ETFbitcoin
53,210 bitmover*
53,333 icopress*
53,458 malevolent* Wanted to highlight there prices to attract as many as possible to join there range I see! I am glad I asked as I did not anticipate that as a possible answer at all. BUT... I have 2 sats to pitch in on this discussion. I think there should be NO RULE limiting ANYONE for picking any price at whatever granularity you choose for the game to employ. Partly because this is actually a strategic aspect. It puts strategic bits into the timing of your selection for example. Being the first to predict in a game has benefits/costs as does waiting until the last moment. I think it makes it fun to see people either be aware of these issues, or not, or as in my case, not care. If you ever DO try to limit close together guesses (if you keep doing these!) I would suggest just making the granularity chunkier. Like saying "to the nearest $10". The only downside is the ability for players to collude to put another player at a disadvantage. For example a miserable BSV shill can pick something like, say, 33,333, and two other players can pick 33,332 and 33,334 thereby limiting the chances he will win significantly. But this is self limiting as you then need TWO people willing to basically throw their vote. It's fun thinking about the theory behind a mic-game! Oh, and thanks again! |
|
|
|
I have to go do some errands, can you please behave while I'm gone.
Of course NOT! I got a nocoiner story to share, but i'm on the run myself atm. EDIT: And Chartbuddy... Can't he open a thread for his bot-posts and further discussion, if complying with tha rulz (or negotiate to be allowed to botpost in his own thread with theymos or board mod of the parent section)? I'm not really annoyed by the bot-posts, but i can understand Arrie as well. And yeah: Bring the poll! answers suggested: 1. yes 2. no, it's spam! 3. idc 4. yes, but not here on WO With a selection like this interpretation rules must be clear. That is like a poll with 1 yes and potentially 4 "no"s. I would suggest something like: Yes - For it No - It's spam Yes - Though I don't really care No - Though I don't really care No - Use another thread And frankly we would not need to have all those options. In a ways the very best/purest would be: Yes No And people discuss nuance in messages. Either of the other two ways give a bit of an advantage to the "no" vote(s). |
|
|
|
Also, I guess poker is not really poker if it doesn't involve real money (or bitcoin.)
Oh! I agree with the basic sentiment behind this, but I disagree technically. I think poker is poker... but put money on the table and the dynamics change quite a bit. I like playing play money poker just as much as the "real thing" in some aspects. In fact it is a great exercise in learning to adjust to extreme table dynamics. |
|
|
|
I first got into bitcoin for Poker.
Ever consider "provably fair poker"? .. I think SWC died already, had a version 2, then died again. I had a thread before somewhere here about it, seemed like a good idea, but no one ever tried to join my game, or no one else used the same idea. There is this thing called "mental poker" and I do believe a few sites out there are using it to make fair poker games. Usually the RNG is suspect or the server (and the owner) might know the deck or shuffled card order. In the end, the only issue would be collusion between players and there's not much you can do about that. I think PokerStars and the big poker networks have ways of finding out based on behavior but nothing that can really be proven. Still, they'll ban your account for suspected cheating. For casual play, I just find the android ones that look nice to me, I don't really care about all the other features. Fresh Deck Poker .. so maybe it's not fair (altho I think they claim to be), but the characters look cool. Also, I guess poker is not really poker if it doesn't involve real money (or bitcoin.) In the early days of Bitcoin poker (I go all the way back to betco.in) collusion was almost as big a problem as it is now but there were mitigating factors. Heads up games were a realistic option (although I loathe H/U outside of a tournament setting... too swingy for me) but the biggest mitigating factor was a great number of the folks who I was playing were either customers or vendors of the Silk Road. Imagine playing a whole table of GemBlitz's. LOL. So with a little care to avoid the obvious collusion it was a great game back then. Nowadays the colluders are better, and so are the players especially since Seals (and later SwC) became this sort of popular back room with some fairly serious players... But the final nail for me is, having logged in just a few days ago and seeing they added BCH. Sadness. I mean, I get it, even if I disagree with it, as deposits and withdrawals are no longer realistic when using Seals. BUT DAMMIT... why wouldn't they do a lightning implementation FIRST. I know it might be tricky... but SO DOABLE! In fact I have had the idea of a lightning based table... you basically buy in by paying an invoice, and cash out the same way... no need for any account at all. Only counterparty risk is the table itself. In fact, I think it would be POSSIBLE to do "steaming" payments where you basically just have the client do lightning transactions in the background for every hand or even BET. The bigest problems with this are probably game mechanics like how to defeat players going south etc... |
|
|
|
So to recap, r0ach, gembitz, nullius, and other off-topic shitheads are/were fine but on-topic wall-themed posts are irritating and shall be banished or voted out.
If only there was a feature that would allow some users to ignore other users instead of getting their panties in a bunch... but that would require exercising individual freedom of choice, and we obviously can't have that in this anarchist paradise, can we.
It is hard for me to imagine that an accurate poll will not reveal a strong group bias towards allowing it. |
|
|
|
Looks better with black background.
I will bear it in mind. This was a minimal effort resurrection. If only there was a way to donate time. I am all for a lightning (or Monero) tipping address by the way. Not that I would give all that much because I am a greedy bastard. |
|
|
|
I am appreciative of Chart Buddy. I was a lurker on this thread for the first ~3-4 years. I first got into bitcoin for Poker. And almost all of my posting between 2011-2013-14 was related to poker. I remember getting my first deleted post in the "Show your mining rigs" thread where I posted a picture of me sitting at a Seals with Clubs table.  But that WAS my mining rig. But I watched this thread, and would, from time to time read through a few pages. But I used to like to see the Chart Buddy posts. In fact I remember that a post from it would spark some conversation about a huge sell or buy wall, and at the time I was really just beginning to understand why that data was helpful, or at least interesting and meaningful. Anyway, I thing it is a great thing for this thread, which may even be more on-topic than 90% of our posts, and that it will spark discussion. I think for the minority that finds it annoying, the IGNORE button is an acceptable compromise. Unless the majority finds it negative, in which case I would yield to the majority. But my impression is most find it a +. I agree it does not need to post super often. (although I used to get a kick out of, during the quiet times, how it would post a page full of graphs. ) How do you (or I for that matter) know that a minority dislikes CB. I also remember the days of a whole page of only CB, and I had the very opposite reaction to yours. None of you have played the "free speech" card, and I find that a bit depressing in a thread of supposedly mostly libertarians. I have myself thought about it and decided that all though it is so irritating that it makes my skin crawl, I have decided that my initial reaction was wrong. I will just ignore and let live. Go resurrect the idiot bot. To your first question. A poll. We don't know otherwise. To the free speech argument: This is a moderated thread on a moderated forum. I respect the right of the people involved to absolutely limit "free speech". I think that argument is in error. Free speech means: -starting another thread here with no moderation -starting another bitcoin forum with no moderation -just using something like 4chan And I think participating in a moderated, or curated forum IS a form of free speech. |
|
|
|
My tolerance for whining is zero right now so I shut Chartbuddy off. I notice also that the price dropped after I did so so draw your own conclusions.
This is sad, but I respect your right to do exactly as you please with it. I look forward to the poll. I would love to know if it's overwhelming in one way or the other, or if it's more 50/50 which would be more difficult. I would find that poll interesting whether Richy decides to turn CB back on or not. If he was understandably tired of the abuse also someone else could pick it up, assuming the poll turned out the way I would bet, which is entirely based on my own bias. |
|
|
|
I am appreciative of Chart Buddy. I was a lurker on this thread for the first ~3-4 years. I first got into bitcoin for Poker. And almost all of my posting between 2011-2013-14 was related to poker. I remember getting my first deleted post in the "Show your mining rigs" thread where I posted a picture of me sitting at a Seals with Clubs table. But that WAS my mining rig. But I watched this thread, and would, from time to time read through a few pages. But I used to like to see the Chart Buddy posts. In fact I remember that a post from it would spark some conversation about a huge sell or buy wall, and at the time I was really just beginning to understand why that data was helpful, or at least interesting and meaningful. Anyway, I think it is a great thing for this thread, which may even be more on-topic than 90% of our posts, and that it will spark discussion. I think for the minority that finds it annoying, the IGNORE button is an acceptable compromise. Unless the majority finds it negative, in which case I would yield to the majority. But my impression is most find it a +. I agree it does not need to post super often. (although I used to get a kick out of, during the quiet times, how it would post a page full of graphs. )  |
|
|
|
|
So, curious. Why, in your list are some of the price guesses red?
Are these the median, or average guesses?
|
|
|
|
|
Mining Wownero with ~16k hashes on my AMD 5950x Monero ASIC.
|
|
|
|
I think this might be important. Holland just took a step towards securing wealth for their nation. This line will keep being drawn more starkly, and the results will define the world in the coming era. The sooner the better. |
|
|
|
This makes me feel much more happy. |
|
|
|
Oh come on now don't fib, no one actually reads a Jay post all the way through, I'm not saying he doesn't make points but it's like an email, you skim it.
I wonder if we could get one of those comment summarization bots working. It could be programmed to recognize only a few basic things... -Finger wagging section -Convoluted figuring of how much BTC you might hold -Sermons on how to average into and out of positions. (JJG, I love you... just a little homo) |
|
|
|
Ok. This is weird... I am ambivalent about Clif High... But this is kinda something (hopefully not already posted)  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
