|
Cyrus is a good moderator and I think he will reply to your question (publicly) in this thread. It's only a misunderstanding (in my honest opinion).
|
|
|
|
The days of government-controlled ‘money’ are over. In the 21st century, you are the controller of your own money. Since the dawn of civilization, the use of a local currency has turned into a tradition. People used to trade physical tokens and objects among them, but now they can use digital currency. You are free from any government regulation and fees. It is a currency made by the people, belonging to the people and for the people.
Can I ask you where do you live? Maybe not the Earth... you are so idealist. It should pass a lot of years before a real change, at the moment we are only in a sort of experiment (and it is not still completed). |
|
|
|
|
Yes, I think bitcoin and the cryptocurrencies in generally need a new economic theory because the actual economic system isn't compatilble with them.
Who gives value to something?
|
|
|
|
Maybe we should make a public shame/spammer thread and list all the spammers?
I agree with you, a public (personal) list of 'all' the spammer could help marcotheminer ... A list of campaign sig spammer would also be biased and cause drama. Isin't it up to the manager of individual campaign to judge the post quality of the members or members to be of his campaign? I think this is not the case, marcotheminer said : ....
Feel free to PM me names of members that you'd like for me to look over.
I'd prefer a PM than a post here. It'd seem a bit odd posting names of people you'd like removed.
But the final decision is of the manager (this is obvious). Yes... Marco said to PM him if you find a user that isint up to the Bit-x Campaign sig. Not start a holy crusade spanning all the Sig Campaign spammers. It is his opinion, and sincerely I don't find 'odd' to post publicly a list of the signature campaign spammers (a personal list, this is obvious...). |
|
|
|
Maybe we should make a public shame/spammer thread and list all the spammers?
I agree with you, a public (personal) list of 'all' the spammer could help marcotheminer ... A list of campaign sig spammer would also be biased and cause drama. Isin't it up to the manager of individual campaign to judge the post quality of the members or members to be of his campaign? I think this is not the case, marcotheminer said : ....
Feel free to PM me names of members that you'd like for me to look over.
I'd prefer a PM than a post here. It'd seem a bit odd posting names of people you'd like removed.
But the final decision is of the manager (this is obvious). |
|
|
|
Is there any evidence that people blindly start trusting each other, only because there is some green text?
I'd assume one would carefully read the actual trust ratings and follow the references first, before trading with a stranger.
Exactly, this is how it should work .. but the users will only see the green trust score and not the 'trust' or comments (in the users trust page). |
|
|
|
Maybe we should make a public shame/spammer thread and list all the spammers?
I agree with you, a public (personal) list of 'all' the spammer could help marcotheminer ... |
|
|
|
so we cant be free here i see ok but really satoshi is a fat stupid bitch  Your ban was clearly for blasphemy.
Blasphemy -
Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable. Do not use the Lord Satoshi's name in vain. Go my child & do 10 Hail Mary's for your sins. Don't spam useless post only to raise your post count, this is the unique rule. |
|
|
|
|
My username is: redsn0w
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Are you showing what it should look like? In my view there's only one "quote" button for each reply and it only quotes a single person, not multiple.
You can insert multiple quote while replying. Look at the under of textbox while you are about to post your reply then you will see shorena's screenshot which is in previous post history of that thread. Ahhh, I've found it. You have to scroll down from the REPLY window. How awkward. This forum software is truly a bastardized version of hell. LOL!Thanks for the help guys. I really can't wait till the update arrives. Anything is better than SMF. I'm happy for you, now I suggest you to close the thread (only to prevent spammy posts by the users that are enrolled in the various signature campaign). |
|
|
|
|
I think it is not needed a new thread, because in the Tomatocage's thread I've seen users posted (me too) a signed message. Two or more thread will only cause more damage and disorder, in my honest opinion.
|
|
|
|
How much BTC do you need: 0.04 BTC Reason of taking loan: Gambling for fun  Your address: 19X4DfZG75TbN4TtmMTbdS1UwuH3PG6LgT Time of repayment: 3 days Collateral yes/no: No Sorry, I can't help you (in this moment). Try to ask someone else... Slightly off topic, but I must ask Redsn0w... Are you still making jailbreaks? I used to jailbreak my iPod Touch and iPhone with your tool  You are wrong, it's not my tool. |
|
|
|
Nope. By alexa rank, a faucet http://freebitco.in, have a traffic rank of 4,754th in the world, and higher than BCT.org. (link: www.alexa.com/siteinfo/freebitco.in) However, by the rank of where bitcoiners can talk and exchange their opinions, then BCT is still the 1st in the crypto world. Edit: just found another crypto site, blockchain.info, have a rank of 3651, which is even higher than the faucet. The number 1 wallet/blockexplorer = blockchain The number 1 faucet = freebitco.in for beginner he just create wallet and earning from faucet he not know abut bitcointalk blockchain.info ? It is not the number 1, because it is the most 'unreliable' bitcoin site. It's number 1 in Alexa ranks. Check yourself in this link: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/blockchain.infoThis is why blockchain.info (aka bc.info) is not the number 1 : - https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3frht4/satoshi_nakamoto_moved_today_for_the_first_time/It doesn't matter the rank on alexa.com  . |
|
|
|
It is not our problem if someone doesn't take 5 minutes to check the trust profile of someone else, before start the 'deal'... or am I wrong?
Yes, you're wrong. As long as we maintain a trust system, we should take care of it and how it is perceived by someone with no previous experience a.k.a. newbie. I used to think like you, but recently I've changed idea. However I can agree with you but until a certain point. PS: dark or light green trust score doesn't mean exactly trustworthy, when all the users will learn this thing then I am sure the forum will be a better place. If the system we maintain flags someone as "green" or "trustworthy" on first glance, we can't simply sit back and say "but you should have looked closer at his ratings".
This is why I said " I think it is needed a good F.A.Q page about the trust system" basically how the trust system works (so all the newbie users will not have any excuse). Sorry if I seem arrogant. |
|
|
|
I would personally trust SebastianJu, good luck with your escrow service . |
|
|
|
The users must read 'positive all the trusts' (the comments) and not only look at the green trust score (or in another case the red score)
In a perfect world, the trust system wouldn't be needed. This is not a perfect world. Newbies will trust whoever flashes some shade of green. Newbies won't ever understand the trust system, heck, even the great old ones don't always. I think it is needed a good F.A.Q page about the trust system, and it should be linked in the maintab. The newbies (and not) should learn more if they want to stay alive (here in the forum). The users must read ' positive all the trusts' (the comments) and not only look at the green trust score (or in another case the red score)  . In that case no one will be scammed, I'm sure of this thing. unfortunately, people dont do this so often; some people dont even bother using escrow when dealing with newbie accounts, what makes you think everyone looks through someone's trust profile? he's free to do what he wants, but giving positive trust to everyone he deals with is something i agree on being excessive, especially for those newbie accounts that are created solely for the purpose of selling an account. It is not our problem if someone doesn't take 5 minutes to check the trust profile of someone else, before start the 'deal'... or am I wrong? |
|
|
|
The users must read ' positive all the trusts' (the comments) and not only look at the green trust score (or in another case the red score) . In that case no one will be scammed, I'm sure of this thing. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
