The purpose of this thread is to award merit for those who have shown to post constructively over a period of time.

It looks like he is arrested again (or will likely will be in the near future) on charges relating to extortion

I would be interested in hearing the basis for believing that he is “unlikely” to engage in similar behavior in the future for those that normally tag accounts in similar situations but declined to in this case.

Please cite posts you have previously made that demonstrate your understanding of any of the topics in the OP. The posts must be at least 4 weeks apart.

Thanks.

I looked at your list and there are a lot of distrusts, even on level one. I am not sure if this is a good or bad thing. I also noticed there are a lot of people with zero merit and it may be a good idea to investigate if you want these people in your trust network and why they are in your trust network and if you want the people including these people in your trust network.

I am not sure how difficult this would be, however it might be useful to include trust ratings either via DT or via a custom trust list. The rating could be as of a certain point in time so that your VPS (I presume) is not consistently scraping the same information.

Not that I don’t agree with the underlying ratings....

Your lack of being able to defend the underlying ratings speaks volumes about your integrity and commitment to fairness 

I updated the OP to reflect my available merit.

Thanks.

I am giving away up to 3 merit per person who shows an understanding (or genuine interest) of any or a combination of the following:

• Bitcoin
• Major altcoin (top 100 per CoinMarketCap.com)
• blockchain technology
• cryptography
• encryption
• free markets
• importance and value of small amounts of regulations
• affects of arbitrary regulations

In order to receive merit from me please post the following:
At least two posts demonstrating solid knowledge of one or more of the above concepts/topics. The posts must be posted at least 28 days apart. You also must have made at least 12 constructive posts between your referenced posts. The time difference between referenced posts is not a hard requirement, although my standard will be higher for posts with shorter time between posts.

If you need 6 or less merit AND have 20 activity above the activity required to rank to the next rank, I will give you enough merit to rank up to the next rank.

I prefer you request merit yourself, however I will review submissions on behalf of other users.

Self moderated.

Current merit available: in flux

All languages are accepted, I can use google translate when necessary, however please only link original content and not translated content from elsewhere.

If you have received merit from me via this thread, you may resubmit another application one month after I send merit on this thread. If you are close to having enough to rank up and need merit to do so, and have already received merit from me via this thread, you may PM me and I’ll review your post history and will help you rank up if you have a strong post history.

If you have concerns or suggestions about my thread, please PM me instead of posting here, I want this thread to be mostly applications.

Please don’t submit “guide” threads you created, but responses in guide threads are okay.

---

None of the above are hard rules, although it is what I desire. As long as your posts are ‘objectively high quality’ and the type of posts we want more of, and you show a genuine interest in crypto, you will generally receive merit. 

The bounty campaign section is literally separate from the rest of the forum. Unless you are specifically looking for the bounty campaign sub, you won’t even notice it...

I haven’t looked into if the transaction funding the loan was from one exchange to another, the address to fund the loan was posted prior to the loan being funded. I don’t have any reason to believe the transaction wasn’t actually ultimately sent by the person behind 2double0. I do have other suspicions surrounding the loan and the vouch though.

Ummm, people are very happy that bitcointalk will be made great again!

The OP withdrew his offer to escrow the bounty approximately 8 hours after he made the offer, and after multiple people called him out as to why he is not qualified. I don't think he going to make that same mistake in the future.

The issue of him promoting ponzis has the potential to be more serious, depending on if he was the one running them, how many he ran and how much money was stolen, and the deception involved in running each ponzi. I haven't looked into how strong the evidence is on this very closely.

There was a footnote that said:
This in fact does not mention either Clinton, nor the DNC being the ultimate client. Nor does it disclose Steele's anti-Trump bias.

Interestingly, it also cited the Director of National intelligence, but instead of getting a sworn statement from him, they used statements he made on TV, obviously not under oath, nor in an interview with law enforcement, making any lies he said not a crime. There were also lines marked "(U)" (unclassified, I believe) that were redacted.

The FISA laws need to be reformed, but that is off topic here....

---

The obstruction of justice piece is based on things Tump did in the public eye.

An obstruction case against Trump could have been derived from one of two things, his firing of Comey, or his criticism of the Special Counsel investigation.

As President, Tump has the constitutional right to fire Comey, as Trump is politically accountable to anything Comey does as FBI director. As a US Citizen, Trump has the right to protest any government action he does not like, and to petition the government to change its policies and/or laws.

If the special counsel tried to prosecute the President based on either of the above actions, any conviction would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds.

I am also interested to see the final report, but I am going to speculate it contains a lot of innuendo regarding the effect of Russia's election interference. It will likely contain incomplete information, as I believe it was only investigating collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, not Russian election interference in general, so Russia may have also helped Clinton, and this would not be in the report. One could also argue that Russia was intentionally inefficient in their efforts, and made their efforts easy to uncover in order to hurt Trump in the event he ended up winning.

Flynn deserves a Pardon, as does Rodger Stone. Even though Manafort is not a good guy, the only reason he is being persecuted is because of his ties to Trump, and as such I think he should be pardoned too.

Wow check this picture out:

This was the underlying topic Mueller was investigating, or at least should have been investigating. Realistically speaking, there was not sufficient reliable evidence to support opening an investigation, so instead, the FBI used information/evidence they should have good reason to believe was not reliable.

---

---

AG Barr has reportedly sent another letter to congress, and select congressmen should be receiving a letter within the hour. The letter will likely include the principal findings of the report.

It is interesting to see that you are hoping that a certain group of people will get scammed.

This has been noted.

This is quite literally what you are doing, so by your own admission, lenders should not lend to you.

If there really is some kind of strategy to make as much as you are claiming, your best bet would be to sell the strategy to someone trustworthy on a contingency basis for a portion of their profits. Your strategy appears to use an exchange that is probably not a good idea to trust, so even that may not be successful.

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

I don't think it is "inappropriate" to be asking for a loan, however the loan sizes are consistent with someone trying to pull an exit scam.

Yes, he signed a message here that included the date. Also he has had multiple loans funded to that address.

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

I am not sure if you have heard of a credit card, but that is an example of banks giving no collateral loans. Banks also give no collateral signature loans all the time, on much better terms than you are proposing. Banks will generally want to document a potential borrowers' ability to repay (usually based on their income) before giving this kind of loan