I find it funny you use this saying, as i feel you've fallen into that trap. You are so focused on what you want people to do for you, as this is an issue you have with what someone has said about you. That you haven't paid attention to the forest of information,options or ways to resolve this yourself.

I refer you to my previous post about this. I will go so far as to say that if you are not willing to take any action such as leaving a neutral or engaging with lucius, i would not be willing to leave a neutral myself in your place, as others have considered.
 
Lucius i would really reconsider using negatives for behaviour/posting issues you have with people. That is a good place for neutral to use as a comment. In your case it will be seen the same to the rest of the world. With the added benefit that others may find your feedback useful

Thanks to all who ventured outside of the mining section to post here. I would say most of you had more direct interactions with Norm than I did, as My focus was elsewhere for a good part of December.

If it weren't for that damn, swiss miner thread I may have forgotten about them all together.

Either way this has nothing to do with their personality or level of rudeness in response to corrections. One would hope that given time people could learn to treat this place as a community rather than the blind faceless void of the internet where the users on the other side of the screen are of little consequence.

I appreciate what Phil was trying to do there, he's always been willing/able to assist/counsel in a lot of aspects; and deals with a lot of shit for it undeservedly so.

---

Frodocooper I appreciate you chiming in as well. I want to be sure that I am in no way trying to say you made an error in this decision. I often try to explain that the moderation in the mining section has improved for the better when looked at as a whole.

This appeal was in relation to an exchange I had with theymos. This brought my attention to the fact that there are apparently a varying degree of punishments available.

I placed the quote below. I've read theymos's posts regarding this and how this is generally cut and dry, if say they are sig spamming or just trying to earn from the forum.

Hey I understand your frustration. There are a few facts you can take comfort in.

They are not DT so this shows as untrusted feedback.
The feedback shows how poorly they use the system by using false risked amounts.
The reference shows a sig campaign spreadsheet, there's nothing wrong with that.

With feedback like this if they ever wound up on DT people would reach out to them to have it changed, or they would be excluded pretty quick.

In the meantime you can leave your own neutral, about the situation and your opinion of the feedback, reach out to them regarding it, or just let it go.

It's convenient you already have a rpi3 ready to go. I hadn't heard of anyone using other controllers, where did you order  your gear from

You should try at the moment just swapping your controller for the rpi and see if you still have the issue with the 3.

---

As a side note do they run any risk at the moment if they were to load the 3 machines with the same MM version as the others.

I only ask because if they did not have a pi available, that would be the fastest option for trying to get all machines hashing.

MODS - Please leave this topic for the time being. This is being done to work within the forums Ban appeals process. I do not intend to have it go on for ever just until I get a little clarification on when I can consider the appeal over; and whether it is necessary to call on people to comment on the case  who may not normally happen across it.

As some may have noticed a newer member to our Forum was banned I beleive January 5th. I have created a "Candidate for Ban appeal" thread in their name.

My reasons for doing so are explained in the topic. In short it has come to my attention that some Permanent Bans for varying Degrees of Plagiarism have been handled with varying degrees of punishment. I believe that Norm could fall into that category, if their case is examined closer.


This thread is only to serve as a notice for people to go and check out the topic in Meta and add something if you feel you have anything to say.

Going to give this a bump. I must admit I'm unsure if I need to keep this continuously visible, or if I need to mention this to the mining board members who don't generally frequent here.

Or.

Is it enough that I've made my this thread and it will be reviewed. In the case of Norm Macdonald they are not a long standing member but I do believe it was a minor error in this case. They either copy pasted their response from youtube comments here not thinking there could be consequences. Or they plagiarised someone's youtube comment to the thread. If the latter than they did break the rules in such a manor that a ban of 30-60 days is sufficient and a 1 year -> permanent Sig ban is reasonable.


In the meantime I guess I'll try and draw attention to the thread, unless I receive a comment from the powers that be it's unnecessary and the thread creation was enough.

I think you nailed it. I was trying to track the same thing but kept getting lost in the log, that's one of the reasons I was gonna get you to group things together, it would be easier to compare them.

I don't have any past the 841's, and I haven't updated anything in a while. Best to confirm with Canaan/or someone here. I think you'll need to just set up the 3 miners having problems and then upgrade the other version that is working across the board. This way everything will be the same. Not sure if there's benefits to one over the other, but once everything is the same, you can make changes in one broad stroke moving forward.

I would be looking to try a couple of things, as all 3 may not have the same issue, if any.

First I would just start working with the 3 miners giving you issues, so you don't have to unnecessarily start and stop the others.

My first thought on this is that maybe you have some bad/ 4 pin cables running to those miners, or they could be not seated properly. I had to once that despite appearing and feeling correct they needed to be reseated.

You can try swapping around cables with others that you know work for other miners.

Also just to note for further troubleshooting, are either of these miners on the same chain/auc line? If so the second one may have no problem if it is a cable issue.

What are you using to power your controller?

Edit: It's weird I took some time to go through everything and nothing jumps out at me as something obvious. I would still try them just on their own swapping some of the 4 pin cables around just to see if that helps. Definitely start a repair ticket with Canaan, and let them know what you have done so far.

In my experience they are really good at working through things with you, and from time to time depending on your comfort and knowledge can send parts out as opposed to asking for everything to be shipped back. Good luck and keep us up to date.

Would the user who originally left the feedback get a chance to respond? I say this because this tool would be used mostly by the very people we are trying to warn people about.

I would say if people want to tell their side of the story they should just open up a reputation thread for themselves and explain their side of the story. This allows for a discussion to be had by the interested parties, the thread can then be linked/referenced in the future.

Now for undeserved feedback, you can do the same as above, or leave a neutral on their profile about their feedback being baseless.

Personally I would prefer the option for being able to add your own reference link, preferably to a thread discussing the feedback.

Actually these days most manufacturers ship on time even with the first batch, or they update everyone with an email or on their webpage.

Inno has been pretty iffy lately and i wouldn't be preordering from them based on that. Especially because it's not that cutthroat right now to secure a miner.

They missed and stopped talking about the T2T + that should have been released, at least they didn't take orders on it.

Edit: Just had to check it didn't change but the expected ship has said "within a month" since they updated the sales thread for the T3

I was never big on any of these but lately when i get a group trip together we set up chats through telegram, or WhatsApp.

I tend to think a lot of people use them similar, especially cause every scammer out there tries to steer a private convo to these platforms. Wouldn't hurt having a place for it in the profile so that people aren't being fooled by fake accounts pretending to be reputable members.

Nice that's good news looks like it can go up to 300 or less.

Where these always scheduled to ship april 1- 10? I think I'm just going to go for it I'm a touch worried about the over 240 but am willing to chance it.

I have some that i might be willing to part with. 3 or 4

Feel free to just post in this thread if PM's are to difficult. Where are you located, i would be shipping from Canada.

Yeah no news and it arriving is way better than no news and it staying in Limbo.

Looking forward to the video Phil. Did they think it was that part due to it being kinda a weak board then dropping off completely?

Thanks for the update. Glad to hear there's been some communication

Updating my staked address, I can no longer sign a message from my previous address.

Or is it to accurate.

You are mining "without" receiving transaction fees  Con
You are mining "without" paying fees for it out of pocket or from your implied reward   Pro
You are mining "without" knowledge of transaction fees being your responsibility.  Con

Either way I'd move on, my payouts/fees have all been crystal clear this weekend.

8 - Steamtyme

Firstly, good on you for trying to promote the idea of a healthy use of the feedback/trust system.

My main issue with this is that you completely ignore the "Neutral" rating; which is terribly overlooked IMO. If it is your intention to enlighten others on the use of the system, perhaps promote the 3rd option. I personally see Neutral as a tool for notes on the account/users behavior whether positive or negative, but not a scam/trade dispute. In this category I would include #'s 3,4 from your positive column and #'s 6,8,13,14 from the Negative Column.

#5 from the positive column doesn't necessarily warrant trust, but they should be included in your custom trust list, or could be left as a neutral to "vouch" for the user.

#8 from the negative pile, could again be a neutral rating, because I'm assuming they completed the trade. What this comes down to is members leaving appropriate ratings in their references to signify it was a small trade, or by only leaving them neutral in the first place until.

Then on top of it just remind people that they are free to leave trust as they see fit, but should be willing/able to justify them, and that these are just some guidelines as you've interpreted them. This is just my opinion and how I try to apply the system.

Edit: sorry forgot to explain my reasoning on #6 in the negative column - Everyone has to start somewhere, I'm sure I know the case you are thinking of, and while it was a poor idea from the onset a neutral could have served just fine. Would someone deserve a Neg for trying to build a reputation as an escrow by starting out small?

The idea behind this was originally spawned when I read a topic LoyceV created about adding the wrong user by mistake due to a typo or similar account name.

What I would like in theory would be a "button" to add or exclude a member from your custom trust list. It would be on everyone's profile, so that to perform those actions you just have to find the proper profile and select it. Each button would come up with a little box with a small explanation of what each action does. The description could also have a link to appropriate information sources on trust,DT, or anything else deemed relevant to the overall system.


It very well could wind up being misused/abused this way. In reality though the current system can/does get used this way, it's just a little more difficult to do. The reality is though any users using it in that fashion will find themselves excluded by other DT members for having a flimsy/poor trust network.

Edit: Forgot to mention the above italicized exclude, came from LFC_Bitcoins post above.