I realise how wrong it is to try and pass other people's work as my own and there isn't much I can say to justify my past mistakes and behavior than to say that it wont be happening again. If there is something I have learnt from all this its that getting ahead is a process not an event. Rule-breaking is an action that should not have occurred in the first place. If all you get is a slap on the wrist then what is the point of even maintaining the rules of the forum? Moreover, if you hadn't been caught, what are the chances that you would have stopped? |
|
|
|
|
Are you going to reveal any details at all or is this going to be another vague loan request?
Anyone is able to sign up for a throwaway account and ask for a loan with a sob story. Anyone.
|
|
|
|
and the amount of the surgery also expensive of living other country for one month by the way the ticket is 5400$ you need to multiply it by two (home and away) I also don't understand where your numbers are coming from. What exactly is 10800? Why not give out all the details beforehand? Return flights are of-course cheaper than two one-ways but this is what we would have evaluated: PRICE_PASSPORT = 600
PRICE_TICKET = 1200
INSTANCES = 3
3 * 1200 * 2 = 7200 (COST OF FLIGHTS)
3 * 600 = 1800 (COST OF PASSPORTS)
18000 - 9000 = 9000 (COST OF SURGERY)
What, exactly, would be the details that we're missing? |
|
|
|
If we're all going with the idea of blindness...  |
|
|
|
Once you disclose the existence of the money publicly, you lose the benefit of hiding its exact location. What? |
|
|
|
I don't think that makes sense. Maybe I should clarify, that this is not at all logical. BestMixer would not benefit to having the money hidden because the fact the money exists is still public. Would they benefit from having the location of the money as an unknown to the public? After all, you presume it resides with DarkStar_ now as a result of Hhampuz's loan. What if this is not the case? |
|
|
|
I'm sure the most BTC paid campaign managers will consider to do it like that but I doubt if some altcoin managers will do the same... I hope so. A high (and significant) number of bounty managers don't give a damn about the negative feedback and they didn't care back when it had the warning associated therein. Much of that whole section is dedicated to just flopping about on the forum, paying bounty hunters with useless tokens. Why would they care about quality? On either end? |
|
|
|
Or he simple mixed and moved the funds to protect his employer? Ah, this makes sense. The issue with using fragmented circumstantial evidence is that you are using portions of the whole picture. If we think about how cherry-picking statistics can bring about false truths, then there is the possibility thereof with a similar cherry-picking of circumstantial evidence. The scenario: it's possible but uncertain. |
|
|
|
|
Campaign managing is more of a laissez-faire system at least in my opinion. If the advertiser wants to allow people who have negative feedback or flags to represent their product, then they could definitely do that.
In this case though, negative feedback is less impactful than it was before: there's no warning on the profile (outside of the trust page) and hence there won't be as large of an association between a "trade with caution" tag and the advertisement.
|
|
|
|
Reverse or counter all feedback that you can not demonstrate direct clear connection to scamming. Again, which feedback should I counter or remove? You can't exactly "counter" feedback anymore. It makes no sense to mark someone with positive reputation as there is no effect on the "trust score". The -1 distinct negative feedback will still remain. Given that theymos wants users to now start relying more on reading feedback, a neutral feedback would be more viable. |
|
|
|
It may work with airdroppers that only want to make a quick buck dumping their shitcoins, but to atract any "important"/sensible user, they should start resolving their support tickets once in a while (I have an unanswered one since March 2018 as an example) They clearly aren't hurting for users. If you think about it, they certainly do garner a lot of money from shitcoins. But it's not even the airdroppers -- you have to understand, there are plenty of ignorant users that YoBit capitalizes upon. They even have their outrageous dice game with a crazy house edge and their "IEO" pump & dumps. All these can interest newbies or even perhaps older users that think they have a chance of earning money with low-volume/mcap coins. |
|
|
|
They could have at one point been hacked if weak passwords were used. Data breaches will eventually push out the most weakly-secured accounts. I'm willing to bet that what's happened is that we're seeing various Newbie accounts reactivate due to their low barrier of entry. Higher-ranked accounts were most likely cracked earlier due to their value and (expected) higher security. |
|
|
|
A @ 0.003 BTC. Don't have one of these in my collection yet  |
|
|
|
Would you actually be able to do it full time? Sounds like an easy way to burnout after several days at most, and it would only be a matter of time before you would get banned. Your posts in that experiment aren't that bad actually (compared to an average stake.com/yobit sig-spam shitposter), but I bet your post quality would start suffering soon, to the point of getting eventually banned. I would probably be able to do it full-time. Lowering the speed, you can start to get into the mind-numbing state of ennui and start pumping out the posts with automation. Considering most of the shitposts are just vague, generalized bullshit that are either one-liners or just jam-packed with false rhetoric and repetitious nonsense, it isn't that difficult to just repeat essentially the same things about "the bitcoin" over and over again. |
|
|
|
they will require great evidences to create a scammer tag or else they will be outcast from their beloved powerful positions. Wasn't that always the case? |
|
|
|
Got paid. Got laid.
actmyname got paid and got laid: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5154091
---------------------
3DgxsamQ1CGPVRibH9aV43CGPkDp3vifNz
H9ko4NNEtOeLv5ZxuwYC/QA13SZDzHphGpGZA/aC4eY+GhsYbrryqPB2HX6nMKT9AY6V3AFwrNLX+wRDZrrwI68= |
|
|
|
Cheers. Updated.
More accounts will be trickled in as I scour through my ratings. If anyone spots some big players they can feel free to PM me about it and I'll write something that we can link the flags to. |
|
|
|
As QS says, to hit maximum you would need 2667 posts. For a standard full time job of 40 hours a week, this means a post every 54 seconds for 40 hours.
These numbers are utterly ridiculous. To suggest a user is able to open a thread, read the OP, read the replies, formulate and type a worthwhile and non-spammy reply, and move on to the next thread, all in 2 minutes, let alone in less than 1 minute, is preposterous. Absolutely. [EXPERIMENT] Testing the Limits of ShitpostingYou could probably crank it up to 80-100 posts per hour if you started jumping into megathreads and going really generic. That's $30/h for essentially non-stop work. It's equivalent to about a 5.5 hour (per day) work week. Make a script to generate generic remarks about "the bitcoin" and you'll find your margins increasing more. |
|
|
|
No, you are just not allowed to use the high-power scam flags -- intended mainly for punishing people, not really for preemptively warning about scams -- without first being scammed. You can still use the newbie-warning flags and negative ratings, which have plenty of warning power. I suppose we did want differing degrees of severity in regards to negative feedback. I'll have to give this some more thought and form a more substantiated opinion as discussion develops.
Is there any message indicator for when a user PMs a flagged user? I know that some users have tried to sneak their way into scamming others in sections that hide trust ratings (and now flag markers). |
|
|
|
Our trust now shows a flag and those people have not proven we have scammed anyone because that would be impossible. So this may not be the case. I don't mean the guest/newbie flags. I mean the type-2 and type-3 flags, which are reserved for victims of scams. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
