Yes I think he should be removed from the default trust list but not from his position of 'staff member', this was only my personal opinion (and it is obvious that someone will not agree with me  ). |
|
|
|
This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.
As mentioned before, I can already censor whatever I feel like in my self-moderated threads, so why not at least make it obvious? In other words, right now, if I don't want newbie posts, I let them post and delete it. Why go through the hassle of them writing and me deleting if I don't want their posts anyway? If you dogmatically oppose censorship, you shouldn't use bitcointalk in the first place.I am opposed to any form of censorship and this is why when I will see an self-mod thread I'll open a new thread because I don't want that that my opinion will be canceled/deleted (because it will be contrary with the OP's opinion). However you are right when you said " Why go through the hassle of them writing and me deleting if I don't want their posts anyway?" ... It will be really interesting read what an admin think of your proposal . |
|
|
|
|
This will be a sort of censorship or am I wrong? I understand what you wanted to say/request but I don't agree with you, sorry. It will be really an useless idea restrict who can post in your thread/topic because it will destroy the concept of a forum.
|
|
|
|
If you have a strong password and you logged out from the forum before you go on a holiday, no one can access the account anyway. There is no need to actively lock it. It then sprouts problems when members accidentally lock their account and need admin to unlock them.
I am not really sure about the 'bold part'  , but maybe I am only more worried about this thing. The lock function it will work only with the use of the actual password (and maybe 2 requests of that pwd before the complete lock). |
|
|
|
This is a good option but there must be a secret password or 2FA for locking account.
Hmm .. 2FA, it will be really good but in this thread I want to discuss (more) for the lock/block question and not for the unlock question. However thanks for your opinion. |
|
|
|
I confirm the restitution of the loan, you are welcome (and if you need another btc send me a PM or reply to my personal thread). PS: you can lock this thread (if you want). |
|
|
|
|
Hey guys,
I would like to ask if it is possible to add a simple forum function "lock the account" for xx days but without ask the intervention of an admin. I thought that this function would be really useful if someone wants to lock his account temporary - vacation,hiatus, etc... ( also for a security reason).
What do you think ?
|
|
|
|
@Quickseller, do you remember when I said you this thing : ...
But since he (QS) he is not more in the depth 2 of DefaultTrus list his negative trust is not important anymore (under a point of view of the trust system).
and you replied: A lot of people still have me in their trust list and even more have me in their trust network. My feedback is far from worthless.
Now you know that I do not have nothing against you but I would like to ask you : Are you worried or scared because you are not more in the default trust depth 2 (one more time)? And if you are still thinking this thing, you will not have any type of problem to say out from the depth 2 od that list or am I wrong?
Thanks @theymos for the fantastic explanation. |
|
|
|
Thanks for all Vod, and good luck with your life . You were so funny and I will remember your actions for a long time! |
|
|
|
I've noticed that the services section is heavily populated with affiliate networks and signature campaigns. It makes it difficult to find the offers of people actually willing to provide services for bitcoins. Maybe adding a sub-section for Affiliate/Signature Campaigns might be a good idea?
I also think that there are quite a lot of people posting threads about physical crypto-coins in the Goods section. A new sub-section for Physical Cryptos might also be beneficial.
Thoughts?
I agree with your proposal, we need these sub-sections (especially the services section that it's populated by all the sig. campaign thread). |
|
|
|
|
I agree with you and I have always said this thing in all my previous posts "They should not decide for us", in this year (until Feb-Mar 2016) I will continue to think and inform myself about this fork. Now my choice is to spend the BitcoinXT coins and hold the actual bitcoinCore coins, my unique perplexity is the bandwith problem.
|
|
|
|
Well, 2 guys for me, of which neither understands the trust system and are actively abusing it themselves. Its a lot quieter now the guy with 10 accounts got banned.
Are you by any chance referring to QS and Vod or are you talking about others that you won't name? I actually read the accusations against you just today. It was a fun story to read.  No he added the neutral trust, it is not related with any list. The 3 tiers are negative, positive and neutral trust or feedback (that you can leave to any user).
PS: Or maybe I didn't understand your question.
I understand that, however I was asking if trust depth 3 has any influence now? I somehow misunderstood (?) it as if depth 3 had influence now (making everyone else depth 4). It has an influence only if you change your (visualization) trust depth from 2 to 3, if you stay or better choose 2 you will not be "affected" by those users in the level 3 of depth. |
|
|
|
At the moment the site is very slow for me, not sure what is going on, it's probably an idiot ddossing the forum for the 1,000,000th time. Are the more people experiencing the same?
Same here, but its still reachable. Also for me (Italy). First I thought it was a fault of my ISP but after some check & test I have found that it was not due my internet service provider. |
|
|
|
Here's the nutshell explanation:
Gavin is going to make some critical (and necessary) changes to the Bitcoin code. Then everyone will join the new fork because that's the only thing that makes sense.
And that's a different coin? I mean, if I have Bitcoin, I will need to sell them and buy those famous Gavincoins? Or those new updates and implementations will be added to the same Bitcoin of always.. If that's so, the next months will show some cryptocurrency life. I suggest you to read also this (other) thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1076316.0 there are a lot of useful information and I also in the beginning I thought some wrong things but now I have all the point clear in my mind. 2 different coin <> 2 different chains |
|
|
|
...
What's this about, I'm confused? Theymos changes the trust list to 3 tiers?
No he added the neutral trust, it is not related with any list. The 3 tiers are negative, positive and neutral trust or feedback (that you can leave to any user). PS: Or maybe I didn't understand your question. |
|
|
|
Not sure this worked as intended.
Depth 0 is DefaultTrust
Depth 1 is Tomatocage
Depth 2 is Tomatocage1
So any trust ratings Tomatocage1 does doesn't really do anything.
I had a feeling I wasn't understanding it right. I have no plans of using Tomatocage1 for anything other than adding people to my Trust list at Depth 2. Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but as I think it works, Depth 2 ratings hit a little softer than Depth 1. You'd think I would have a clearer understanding how the Trust system works, being in the actual DefaultTrust group and all  If you really want to use Tomatocage1 for trust only you'd have to get him on Depth 1 as well. They're correct. Being on depth 3 has no affiliation with the default trust as well. If you put for instance Vod in Depth 3 his ratings will be invalidated. You could try asking BadBear to add your second account there though. Then we'd be back where we started  Exactly , now he used tomatocage1 and added to his trust list those users: Tomatocage1 Gavin Andresen haploid23 the joint Vod John (John K.) El Cabron DiamondCardz dogie DefaultTrust shdvb Quickseller gate11They are still in the default trust list but visible only if someone will put the Trust depth : 3 (and trust DefaultTrust). |
|
|
|
...Lol newbie saying this or I say shill of some account who don't want to disclose his main account.
Mostly people know me here. And all know I am trader here and mostly focus on trading.
Btw I just gave example of tspacepilot.
Typical. Another thread slanderin Quickseller. And when uninvolved buystanders like myself come to his defence, were accused of god knows what without any proof. I see whats happening here, youre not fooling any one. Lol I am not fooling anyone that is why I am posting with my main account. You are fooling other by making new account and posting. Most probably you are alt of QuickSeller that is why you are doing this. So later you will sell this account. So it will serve both defending QS and making post so it will move to upward level. Im not posting from my main account because first BadBear takesQuickseller of his list, Tomatocage adds him, and then right away has to go and take him off for no reason. Coincidence? Sure. I dont want to get pushed out of the way and sweapt aside like Quickseller, but I cant just stand by and watch him get slandered and railroaded while his fairweather friends like Redsn0w turn on him. someone is tired? I have only explained (partially) how the trust system works ... nothing else, because I do not have anything against Quickseller. I think you can post from your main account, because if you are an honest person an you've never abused the trust system then you will not be removed from some depth 1 users's list (I am sure of this thing). |
|
|
|
...Lol newbie saying this or I say shill of some account who don't want to disclose his main account.
Mostly people know me here. And all know I am trader here and mostly focus on trading.
Btw I just gave example of tspacepilot.
Typical. Another thread slanderin Quickseller. And when uninvolved buystanders like myself come to his defence, were accused of god knows what without any proof. I see whats happening here, youre not fooling any one. Really interesting, why a newbie registered 19 May should defend Quckseller? This doesn't make any sense... but good to know. |
|
|
|
Thanks so much for your help
At "recive Coins" it only showed one address (Below)
17SZMZY1N7ZQBR55Xn9DuSPMtmxsVgJfY4
It did not list the five bitcoins separately. The wallet previously said "Balance" 5 it now says Balance 0
Also...not sure what you mean by "Have you open/decrypt the wallet on that computer"
If you did so, your password could have been capture by a keylogger. Your address has 1 bitcoin, last transaction out was 8 bitcoins distributed in 2 addresses:https://blockchain.info/address/17SZMZY1N7ZQBR55Xn9DuSPMtmxsVgJfY4Last transaction included in the block 273390 with this timestamp: 2013-12-06 13:41:25 so it is not this the correct address. |
|
|
|
Not sure this worked as intended.
Depth 0 is DefaultTrust
Depth 1 is Tomatocage
Depth 2 is Tomatocage1
So any trust ratings Tomatocage1 does doesn't really do anything.
If I understand the purpose of this thread, he basically have updated his trust list (removed & addedd some users). This is his actual (correct me if I am wrong): Yes that's correct. What I was saying though is there is in effect no cascade. Being trusted by a tier 2 is the same as not being trusted, it makes no difference within default DefaultTrust. The error has come because TC thought he was Depth 0 but is in fact Depth 1. All users will show themselves as Depth 0 in their own lists as its assumed a user trusts themselves, but globally will be Depth 1 or lower. Only "DefaultTrust" is Depth 0. Correct, DefaultTrust user is the base of the entrire trust system and simple (as you know) all the users that were added by theymos under the DefaultTrust's list is in the depth 1. Now if Tomatocage will add users with his alt (tomatocage1) those users will be added and see as trusted only if we put the level 3 of depth and trust the user DefaultTrust. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
