It will be extremely hard for you to take off and get a decent trade volume unless you offer something different. No one will move their funds from other, established exchanges to new and untrusted one, unless there's a solid incentive.


Listing new, promising tokens and being the first place they could be traded is by far the best strategy. But you need to be proactive, don't expect them to approach you, you need to actively seek for projects with potential and offer them listing with you.

And do you only allow ethereum tokens to be listed? No other blockchains? On token submission form every field is marked with red asterisk (as obligatory?). I don't see the logic behind it, would you reject application if token doesn't have telegram or twitter account?

Recently I signed up to Gab.io (censorship-free twitter alternative) and few days ago received an email about their ICO: https://www.startengine.com/freespeech


$40m is a rather modest market cap for existing platform with over 600k registered users. My personal opinion is that it's a "low risk - low reward" type of thing. It will hit $40m market cap but won't get higher than 2x that.

CoinDesk:
https://www.coindesk.com/alt-right-ico-social-network-gab-sell-10-million-tokens/
SEC filing:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1709244/000114420418004542/tv484000_partiiandiii.htm#gab_006

They've already raised $404,752. The minimum is $252, which is a bit too much to throw around without doing proper research.

Thoughts on that? What's the potential here?

Keeping it simple would be: investors pay for your lawsuit - investors get their money back if you win + some share of your "winnings".
In your proposed model, there's still a risk they will lose money even if case is won (as you can 'win' but get less "winnings" than you asked for).



You didn't understand. You lose money if you win. As the 'winnings' are actually a 'compensation' for you. Simple hypothetical example (lets ignore legal costs to keep it simple):
- You sell a bike to a guy for $400 and agree he would pay you next week.
- He don't pay you (also bike got destroyed/stolen/sold etc)
- You take him to court and you win. Court orders him to pay you $400
- You share 50% of that "winnings" with investors.
- You have $200 left.

Summary: You had a bike worth $400, now you only have $200. That's a $200 loss.

Don't wait for others to reach out to you. If you feel you're a good reviewer, just hit up all the major review sites and offer them your service. Have a sample of your work, describe your usual methodology etc.

If that doesn't work, start your own blog ie with top ICO picks of the month, share the content on this forum (dedicated thread), Steemit + on social media. If you get any traction, you could start charging ICOs for featuring them.

"Some" is a bit of understatement. There was already a discussion on 18% of students owning cryptocurrency, the same survey, commissioned by Coinbase, showed that 42% of the world's top 50 universities offered at least 1 blockchain related course.
See for reference:
https://blog.coinbase.com/the-rise-of-crypto-in-higher-education-81b648c2466f

Pretty much correct. It's the same screen (with reported posts stats and 2nd para) but without the list of the reported posts (table).


Speaking of fake screenshots, wouldn't it be better if we started casually dropping something like the one below on the spammers' most popular boards (create "paid for report" ^TM meme). No outright lying, just letting them come to their own conclusions. IMO it could work miracles, but just thinking out-loud.

How? Explain the mechanism please.


Utterly confused. If you see USA as a major threat (I can see why), then who did view as protector of 'humanist democracy' in your previous posts? Slovakia?

Not really. One could argue the opposite - cryptos represent ultimate (financial) freedom, one of the cornerstone of western civilisation.

Anyhow, 'humanist democracies' have been weakened themselves for much longer than crypto is around. I'd like to think it's a natural cycle.

Signature campaigns have been here for a long time, some running for years, so it's fair to say they could be efficient. You could always do a test-run and analyse the results. There are also cheaper alternatives such as social media campaigns.

Other ways: get community engaged: create official ANN thread and keep it active. Organise logo contest + other, for fun contests (just to get name recognition). Get it listed on the review websites. The best way to attract people quickly, is to organise some few $ worth giveaway to new sign ups (make sure you prevent abuse).

But most of all, make sure your service runs smooth, have knowledgeable tech team, is legit, and offers some advantage over competitors (why should anyone choose you?).

Many spammers will return, but also many will drop out. You have to zoom-out and look at the large picture. From now on, you can't just create dozens accounts and jump straight into bounties, you have to compete for limited in amount merit.


And if you don't get merit - you lose signature? If so, all the signature campaigns would get hit hard, even the ones that care about quality. Managers would have to monitor and re-recruit big chunk of participants in periods shorter than 1 week. Plus, that would encourage different kind of spam - "pseudo-smart" posting on most merited boards. Also, senior ranks would more likely send merits between themselves, making it harder for new ones.

It's definitely overcomplicated solution (I do see the logic behind it though), we should keep things as simple as practically possible: restriction for newer accounts (necessary as simply you can't stop people from creating new accounts) + bans/red tags for notorious spammers, whatever their rank is.


Than it's a good idea to learn and bump your post count by asking legit questions (after searching the forum first) on subjects you're genuinely interested in. Earn why you learn.

1 merit sent your way - but if I ever see you posting shit like "Hello sir, good project sir!!!" or alike - I will hunt you down

ps. I don't consider bounty-proof posts as spam as they're contained within relevant threads so don't pollute the useful parts of the forum.

... or people in enslaved, shithole countries can use crypto as a currency of choice to escape hyperinflation (Venezuela) or government seizures (see Cyprus raid on savings 2013).

+ what others already said.

There was a bug preventing Newbie members from posting. It's sorted now.


It's pretty obvious that you're not quite new, you just created new account as you reckoned spammy post history will prevent you from getting merit. Not a bad idea tbh.

Good effort OP! I was thinking of doing similar thing: rewarding merits for X reports with high accuracy, but didn't go with that as it's just to easy to fake (so would need mods to verify).

I'm bit surprised newbies don't have this option available, maybe it's only available after reporting your first post?

@any newbie - do you have 'report to moderator' option available at all (lower right of every post)?

I don't think anyone was deluded enough to think this would stop the spam completely. It was meant to be an extra step to make it harder for the spammers.

So far the results are visible: The new rule (1 Merit for Jr. Member) is already reducing spam; + see Theymos' post within the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5032314.msg45912431#msg45912431

But I do understand where you're coming from. I am hesitant in rewarding good posts by newbies if there's a lot of spam in their posting history. There's too much risk they'll return to the old habits as soon as they have that +1 merit.

Oh well, lets give it time.

Do you mean different twitter accounts with same/very similar tweets? If so, it's not a solid proof. When you have a bunch of non-english speaking guys doing dozens of bounties everyday - of course they'll be copy/pasting.

Plagiarism is bannable offence on this forum, not so much on twitter unfortunately.

I think it's best to follow the money in searching alt accounts/bots. I heard than on one occasion a thousands of bounty-hunting accounts were associated with one ETH address. That's insane.



Everything is possible, but forum admins don't run campaigns and do not interfere with their rules. As long as forum rules aren't broken - no one gets banned.
The real problem is that bounty campaigns are paying with their own tokens (created out of thin air) so they don't care too much about fighting bots/alts/spam -as there's no costs to them, so nothing to lose.

I'm no expert, but from I learnt so far from internet self-proclaimed TA experts - professional term for this pattern is: green dildo giving a a birth to the new bart.

Jestes jedynym w tym watku, ktory nie ma sygnatury, wiec nikt nie pisze o "zarobkowiczach". Tu chodzi o spam.

Zalinkowany post jest konstruktywny, wnosi cos do dyskusji. Pisz takie posty to i zarobic bedzie latwiej.

If you do it through BitPay, or other payment processor, and get it auto converted to fiat (100%), then, from accountants perspective, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Accepting BTC directly creates some extra work for her, which you'll have to pay for, so makes little sense if purchases in BTC are rare and insignificant.

Spam jedynym zrodlem zarobku? Nie mozesz zarabiac w ten sam sposob piszac konstruktywnie?

Jak dlugo, twoim zdaniem, pociagnie to forum, jezeli nic sie nie zrobi z tym zalwem gowna? Kto tu bedzie przychodzil zeby czytac pol-linijkowe posty bez zadnej tresci? Komu bedziesz reklamowal sygnature? Kto ci za to zaplaci?

Chodzi o proporcje. Zeby to pozostalo forum, to musi dominowac normalna dyskusja. Nie ma forum - nie ma zrobku.

Jesli to jest jedyny sposob w jaki mozesz zarobic, to cos w zyciu robisz nie tak.

It's possible for your account to be recovered (follow the link from SFR10's post above) if you have btc address associated (stacked) with your account and if admins are willing to help you, but since your only contribution to the forum are bounty claims and half-liners - I wouldn't count on that.

ps. and move topic to Meta (scroll down, it's on the left)