got it tnx! made some article about coin.. but i bet its only beneficial to that coin thats why i dont get merit  Keep making those posts and the merit will surely come. It is indeed simple but that doesn't mean its functional or the most efficient way to distribute merit. Let's give the man some credit for at least presenting something out of his "ass", instead of just whining and trolling like others do.
But if this was the system theymos actually implemented then people would be crying about that and probably much more so than they do with the current system because it is incredibly more difficult to earn merit. People are so against this system they'll propose anything just so they can oppose it in some way.
I agree with all of your insightful responses hilariousetc, yet I would like to elaborate on this one correct point that you made.
Of course, KingZee seems more than capable of earning a lot of merits, so long as he put forth the efforts. He has decent language skills and decent abilities to connect facts and logic. Surely part of his problem remains his exaggeration, his whining and his negativism, so surely, this system is designed to make it more difficult for whiner-tards like that to rank up without first going through the motion of contribution and even a significant amount of contribution before they are going to be able to reach the highest of forum ranks.
Even though some of us, including yours truly, remains quite unwilling to send any merit to such a member, there are other members who are similarly contrary and similarly jaded who are ready, wiling and able to give merits to such seemingly "undeserving" members.
By the way, even though my current mindset is to block myself from giving merit(s) to KingZee, I am not necessarily stuck in my ways, because if, in the future, I see interesting and or contributory posts coming from him/her, then I am not the kind of person to hold a grudge, unless the negativism is so stuck in my head that I have to see meaningful changes in the consistency of the member to contribute to the forum.
Rightly so, each of us have differing thresholds in determining whether and how much to send merit to other members, but I do believe that even seemingly fucktard members can concentrate on their efforts and posts to the forum and transform themselves in such a way that members will change their minds about NOT giving merits to them after they begin to read "better" contributory posts from such previously blocked member.
He doesn't even need any additional merits to join the campaign he keeps trying to; all he needs is to make decent posts, but I'm not going to merit people just for complaining at the system, especially when they're suggesting something much worse, but wouldn't have an issue in meriting other posts of his. He's just needlessly whining because he's not automatically a Hero or Legendary and this prevents him earning maximum in most campaigns but is irrelevant to Chipmixer so if I was him I'd just concentrate on my posts rather than anything else. |
|
|
|
I’ve had a crap day for my predictions. I’ve somehow stayed in 2nd place but I did really badly. I got 3.5 points today, that’s pretty embarrassing. Must do better.
So did I but seems most people did quite poorly. A lot of unexpected results. I didn't expect there to be many goals in the Cardiff game and went with 1-1 and Cardiff ended up getting their first win in the league with a 4-2 victory. I got screwed out of a perfect score on the City game with the late goal from Mahrez to make it 5-0 (as did three other players). Bournemouth screwed me out of my weekly three-fold accumulator win with a 0-0 draw. Not gonna bother watching any of the games today. |
|
|
|
^ Yup. Da Faaak.  Edit: Seriously. 6 minute extra time? Rigged. My thoughts exactly Chelse homeground, Ibramioch rules with his money i guess, they stole the victory from Manchester United. Do you guys actually believe that? Because you're fools if you do. Sometimes there's a lot of injury time and sometimes there's goals in them and sometimes there isn't. This is the Premier League not a Sunday league and the ref wasn't going to play until Chelsea equalised. If you watched the game there was a lot of stoppages and Man United were wasting time towards the end which should and usually is accounted for. I actually think a lot of the time there's not enough extra time played if you count all the actual stoppages in the game. Anyways, does anyone think it was a fair result? Looking at the statistics, it seems like Chelsea had the ball possession but both teams had almost the same amount of shots on target.
Yes. It was pretty even in my opinion. United did well and better than expected though. |
|
|
|
hello can i beg for only 1 merit ? ive been looking for 1 and i have 40 plus activity Begging for merits is a good way to get negative feedback. Please don't do this. i see  so what should i do to get merit then? no clue Make posts that are deemed meritable by the community. Alternatively, you can purchase a copper membership to get the benefits of a Member-level account. |
|
|
|
If someone participates in a bounty from more than 1 account, it's counted as abusing. But what if someone uses 2 accounts and participate in 2 different bounty? Will it be counted as abusing?
This isn't a Meta issue but a reputation issue, and there are no forum rules on this, but something is probably only seen as abuse by the community if it's against the stated terms of the campaign. Not sure why this would count as abuse though. I'm on two different signature campaigns on two different accounts (if you count them as 'bounties'). |
|
|
|
As has been proposed and discussed numerous times before this isn't ever going to happen and nor should it.
No kidding--and I don't know of any other discussion forum in existence where you need to prove who you are in order to be a member. And to have that absurd requirement on a forum about a form of currency based on anonymity and populated with individuals who value privacy is just stupid, stupid, stupid. Bitcointalk has a lot of problems, yes, but all of them could be handled without resorting to KYC measures. I wouldn't trust the admin with any of my data anyway, given how many times the forum has been hacked. Bitcointalk has a unique problem with getting paid to post and obviously we've still got a long way to go to try tackle that. I get why people are suggesting such things as KYC and their heart is probably in the right place as it would undoubtedly curb a lot of abuse, but it's just simply not practical and isn't ever going to happen. We need to find alternate ways of tackling the issue and I think punishing those who continually pay people to spam is the next logical step and would help a lot. |
|
|
|
In addition, outside this website, these merits don't mean anything and can not be used at all. To be honest, I do not quite understand as well. I am grateful for the merits that were given to me, but I genuinely do not understand why so many people are hung up on getting them. They said it was for the signature campaigns, but I guess if you do not have services to offer and are just here to learn cryptocurrency and communicate with other crypto users then it should not matter much? After all, it is not like we can trade them for bitcoins, right? They don't mean anything in the real world? Merits get you laid. Scientific fact. There's a reason people call them pussy points. Next time you're trying to impress a lady whip out your phone and show her your merit page. Instant aphrodisiac. Though maybe it depends on how many you have. One or two probably isn't impressive but when you're one of the merit big boys like me I have to beat women off me. It's a gift and a curse. After all, it is not like we can trade them for bitcoins, right?
You can. People sell merits and it'll probably become big business. Most people will probably just cough up for Copper Membership rather than buy the one merit to become Junior though, but to become higher ranks merit will become increasingly harder to get and more valuable/costly. |
|
|
|
does anyone really care about Newcastle United - Brighton & Hove Albion, Bournemouth - Southampton and Cardiff City - Fulham?
I care. I normally wouldn't even pay attention to those games, but ever since I've joined this Pool I've been keeping an eye out for those games that I usually wouldn't care to watch, now I might even sit and watch those "boring" games because I want to know if I predicted the correct scores  Well one thing I like about the pool is that you get a lot of value for your money - an entire season of gambling for a very small fee and every game certainly matters when you've got money on the line. You can watch the results come in with interest, but I still don't really care about those games and certainly won't be making any attempt to watch them. I think they'll all be pretty boring games but sometimes you get surprises. |
|
|
|
So explain to me how does the merit system prevent heroes and legendaries from posting equally low effort posts if they start with more points, have more to distribute to each other, and vice versa, how does it encourage lower ranks to merit posts that deserve to be merited, if they don't have many sMerits nor Merits themselves?  It doesn't. It prevents new users from becoming them just by shitposting, I wouldn't be against everyone starting from zero merit either, but then you would still have all the shitposters crying about that. "y u take awai mah merit! Its nut fare!". We really can't win. Without merit the forum is a shitshow, but with it people complain that they can't get paid for shitposting.
Lol? I don't even have a sig campaign under me.
Where did I say you did, but you're actively trying to join the highest paid one repeatedly. I already know I'm never getting merited because the top people who have the points only merit the people they care about. You've already been merited. I'd say you'd actually have little problem in rising through the ranks, but this is something you seem to be unwilling to do. You seem to want it all now, and that's not how this works. So what are you even talking about? I am writing these long-ass posts out of pure disgust of the merit system. Well this would be fair enough if you don't ever join a signature campaign, but this is exactly what you're trying to do, so you have motivation for writing "long-ass posts". In fact, you have little to no chance of getting on the ChipMixer campaign without a history of great posts. If only every campaign was run like them there wouldn't be an issue with spam. And YES, I don't want to post 60 posts a week to make 20$/week. That's the whole POINT I'm arguing for. It's MERIT that denied me access to higher paying sigs. This last paragraph you wrote is just pure garbage..
This is a bitcoin forum to discuss bitcoin. If you don't want to talk about bitcoin without payment then you're probably on the wrong board and you could be better spent earning money elsewhere. You are 100% only here to earn and that is exactly why the merit system was introduced to stop people just signing up in droves to bleed the system. If you want to earn then bide your time, get the merits and try join a signature campaign. You've already got enough merits to join most campaigns so I don't really know what you're moaning for. Regardless if your observation is true or not, merit isn't even a problem for those newbie accounts. It BECOMES a problem for legit newbies who WANT to commit to the forums to make money later, because it's now HARDER for them to breach the line to become relevant.
The fact that they're newbies already fucks them over because no one is going to merit them, and that's it, stuck in a deadlock, not just as newbies, but again and again until they reach Hero level.
What exactly are "legit newbies". This is a bitcoin discussion forum and "legit newbies" can post about bitcoin here as intended. The fact that you can get paid from posting here is secondary, but I don't believe people should be able to come here and get paid for posting straight away. The fact that we require one merit to be able to do so is nothing and should be much, much more, but if you want to earn more money here then you now need to put in the time and earn the merit and ranks. With the merit system ranks actually mean something now and are something people could be proud of once they achieve. Here's a solution I proposed a few posts ago : Or maybe the merit system but in reverse, instead of people being able to +1 people, how about them being able to -1. No one might care about meriting a well-written post, but that doesn't matter because it also prohibits people from using merit as a bargain chip. On the other hand, if a user posts some extremely low quality post, make other users punish him. Really? How is this any different? This is actually a far worse system and I don't think you've actually thought it through. If we would have implemented this system you'd be here complaining about that right now as would thousands of other angry shitposters who had been neg-bombed into oblivion and have negative chance of being able to earn. How would they even get that back to positive or neutral without some sort of +1? Why are negatives so important? Because they give weight to neutral points. Just like trust. If a user has positive merit : This guy knows how to get himself sucked by other users. If a user has negative merit : This user writes shitposts and spam. This wouldn't work and isn't a solution to anything and would be far worse than the merit system. I don't get why you are ok with giving people negative points but positive merit is a no-no. How would it even work? Can anyone give negative points? What happens if someone who doesn't like you and gives you negative points for every post you make? You would never be able to join a campaign. How is that better than making decent posts and hoping someone merits you? You're so blindsided by your dislike of the merit system you'll propose something that would be infinitely worse and more abused just because. So how about another idea, decentralize it. (ha-ha) Make everyone able to give out merit, just not by large quantities, and only by peer confirmation.
Someone posts a good post? If 5 different users give it a +, the user gets rewarded by a point. But wait, what if people make junior armies to spam +?
Let's see, let's make it weighted. For a user to get a point out of a useful post, he's need + from 3 different user ranks, and 5 total +. Everyone has the ability to give out +s, but they all have an equal amount of currency. Rank doesn't matter, each user can only + 5 posts per month. These are just numbers I'm pulling out of my ass. But I hope you see the point.
It's really not hard to try and come up with a less biased system if you spent a long enough time thinking about it. But like I said, I'm burnt out of this topic and feel like I'm wasting my time contributing. You can reply to let me know your opinion, but I'm afraid this is going to be my last post, cheers.
You're just needlessly complicating something that is actually very simple and desperately trying to come up with alternative systems which you haven't really thought through and which would in fact be much more worse. You're complaining that merit is hard to get, but now you're suggesting people can only get merit if five others agree. So now it's five times harder to get merits. |
|
|
|
|
A simple search for "kyc" in Meta would have got you your answers. As has been proposed and discussed numerous times before this isn't ever going to happen and nor should it. All it would do is put off the small percentage of actual genuine users who come here and just want to talk about bitcoin or get some help, while those who stand to profit from being here would find any way they could to bypass and abuse the restrictions. People can easily buy fake IDs and document scams and the farmers would be the ones doing this because they stand to gain from it. If I signed up to this forum and it asked me for ID and KYC verifications I'd be like fuck this shit and not even bother completing the registration.
|
|
|
|
Hi
My main account got banned about a month ago.
Ive not posted outside of "Meta" at all & i Won't do that in future. My new acc get banned too?
Why are you asking the same questions expecting to get different results?  Why would you even want an account just to post in Meta? You're only really allowed to post/appeal your ban in there once banned, it doesn't mean you can use it to essentially evade your ban if that's what you're asking. |
|
|
|
OP, who exactly are you accusing of giving merits to their "friends"? From what I've seen, it's mostly the shitposting bounty hunter families that do that, and a lot of those idiots have been tagged. Those people wouldn't dream of giving merits to people who make posts that deserve them.
How do you know who merit sources are "friends" with anyway?
He doesn't. He's just one of those 'the rich keep getting richer' idiots who wants to have a whinge because nobody is going to merit his half-assed posts. Since the introduction of this merit policy, I have been following how people with merit source award the merit. One thing I have observed per the given out of this precious merit is that most people award this merit on the basis of "whom you know or who knows you". Just a few people are going by the actual brain or principle behind the institution of this merit policy. A lot of people with the merit source just share the merit among themselves forgetting about the intended purpose. At times, you could see that a certain post deserves to be rewarded because of its importance to the forum members but the otherwise happened. Now my question is "Is the merit really rewarded based on merit or whom you know?
Please I need your observations on this merit policy and its distribution.
Yes, this is how it works and we don't like people muscling in on our patch trying to take away our precious merits. You haven't got any merits because you're a bounty hunter making average-to-shit posts. You're also plagiarising content: Blockchain is a shared public ledger on which the entire Bitcoin network relies. All confirmed transactions are included in the block chain. It allows Bitcoin wallets to calculate their spendable balance so that new transactions can be verified thereby ensuring they're actually owned by the spender.
https://bitcoin.org/en/how-it-works |
|
|
|
|
I don't usually do mine till the end of the week and usually on Friday, but looks like some tricky games to predict this week. A lot of boring fixtures for me. I mean, does anyone really care about Newcastle United - Brighton & Hove Albion, Bournemouth - Southampton and Cardiff City - Fulham? They'll probably all cancel each other out. I joked in the other Premier League thread about a shock win for United but wouldn't surprise me if it happened haha. I've got a feeling some team will underestimate United at some point and pay the price for it.
|
|
|
|
Found this one whilst looking for posts he's likely to have copied: Crypto doesn't like crying I think. It is very strong technology that needs in the analyzing and clear mind so much. Even if fyou have lost money could not be the reason to regret.
 |
|
|
|
Copy and pasting: Depends on criteria of "the best" crypto. If you mean popularity and value then Bitcoin is still the best. But if you mean profitability, then Ethereum is definitely one to buy.
Depends on criteria of "the best" crypto. If you mean popularity and value then Bitcoin is still the best. But if you mean profitability, then Ethereum is definitely one to buy.
Anyone find it suspicious the only merit he's sent is to an account registered back in 2011 within a couple of weeks from him? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=27528 btcoin June 20, 2011 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=31711 csbsstudent July 03, 2011 And csbsstudent has received merit from foserfox who has been banned for copy and pasting, and has also been meriting loads of accounts that were copy and pasting: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5037225.0Merit summary for csbsstudent Merit: 2 Sent in the last 120 days October 04, 2018, 12:29:04 PM: 1 to btcoin for How to start investing? Received in the last 120 days September 21, 2018, 01:57:21 PM: 1 from foserfox for Belief in the Bubble September 21, 2018, 01:52:56 PM: 1 from foserfox for Belief in the Bubble |
|
|
|
The people who come here don't necessarily spend all their days and live through sig campaigns. It's not that hard nor that time-consuming You're right, it isn't that hard, but that's the issue. A lot of people are actually coming here and "doing bitcoin full time" and this is their "job" now, but they're doing a shoddy job. The problem is is that some people do just sign up here to earn by getting paid and they literally have dozens to sometimes hundreds of accounts just churning out rubbish on each of them, and that's why we unfortunately need the merit system. But WHY do all of you guys belittle Juniors, Members, and Full members this much? Sig campaign managers put (word-count, time, etc..) limits on their campaigns all the time. I'm sure that you could pick any random senior and hero participating in the same campaign and you would see very little difference in post quality, as long as they both adhere to the sig campaign rules. We don't, but for some reason you think we do. We belittle the shitposters, who just so happen to consist of a lot of lower ranks a lot of the time, but there are shitposters of every rank. People are tired of all the spam, not just spam from lower ranks, but systems need to be put in place to stop spammers farming as many accounts as they like and the merit system severely curbs that. What I don't understand (or I do understand it.. I just don't like it), is this stance towards lesser ranked members. WHY don't you want them making money too? You seem to be confused about something here. We don't want shitposters making money for spam. People shouldn't be able to get paid for posting rubbish regardless of rank. I don't care about others making money. In fact, I think it's great if people can make some money here just for posting, but not for writing crap about something they know nothing about. I'm an example of many, the lowest accepting campaign takes Senior with min 260 merit, average is a lot higher now. WHY do I need to put in so much extra effort to become eligible? It's purely unfair, because just a few weeks ago, I had the same possibilities open to me like you did. But right now, the gap has gotten so much larger, that it just benefits you guys, the ones who already made it past the red line. Poor you. You're literally complaining that you have to put effort into your posts now. Have you ever thought that you or your attitude might be part of the problem? People have become so entitled here it's ridiculous. We have no control over what campaigns accept as their minimum thresholds, but I think they should have higher standards and much more so. If every campaign did then we wouldn't have an issue with spam in the first place and we probably wouldn't have needed the merit system either, but campaigns are lazy and were paying for spam constantly and something needed to change. Oh, there are also lots of campaigns you can join, even as lower rank, but I suspect they don't pay as much as you'd like and the fact that you can't get onto a higher paying campaign straight away and without any fuss is probably what's annoyed you so much. It's a shame I can't view all members to prove my point, but there's probably a shitload of existing hero members that make posts of mediocre quality. The same quality that a junior sig campaign member would do write to barely fit his post inside the post count rules. But because the merit system was uneven from the start, it makes it look a lot worse than what it already is. There are lots of shitposting Heroes (and every other rank), but this is why campaigns shouldn't just accept anyone based on rank and should take each user on a case by case basis, like ChipMixer does. A mere rank doesn't mean you're a great poster, but you need a higher rank for a bigger signature and that's what most of the campaigns want or are paying for. That doesn't mean they should be paying for spam though. |
|
|
|
^ Lol. How long was the EPL the BPL for? Too long I guess if people were starting to subconciously refer to it as the 'BPL'. I don't think I ever did as I was very nit picky when people did it.  I think it was referred to as the Barclay's Premier League from 2007–16, though they sponsored it for a few years before that, and before them it was Carling (that takes me back). https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/barclays-maintain-premier-league-ties-despite-ending-title-sponsorship/1388023Barclays has signed up as official banking partner of the Premier league after opting not to renew its title sponsorship of the competition. The Premier League has decided to pursue a strategy of having no title sponsor after Barclays decided against renewing its £40m-a-year sponsorship last year. £40 million a year, just for their name on it. I don't know why some companies even bother with sponsorship. Is anyone going to bank with Barclays just because of the sponsorship? A more confusing one for me was when tyre companies like Pirelli and Continental sponsored things like the Champion's League. Does anybody choose their car tyres by brand? You usually just get what you're given when you go for new tyres. Forgot about Yokahoma Tyres sponsring Chelsea as well: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/26/chelsea-shirt-deal-yokohama-rubber] $200 million deal. I think I'm in the wrong business. Seems tyres is where the money is right now . Anyway, you got any funny hunches on this weekend's matches? Yeah, shock win for United . |
|
|
|
I heard from a major source that Bitcoin is in full development. This is great news for the Bitcoin adaption. What are you doing to adapt it in your everyday life? Breaking news: Bitcoin in full development. If I had to guess those posts have probably gone through several translations and back, hence why they're such nonsense. Luckily he's already been banned: I expect bank on is safiest accommodation emblematizing my currency however i prize crypto very today you dont condition to chore machine or currency whether do you permit digital pouch so you can pay emblematizing anything you with out cash and machine cards.
I think bank is safiest place for my money but i like crypto too because you dont need to bring atm or money if do you have digital wallet then you can buy anything you with out cash and atm cards.
"safiest" .
|
|
|
|
I thought that these accounts had been abandoned but I saw one today that had reactivated and started posting again: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2280138 James_Cline July 14, 2018 Last post was on August 12, 2018 then starts again on October 08, 2018. It's a similar story with all the others. Stop posting in August and either reappear recently or have yet to be active again. The first one I spotted (Aidan_Davis) has been inactive since August 20, 2018, 08:15:36 PM https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2271537 July 10, 2018 But his "sister" hasn't: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2280121 Emily_Davis July 14, 2018, "She" was inactive since August 12, 2018 to October 12, 2018. Interestingly she made this thread on the 16th: As of August 2018, there are over 1600 cryptocurrencies that exist, according to Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable of sources because anyone can edit it whenever they want, but the point is the number of cryptocurrencies being introduced. Some of the new cryptocurrencies I've heard were DeepBrainChain, ByteCoin, IOST, and Elastos. There's also a new coin called Virie, which is apparently a cryptocurrency used to crowdfund and jumpstart the Virternity Project, a project that aims to digitized our minds, economy and the society. I believe that not all new coins aim to scam people, but do we really need more cryptocurrencies? Do we need new cryptocurrencies for every project that exists? Why can't there be one or five cryptocurrencies that all projects can use? If we look a few posts down in that thread there's another one: I have to agree with this. Not all projects would work on other existing coins such as bitcoins or ripple or other altcoins. Some needs a specific coin to run their projects, like DeepBrain I think and Virie. That said, I wonder how people would react to too many coins if and when cryptocurrencies became a worldwide digital currency. Do you think that people will be open to the idea of learning about different coins for different purposes?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2280133 Blanca_Gregory July 14, 2018 Gap from August 12, 2018 to October 12, 2018 I wonder if they've been created to shill for DeepBrain and Virie (amongst others)? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
