Yes you did. You literally asked someone to send you over $100k and that's what you got the negative feedback for. There is no way to know what you would have done with that money had you been sent it but I think the chances of you just running off with it were very high. That sort of money could make even an honest man turn into a scammer and people will run off with much less. Of course you could have had every intention of safely holding the money and returning it when asked but that's something we'll never know. The feedback doesn't say you're a scammer but to trade with caution and lists the reasons why I find you untrustworthy, but you can't do anything about how others interpret that other than telling them to actually read the feedback and that no money was ever actually scammed.

Don't forget the time someone had their whole entire "office" accounts banned: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1912475.0

That's why they all shared the same IP and obviously wasn't someone just writing the same sentence just reworded slightly account after account page after page on two hundred accounts.

And my personal favourite is the husband and wife duo who are so in love they virtually have to hold hands on the forum and post back-to-back because they can't bare to not be side by side:


And not that we needed to prove that it was bullshit, but:

Removing signatures will stop signature spam, which is probably 99% of the spam here. I wouldn't be against removing signatures, but I don't think it's going to happen. If we were going to remove signatures though then I don't think we should do it for everyone as that's unfair to those who have actually contributed something here and it's the spammers who will leave as soon as that happens and will have then ruined it for everyone else. Remove signatures from everyone and require a ridiculous amount of earned merit before you can get one. That seems more fair. You could also let people purchase more donator ranks in addition which get you the benefits of signatures, but I would only be for that if they were sufficiently expensive, so either earn your merit or cough up for a signature. Or go away. Either way you can still post as normal so nobody is effected from that.


You simply need to clamp down on the people who are paying people to spam as that's the cause of the issue. If a user signs up here and spams then they get a ban. If these people who keep getting banned are on the same campaign then that campaign should get the ban. Once ICOs start getting banned from activities here they'll soon change their ways because this forum is too valuable to them. They get away with it at the moment because there's no repercussions for them doing a lousy job so they're not magically going to change because that's far too much work for them that they just don't need to do right now.

What makes you think it's about the money for him? Why wouldn't he want another opportunity to beat him? Connor has a slim chance of actually winning against him unless he gets lucky. There's obviously some real bad blood between these two now, or at least for Khabib. McGregor just says things to be inflammatory to try get inside your head and it's a good tactic and often works because it can give you an advantage and can often make your opponent lose their cool, and that's what happened when Khabib did a Cantona and jumped into the audience. Apparently Conor's trainer was taunting him during and after the fight making racial and religious slurs so that's why he did what he did. I'd like to see a rematch because the badblood might make for a more explosive fight now and who else are those guys going to fight?

Locking a spam thread isn't really an urgent report. We have to actually go through the thread and make sure it has actually served its purpose. Sometimes I leave the reports because it's arguable about what a spam thread is. Sometimes the original post can be well written and well thought out, but if spammers can just answer the question in the title without reading the thread then it can quickly become unusable, but also sometimes people can still be making intelligent posts in there. This is why I think we should be cracking down on campaigns that pay for this crap rather than playing cat and mouse and locking good threads that have just turned to drivel because of spammers that are being paid for low quality contributions. Until that changes we're just wasting time and energy really.


You can compile as many lists as you want but it's futile if theymos isn't going to take any notice of it and the problem here is theymos just isn't acting on these things.

No. I don't believe anyone should be locked up for life other than murderers, and especially not for merely running a dark net market (and if that's all we're arguing about here). I think there's a double standard in that he got a harsher punishment than some of the actual drug dealers and traffickers who used the site. I don't really think there's anything morally wrong with drug dealing, as long as you are A) Not forcing anyone to do drugs or are pushing harder drugs on someone, and B) don't commit acts of violence due to your business, but obviously the government doesn't agree with that and their punishments are harsh for it and everyone knows that and unless the laws change then the harsh punishments won't either. I guess there's been some progress in the States with the legalisation or decriminalisation of cannabis, so maybe that will lead to relaxed laws on other 'lighter' drugs but only time will tell. The war on drugs is an obviously failure so they probably should just give up and let people buy drugs from darknet markets but that's probably too scary a thought for the average person or politician, but regardless of what they do people are always going to be buying and selling drugs regardless of the punishments or consequences and the sooner they accept that the better in my opinion.

I think he probably just hasn't edited it yet.

This probably still applies though if you feel you fall under that:

As with any merit giving people should just take it on a case by case basis, but I don't think we should stop giving them out in certain sections, but you can certainly stop giving them for certain types of posts. People either complaining or just 'agreeing' that the merit system is good probably shouldn't get them. If people stopped meriting posts in here then I'd probably have 98% less merits, but things like boycotts only ever work if everyone (or a significant) percentage of people are involved. There'll always be one or two users (or scabs) that make it ineffective and it's impossible to get everyone on board.


This is why I think the merit requirement should be higher and put up to ten. People would probably actually be more liberal with their merit giving then and giving one out for an entertaining post should be ok, but when one merit is all somebody needs to be able to post it's dicey. One merit is far too easy to get and is too prone to abuse so I personally think we should keep the one merit to become a Junior but remove their signatures and you can only get one when you achieve ten merit and become a Member.

Not enough. Just think of all the ones we've probably missed. Just goes to show you how desperate and valuable accounts are to shitposters that they have the audacity to try get them back. 


For those that don't:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3igggNc8yU


If you read the rules you'd know what you were banned for. In fact, if you read the rules you wouldn't have been banned in the first place, but you should know copy and pasting isn't acceptable.


Somebody should create a thread of all or the best "family & friend" banned excuses. Doubt any will top this one though: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg46576373#msg46576373

It could be just some way of saying you're an idiot and are doing a bad job. I was going to say that things probably just get lost in translation. There might be local language insults that have no meaning in English and when you're using translating software it just garbles it up even more. You've got to remember a good portion of posters here might even be illiterate in their own language so that will just make the translator job even worse especially when you're trying to make sense of something that never made any in the first place.

Another good one for you. This poster was mocking me for my bad English but ironically I was mocking shitposters for theirs:

You can leave negative feedback for any reason you wish if you think it's appropriate, but I would either just report the post and/or tell him to stop it as it's likely to get him negative eventually if he keeps doing it. That users posts are trash but I can't see any other place he's begged for it so maybe a warning will suffice.

Olaiasal36 is red tagged for ban evasion which he admits via the reference in the feedback:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1853995 Olaiasal36

The banned account he's probably talking about is Olaiasal18:


Found more that are not banned:





Which lead to this one:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1311641 tvplus006

Which is a Full Member and seems to be the odd one out. Are they related or has he just used that users details?

Is this another "friend":


Seems you have a lot of "friends" here:

People shouldn't stop giving merits in here but they should stop meriting merit beggars who come in here to either whine at merit or fake 'agree' that it's a great system in the hope that they get one (which a lot of time they have been even though you know they're probably crying with rage behind the keyboard but are just smart enough to know that complaining won't be as effective).


Disabling signatures in this sub board isn't going to stop them fishing for merits here. Most of them are Newbies who can't even have a signature until they get a merit and that's why they post here looking for them, but there are worse boards for sig spam. Why aren't you making the case that we remove signatures from Bitcoin Discussion since that's the sub board with the most spam and has been ruined the most? Removing signatures from there would surely resolve that?

He's bounty hunter that is even too lazy for that:



You know things are bad when people start copying spam because they can't be bothered coming with something original. Purchasing a Copper Membership doesn't mean you can get away with breaking the rules.


Also "friend":

Why would you have to be politically correct? All you need to be able to do is follow and enforce the rules here as impartially as you can (which there aren't that many rules anyway). If you've got a high report count with a decent accuracy and are not a complete arse or troll then there's probably not much else that qualifies someone to be a mod or not.


Only theymos has access to those stats. He posts them occasionally but hasn't in a while. He sent me the top reporters in Bitcoin Discussion a few months ago after I requested them, but no further action was taken.

No. It's a state of people being lazy, incompetent and entitled. Letting anyone and everyone earn from signature campaigns is like giving jobs to people who are not qualified to do them. Should everyone be allowed to be a brain surgeon? No. Should everyone be an electrician? No. If you're not qualified to do a job then you don't get that job. Simple. Should everyone be able to earn from signature campaigns here? No. If you can't speak English and know nothing about bitcoin then you shouldn't be allowed to earn here via such a way. Merit should be the qualification or aptitude test to show that you're qualified to earn via posting since campaign managers can't be trusted to hold some sort of minimum standards, and this 'qualification' should be much higher than one merit.

The clue is in the name of merit:


All you need to do is make posts that are notable, but obviously this is too hard for most of the idiot kids here. If you make great posts then you will get enough merit eventually. If you're a shitposter then you won't. That's it. Anything else is just whining and whinging because they now actually have to make some effort to actually get anywhere instead of just getting paid to churn out generic nonsense over however many accounts they have which is useless to everyone apart from the signature campaigns who pay for it and that's the issue and why we need something like the merit system, but it certainly doesn't go far enough.

Since when does a thread mean it's done after ten pages? Spammers won't care about that and they will just open another one either just with a slightly reworded title or 'shit thread part 2' etc. We need to tackle the issue at the source and that is campaigns that continually pay for drivel. Spam posts in spam threads shouldn't be getting paid but until that happens then nothing much will change and it's just pissing in the wind.

The murder for hire charges aren't relevant to the time he got because he wasn't charged for them at his trial, but I don't get why attempting to hire someone to have someone killed is less serious than actual attempted murder. The outcome would have still been the same with a life being lost and that person being responsible for that.


This isn't proof. Lots of times charges get dropped for a multitude of reasons even if they know the person is guilty of them (or highly likely to be). A lot of plea deals often involve more serious charges being dropped in exchange for a guilty plea on lesser charges. The state doesn't care as long as they get you locked up with as less fuss as possible.


Says who? They convicted him of money laundering and running a darknet market amongst other things. It's running the darknet market that got him life, as harsh as that may be.


I don't think it was dropped because of that. Attempting to have someone killed regardless of it happening is still a serious crime. It was probably dropped because they didn't need it to send him down and the murder for hires did include the corrupt agents (from what I remember) so it could have even been entrapment, but they probably wanted to leave the corruption of the agents out of the trial if they could for obvious reasons.

What? How so? Nothing much has changed other than shitposters now need one merit and once they get that it's business as usual (and it's really not hard to get at all whether you buy it or not). Bitcoin Discussion is still a spam fest and people are still shitting up it up 24/7 and that's not going to change anytime soon or until signature campaigns are punished for paying for spam. In the meantime we can add some mods to help clean the place up.


I thought you'd previously said you didn't want to be a mod? I think some of the long-time users who are reporting loads probably should be made mods as certain people have obviously put in the work and would be beneficial as staff members. More staff members have left than have been added over the years and the forum only continues to grow so we need to meet demand and workload is never ending.