Salty what are you looking for to buy? I've got a bunch of old junk silver (mostly dimes and quarters) as well as about 30 2013 silver eagles, a bunch of Maple Leafs, some turtles, etc; Kind of a weird eclectic mix  Sent you a pm |
|
|
|
As low a priority as its percieved... Its so much easier to follow posts via profile pics... As for the timeframe.. sounds like BFL are managing the forum  BFL set deadlines and missed them repeatedly. The forums set no deadlines, because we believe that account and forum safety is a tad more important than profile pictures, and have no idea how long it will take until the forums are secure to the point where we are ready to call it a day and go to work on the cosmetics. That being said, I'm not sure what the progress on any of it is, but there has been progress. |
|
|
|
|
And I can do check if interested.
pm me if you wish.
|
|
|
|
|
Profile Pics are sort of on the low priority list. Fixing the more important and less cosmetic features are taking precident, and since we don't know when those will be fixed, there is no ETA on profile pics. If there is a breakthrough, could be today! Or, it could be fixed 10 years from now (I hope not)
|
|
|
|
Nothing like blowing air and all the particulates in the air onto your food while it cooks on a surface coated with material not necessarily approved for food. At least use foil.
I'll wash the irons with bleach, and put the whole contraption in a plastic bubble. Better? |
|
|
|
No. Bitcoin doesn't care about your race, ethnicity, or sex.
It's an irrelevant category IMO.
I second this. We don't need to segregate the forums. |
|
|
|
|
I'm now tempted to get 8 irons and 8 hair dryers, and adhering them together in a circle, so I could properly cook an entire pizza.
|
|
|
|
|
Any rules on what you will or wont send? For example, if I wanted you to send a picture of me on a plate with an apple in my mouth to everyone you sold stuff to, would you do it?
(and by me, I mean it would be someone else, but the first part of the question is valid)
|
|
|
|
This is the root of the issue I think, since Vod is in the good ole boy network, his trust is weighted heavier as it is more visible to the mass majority who won't actually look into the details as compared to the retaliatory feedback that was given to him by people not in the good ole boy network. Perhaps someone in the Good ole boy network should step up and justly give him his just desserts until the matter is cleared, would you be willing to be a negative trust "escrow" Salty until the matter is resolved? As the fact of the matter is the mass majority won't look into the facts so Vod is wielding e-peen which is wrong, and the simple fact that he has this e-peen for being an "internet policeman". This will be my last contribution to these... threads, I've already ignored those which deserve it and that's enough for me but someone with authority and maturity needs to step up where they are needed and this system needs a very serious reconsideration/reevaluation for its effectiveness and purpose.
And to those who invited him into the good ole boy network... they should also reconsider their positions on the matter and use their trust ratings with scrutiny and evidence of trustworthiness and not just invite every "internet policeman" they see into the network.
If people are going to look past the meaning of feedback, and just follow blind numbers, thats not Vod nor Andrew's problem, but Andrew sadly gets caught up in it. I've got negative trust, for busting a scammer, but never the less, it is negative, and it doesn't bother me in the least bit. Because people can read the guy's feedback, and it says that he negatively trusted me, because I negatively trusted him without being 100% certain. Although I disagree, he did indeed use the system correctly, so that people could honestly see what he thought, and judge the validity for itself. TomatoCage is in my opinion a trustworthy individual, so I trust him. I don't know Vod enough to say that I trust him, however the fact that TomatoCage trusts him, makes me value his opinions a slight bit more based on TomatoCage's willingness to stake his own reputation on Vod. But if I was reading Vod's feedback for Andrew, and it said that he scammed him out of 15BTC on some deal, but there was no proof, I would no longer value said feedback. The global trust system is a system of suggestions. To be quite frank, I trust Dank even though he has a scammer tag, however I don't expect anyone else to, and thats their priviledge. The community should be mature enough to realize that people have their own opinions, and they are welcome to share them. Likewise, if you feel some way about someone, you are welcome to leave it on their trust, positive or negative. They system is set up based on individual credibility. I value my credibility, so I try not to add trust to someone who will end up scamming someone. If they do, I lose some credibility as a part of that. If TomatoCage believed what Vod did was wrong, he would remove Vod from his trust to protect himself. However, because Vod has given realistic feedback, not some made up numbers based on emotion, it is a valid use of the trust system. *edit* I'm glad you guys worked something out, but I feel this is still relevant for future use. |
|
|
|
|
But negative feedback is allowed for whatever reason someone wants to give it, as long as its honest. Technically, you can give dishonest feedback as well, but then these threads start.
If Vod wants to give you negative feedback, with 0 risked BTC, saying, "I don't trust this person" that isn't really abuse of the system. Then, someone can check your feedback, see that you were given negative feedback because Vod doesn't trust you, and they can judge whether or not they trust Vod. If Vod had said, I Lost 15 BTC to this Scammer in a fake monkey deal, then it would be grounds for an appeal.
If they trust Vod's appraisal, they won't deal with you. If they don't trust Vod, they will deal with you. Not any different than had they happened across a thread saying that Vod didn't trust you.
|
|
|
|
Cult has a derogatory connotation... anyways.
Yes, proceed. Your trust on my feedback is an eyesore, please remove.
*COUGH COUGH COUGH COUGH* But agree to disagree! From now on, we will keep the conversation on my "abuse" of the trust system.
|
|
|
|
But agree to disagree! From now on, we will keep the conversation on my "abuse" of the trust system.
Ok, so the religion talk is over. Hasn't Vod already given you a reply about this like... 5 pages ago? He doesn't trust you, so he gave you negative feedback. The goal here is to make him not, not trust you, so he removes the feedback (if possible) I don't know what just saying, remove your feedback is going to do. |
|
|
|
|
Goat has been banned, but he is no longer.
Goat tends to rub some people the wrong way though. I'd trust the guy with my finances, but not to be my PR.
|
|
|
|
|
So from the last few pages of this thread, I'm taking it you are no longer interested in Vod's feedback, and now debating religion with each other? I think you may want to move the thread to Politics and Society.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends if you can afford to lose. Silver is never going to go to 0, and chances are in the next 10 years, it will go wayyyyy up. The question is, will Bitcoin go way up, or will it go extinct? Bitcoin is higher risk, higher return. Silver is lower risk, lower return. Invest appropriately my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Lots of silver, computer parts, food, rent, electricity, various whatnaughts. I use Bitcoins like I use cash, I don't really hold them all that long, they are for spending. (I do put some asside for years from now though)
$10000+
|
|
|
|
|
I should have a package coming in tomorrow containing some silver coins I've never owned before. Be sure to watch out for those, especially if you are a sport fisherman.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
