Bitcoin was originally created to be;

The above quote is gotten from the Bitcoin whitepaper and shows the purpose for which Bitcoin was created, it could have been a coincidence that it came right after the recession of 2008.

There's however no singular use case for Bitcoin, it can be anything the holder wants it to be.

Such trust management schemes usually act like pyramid schemes, which attracts users at the beginning as the early depositors gets payment, and the next and maybe the next. This is done until the project has attracted a huge number of people who are then ripped off if their investment.
As a rule of thumb, treat all options as a scam until it is not, this way you always look for reasons to not invest in a project, helping you discove the holes in them.


Fiat and Bitcoin cannot always be interchangeable, and as an investment options, holding fiat does not generate much revenue, and factoring in inflation, the devaluation speeds up.

I get your point, but they are not essentially the same to me. I can dislike a users posting habit, due to opposing views we may have on some topics, but except they are crossing an ethical line, I wouldn't see a reason to ignore them, but this is just me, other users could have different reasons why they ignore users.
Regardless of your personal reasons however, users are allowed to use the ignore button as they want, and sources should not be an exemption.

I'll reiterate my previous reply and add the merit sources are volunteers and should only appraise boads or users they are comfortable with as that's how they'll function best.

Spain played their quarter final fixture to the very last kick (penalty), and here again at the semis they are going to extra time, j certainly hope match fitness does not start to play a part against them. Both teams have put up a good performance tonight, with Spain being the better of the two sides; It is now a question of who wants it more.

Ignoring a user does not mean you do not like them, it is likely because they post repeated spam to an extent they are infamous for it, and they could also have very extreme views about topics which can be disturbing to other users, in the same way not ignoring a user does not mean you personally like them.

About objectivity, merits sources should make effort to view posts without prejudice, but should not be forced to entertain content they do not want to; it would be best to not overuse the ignore button, but it should be used where necessary, and possibly set up a system to evaluate those on your ignore list to know if there is any change in posting habit.

Imo, it was always well deserved even though the merits were air dropped. Those contributions to the forum before the merit system were the major building blocks which led the forum to where it is now.
Congratulations on your merit achievement, I have come across your account on several occasions and almost always find your posts and replies helpful.

I do not think they do, neither do they need to. The only thing that's important is how much each miner is contributing to the total pool percentage which would usually determine how payments are distributed.

If about 90% of ICOs turned out to be scams, making up the vast majority, it's safe to say that market is dead as it's to risky for an investor.

Such an addition would only encourage the spam which goes on in that section and the admins would not be inclined to do that.

If you are posting in order to boost your activity, you have already attained the maximum activity commensurate to your merit count for a new rank and would need to get some more merits for any further activity to count, and such posts as these or thosein the off topic section would not help you much to gain those merits.

If not, then halving is an event that takes place approximately every four years or 216,000 blocks. The last one was last year and It's another ~3 years before the next one.

I doubt this is the case as some start up founder kickstart an idea inorder to sell it as they've accepted they do not have the means to scale. In this scenario, you'll need to time your exit for the best possible time inorder to get the best possible bargain out of a deal.
Unfavourable conditions could be a reason why one steps down from leadership, but I don't think it relates to most founders.

I do not invest or have a deep interest in stocks, but I would not expect whoever replaces Bezos and the other excos to fail at filling the shoes, they could come with fresh ideas that will benefit the company positively and have had years to study the business model of their predecessors.

Quality is subjective, so what one person finds to be of high quality, another may not, merit is also not only given for quality posts, some can give them to witty or funny replies.
There is also merit sales still going on. So filtering by merits would not be a good metric to determine quality, one would also need to filter through lots of threads in local boards whose language they do not understand.

Before looking for a solution, a problem has to exist or an existing system becomes inadequate, I don't think either is the case here. The merit system has been working effectively for a long time now and there's no real shortage of merits to go around (although it's been a while I saw a source ask for more smerits). Creating an upvote-downvote system is not really necessary and could complicate the entire merit system.

There's a designated thread for that (link above), which allows for replies as well as thread starters to be nominated for merits

Governments (and hackers) can make regulations and monitor Bitcoin transactions all they want, that does not really affect the decentralization of the Network. The level of freedom a Bitcoin users has depends on how they chose to use it; if you use a custodian wallet, you've already given up control to a third party, submitting KYC documents also makes it much easier to trace your real identity to a wallet address.

The Bitcoin network is transparent and easy to monitor, but no one can breach your pseudo anonymity unless you let them.

Locking an old thread could lead to so many quality replies being buried along with the old thread.
It might be too much work for the admins to start entertaining requests like these, but they do not have to make it a habit, they can evaluate the situation and choose not to take any action; just as theymos does with display name change requests.

Thread starters should also try to be pro active to avoid situations like these one by creating enough reserve slots for future edits.

To do this, you may not need to find friends to trade with peer to peer platforms like hodhhodl or bisq allows users to connect and trade without having to directly go through a bank, the transaction would appear like any normal one with no trace to bitcoins. If you have a large stash and wish to convert to fiat, you'll likely have to do it over numerous smaller transactions.

Or if you own a mining rig and wish to keep it functioning.

I like the use of forum made legendary member as opposed to 'self' made, shows the contribution of other members in your growth imo.
Congratulations Primenumber7 on your new rank, now to stack up more merits should theymos decide to better the legendary rank anytime in the future.

P.S; This should fit more in the reputation board than Meta.

I should be congratulating you on your four year anniversary, but it's actually we; the community that have something to celebrate. Only very few members are as dedicated, hardworking and transparent as you have been on the forum, and you have benefited this immunity in many ways, as a member, DT member, campaign manager, charity program organizer and merit source.

Cheers to many more years discussing about Bitcoin and other related topics.

AFAIK, This would depend on the fee set by the node through which the transaction is being routed, the fee is usually low and can be free.
If you're going to open a channel yourself, you'll have to fund it through an on chain transaction; paying regular transaction fees.

Here are two good threads both started by Rath_
The Lightening Network FAQ
Basics of the Lightening Network

It was a really bold move from El Salvador and has gotten lots of crypto enthusiasts talking about how much it could affect the growth of Bitcoin and the country as well.
About becoming the 'home of Bitcoin', I do not think such a country would actually exists. Bitcoin exists everywhere with no bias as the network is universal, anyone, from anywhere, can use it the way they please.

Possibly this move would spark a wave of legal adoption of Bitcoin as a currency. Every new epoch in Bitcoin's history, started with a seemingly small move which laid the foundation for further growth.

Developed countries are more concerned with the strength of their national currency and its usage in foreign trades, adopting Bitcoin would likely weaken that position, making it more difficult for them to make such a move.

To be part of the verification team, you will need to run your own node and save your own copy of the blockchain, if you're using Bitcoin core, you can run a node it, however not all wallet softwares operate like that and for some you do not need to save a copy of the blockchain.

There would be no more coins to be mined, but transactions would still need to be confirmed, and miners would be needed to confirm them. Except that in this case, they are only paid by the fees on the transaction with no coinbase reward.

Yes, if you run a full node wallet. You can however use a wallet like electrum connected to different servers.