I don't have a problem with anyone earning their living via signature advertising so long as they are posting intelligently and are positively contributing to the overall community with their posts. I would not be surprised to see a few people who make pretty good posts that earn a living from signature advertising, probably from Malaysia, India, or other third world countries. I would not particularly like it if someone was doing this with 10 accounts.

Nice advertisement....

Really though, there are not many differences between what CryptoSparks claims to be selling, and Gunbot.

Assuming this is not already the case, to get from what CryptoSparks is claiming to offer to Gunbot in terms of a trader being able to customize their settings, someone would need to set fixed values to variables whose values are determined from a second file that can be changed by the trader.

It may also be somewhat of a headache to get the bot to interact with a specific exchange's API, but this would not be a major project.

Creating something that works very similar to how Gunbot works is not terribly difficult, what is difficult is figuring out the best settings to use to maximize profitability. You can backtest specific settings, but correlation does not always mean causation, and to try to rule out correlation but not causation, you can run A/B tests for when the output is not close to the expected output based on the input, but you may not have enough data.

The whole hubbub about the API secret in your post is advertising hogwash. If you create the API so it can only trade, that is all it can do.

Your post is not unlike the type of advertising referenced in the OP.

No, its not, but plagiarism helps save minutes off the time it takes to write a post, and these several minutes extrapolated over many posts can add up. This adds up even more when someone is intending on spending all his available time writing posts (he is earning all his income from posting). 

Sure someone with API keys can do all sorts of things, but I don’t believe there is evidence to suggest the bot is doing any of these things. More importantly, CryptoSparks appears to have a target market of those using a few thousand dollars to trade with, and even the altcoin markets on bitmex are liquid enough so that these amounts are not going to move the market very much.

More importantly, I think CryptoSparks probably stands to profit more from the long term trading profits off of his customers verses having advance knowledge of a few percentage points move caused by his bot.

Regarding your "transaction accelerator" comment, I have seen these threads and thought about approaching one or more mining pools with a proposal to 'pre-pay' for block space well in advance, with the hopes of setting up a platform where I would resell block space to people whose transactions are 'stuck' at a premium rate, and a profit.

Edit/spelling 

Yes, I am referring to yahoo62278. I think you are arguing semantics, if he has the power to remove someone from the campaign, he has the defacto ability to accept someone because he could remove someone immediately who he does not want to accept. I have also noticed that he does not handle payments on most signature campaigns he runs, the payments are rather handled, and credited on the website platform of the company that is paying for the advertising.

Nevertheless, he is associating his reputation with YoBit, which is not beneficial to him. YoBit has a history of conducting business unethically, and anyone helping YoBit run its business, including helping with a signature campaign is furthering these unethical business practices, even if not directly participating in the unethical behavior personally.

I would hope so. The person running the signature campaign seems to have a decent amount of positive rep, and I would assume he would care about the answer to this question before associating himself with a company. I would also think YoBit themsleves would want this addressed to protect their own brand and reputation.

I asked the below question in their signature campaign thread

I haven’t received an answer yet.

They are paying very well, but are very shady. I would advise against advertising for anything associated with YoBit.

These pay rates are very appealing. Has Yobit resolved their flag about possibly running a pump and dump scheme? Asking because I believe I will be a senior member soon, and may consider participating.

bakkang was banned this past spring. It is possible this was done out of fear of getting banned for ban evasion.

He is accepting people that generally make really bad posts, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he is the same person.

Dontme is clearly not accepting the most qualified candidates into his signature campaign. I applied for his CryptoMania campaign, was not accepted, and looking at who was accepted, I was passed over for multiple people with no merit received. 

There are many people who create trading bots for their employer. Hedge funds and HFT firms need bots to trade, and I would assume their principals are not the only ones creating their trading bots (the HFT firms, and hedge funds hire people to create their bots).

He is selling his bot for 20% of the profits. If he can get people to cumulatively use a 'bankroll' 501% of what he can afford to risk in a bankroll, he will have higher profits than if he was using his own money.

I also am not sure that he is claiming it is 'guaranteed' his bot will produce positive returns. In a heavily regulated world, he would give a disclaimer that previous performance does not guarantee future results, but the crypto economy is still the wild west with virtually no regulation.

I am not sure I agree with this conclusion. He may argue that buying during a sharp, sudden decline may slow or reverse the decline and create bounces off lows we often see in trading action. See bitcoin going from ~7800 to ~8400 in well under an hour today. If he did make this argument, I am not sure I would agree with his logic without first studying the specifics.


Do you have a link to this? If this is true, and there are no extenuating circumstances, my opinion on him would change.

This should be transparent to anyone considering using his services. You may have a good reason to think this is a raw deal for any possible investor, but any possible investor is free to negotiate terms acceptable to him or her.  

---

I am not vouching for CryptoSparks, and he may turn out to be a scammer. My position is that him offering his bot services does not automatically make him a scammer.

I think this is probably Pelosi's (and the Dem party 'elders') way of ensuring Biden will not get the nomination. The whole story makes Biden look a lot worse than it makes Trump look.

There are too many dirty and probably illegal things the Obama administration did for there to be a reasonable chance for Biden to win the presidency. These are things that are secret, but as President, Trump likely can find out about, and possibly things that Biden was involved in. A presidential race between Trump and Biden would likely highlight this corruption, and could possibly hamper turnout on the democrat side, and raise turnout on the Republican side if someone previously engaging in this likely corruption is running for President. This could possibly mean Trump not only getting reelected, but Republicans having both majorities in the House and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, if the dirt is bad enough.

The effect on the election, and all races will be less if the Dem's presidential candidate is not associated with the Obama administration corruption. 

All of this assumes all this is not Trump playing the Democrats, which may be the case. The White House apparently has evidence the Whistleblower is politically motivated in favor of a specific democratic presidential candidate and if this is true, it would throw cold water on this theory.

I was not accepted (strange), but I am withdrawing from possible future consideration due to a possible conflict of interest.

The type of flag involved actually does not requite any actual victims. It only requires the perso nto be engaging in high risk activity.

There are many root causes of plagiarism.

The ultimate root cause is financial incentives. People hope to use plagiarism to achieve financial gain. I would hypothesize this is primarily those making posts in exchange for payment, primarily for advertising in their signatures, but may also be otherwise promoting a service/business.

Others may be testing AI programs and other automated scripts to generate text. This technology is quickly evolving.

Minimum wages and arbitrary regulation almost always results in negative outcomes. I don’t think it would even be possible to enforce minimum payments because signature campaigns could be arranged on reddit or elsewhere, or arrangements could be made such that participants would need to give back a portion of their earnings if they want to be accepted, or if they want to stay in the campaign.

The free market is already working to find the correct price for signature campaigns. There are currently a decent number of open spots in various signature campaigns with posting restrictions, and requirements to post in certain sections.

I am glad to see some people being able to continue participating in the community, who might be expected to be permanently removed, even if their participation declines.

I don’t think anyone can deny that signature campaigns have an effect on posting habits on a broad scale. I believe anyone who denies this is either naive, or is trying to push some kind of narrative. This is not to say that signature campaigns do not help the bitcoin economy because they do, especially the forum economy.

Anyone who has outright stopped posting after receiving a signature ban is probably a good candidate to be checked for ban evasion, and was more likely posting solely for the signature payment, which is not a benefit to the forum ecosystem. 

Based on the evidence you are citing, I would say it is more likely they are in some kind of business relationship than the two being alts.

Technically speaking, BestWebCreator didn't offer shilling services (he solicited a TG handle in response to a solicitation for these services), but if his name pops up in a case of likely paid shilling, one can make a reasonable conclusion.

I don't want to get involved in forum drama, but I also don't support the flag against CryptoSparks. I would describe what he is offering as similar to GunBot, who has many vouches from reputable forum members, the main difference being that CryptoSparks has settings 'pre-filled' for his customers. GunBot also appears to have what I assume to be paid salesmen, and although I don't know the specifics of the commission/payment structure, I think it would be fair to say it would be similar to what CryptoSparks is offering in the thread you describe as "offering to pay for shilling".

CryptoSparks loan request was a little scammy, but a lender could negotiate better terms that would better protect the lender, such as asking CryptoSparks to put up some of his own money that would be used to cover the first trading losses, if any.

I would not personally trade with a bot I didn't code myself, but I cannot deny this does not commonly happen. 

This sounds very unethical. I can only imaging the backlash if it was discovered that one of your clients was using your services.

By the way, it is not 'viral organic content' if you are 'manufacturing' it...

That is good to know about PIA/Private Internet Access. I will have to keep this in mind in the future.