This thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2150057.0

---

And no, the token won't be updated. Rather, it's a medium for bankroll investments. Since you sell the tokens to the site every quarter, holding the tokens & selling them would be the way to do it.

And there are still some pretty huge arbitrage opportunities right now.

Questions can always be asked on the other thread in the Gambling section which overviews the site as a whole as opposed to the token.

Moreover, there isn't much to ask that hasn't already been answered: the concept is pretty straightforward.

Yes.

Okay. So you're not banned but how come a supposedly-reputable user involved in legal cases is so controversial, to the point where a potential ban was being actively discussed for you?

I meant your triple-posting. Edit them into one reply.

---

By the way, what is this?

[Link]

---

So... 70% of what? 0?

You're not in any position to start attacking others' post quality. A wise man once wrote in a play, "brevity is the soul of wit," and hence it is not the quantity but rather the quality of a reply that matters.

Unfortunately, for your many Altcoin Discussion posts, they lack both depth and volume.

---

Also, are you really comparing your opening post to a reply? It even has a padded and redundant line at the end.

Life is larger than having neutral/positive trust on Bitcointalk. If you were here to properly discuss, as it should be, then you would not make such garbage replies within literal minutes of one another. I'm not going to delve into the account-trading business because I will firmly keep all feedback based on the topic as-is. I will, however, critique your posts.

Acting with such indignancy is not the way to go when your posts look so forlorn.

Let's take a look at some recent posts. You posted 12 different replies in ~11 minutes.


Come on, mate. If you're telling me that you put in effort for these posts then you would really be taking the piss.

Especially this one: "It is never too late.... We are still in very early stages..."

I timed myself and checked how long it took me to type. Six seconds. Is that really a high-quality post?

The fact that you simply dismiss DarkDays's replies and try to deflect with an ad hominem doesn't really grant you any favors.

If you're trying to defend yourself, why don't you do it properly instead of resorting to child-like behavior? These playground insults are making you look bad, not 'DarkBrain'.

And let's not forget that double-posting is against the forum rules, never mind triple-posting.

I don't usually think that redundancy of negative feedback from DT members is necessary in most cases but I have tagged the users anyway. It is usually good to have at least two neg tags for users just in case there's some change in DT status for one of them. (Especially considering TP was already excluded once before)

/thread

I'll reserve tags for explicit/blatant cases. As it currently stands, we're heading towards the plateau of merit abuse and so we can let the discreet instances fly by without an issue.

With things like this where the users send back and forth (especially on trashy posts) I don't think many people would complain about tagging the users in question.

Here, the case should be very clear. The merit that is being sent (second transaction) is half of the amount received. This is very clearly trading/selling. Moreover, the posts that are being merited are being done so within minutes (for two instances) and are for relatively low-quality posts. They don't deserve merit. Especially this one:

Given that you pretty much copy pasted content, you shouldn't be unbanned. What made you think that plagiarism was acceptable?

https://www.logmeininc.com/legal/open-source-disclosure



Nice thesaurus.

---

You shouldn't be unbanned. I assume all 5 of your most recent posts are copied from elsewhere?

These transactions are far too localized to be considered accidental or a lack of knowledge of the merit system. The user is clearly either trading/selling merits or sending merit to their alts. I won't say anything about the other users since they don't have multiple instances of the abuse but I am tagging Rugosa.

C

776da9129342ee084fe7d33057d2343639eddf73238ac890f386c966ffdda710
Payment sent to all qualifying participants.

Reminder that the campaign is closed to all users who do not have ≥20 000 followers.

There are a lot of these common "level" mining games. See: bitcoin stacks (iirc that was the name), ore-miner, etc.

It's a common trope and most people who have been around will know instantly that these sites are ponzis. Really, only new users to Bitcoin would fall for them.

If you ever see a site with unrealistic returns (i.e. the crazy 1800% monthly profit quote on the site) then it's most likely a fraud.

Do you know how much workload that would add to the staff? They already have to deal with an exorbitant amount of spam in the form of shitty thread replies. You want them to now go through every feedback sent? Unlike posts, feedback takes a lot more time to digest and review.

It's most likely never going to be reviewed. Scams aren't even moderated, never mind trust feedback.

Why bring it up, then? It seems like a very moot point to make. And I'm not making excuses. I just want to see what's going on.

---

In regards to mikeywith's image, this is not necessarily an attempt at a Bitrated scam. The sender is naming two escrows and stating that they may proceed on Bitrated. This is further cemented by the last quote, keyword being if. If there is a more critical push towards the fake OgNasty account then that would be a better piece of evidence.

Now I'm not sure what was said in the voice recordings, but the content would help with context.

When were you phished? Your date of registration is on the 19th. There hasn't been anything that affected your account in a way that would seem like it was phished. At all.

Thread archived: https://archive.is/xEVGm

If you have visual evidence for these accusations then that would be something that you should bring up in a new Scam Accusations thread.

The claims are pretty heavy and would (in my opinion) warrant a negative feedback.

.0039

Not sure if this belongs in Reputation. Probably Altcoin Discussion is a better board for it.

---

Publishing the team lessens the possibility of a scam (though that hasn't stopped anyone). If there is a good idea and a means to implement it, then of course that would garner interest. Blockchain is not limited to a single purpose. It can be expanded and developed. Think about the differences between Monero, Ethereum and Bitcoin as an example.

I do think that you did the right thing. From a new user's perspective, this makes sense if you haven't known MJ for very long. Users should prompt discussions when there's (to a less-involved user) suspicious activity involving a large trade.

---

I personally wouldn't have trusted AM right off the bat either: it seemed really odd.

We can move on from this situation but should still exercise caution with all trade activity outside of one's comfort zone.