|
Please remove the bump from your threads when you make a new one. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
You're meant to list them in one thread: 5. Reasonably similar* items must be listed together
*at moderator discretion
I Pmd him about it. |
|
|
|
I don't see how this would be anti-freedom of speech. You can have an alt to post 'controversial' optinions or sell something if you don't want it associated with your other account, but there's no good reason why you would need multiple accounts to sell the exact same thing other than to spam advertise which is exactly his intent.
Say you have one account that you are selling widgets on, and you have an opinion regarding some issue/topic unrelated to widgets. You then make what turns out to be a controversial statement about this topic, and this statement is so controversial that some people don't want to trade with you anymore -- you still trade honestly, and still sell a quality product. You might then want to create an alt account to well widgets that is not associated with this controversial statement/opinion, however if your first account stops selling widgets at the same time your alt account starts selling them, then your alt might stick out like a sore thumb as being the same as you. If you were not allowed to continue selling widgets on your first account while your alt account is also selling widgets, then you might refrain from making statements in the first place. I think this would be an exceptionally unlikely circumstance but they would be evaluated on a case by case basis, but I would say just don't get caught selling on another account. He doesn't have any excuses. Never known a user like him. Interesting. I wonder if he will be back. Almost certainly will be if he's not already. He's pretty much tried to evade his ban on dozens of accounts almost continually since he got permabanned in January. I'm locking this thread now because it's served its purpose and is just going off topic. |
|
|
|
|
Those sorts will be taken on a case by case basis. I don't think copying your own post is that bad just as long as it is still relevant and a user wasn't doing it en mass or making a habit of it etc. You can't plagiarise your own content after all so a warning would be more appropriate than a ban in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
I hope you do because this is your final warning. Next ban will be permanent.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, in 30 days you will be unbanned.
|
|
|
|
|
It states the reason and this is your third ban.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes he was already banned.
|
|
|
|
|
One was already banned. Banned the other.
|
|
|
|
I am not familiar with a 'one thread per person' rule....maybe you are referring to the rule that similar marketplace items should be consolidated into a single thread. Yes, the Marketplace rules. Services can't have multiple threads and individual sellers can't have multiple threads to sell or promote the same thing. If you are selling the same thing via multiple accounts *AND* are bumping each accounts' respective threads every day, then you are, at a minimum rubbing up against the one bump per 24 hours rule. This is exactly what he's doing on multiple main accounts and countless other newbie accounts who's sole purpose was to bump his thread by either feigning interest or faking a trade then leaving a fake vouch. He's also leaving feedback with his alts (not against the rules but pretty scammy (and then there's the dozens and dozens and dozens of hacked accounts he doesn't seem to want to answer where he got them from)). I guess my concern about mandating that you can only sell the same item via one account is that it gives incentives to not take unpopular stances on issues, which is anti-freedom of speech. I don't see how this would be anti-freedom of speech. You can have an alt to post 'controversial' optinions or sell something if you don't want it associated with your other account, but there's no good reason why you would need multiple accounts to sell the exact same thing other than to spam advertise which is exactly his intent. For clarification, I don't disagree with the OP's ban, assuming that what you say about him is true (or mostly true, if he is able to poke a small hole in what you say). He's just just clutching at straws and trying to wriggle out by a technicality on one of the many rules he broke. He doesn't have any excuses. Never known a user like him. |
|
|
|
Your account wont be unbanned: Warning: Anyone caught copying other users' posts or plagiarising content from elsewhere on the web will be immediately permabanned. You shouldn't need a warning to know that this isn't acceptable under any circumstances.
|
|
|
|
I don't know which post you're talking about. Because, i didn't copied anyone's idea afaik. I just researched about few topics on internet and wrote with with what i've understood/learnt. I'm using bitcointalk.org since Nov 2014, I do even have some knowledge. So, please remove my ban. And i'll try to be more unique from now.
Most of your posts seem to be copied: Yes, any data can be embedded in a blockchain using transaction metadata, and then all participants in the chain will then receive a copy of this data.
Having said that, blockchains only make sense for file sharing where it makes sense for every node to receive a copy of every file, and (at least in current implementations) every node keeps every file permanently. Otherwise you'll want something based on distributed hash tables, where files are stored with just a few copies and retrieved only on demand.
https://www.quora.com/Can-blockchain-be-used-for-file-sharingbtcjam is by far the worst lending service I know.
The site is full with scammers and the staffs are not even doing anything to prevent this from happening.
Btcjam is a cesspool for scammers and I would advise anyone considering to invest in their loans not to. I am not really sure about the other Bitcoin related websites however I would think it would be the case generally speaking.
One major problem with Btcjam is that they force you to collect on defaulted loans. If someone borrows $5,000 from 100 people, borrowing $50 from each person, then each person would need to invest additional money to only potentially recover a small amount, likely needing to invest the entire amount they are attempting to collect. A better solution would be for BTCjam to collect on behalf of the borrowers as a whole (or employ a collection agency) which would allow them to realize economies of scale when collecting on delinquent debts and it would obviously be much more worthwhile to collect on a $5,000 loan.
Itgot really bad with lota of defaulters. btcjam was never any help. no way to recover the money
Btcjam is a cesspool for scammers and I would advise anyone considering to invest in their loans not to. I am not really sure about the other Bitcoin related websites however I would think it would be the case generally speaking.
One major problem with Btcjam is that they force you to collect on defaulted loans. If someone borrows $5,000 from 100 people, borrowing $50 from each person, then each person would need to invest additional money to only potentially recover a small amount, likely needing to invest the entire amount they are attempting to collect. A better solution would be for BTCjam to collect on behalf of the borrowers as a whole (or employ a collection agency) which would allow them to realize economies of scale when collecting on delinquent debts and it would obviously be much more worthwhile to collect on a $5,000 loan.
Bitcoin Core was Satoshi’s implementation of his novel Nakamoto consensus algorithm.
Bitcoin Unlimited is an attempt to utterly destroy Nakamoto Consensus in Bitcoin.
The new bitcoin unlimited implemented without community standards.It developed to destroy the original bitcoin core.Now a days forking affects the bitcoin price,this is the reason bitcoin price decrease a lot and the situation is unstable.This condition very risk for traders and minors.Finally,Bitcoin unlimited is just a diversion not a alternative.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-Bitcoin-Core-and-Bitcoin-UnlimitedThis is kind of a chicken and egg problem.
For someone to come years later and wonder about this, the coin must be alive still. This means there must not have been any moment in its history where the vast majority of people thought there was no point mining this coin. This is the reason why there is more incentive given to early miners to support the coin, since it has not proven itself yet, and so it is seen as very risky to mine this coin and hold it.
Moreover, the percentage of coins already issued at a given moment is only a factor if you're going to be mining (note: I'm not talking about the relative holdings of different people, just the percentage of issued coins, these are very different things to consider). If you're not going to mine, but are considering buying instead, then the price/market cap is much more salient.
Additionally, whether people have profited or lost in the past should have no bearing on whether a coin is good to buy and/or mine, all other things being equal.
Note: the things I said above are what I said, and nothing more. For example, "whether people have profited or lost in the past should have no bearing..." does NOT mean that the particular circumstances in which this may have happened should not have bearing. Just make sure I an not misundedrood
http://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/1145/is-it-possible-to-increase-the-total-supply-and-how-equally-distributed-is-moner/1148I could go on. |
|
|
|
|
How up to date is this? I notice all the campaigns currently state that they're open for enrolment. Is this true? Will be helpful to keep track of all the crapcoin campaigns because there's a ridiculous amount of spam coming from them.
|
|
|
|
Is there a written rule somewhere that people cannot sell the same item via multiple accounts? Or is this something that is more along the lines of a mod's interpretation of the rules?
I don't think there is one that explicitly says You cannot use alts to sell the same thing so you can take it as my interpretation if you wish, but it directly contravenes the one thread per person and one bump every 24 hours rules. It can certainly be added to the rules, but this is exactly why BadBear was against posting them in the first place because people then just try to evade them on technicalities. OP knows you can only have one thread per person per same item/service. He knows you can only bump once per 24 hours, hence why he uses multiple accounts and dozens of others to bump them. It's a direct attempt to evade rules and spam the forum. He was told about this numerous times, on numerous accounts and had numerous bans yet he ignored them every single time and continues to do so. |
|
|
|
|
Please remove your previous bump when you make a new one. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
There are many spots available, you do not need to ask to be accepted.
How many places are available? Please make sure you have read the Signature Guidelines here and don't just accept any users that sign up without vetting their posts/account first because it will only lead to massive amounts of spam and account farmers abusing the campaign. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Using alt accounts to sell the same thing
I don't think this is against the rules. Yes it is. You can't skirt the 'one thread' rule by having half a dozen accounts to sell the exact same thing. It's pure spam, not to mention using dozens more accounts to spam bump his multiple threads every day and also ban evade whenever he was banned on an account. learn from your mistakes , and quit forum for several months and then come back fresh again and contribute to some mature talks/knowlwdge on bitcointalk.
He's been told this numerous times by several people but he's not interested. He is incapable of playing by any rules nor does he listen to dozens of warnings and because of this he'll never be permitted to sell here again. The fact that he continues to use hundreds of hacked bitcointalk accounts tells you all you need to know about him. |
|
|
|
|
Try re-sizing the image. Sometimes they're blocked if they're too large.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
