Why would you do a deal with this guy? In addition to the yellow flag, he has 3 negative trusts. There's nobody that can help you if you aren't paying attention at this very basic level.

You should not be trading here. Sorry to tell you but you're highly likely to get ripped off again if you try.

Why would you do a deal with somebody who not only has negative trust but also a red warning label on all their threads?

Everything about the forum is trying to tell you don't do a deal with this guy, and yet you did anyway.

I'm just trying to understand: why would you do that?

OK, first go here: www.imgur.com

Drag and drop the pictures (they make you watch an ad now) into the website.

Copy the links for each picture and paste them here.


I have a feeling I know who it is already but would like some confirmation.

Regardless, hard to stop people from getting scammed if a scammer already has a flag and negative feedback. We'll see if that's the case.

OP hasn't actually demonstrated anything. This is an age-old conspiracy theory being floated for the ten thousandth time. Its 100% on OP to provide any evidence that supports his claims; 0% on anybody to disprove them.

Asserting that something exists because you say it does is not how "proof" works.

Coins.ph fees have immobilized my coins. Its too expensive to move them. No point in cashing out to XRP or BCH because nobody accepts them as a method of payment.

They've been in business for years now. They should know better than to charge their customers such crazy fees for transactions, especially since they do transactions with multiple outputs.

The fee should be proportional to a withdrawal's contribution to the total transaction size -- not account for the whole fee, nearly the whole fee, or sometimes extra.



Current mempool with min req fee for next block:



This Coins.ph transaction, contemporary to the generation of the fees shown in the first image, has 25 outputs and cost 0.00939306 in fees... Each output should therefore be responsible for 1/25 of the total transaction fee, or 0.00037572 BTC.

Adding let's say a 10% "processing fee" on top of this would then total 0.00041329 BTC, which is still 1,140 PHP to make a transaction.

Yet coins.ph is charging about 800 pesos on top of this... They need to restructure fees when the mempool is clogged like this... passing on costs to your clients isn't a valid excuse to rip them off this way. It demonstrates the need for competition in this industry.

---

Update.

Fees have increased despite the mempool starting to clear up (currently 46 sat/byte recommended for next block inclusion).



Transactions didn't suddenly get bigger or more expensive, what's the problem?

---

Second Update.

I can't wait any longer so I made the transaction.

This is the fee I paid Coins.ph:



This is the fee Coins.ph paid for the transaction:



(edit): they gotta fix these transaction fees.

What's weird is a week or two ago I thought I had connected a bunch of bounty hunters together in a farm until I realized these tokens were being actively collected by a single member on the forum. If that hadn't been documented, it would look strange, at least. But I have no reason to believe that this isn't simply a case of loosely-applied positive trust.

just upload them to an image hosting service and post the links here. post all the screenshots you have because right now you haven't provided any actual evidence.


So Timelord's known using just registration/active dates to declare accounts alts of each other is a bad idea for over 3 years. He's the last person to admit when he's wrong, but I don't believe he just never learned that reliance on a single, flimsy connecting factor is dumb after 3 years.


There's no preventing this person from losing money. They're going to keep getting scammed until they either learn the lesson or have nothing left to lose.

The market doesn't always behave rationally but its favored bitcoin over bcash since bcash was born, the entirety of its existence.

Another thing you forget is that nobody trusts a coin captained by a con artist (Ver).

Ver had plenty of opportunities to stop mooching off the good name of bitcoin, but he never did. He's a shameless opportunist, and everyone who ever exchanged bitcoin for bcash at his suggestion has suffered financially as a result.

I agree that tx fees are out of hand for BTC at the moment. Solutions are on the way. Solutions more elegant than simply increasing the length of tape inside your audio cassette.

Pretty sure this is the same group/person behind Malubit, as I saw something posted today that lends credence to that theory.

From a thread called "Adkinsbet.com PURE SCAM!"


Interestingly, game-protect didn't do any special favors for Malubit, so by transitive property I don't think he has anything to do with Adkinsbet.

Here's the interesting part, and something that I think also ties Adkinsbet and Malubit together.

From the Malubit thread:



What I happened to see today, posted by one of the Adkinsbet accounts:


From the Adkinsbet account itself:


There's only 2 other accounts who have used this misspelling on the forum... One of them was promoting a sportsbook that fell flat on its face:


tl;dr: Adkinsbet is Malubit and neither are game-protect.

The purpose of bitcoin is to provide a secure and decentralized platform for peer-to-peer transfer of digital cash.

Now guys, sgbett was on the verge of having a come-to-Jesus moment and you are prodding him back into the big blocker corner.

It's okay if he was smugly laughing to his inner-self after penning his "concession," finally thinking aloud, "Fools! They thought I am conceding but when I said 'Bitcoin' I actually meant Bitcoin Craig! Hah! Tricked em."

I know that's as good as we're gonna get as far as an apology is concerned, and we should all take it.

Of course, this was slightly embarrassing, written only 6 days ago, which is six days prior to the last ATH:


Also this didn't age so well either:


The price of BSV has certainly gone up since then (in terms of dollars anyway), but BSV transactions have plummeted by about 50% since then. What happened?



Interestingly, BCH picked up the slack, and as a result, all 3 blockchains average around the same number of transactions per day. The transaction volume is pretty blatantly artificial for 2 of them, however.

So anyway, why did BSV transactions drop off so much during Dec and Jan? My guess is they stopped funding whatever service was generating gigameg block numbers of transactions for them, and that service got hired by BCH.

All bitcoin mixers are transparent. You just need to know what to look for.

The red flag warnings above the threads of scammers like DreamerBT is really an intelligence test to those who are logged out of the forum. If you click on a thread started by that guy, and decide to deal with him anyway (in spite of the red warning label), you are pretty much too dumb to be doing business on the forum and should not trade here.

If you off-handedly see his telegram handle somewhere else and make a deal with him over Telegram, well that's a lesson in trust which unfortunately has to be learned to be understood by some people. There's absolutely nothing we can do to stop those people from being scammed.

The problem is you're trying to personally capitalize on a pre-existing idea that has no real central leadership, and the concept of transforming it into a cryptocurrency has already been ridiculed by one of the biggest crypto websites of all-time. Nobody here is going to have sympathy for what you are trying to do as we've seen it all before.

It involves French horns, which as we all know are the dirtiest of all the horns.

Yeah! So c'mon everybody, let's get sgbett! GET HIM!!



 

I think that's the problem. After repeating the same thing literally hundreds of times, you never stopped to consider whether the issues you believe to be outstanding have actually been baked into the price since Day 1 of the DASH masternode system.

You should have realized a long time ago your words have zero effect on the course of DASH development, and if you were serious you would bring them up to people who actually have influence over the protocol rather than repeating yourself ad nauseum here... don't understand what it is you think you're accomplishing other than banging your head against the wall.

You were visited by a traveler from a parallel universe and you turned him away??

The amount of work that went in to developing a version of Telegram that runs on a quantum processor was tremendous, and it was all so he could be condescended to by a parallel version of himself.


With a username like that you can assure you're going to be the target of scams if you put yourself out there.

I recommend starting fresh with a new account. What's the worst that can happen?

Can't make what any clearer? Your steadfast dedication to a tangential sideshow? Anything to take attention off the fact that your dev is a fraudulent con artist?

You know what takes precedence over interpretations of adherence to a white paper, at least in the minds of users of decentralized financial products (as spoken by market demand)?

That the administrator of the system not be a giant fraud.

What? Project much?

I don't agree with that sentiment at all.

We just want to point out the many ways in which you are wrong so people don't accidentally take your awful advice. You have been unflinchingly wrong for 3 years. To me, that would be painful to watch if it weren't funny.