Okay, I can remove the selling thread and stop it, but please remove my negative trust also then. Im not scammer and havent scam anyone, I want to gain trust as im quite new here. What legal reason would anybody have to buy documents? The answer is none. You're perpetuating illegal activity, whether you acquired the documents legally or not. It's like if you were selling weapons to terrorists, stating that you got them legally. Doesn't really matter. |
|
|
|
That account farming means that your "hard work" is undeserved. Why don't you skedaddle somewhere else?
Oh, and here's another red feedback just in case anything happens to The Pharmacist.  |
|
|
|
I was going to say something similar: whether the users are posting constructively selfishly or not, it matters very little. If you have a forum of constructive posts, that's pretty good. And in that regard, "constructive spammers" can't fall out of their posting habits lest they drop below the new status quo of post quality. So by allowing members with high post quality to get merit, we're not harming anyone. There is one situation that can happen (but will eventually fizzle out): account farmers can try to max out the use of their merit by sending it to their now-constructive account. Again, not a huge problem because it's going to a "good user". |
|
|
|
But let's assume 10% of the players do get greedy and try to win back everything and fail, then that means the casino will be in profits from those 10%. Of course we can assume as well that there would be players the profit from the casino, but theoretically it would still be hard to defeat the casino with the limits in place. Then, in this case, you are assuming that the variance is in the casino's favor. Expected value changes not based on the bet limits, nor the strategy. You are assuming that the casino has profited off players to prove that the casino is profitable. That is begging the question and is invalid. Expected value is absolute. |
|
|
|
actmyname wondering how much an account is worth and buying it is two different things, so I'll ask you to return the previous trust to me. How much is this tomato? Oh, two pence? Nah, I don't want to buy it. I just wanted to know its price. There's no possible way I would have the intention of buying something I'm price-checking. |
|
|
|
EDIT: I'm not talking about creating a demerit button,[/b] but I'm saying that we could work on a system where who gained merit by posting needs to prove he deserves them by earning a minimum amount by the end of the month or similiar. If the user doesn't reach that amount he loses some merits. Those merits could be re-distributed to members that deserve them. It's only an idea, I don't want to offend anyone. There are some other users that have contributed to form this place, a magnificent place full of information. I would like to know what you think about it, thanks. Seems decent on paper, but you're forgetting that some people have lives outside of BCT. And not only this, but there are a limited number of merits that can be sent by sources every month, which means that if a user doesn't get to that minimum amount of merit in the month despite posting well, then they are punished by the system.
Redistribution seems like a zero-sum game and beneficial but there are the hindrances to individuals that may choose to take a break. Would that dissolve them of their meritorious behavior? Surely not. |
|
|
|
|
Alright, you win this one ¬¬
My mates are telling me to stop before we go into a war
|
|
|
|
gg Man, I wanted a roll so badly. .101 |
|
|
|
|
This could actually be a veiled way of sending merits to yourself. Given a good post, few would question the use of sMerit upon it.
However, this would only be to "new" account farmers rather than older ones since they would just as well post on their higher-ranked accounts and rank them up.
Perhaps it's a new wave of accounts being farmed as the max monthly merit cap is reached?
|
|
|
|
How can we see if how much time someone stays on the forum, because when I click their profile it only shows the general information of the user!? Used to be in the "Show general statistics for this member." section but it was disabled. Now the best you have is your own statistic, bragging amongst yourselves, and checking the statistics center: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=stats |
|
|
|
I always have this strange fear that someone has easy access to my cookies and I obsessively clear them out almost instantaneously and constantly. I never allow excessive cookies. When someone has access to your cookies I have a sneaking suspicion that my cookies are more easily accessible I keep my cookies safe and secure!  bit of a juxtaposition there |
|
|
|
He's included by Blazed and hilariousandco which balances out the two exclusions and gives a (0). Does that mean he's back on? Yeah. If you have a 'rank' ≥ 0 on the network then you're in. He's kind of in the same situation as I am, though with more DT1's involved. The Pharma guy is much active in tagging scammers, I like his thought process. There is no harm of him being in DT but there are some benefits. Get out of here with your spam. |
|
|
|
Theoretically, it is possible for a gambling site to profit from a 0% house edge gambling game. There are two reasons why, first is bet size limits and the house having more money than the player. False. The rest of your post with the scenario does not matter. It doesn't matter whether there are bet limits or if the house has more money than any given player (or heck, even all the players). If they bet some amount, they have an equal chance of winning and losing. That's it. Greed doesn't matter. They could still very well win all their bets or lose all their bets. Once you get past this, it's easy to understand that with variance, martingale can end up with a player busting but when you consider the entire space of players (we'll call this S), it's different. The expected value of the amount that S is returned is going to be 1. And this value is equivalent to the amount that the house gets: 1. If statistically the house makes no money on each bet, how can you expect to profit regularly? Hoping that individual players get greedy doesn't help because of the very question: what if they win? There isn't a house edge to make the chance of them losing more likely. |
|
|
|
We all know that theymos request to eliminate The Pharmacist to be listed on Default Trust Network due to his trigger happy attitude That was me, not The Pharmacist. The Pharmacist was excluded because of OGNasty and Tomatocage, IIRC. theymos has (or at least shouldn't have) nothing to do with his exclusion. |
|
|
|
Is there a way to see the complete leaderboard list of the rake race promotion? Click on your name at the top (which navigates you to the profile section) and then click on the Leaderboards tab. That initially lists everything from rank 1-10 and you can click on show more for other results. |
|
|
|
You are lucky you didn't get tagged for trying to buy an account by actmyname INCOMING RED STORM /s
|
|
|
|
Enjoy I have rolls bought at .035 not worth the premium:) Last sale I saw, they went for about $580 (USD) so this isn't too far off if you're basing it off US prices. Of course, I would rather have more bitcoins than not  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
