2 hero members gave me a negative feedback just for participating in the signature campaign
My yobit campaign was showing inactive so I applied to double bot Signature campaign.
I asked the member tht is it a ponzi site or not he told that he was no way related to the site and neither am I.
I am just trying to make some living here.
Please help me remove this negative trust.
Hey please remove the feedback u gave to me I dont if its a ponzi scheme or shit.
My yobit campaign was showing inactive and I am just trying to make a living here.
Plz remove the negative feedback.
Regards
#1 You are impatient. #2 I dont believe a word you are saying. #3 You make a living off of 0.013 per week? Anyway the rating is change to neutral as promissed. I tend to keep my word. I know EcuaMobi will not change the rating and I dont think it matters much anyway as you had negative rating before joining the campaign. thank you bud plz try if u can ask ecuamobi to remove his trust too regards No. |
|
|
|
Because in my opinion - and this is probably what it boils down to, opinions - it would lead to more spam. You would give every member an incentive to create a post without any substance, the referal link. I do not expect lengthy reviews of services with a referal link at the end, but quickly done posts similar to "sign up here, is good <ref link here>".
You really got lot of free time Sir to scrutinize & then reply to each & every word I write. Hat's off! As per your "opinion" all posts which will contain referral links to xyz site would be without any substance? Not all, but the majority. As it is now there are good posts that have a ref link, in these cases staff sometimes edits out the ref link instead of removing the entire post. This obviously depends on the person handling the post. It did not happen with me though. mexxer-2 reported my post and that was straight away deleted even w/o letting me know. I know and as I wrote above I suspect this is the case because you as a Newbie are still handled by certain mods. Patrollers or as I frequently get it wrong parolers. They handle all newbies, but nothing else. Once your rank increases (should be in a few days) they will no longer moderate you, but the moderator for the specific section you posted in will handle reports. It is my impression that patrollers are more rigid when handling reports and they might be unable to edit posts at all, thus their only chance is to remove the post entirely. This of course will not allow you to post a referal link, but it might preserve the post. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Yes my account is left outside. The name of the other person is klitoris69
Rating is gone. Im not entirely convinced its the right thing, but I think its equaly likely that the former owner tried to reclaim the account as it is that the account was hacked. |
|
|
|
Because in my opinion - and this is probably what it boils down to, opinions - it would lead to more spam. You would give every member an incentive to create a post without any substance, the referal link. I do not expect lengthy reviews of services with a referal link at the end, but quickly done posts similar to "sign up here, is good <ref link here>".
You really got lot of free time Sir to scrutinize & then reply to each & every word I write. Hat's off! As per your "opinion" all posts which will contain referral links to xyz site would be without any substance? Not all, but the majority. As it is now there are good posts that have a ref link, in these cases staff sometimes edits out the ref link instead of removing the entire post. This obviously depends on the person handling the post. |
|
|
|
@shorena: Just because I am a newbie that's why you're so against my opinion. I know you're against newbies raising their opinion.
I doubt you would have argued so much if the same thread was started by some Hero or Legendary user.
ad hominem. The "you are new here" by me was uncalled for though, sorry. You havent been here long have you? Take a look at the mining section[1] from time to time. Alternativly read this[2] thread. Its currently spammed by utter nonsense. Sane users are hardly the metric here. Its the insane, greedy morrons that made these rules a requirement for the sane users to still have a usable forum.
Just for the sake of answering, I'll answer that isn't it obvious that rules are made for sane users? I would argue that rules are against insane or sane, but misbehaving users. One might not be aware of a certain rule when violating it for the first time. E.g. one of my earliest posts was necroing an old haiku thread. The post was on topic even though it was in an old post. It was removed and I understood that posting in old threads is not always acceptable here. Can you stop morons/fools/bots from creating multi's & breaking these rules again & again?
Depending on their determination you can not, no. Well you could close the forum for new users, but thats not the point. I would however think that most sane users that are the subject to moderation will take their time and learn about the rules and as such either adopt them or open a public discussion about the reasons behind the rules. Rules of a community are not always straight forward and easily understood. I would think that most communities have rather specific rules and that it takes time to adopt to and understand them. From real life example: Do you think the locks we use on our doors when we go out of the house prevent thieves from breaking in the house & robbing our house? If that would have been the case there there would be no robbery happening anywhere in the world.
Even if you want to make these rules then why not keep them specific to that section only? Every section can have their own rules.
It would complicate things, but its a possibility. Why not allow placing referral links as part of OP only in Services or Games & Rounds sub-section (whichever section allows users to pay other users for signing up on their site) but nowhere else on this forum?
Because in my opinion - and this is probably what it boils down to, opinions - it would lead to more spam. You would give every member an incentive to create a post without any substance, the referal link. I do not expect lengthy reviews of services with a referal link at the end, but quickly done posts similar to "sign up here, is good <ref link here>". |
|
|
|
-snip-
Please explain how "look links can be used for bad" should make us think "referlink links will never(!) be used in a spammy way".
Please explain how links which ask you to download something (which you are not even aware of) are better than placing referral links?So a link to download the latest bitcoin core is bad? You guys care more about this forum getting spammed (which I highly doubt would happen as none of the sane user
You havent been here long have you? Take a look at the mining section[1] from time to time. Alternativly read this[2] thread. Its currently spammed by utter nonsense. Sane users are hardly the metric here. Its the insane, greedy morrons that made these rules a requirement for the sane users to still have a usable forum. would go around posting his/her referral link explicitly on all posts made on this forum) or user's computer getting infected because of some virus which was placed as part of such a downloadable link which apparently is not violating so called rules of this forum?
IF a downloadable link leads to a virus it is against the rules. I probably did not get your point, because I doubt its "linking to virus is allowed (which is not the case) so should ref links". To be honest you don't even need to write a rule for not allowing viruses or malware links as part of any post being made on this or for that matter any forum. This is self-explanatory and no one should be doing it. If you find some one doing it then they should be permanently banned.
You just found someone doing it, so obviously it happens. Are you suggesting that staff can just make up their rules according to their personal believe of what they consider "self-explanatory"? [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=14.0[2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1278196.0 |
|
|
|
Yeah you all rich and I'm a poor person thank you for all wonderful words you said to me.and you happy now? .. All I send on gleb gamow its true I borrow the money . my brother got sick . I'm a poor person need some help but I don't think gleb will do this for me ,
Thank you all rich people .
Maybe you shouldnt blow your coins on scams... -snip- Nice stats sir! Thank you for trust with us  username: allysanathalie current post: 10 rank: newbie BTC ADDY: 1BVxNN9QwBy1R2h4ww92xuCeWySXaBfE3s thank you |
|
|
|
This page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemmaReason: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-triffin-dilemma/Can Bitcoin Solve the Triffin Dilemma?
The Triffin Dilemma, where countries issuing reserve currencies attempt to simultaneously manage national savings levels with necessary international liquidity, continues to act as a barrier to economic growth. However, could it be that the introduction of bitcoin brings forth a viable solution to the Triffin Dilemma?
If we assume that the prerequisites for a currency capable of solving the Triffin dilemma were to provide the following, it may be possible to argue that bitcoin is the perfect fit.
1. Stable value
2. Rule-based issuance
3. Manageable supply schedule Yes, something like bitcoin could be the solution. I cant find a good summary atm, but the initial suggestion for the "bretton woods system" by Keynes reminded me very much of bitcoin (or vise versa, its been a while). I doubt though that governments will accept bitcoin for the exchange currency, its more likely that a specificly designed currency would be used. Its also very likely that - again - parties with high influence will try to modify the system to suit their needs best. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Did you honestly believe that pointing to something worse would be considered a valid point in the discussion?
The point for this thread was to point about something worse than not allowing referral links as part of OP. I assume I made my point by pointing to this wherein the 1st user who clicked on that link got his computer infected whereas if that was a referral link telling about some xyz site then that user could have googled about the site even before clicking that link. How come putting referral links as part of OP be spammy whereas putting such links is NOT? Links in general are not against the rules, because - as pointed out above - it would be silly. Links that spread malware are explicitly against the rules (#6) unless they come with ample warning for educational purposes. Non of the above is considered spam per se, but might be seen as such if used in a spammy way. Referal links are considered spam, because - as pointed out above - they typcially lead to spam. Your experience might differ, but it does not matter. Please explain how "look links can be used for bad" should make us think "referlink links will never(!) be used in a spammy way". |
|
|
|
What to do when someone says you to go first in a trade.
When I says someone to go first , they call me scammer even though after joining here I am in loss still not in positive.
Suggest escrow. "Want to go first or shall we use this (insert link) reputable escrow?" If any one can give me thread on how to disobey going first. When I go first people sxam me ,and when I say them to go first they says me scammer Me: If you want to buy monero , you need to pay first , I will not go first.
Other guy: nice try , scammer.
What do you mean by nice try. "Nice try" usually means "Im too smart for your feeble attempt". |
|
|
|
When I've set up my wallet, I expect to be running Bitcoin core over public WiFi connections. So I've got a couple of questions with regard to this.
Will my activity have much of an impact on other users of the WiFi service?
Depends. Bitcoin core can make streams load sluggish. I hardly notice it while Im surfing regular web pages though. This is also somehow what I would expect from public WiFi, so I dont think anyone would complain. Will it increase the costs for the service provider by a noticeable amount?
No. They should have a flatrate or other means to limit the traffic. Do many other users run the core regularly over public WiFi?
No idea, you are the first I heard about. Not that that means anything. Is my activity likely to result in the blocking of relevant ports, and thus remove the facility for other potential users?
I am aware that there will be some personal security issues, but I hope to discuss these in another thread when I understand a bit more.
It might, but this greatly depends on who is responsible for the public WiFi and how uptight they are. Someone that has no idea what is going on might jump to conclusions and assume the high traffic can only be used for illegal downloads. There is hardly something you can do about this, besides maybe talk to the employees and try to explain to them what bitcoin is. |
|
|
|
Spreading malware is against the rules, all their threads have been reported and will be removed shortly. Thank you for telling me the obvious Sir! Did you honestly believe that pointing to something worse would be considered a valid point in the discussion? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You still do not seem to get my point. God help you guys!
I got it, I just dont agree, but as we already have established I also have no "logical" reasons to offer you. |
|
|
|
Windows firewall says that Bitcoin core can use any port - should I change that to be port specific, or just leave it alone?
That sounds alright for Windows, but in order to allow connections from the outside the WiFi router would have to point to your device. E.g. you sit at McD and get free WiFi from their router. Lets assume its just a simple SoHo device for simplicity sake. That router has a public IP on one side, this is the IP your computer uses to talk to others in the bitcoin network. On the other side is has internal IP addresses one for each of the devices in the store. If you establish the connection from the inside those from the outside can just answer. Like with a phone call[1] you already have an existing connection if you called the other party. They dont need to call you back or something like that to reply. You can just speak back and forth. In order for someone to estabish a connection to your specific machine, the public IP is not enough. The router must also know if someone asks for "bitcoin core on TCP port 8333" on their public IP that its your laptop and your laptop only that will answer this. Chances are you will not be able to confirgure this on a public WiFi, but it might happen. Bitcoin core has a setting called "Map port using UPnP" ( Settings -> Options -> Network) that will try to open the port on the router for you. Windows firewall says that Bitcoin core can use any port - should I change that to be port specific, or just leave it alone?
you need to change it to 833 3 like it was said and allow outbounds connections, if you want to run a full node Even if you dont accept outbound connections you are a full node. Even if you dont have the full blockchain available (pruned) you are a full node. A full node is any device on the network that enforces the network rules. A full node verifies all data it gets, checks if its according to the rules and relays it unless its considered nonStandard or invalid. A pruned node can not help others to sync up to the latest block though. A full node that is not accepting outside connections can not be used by other wallets (like multibit) to gather data about the current state of the network. [1] TCP connections are only virtual fixed connections over paket based IP and dont actually have a fixed line reserved for them as phone lines would before VoIP. |
|
|
|
Spreading malware is against the rules, all their threads have been reported and will be removed shortly. |
|
|
|
There was a person who made an account just to ask for a vouch copy of my product,when denied he had gave me the following feedback
Terrible. Scammed 2.01523 bitcoins. Ridiculous. DO NOT trust him.
How do I get this removed as it is a false scam accusation?
Talk to the person. Trust is not moderated. |
|
|
|
[ center]For all those people who were scammed by Armour, here is a some info -redacted- [ center] Don't threaten to leak peoples info, bud. Let this be a lesson. You have more coming you sick scamming fuck, just wait.[/center] The IP is from an NSW AU ISP, the address is most likely faked. Edit: I have canceled his internet.
I dont think you should violate more laws. |
|
|
|
Thanks. Why did you remove the names from the PMs? Is it to keep the accounts involved private? |
|
|
|
I just set keypoolrefill to 100000 on a core testnet wallet. When the log showed ~20k addresses generated the UI stopped working. 2015-12-20 22:37:42 Pre-allocating up to position 0x8000000 in blk00022.dat
2015-12-20 22:37:43 UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000020542d296e1cf56f991f838814583b8ba1473687c2cc2f0d67 height=605658 log2_work=66.751446 tx=7191458 date=2015-11-17 01:19:20 progress=0.998588 cache=5.8MiB(21617tx)
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 118, size=101
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 119, size=102
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 120, size=103
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 121, size=104
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 122, size=105
2015-12-20 22:37:43 keypool added key 123, size=106
...
2015-12-20 22:48:48 keypool added key 100017, size=100000
2015-12-20 22:48:48 keypool added key 100018, size=100001
2015-12-20 22:48:48 keypool reserve 18
2015-12-20 22:48:48 keypool return 18
UI is working fine now. Wallet.dat is 64552 KB in size. Its still synchronizing, as I didnt use the testnet wallet for a while. Start up is slightly slower than my regular wallet with < 300 keys. {
"walletversion" : 60000,
"balance" : 0.00000000,
"unconfirmed_balance" : 0.00000000,
"immature_balance" : 0.00000000,
"txcount" : 36,
"keypoololdest" : 1447094366,
"keypoolsize" : 100001
}
Let me test one more thing here. A wallet file that is >421000 kb in size. It contains ~100 private keys that were disclosed during one of the earlier spam attacks on the network. 2015-12-20 23:08:59 init message: Loading wallet...
2015-12-20 23:09:05 nFileVersion = 110000
2015-12-20 23:09:05 Keys: 203 plaintext, 0 encrypted, 203 w/ metadata, 203 total
2015-12-20 23:09:05 wallet 5991ms
2015-12-20 23:09:05 init message: Rescanning...
2015-12-20 23:09:05 Rescanning last 22988 blocks (from block 366433)...
2015-12-20 23:10:05 Still rescanning. At block 371174. Progress=0.878292
2015-12-20 23:11:05 Still rescanning. At block 376108. Progress=0.915589
2015-12-20 23:12:05 Still rescanning. At block 381165. Progress=0.951302
2015-12-20 23:13:05 Still rescanning. At block 385897. Progress=0.980783
2015-12-20 23:13:54 rescan 289616ms
2015-12-20 23:13:54 init message: Activating best chain...
Once loaded the UI is unusable. It constantly uses 100% of one of the cores and eats >1.2 GB memory (compared to regular ~200-300MB). Last log entry was 8 minutes ago. I have to assume it crashed now. To sum it up. A high load of transactions puts more straing on core than a high load of addresses. I would assume this is the same for watch only wallets. |
|
|
|
I have the wallet file. I've rescanned the bitcoin with zapwallet and my bitcoins are still not appearing.
Run the same command you are running with zapwallettxes but instead of having zapwallettxes there, change it to -rescan. Just completed this command and it's the same result. Wow, surely this isn't some flaw?? Find it pretty poor how you can lose bitcoins from a genuine and normal transacation. You cant. Im not entirely sure what went wrong though. If you look at the transaction tab, does it show what you would expect? Same for the receiving addresses, are they still the same you had previously? The address you had received the 6 BTC on (or whatever more there was) does it still show the correct balance on a blockchain explorer? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
