He can always change his mind.
I appreciate that and I'm not suggesting it's not worth still arguing for it. I was just thinking that there's more than one way to skin a cat and there are many other things that could be done as well. |
|
|
|
How so? Can you explain how the "real" users would leave? Most of the "real" users have already left because this forum has just been swarmed and overtaken with the shitposters the pharmacist listed. Everything will be the same apart from you don't have a signature at all unless you pay for it. These users do it professionally because it is currently 100% free to create an unlimited amount of accounts so they do. How is your average, unemployed illiterate Filipino/Indonesian going to afford $500 per account for a signature on his dozens of accounts? If this was the case most people would be limited to one or two accounts and it wouldn't be profitable to do this industrially. There isn't really any other way to prevent this sort of abuse because accounts can be easily farmed and now they are now done so along with merits (or they just trade them between their "friends"). It doesn't effect anyone at all other than sig spammers because users who come here just to post aren't penalised at all. The only people who would complain about this are the type of people who complain about merit and they wouldn't be missed at all.
I've already said a few times that I think the pay for a signature solution is a good one. But it seems that theymos is set against it so I've been trying to think of other ways to achieve it. First off merit farming is increasingly difficult for them as the initial distribution drys up. Tying the availability of signatures to earned merit on an ongoing basis will slowly put signature spammers out of business. Why does the forum ban ICOs from bidding in the banner ads auction but still allow them to advertise freely in signatures? Ads may not link directly to any NSFW page. No ICOs [1], banks, funds, or anything else that a person can be said to "invest" in ~
[1]: For the purposes of forum ads, an ICO is any token, altcoin, or other altcoin-like thing which meets any of the following criteria: it is primarily run/backed by a company; it is substantially, fundamentally centralized in either operation or coin distribution; or it is not yet possible for two unprivileged users of the system to send coins directly to each other in a P2P way. The intention here is to allow community efforts to advertise things like Litecoin, but not to allow ICO funding, even when the ICO is disguised in various ways.Why do we need the altcoin bounties board? There's no reason I can think of why spamming Facebook and Twitter needs to be organised here. If we got rid those two things I think that would have a massive impact on reducing spam. Although I agree that $500 fee for a signature would work I still think there are plenty of other things that could be done. |
|
|
|
It has been about one week or a bit more that no new signature campaigns are available. The only two ongoing and still active seems 777coin and Bitvest.
Maybe the reason is the signature campaigns are not that effective compared to the cost they have on the company running them ?
Not at all. There are probably more campaigns now than there have ever been so the advertising is very effective. It is just a supply and demand issue. When slots become available there are a large number of applicants due to the influx of people that only came here because they think they can make easy money. The only reason 777coin and Bitvest always have open slots is the campaign manager has high standards and most of the applications are rejected. |
|
|
|
No - the Internet was created for people to exchange pictures of cats, and one of the failings of Bitcoin Talk is that it doesn't have a cat picture exchange board.  There's got to be a cat picture thread in off-topic surely? I think argument and discusson is good, but it is better if one can avoid personal insults.
I agree but it is also inevitable. I agree that the OP has not made a clear point, and I find it difficult to understand the benefits to be gained from making the simple concept of merits into a complex blockchain based trading resource. Of course, it may be that this would be the only way that some people could gain any merit. Would it be based on PoW or PoS?
I'll leave you to work out the meaning of PoS.
The main point the OP hasn't addressed is how it could possibly achieve the objective of the merit system as stated in the official announcement thread. I'm hoping that this system will increase post quality by:
- Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
- Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.
Any method of obtaining merit not based on an objective opinion of the value of a post undermines that. (I like the idea of PoS though......)
Edit: I should have thought of this: https://www.google.com/search?q=cat+pictures+site:bitcointalk.orghttps://i.snag.gy/D7LZSY.jpg |
|
|
|
what speaks for or against this?
Considering you are making the suggestion (for nnnnnth time) wouldn't it be an idea if you gave your reasons first? Then people could explain to you why it is so stupid.
The forum I'm sure was not established for members to argue or insult each other.
I'm pretty sure that is what the entire interwebz is for. |
|
|
|
That's probably one of the most factually incorrect conspiracy theories I've seen yet. CRYPTO SP. Z.O.O which Bitfinex used as a payment processor a while ago was the company that had the money seized not Bitfinex. Basically, these are attempts by Bitfinex to stay functionally solvent given that one of their primary bank accounts were seized.
Even if they had still been a CRYPTO SP. Z.O.O customer, it was only a payment processor so no significant funds were ever held there, they just passed through. ING holds the money. https://www.coindesk.com/dutch-bank-ing-confirms-bitfinex-account/Also quite funny to think that a sum as small as $400mil would be a problem to an exchange with 25% market share and $1.4Bn volume in the last 24hrs. |
|
|
|
Paying to post is effectively a tax that the spammers could pay. Making it mining is just a different payment method of the tax.
Is there a price scale that's too high for low-ranked spammers, but also low enough for high-ranked genuine posters? ~ That would only work if it was combined with resetting the ranks by removing the initial distribution Merit. I'm mainly counting that option out based on what theymos has said. I seriously considered this, but I decided that it'd be just too disruptive. The desire to minimize carrying over flaws of the activity system are why I gave everyone the minimum merit to avoid being demoted, though.
Based on the numbers from yesterday it would make theymos the only Legendary member, Lutpin and Lauda the only Heros (satoshi, and nullius don't have enough activity) and only 24 Sr. Members. That would be fine for me as I'm one of the 24 but I can't imagine how much uproar there would be from the thousands that would lose out. So if that doesn't happen then all the sig spammers can afford to pay the tax. Could trolls afford it? Most couldn't. And those that could would end up paying for the Seniors (and above) to post.
That's a very different issue to spam and I really don't know how well funded or what motivates each individual troll. Despite some thoughtful replies, I still feel everyone is missing the point.
Price is a very effective mechanism. Most people are saying "I won't pay", but they won't specify how much. We can do micro-transactions now, very effectively. We can pay the equivalent of a tiny fraction of 1 cent to make a post, like 0.0000001. Is that too much, if it cleans the forum up?
Why not tell us how much is too much, then we might start to get somewhere
Maybe I've got too much of a bias to 2012 and 2011 when I started to read the forum: it was much better. This place was full of computer science types, sound money enthusiasts, math people, electronics people, old luminaries of the cypherpunk era, and totally anonymous people like today as well of course. I'm not saying everyone has to be some kind of polymath, but the conversations in the thread were usually motivated by earnest and genuine enquiry, people discussed all sorts of stuff. 2013 onwards, this forum just slowly filled up with sig spammers and trolls. Lots of the old crowd don't even come here anymore, the orgy cesspit of mindlessness that the Discussion board turned into pretty much killed the previous atmosphere. It seems like alot of people want to fight for keeping this place how it became after it went downhill, not for how high the quality here used to be.
I think most of us replying in this thread share the same objective but just disagree about this being a workable solution. When I think back to when I first started reading this forum in 2012 and then joined in 2013 only because I wanted to buy mining equipment. If it had been pay to post at the time I would have just done the deal by PM and probably remained a lurker. I'm glad that didn't happen and I got involved in talking to people here and became part of this. Pay to post would put off anyone new to but genuinely interested in Bitcoin, but would just be seen as a tax to be paid by the signature spammers. There's a number of other solutions to the spam problem from the extreme of banning signatures altogether or what I would prefer, getting tough on signature campaigns that pay for spam. Set some strong rules for campaigns and then appoint one of the moderators to monitor them. Give that moderator the ability to ban those signatures from the forum. Extend the advertising ban on ICOs from the forum banner ads to the entire forum. Trash the altcoin bounties board. |
|
|
|
To check my sMerit I usually open my profile /or any other profile/ and click on the merit link. There is your /or any other/ merit history, but above the statistics you can see this : Bitcoin Forum > Merit > Merit summary for iasenko That takes you to the link including your user ID. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=1291828Clicking on the > Merit> will take you to your current sMerit statistics  Maybe there are other (easier) ways, but this works for me. Using the URL with the user ID deleted that my browser remembers https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=meritis just another way of getting to the same place. |
|
|
|
Isn't there a new version of this forum or something? These suggestions might all be redundant if Bitcointalk is going to upgrade soon?
Didn't find an ETA though...
It has been Coming Soon TM for as long as anyone can remember. There's a sub-board for the new forum software https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=167.0If you find an ETA that hasn't already passed it would be wise to completely ignore it. But making suggestions on that board might still be a good idea. |
|
|
|
Well, spammers can mine, spammers with $ can pay, merit can be traded, accounts can be created in masses.
I got it the way things can be improved only, not totally fixed.
I gave my reasons I disagree with the OP here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3345485.msg35059537#msg35059537Paying to post is effectively a tax that the spammers could pay. Making it mining is just a different payment method of the tax. PS. But thank you, I at least won "The wackiest idea" prize You earned it.  There's a number of good suggestions about. The most effective would be to ban the ICO bounty campaigns from advertising here. They've already been banned from taking out banner ads on the forum and extending that to signatures would reduce spam dramatically. |
|
|
|
Probably charging for posts is too much, but it could be acceptable to require some amount of PoW instead? Say, mining one of the Cryptonote based currencies for btctalk account?
That's got to be the wackiest idea yet. Is there any particular reason that you think spammers can't mine? |
|
|
|
The 100 SMA & 200 SMA standards are better to know if the price will rise or not.
That's a hotly contested matter of opinion. I would side with those traders who would say that the only thing a moving average is good for is showing a lagging picture of what happened in the past. Watching order flow will give a good idea of what is happening now (the stat in the OP is a small part of that picture). But nothing can tell you for certain what is going to happen next. |
|
|
|
How can I see my sMerit? In this table, I can't see the Smerit for the full member. The merit system is very good but it is very tough to earn actually. That's why I need to know if I have sMerit then I can help others to rank up their Account
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit |
|
|
|
I was not a Member rank when this system striked us like he is and I was not given free Merits, therefore I'm not sure how many sMerits he'd have.
It's not possible to know but there's a bit more information in this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3342949.0 |
|
|
|
I want to ask more about how to give merit, because I want to give my friend a little bit of merit. But I only gave it once.
Why ?
Why did you (and many others like you, it seems) quote the entire first post? Your question makes no sense, otherwise - why did you give your friend merit only once? Uh, probably because you only gave it once...  It is difficult to decipher but I'm going with his question makes no sense because he may have quoted the whole OP but he didn't bother reading it. He probably gave his alt friend the one and only sMerit he got in the initial distribution and doesn't know he isn't getting any more. |
|
|
|
Why nobody can answer about selling ico accounts?
It might be because this is the Bitcoin Forum and not the ICO Forum so noone really cares. As long as it is not illegal and you are selling them for Bitcoin you can sell anything here. |
|
|
|
In my case I have noticed if I report a post the percentage does not change at all. Once we report something I assume immediately it does not calculate the percentage of accuracy. Once a moderator examine it and mark it right then it ads up to the accuracy percentage, right? In that case everything seeing 100% accuracy is a bit confusing.
I *think* it only decreases if the moderator marked it as an incorrect report. So it is not immediately calculated but a new report waiting to be handled doesn't change the accuracy rating. Many reports go unhandled because they don't have enough resources but they don't affect your accuracy score. After you have made more than 100 reports then you would have to have more than 1 bad report to see the 100% disappear. |
|
|
|
|
Just to add to what jseverson just said the best option for you will be dependant on the amount you trying to sell and which country you are in. The services vary and those two factors will impact on how long it takes for the funds to clear and the costs involved.
|
|
|
|
Fake News Network
We got the same news last year(about JPS Morgan if I'm correct) During the next following days, the Bitcoin value jumped a little. Some weeks later it turned to be a fake news. Don't believe everything you read and verify information or you will be fooled like many others
It's only the title of the thread that is fake. The news was actually that Barclays has been talking to their clients to gauge the level of interest. That is very different from "plans to open". When Barclays responded to the news by putting out a denial they actually confirmed that the dialogue with their clients had occurred. Whether or not that leads to anything happening is a different question but it still shows that the main investment banks are starting to take Bitcoin seriously. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
