I don't care what the current price is on x or y exchange. That's my price, $200 PayPal for 0.57 BTC, it's non-negotiable.

I will not trade with you if you aren't heavily trusted. I won't budge at all on this.

PM me.

Edit: No longer want this.

Ugh, that's such a pain. I was hoping to check out the site as I've been looking at various solutions recently.

Shouldn't Cloudflare be protecting you from the DDoS with its DDoS protection? Or I suppose that for the advanced DDoS protection you have to have the Business plan which is $200/month, and really it just ain't worth it...paying the DDoSer will just cause more to come as well.

Such a shitty situation. :/

The only problem with that is that the moment I rate something a 6 or below for something people quite quickly connotate that with a bad site and I get a lot of angsty messages saying that I am a bad reviewer, biased, hell I've had plenty of casinos themselves be annoyed at me ;)

But, keeping to a letter based system of, say, B (5), B+ (6), A- (7), A (8), A+ (9), A* (10)...I can get away with giving out B+s and A-s a lot easier than giving out 6s and 7s ;)

Yeah, I do like the idea of lowering all site's grades a fine grade as well, though I probably need to do it more than that in reality. Once there are multiple sites being rated B- and B and even a couple Cs for the bad apples, then I won't get as many angsty messages due to this except from the diehard trolls. A B+ in a sea of A-band ratings is usually a problem.

Edit: disabled smilies due to 8)

Hey all,

I made a poll to see whether the best option for the thread to help further create a gradient between websites is to create a new A* grade above A+, leave it be, or lower all websites by a fine grade and then re-adjust accordingly. I would prefer creating an A* grade as it means I don't have to give sites which don't deserve them low grades just to help differentiate between sites, but I'd like to see your opinions.

http://strawpoll.me/5965274

I'll check the strawpoll in 24 hours.

Indeed, they have now fixed the affiliate withdrawal issue now (the one where if you tried to withdraw you would get the error message "Error withdrawing funds. Reason: #"). Thanks for getting around to it, my withdrawal is now listed as "pending" so I look forward to seeing it go through soon

ID: 29980

This is going to be a rather big wall of suggestions, by the way. My address is 171717Lqgyi88sqSqRtToFYUYmJqeq5Bui.

On the mining tab, please change BitCoin and LiteCoin to Bitcoin and Litecoin. No-one actually capitalises the C. Also, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the difficulty being 0.008 and that this is approximately $3.18. The difficulty I, and most others regard as the mining difficulty, is currently at 62,253,982,450. I like how you present the amount of blocks voting for BIP100 vs the amount of blocks voting for BIP101 as a ratio, though rather than for instance 63.6:0.2 as it is right now it'd probably just be better to code it to automatically find a :1 match, e.g. 63.6 * 5 = 318 meaning that BIP100:BIP101 votes gives a ratio of 318:1. That looks much nicer, too.

I do like the News section, but I don't understand why you've made the Briefs section seem to solely consist of tweets by CoinDesk. Expanding this section to include tweets from accounts such as @Bitcoin is something that I'd recommend to expand the amount of news available, even if you do have a bit of repetition. Right now the briefs section is basically just a page showing Coinbase's twitter account.

I think that the Altcoin section of the Markets tab should be further split into sections for each major altcoin. Right now it's just a jumbled mess of altcoins and it's a bit hard to make sense of it, and it seems arbitrary how (for me at least) Dogecoin is at the top of the list with the price from the Bter market, followed immediately by XRPJubi with another doge entry coming 6th on the list in total. It's kind of a mess, and even if you can configure it as a user, having such a messy default list will put people off.

Also, give us some options for a user avatar and make them be shown when we comment! Right now in the "More" tab you just have a stock Bitcoin Kan "avatar" next to your name and ID and it's not even clear if you can set an avatar or if it's just there for looks.

That's all for now, might have more suggestions later. There was about 10 or so suggestions in that wall of text.

Indeed.

Also, may I make an inquiry? Is there somewhere where I can find the most commonly used ad sizes by advertisers, in fact the use of all ad types by advertisers!

That is the only time I have called someone a shill in this entire thread, and I am calling both those shilling for and against BIP101 shills. You really are a blind old git if you think I'm trying to push an agenda regarding BIP101 or XT, that's not what the thread is about.

And no, I don't agree with you there. We should not be allowing companies like Coinbase to make these important decisions for us, we should not be listening and circlejerking for them! We need discourse, not rage in some crypto-anarchist fashion.

Perhaps they feel that it's easier to track if they deposit to each advertising campaign separately. Although I don't see why they wouldn't just use a spreadsheet for tracking it in that case, so there's really no reason to not take advantage of depositing into a user account.

Hey, I'm going to have to report you to the Portugese Government for failing to create a safe space for 12 year olds by not referring to it as the "address with gay in it" now. You can't be using words like 1EbEEdJi2pvASwpCTSBZgayGvoK4DQEHUt around the kiddies, man, it's just not appropriate. Shame on you.

And at that moment, we knew that RawDog had never actually read any of the BIP papers else he would be aware that there are multiple other solutions for increasing the block size.

Jesus, guys. I'm not even fighting for or against XT or BIP101 here, you damn shills have come and turned the thread into your own little playground.

This thread was created to point out how Coinbase is trying to centralise the decision-making and how we should come to a solution of our own accord, even if it does end up being BIP101 anyway.

You have twisted this thread for your own agenda.

Nope, my payment was on time last week and this week. I had 0.18 BTC listed as the payment I would receive when I went to bed yesterday so while it isn't the end of the world it's a bit odd that I only received 0.1752 BTC, especially as I consider all of my posts to be high-quality.

If you're able to have a look into it the Bit-X address I used was 378QwCRS6hsqs2zEgDJQuPwwESDJBicL7E.

Preferably, if I could be reimbursed for that that'd be nice, but it's not too much of a big deal - it's just the fact I was supposed to receive it

Apparently you're supposed to be able to see it when you go to pay under the G2A Pay option, I don't see it on the homepage itself or the FAQ either. If someone could test that and find out whether it does show up or not that would be useful There are plenty of g2a alternatives that accept Bitcoin, though. Green Man Gaming and GamesPlanet have accepted it for a while and they're legit.

I don't actually think I've even considered my trust score in quite a while now. There's no need to.


Well, not everyone.

Your signature doesn't really paint a good image, though. You should be glad there are any signature campaigns at all, they are a privilege.

Anyway, this discourse isn't going anywhere. I'm going to stop replying.

No, the fact they and other services want to force a move to BIP101 is not good.

Of course, most places should support bigger blocks. The consensus is that we need bigger blocks. However, there is not user consensus for BIP101 nor is there miner consensus for BIP101. Corporations should not be trying to force or persuade us into these changes, else we simply turn into a system of centralised decision making and corporate lobbying.]

Perhaps BIP101 is the solution. But this is not the way such a change should be implemented.

That would imply that the Bitcoin Foundation is even useful to the community anymore. As far as I'm concerned, they're basically corrupt. One of their board members stated that they were effectively bankrupt at one point and had almost gone bankrupt before that. I don't think we should rely on a foundation known for frivolous spending and wasting our time and money.

Actually, that's not the reason I left bit-x, I actually was chugging along fine with the pay rate decrease until I saw this opportunity with Crypto-Games and decided to take the Legendary slot As fun as trying to accuse me of that is, it just isn't true.

If you're asking $10 for 500 words but you write at the quality that you gave in your OP, then I'm afraid you're unlikely to find much work. I type at a very high quality and I've charged less for writing 500 word articles before, so I think you may be over-valuing your skills here.

You're the person who started complaining and kicking up a massive fuss when your previous signature campaign lowered rates, aren't you? Come on, are you that entitled dude? Figure it out. This guy is already in the campaign. You aren't, man.

Seeing that actually reminded me, I need to up your ratings on the Overview thread as you're no longer a fledgling site. FortuneJack has developed a lot now and it seems to be amazing for both promotions and features I'll go do that now, hehe.