Actually there is no such thing as best poker games. There are some that are faster than others, with more or less players or in various formats (tournaments, sit&goes, cash).

It would help quite a bit to know if you have any experience. If you don't have much, which is what it looks like, you usually tend to like sit&goes and tournaments. If you give more details we can help you

User: Rupok365
Post link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5378863.0
Archive: https://loyce.club/archive/posts/5883/58838737.html
Copied from: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/03/what-cryptocurrencies-will-look-like-in-50-years.html

A text excerpt (he has copied the entire post):


From the original:



This screamed plagiarism to me at first sight. I googled paragraphs and could not find the source but it looks like he has changed some words, I don't know if it is what is known as word spinning.

I'm going to believe the feedback left by marlboroza to Timelord2067. It simply says: Lunatic.

Let's see if I get it right because it seems to me that I'm going to put him on ignore.

Timelord2067 distrusted crwth before today. In the latest trust list update from last Saturday it appears like this.

And because today crwth distrusted Timelord2067 he says this is DT Trust abuse. Is that so? Because if so he is a total lunatic. I thought it was about the consumption of potent marijuana or hallucinogenic drugs, but now I doubt if it is not because he is not taking medication for schizophrenia or something like that.

As with all statistically based studies, it is best to take them with a grain of salt because we are comparing long steel ladders with short wooden ladders.



I don't know where you get that from, with Biden in power. If you said that when Trump was in charge, I would see sense in it but not now.


This is the result of left-wing policies based on regulations and taxes for the construction of new housing. Where there are fewer regulations and lower taxes on new housing construction, homes are cheaper.

This whole discourse on social mobility, like that of inequality, is based on the fallacy of considering wealth as something static. As if a rich person in 2021 were the same as a rich person in 1921 or in the year 1000. It usually ends up like the California housing example, magnifying the problems one promised to solve (and blaming it on an external factor, capitalism or whatever is convenient at the time).

The quality of life of billions of people has reached heights that were unthinkable centuries ago, when descriptions of hunger were a constant in literature, that's what's important.

I am very much in favor of responsible gambling features, and in an ideal world all casinos would have such features so that someone with a problem like the OP could avoid being able to enter any casino.

The problem the OP has is that there is always another option. There are non-kuc casino for example. You have to try to solve your problem from the inside, because there is always another site without responsible gambling options where you can go and lose your money. Even playing live if you exclude yourself from casinos you can always end up in an illegal game, so I would focus on solving the internal problem you have that leads you to gamble compulsively, lose your money, regret it and after a while do the same thing again.

Sounds like good news to me, one more in the normalization of Bitcoin, the only thing I was thinking:


is that people who have their bitcoin without KYC, and we have a few on the forum, will probably prefer to donate dollars to deduct the contribution.

To me this is yet another example of the saying "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em". We have seen a few examples already in this cycle, of bankers and people from the world of finance who a few years ago were saying that Bitcoin had no future, if not outright saying a scam, and today have turned into Bitcoin believers even giving predictions for the price of Bitcoin at the end of this year much higher than the price we are at now.

And many more that we will continue to see.

I didn't know krogothmanhattan but I see he has impressive feedback.

Yes it is true that some merited posts clearly look like shitposts like "great project!" style you see in the alt section, such as these:



I'm not saying that you can't reply in a forum sincerely to say these things but precisely in this forum posts of this style are not well seen....

I would not give it more importance because it is just one merit per post, and besides I see that there is something that has not been mentioned: krogothmanhattan gave merit to the first replies but did not give any merit to the replies from March 5. So, it's not the case that he is giving merits to everybody who replies in order to keep his thread getting bumped.

That's all well and good what you say, but you are comparing apples and pears. As noorman0 says, the problem is that there are a lot of honest people on this forum who don't get $1K by mistake so they can return it.

I gave it merit too (without being a merit source), but this is an exceptional thing.

I'm sorry but shitposters are not going to change their attitude because of this thread.

Yes, as Charles-Tim says it is better to try to join a signature campaign. The problem with what you say is that we have no way to check it, and in the forum there are always people with sobbing stories asking for money/favors/employment.

On the other hand, for someone to hire you to wear the avatar and the signature you should show activity on the forum and that you are able to earn merits. So it's the other way around, just write a few posts every day, try to make quality ones, so you will earn merits and then you will be hired in one of the many signature campaigns.

You can do this!

That's all well and good but I think all of us who have been on the forum for a while know that. If you were posting on another forum other than Bitcoin you would be informing them, here you are just telling us again what we already know.


Yes, it is an asset, but there are people in the forum who defend that it is mainly a currency and that it is an asset is secondary, pooya87 for example is a fervent defender of it.

I for my part would say that although today most people who buy it do it as an asset, if you look at the number of transactions it is clear that it is used as a currency.

The fact is that as in the two previous cycles there was a blow off top, the predictive models expected the same for this date already. What happens is that the regularities serve more to understand the past than to predict the future and not because there was a blow off top in the previous two cycles there has to be this one.


It can be like that or not. We are entering uncharted territory and we don't know if the price is going to do that or go 4 years without going above $70K, although I think those of us who are in this see that in the long term the price of Bitcoin will continue to rise, both because of its intrinsic properties and the devaluation of fiat currencies.

Ok so, I am going to write what I hope will be my last comment in this thread and I'm done with it. Unless now cabalism13 and bl4nkcode show up with receipts etc. I don't think it's worth giving the matter any more thought.

I find what suchmoon has said quite sensible, and I said something similar in this thread before he wrote. If I give $50 to a charity, seeing a picture is good enough for me. If you want to show a receipt, all the better, but at the end of the day both the photo and the receipt can be forged, and this is not a professional charity, they were three friends who tried to help people with small contributions that they received at first, the problem came when they received very considerable amounts.

For me there are several things that make me think that crwth deserves the benefit of the doubt, and this is what the community has understood, because if you go to his trust page, the flag is not shown for insufficient support and only the negative feedback of DireWolfM14 is left:

1) The amount of money. He received and handled considerably less money than cabalism13 and bl4nkcode.

2) His attitude. The best of the three people involved in this.

3) He neither ran the charity nor was he the escrow. Although here we could say that he is partly to blame too, I think he is less to blame than the other two, and this is how the community has understood it.

Hello

I will analyze the images later or tomorrow.

I think many of us in the thread expected something like this from you and the others but it's been a while.

You sound honest but we will have to analyze what you are showing us.

Yes but how can we check that? I mean if it is a bitcointalk loan and it is published then it would be a red flag, but we cannot know if the escrow has loans outside bitcointalk. And as of now, knowing this, do you think in the future people in the same situation as cabalism13 and bl4nkcode would publish the loan in bitcointalk?

And I would go further, should a person run a charity that receives significant donations if they are taking low amount loans ($200) as in the case of cabalism13?

It is not incompatible to have debts with being honest, running businesses or charities, the problem is when the donations or what you get in the escrow address is several times your annual salary and you are going into debt for pennies.


I don't even want to mess with you but it seems to me a pretty generic and empty answer you have given, the point is how can we check trustworthiness.

Hi mate. You are another example of someone who hasn't bothered to read. This thread is about reporting unmerited good posts, and some of the ones you post have already been merited. On the other hand, I see that at least some that have not been merited are threads you opened in meta and I doubt LoyceV hasn't already seen them.

Good luck. In my case I have a couple of merits to send but I don't think the posts you post deserve more merits than what you have already achieved.

But wasn't it in 2016-17 that there was already the blocksize war, resulting in the (unsuccessful) shitcoin cash hard fork? I think you don't have a new shitcoin cash in mind as a solution to the problem, and I would like to hear your idea.

I don't know if this is going a bit off topic in this thread but it is a thread I created, after all.

Well, if that were to happen to me, I would pay by credit card and then they would charge me when I collect my paycheck. If it's only a few days, I might even get charged a month later, since credit cards usually have a cutoff day. For example, if I pay between the 27th and 31st of this month, I will be charged in February.

I could also take out an online instant minimum amount loan and amortize everything except what I need, and then amortize the rest when I collect the paycheck, so I would pay very little interest, only for the amount of the medicines and prorated for the few days I had the rest, but I understand that not everyone has the same banking conditions that I have.


Just a point, if I have opened the thread, it is precisely to see other points of view and try to understand other perspectives and life situations in which people who ask for these loans find themselves.


I have not investigated the matter thoroughly, and I do not know if in all cases the loans with collateral are given if you give 100% of the collateral or there are cases where the collateral covers only 50% for example. In the second case it would make more sense. In the first case, it can happen like in banking that let's say you have $10K in an investment in the bank and suddenly you have to make an urgent reform at home (the roof falls down or something like that) that let's say it is going to cost you $10K. One option would be to sell the investment and pay but sometimes it is smarter to keep the investment and take the loan if it is low interest. If you get the loan at 4% and it is clear to you that your investment gives you significantly more than that (like an S&P fund that averages 10), it is smarter to take the loan, although here you would have to take into account market volatility, whether you have a stable income and other factors.

Applying this to crypto loans, I do not know if there will be any similar case of leaving the collateral and taking the loan because you do not want to get rid of the investment, because the interest is higher, but I guess that by leaving 100% collateral the interest would be in the lower range within the crypto loans.


Of course, that's one of the things I figured and said in the OP, that I assumed one of the cases is people from third-world countries. Still, the only sense I see in it is to pay back the loan as soon as possible, otherwise the interest eats at you.

Yeah, doesn't make much sense to me either, at least as adaseb puts it. In the stock market, it is well known that people who manage portfolios of stocks usually remove those they consider weaker at the end of December to offset gains of other sales of shares made during the year and pay less taxes, but selling at the beginning of the year? Never heard of it but I'm not saying that some people don't. You sell in January and don't pay until 15-18 months later.

I have the same opinion, and I think so far everyone I've seen commenting on the thread has said the same thing. That in the beginning the intention was good. Probably neither they themselves cared too much about keeping receipts nor the community to control it because if you get a $50 donation, another $20 donation and I give you another $25 donation, if you show me some pictures that's enough, but if you get a whole Bitcoin, you have to be very careful.


In the end I deleted my neutral tag and supported the flag, partly because of this argument and partly because of the fact that they disappeared from the forum days ago. If I considered myself innocent I wouldn't do that.

To me they consider themselves somehow guilty and defeated. bL4nkcode used to earn $100 a week from the Best Change signature campaign. That's good money for someone living in the Philippines. crwth didn't write as much but he also made money from the campaign. Think of them as people who have borrowed money on the forum, some as little as $200.

If I considered myself innocent, even if I didn't keep all the receipts, I would have come more to this thread to show my face and fight for my reputation and save my income.