I said the price was going down, yes. I was right.  I never said it was dead, don't think so anyway. Here's a post from Oct 2011, a month after I registered. It's okay to say the price is going to go down, and it doesn't mean anything bad about Bitcoin. It can't be up uP UP all the time, there's always going to be corrections to market overreactions, both ways. You seem stressed out. It isn't dead you dumbshit, btc price in fiat is irrelevant. Also this was the best LOL at the entire post. I love how he recommends to "end free trade" as if trade were a policy.
I don't know what coin allegation scheme you're talking about. |
|
|
|
Holding. I don't much care about this short/mid term exchange rate garbage. People said the same thing when it "crashed" to 1.50 after a year or so of bear trends. It's dead, it's over, nobody will ever buy this, etc. They were all wrong then, they're wrong now. For those who complain about early adopters, you have the opportunities. Sure there are risks, but the same was even more true back then. No risk, no reward. tl;dr Buy or die.
Flame on. Moving back to speculation |
|
|
|
|
Good report history, posts and actions that show you understand forum policy, activity (and when you are active could also play a part in it, mods at certain times could be more needed than others), etc. Being a good poster or trustworthy doesn't mean one would make a good moderator.
Finding mods for foreign language boards presents unique challenges, so there's no real set way to go about that. Sometimes it's by polls, sometimes it's just because a certain person has expressed an interest in moderating the board (either by their actions, or by "applying"), etc. It tends to be a more community driven decision, because acting like you know someone because you used google translate on their posts is dumb (though foreign language mods do need to be able to communicate with us in english).
|
|
|
|
|
I find level 3 to be much more inaccurate overall.
|
|
|
|
100% accuracy crew representin'. 1 report.  My reports pre-global moderator were before this new tracking system. |
|
|
|
Or accuracy could just be inaccurate, because it took ages for me to trickle up from 94% accuracy to 95% accuracy.
More reports you have, the larger the spread between individual percentage points. Math. The more reports you have overall, the larger the spread between percentage points. If reports were rounded off to 100ths, like 96.57% you would see it going up more often. Also could be getting some bad reports occasionally, probably won't be enough to drop your percentage visibly at this point so you wouldn't know.
Also, when you report something, it will immediately be added to your number of reports, however it won't factor into your percentage until dealt with by a moderator, and never will if the report remains in limbo (it happens).
I'm not talking about the number of reports being stuck but the percentage.
So maybe is it an error? I'm stuck at : You have reported 79 posts with 74% accuracy I doubt it. As BadBear said percentages move quickly when you have few reports and barely noticable when you have >1000 reports. IIRC hilariousandco is at >1900 reports probably more now. Lets assume 97.0000% of these are correct, thats 1843 correct and 57 not. In order to reach 97.5% (I assume thats when 98% will be shown) he would have to make 2223 total correct reports vs 57 bad. Thats 380 good reports without fail. For 79 posts with ~74.6835% assumed accuracy (59 good, 20 bad) you only need 1 good report (60/(60+20) = 75%) Lets assume 97.0000% of these are correct, thats 1843 correct and 57 not. In order to reach 97.5% (I assume thats when 98% will be shown) he would have to make 2223 total correct reports vs 57 bad. Thats 380 good reports without fail.
Accuracy is always rounded down IIRC, so it'll take even longer. People shouldn't worry about accuracy much, and certainly not single percentage points. |
|
|
|
|
Well coincidentally it happened literally right when I added a new ban.
I did it, I broke the forum.
|
|
|
|
I just counted 21 ponzi topics in the first page of Gambling section. I won't visit that part anymore unless theymos edit forum.
A lot of that is that they generate a lot of spam too, a lot of people constantly post links to "their" ponzi in other threads, people cross advertise, ponzi ops constantly bump their threads. Greedy shitbirds. are most of them being started by the same people or are a lot of people trying to jump on this latest scam bandwagon that appearently works? Little bit of everything. |
|
|
|
1) I made this thread in meta: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=9235672) I know there are many other threads in meta about the exact same subject 3) IMO make new thread in meta often. Explain this is the same problem going on in /gambling. Eventually one of the lazy mods collecting bitcoin for advertising will figure they had better make a +EV move and clean up the forum before we figure out where else to post about bitcoin gambling. Luckily for you there's an amazing feature called merge topics. |
|
|
|
I just counted 21 ponzi topics in the first page of Gambling section. I won't visit that part anymore unless theymos edit forum.
A lot of that is that they generate a lot of spam too, a lot of people constantly post links to "their" ponzi in other threads, people cross advertise, ponzi ops constantly bump their threads. Greedy shitbirds. |
|
|
|
If it has a website, it belongs in Gambling. If it does not have a website, it belongs in Games and Rounds.
What about this one. The OP is not asking for anyone to post anything, but is telling investors suckers to send bitcoin to the ponzi address (from a non-shared wallet, like QT or multibit) then the ponzi OP will eventually send money back to the "sending" address. It does not appear to have a website Games and Rounds. If it has a website, it belongs in Gambling. If it does not have a website, it belongs in Games and Rounds.
So the posts with BTC addresses directly in the forum without a website can be reported? Yes, though one of the ones you reported did have a website. |
|
|
|
|
If it has a website, it belongs in Gambling. If it does not have a website, it belongs in Games and Rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
You constantly spam your websites, and bump your threads multiple times per day. Even on your last (third?) account you bumped your thread 3 or 4 times in a day. You don't care about this forum, you just want to increase the hits to your websites. You're a spammer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing wrong with taking a break now and then. Hope it goes well for you.
|
|
|
|
|
It was temporary, until he evaded his ban.
|
|
|
|
Was going to release today but realized a way people could exploit the automated payout system through deleting posts & reposting. It's a quick fix we'll have sorted ASAP.
i wonder what Stunna's ASAP means.. xD As doggieTattoo already mentioned, it should be fairly simple to patch this "exploit" by simply counting the posts at the end of the sig period. Deleted posts don't add to the post count, so they wouldn't be counted. It wouldn't have to be manual either. Something like this could easily be done via a script. Heck, I could probably write it myself in a single day. Actually it is possible (though not common) for deleted posts to add to post counts, a bug I found a while back. Recalculating forum stats will fix it, that's not done regularly though, just whenever I think about it. I don't think that posting and then deleting posts is technically against forum rules, however it is certainly a waist of forum resources and doing so in any kind of massive scale would be in some way punished (aka banned), correct? I would also think that if you were to monitor the number of pages worth of posts a user has this would be easy to detect from a non-moderator point of view. For example a script could check to see that UID 41911 (aka BadBear) has 162 pages of posts as of 12 Jan 2015, then if their post count went up by 100 posts in the following week then they should have exactly 167 pages of posts. If they do have as many pages then payment could be made automatically, if they do not then it would be an "exception" where posts could be counted manually It's impossible for a user to cause this bug on their own, that would be a waste of time. |
|
|
|
Was going to release today but realized a way people could exploit the automated payout system through deleting posts & reposting. It's a quick fix we'll have sorted ASAP.
i wonder what Stunna's ASAP means.. xD As doggieTattoo already mentioned, it should be fairly simple to patch this "exploit" by simply counting the posts at the end of the sig period. Deleted posts don't add to the post count, so they wouldn't be counted. It wouldn't have to be manual either. Something like this could easily be done via a script. Heck, I could probably write it myself in a single day. Actually it is possible (though not common) for deleted posts to add to post counts, a bug I found a while back. Recalculating forum stats will fix it, that's not done regularly though, just whenever I think about it. |
|
|
|
Yea, scam site  redsn0w xetsr KEEP it up and you will be in deeper than you could ever imagine. DELETE THIS SHIT AND WE WILL NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH AN ATTACK on your computers just a heads up, shits gonna get really bad for you. Just a fair warning.  |
|
|
|
It's difficult to find people who meet all the following criteria. - Can be trusted to make the right decision
- Care enough to do it
- Have the time to look into these cases
Lots of people meet one or two, rarely all three. |
|
|
|
Touche, the websites did operate well and efficiently, which would have taken coding skills. I guess I should have called him an idiot for leaving that much in a hot wallet. So I would suppose stupid but gifted at programming is a better way to describe him. Also a liar for telling people he would back up funds with his own and a liar for saying he wasn't going to keep that much in the hot wallet. You could also argue a thief, depending on what you believe happened to the coins.
This is the sticking point with me. TF was smart enough to know that you can't fully secure anything, and even if you make it so hard it isn't worth it, there's always social engineering. Leaving that much sitting around was foolish, and I don't think he's a fool. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, I don't know. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
