This may be a paid attempt to get their ranking up on various search engines by building discussions about them on various websites.

---

OP as already said, both sites are not the same. While the other one is not explicitly a phishing site, never register with never forum login details on any other website to avoid your account getting compromised. This is a habit you should adopt when using the internet. Never duplicate login details to protect your accounts.

It has been an incredible 11years of bitcoin. The majority of people who knew about it when it was at its infant stage never expected to would last this long, and I think no one expected it to get to its current price value and popularity.
Huge credits to Satoshi Nakamoto for making (what I like to refer to as) one of the greatest innovations of this century. A fully public and user-supported financial system would have been called a scam by most people. But with the integration of the blockchain, it has withstood the test of time.
Happy Anniversary!

Crypto Bitcoin is not a get rich quick scheme at all. Making people rich is not the fundamental purpose of bitcoin. It is primarily meant to be used for pair to pair transactions and allow users to transact without a third party. It's volatile price is a bonus for both long and short term traders.

Some users are down by almost half of their investments from the 2017 bull run, and many would have cut their losses already, but, 'it's not a loss until you sell'.
So if one thinks this is the best time (price) to get into bitcoin, it may not be a bad idea. The best advice is to do sufficient research before investing in any financial venture.

Valverde had spent out his time in Barcelona in my opinion and the club needed a change in style and management. His 2.5 years at Barcelona looks good on paper with the trophies won and matches unbeaten, but the philosophy was fizzling out and the club was struggling to dominate games, too this with humiliating exits from the UCL two seasons running.
And yes, the manager is to blame in situations like this especially with the amount of talent in the current squad.

 Valverde sacked and Quique Serin in. Ernesto did his best with Barcelona but he was not the right man for the job.
Setién was successful at Real Betis, remarkably taking lots of points from the top teams in the league. He has the Barcelona policy of attacking football and strivingg to keep as much of the possession as possible.

Valverde's sack was long overdue but it's yet early in the season and Barcelona are not far behind in the different competitions, and are indeed still leading the laliga table. Setién would have a new challenge managing a dressing room filled with lots of world class players. I'm optimistic for the future.

Appointing Xavi at this point in the season considering the current state of the club would have been a disaster for both parties. No doubt he would be the ideal option for Barcelona a few seasons down the line, but starting his coaching career with the pressure of one of the best teams in the world comes with a lot of demands and pressure.
I have some other options ahead of Pochetino, but I would be comfortable with him taking over from Valverde. Frankly, I would be comfortable with anyone taking over from Valverde at this point in time.

Naturally, 27 years and above is when a player is entering their prime and it's not much of a gamble in my opinion. Eriksen is a very productive player and while he may not have the skills of Hazard he remains a very good bargain at his age. I believe he has at least five more years of top football in him.
I agree. Inter have improved remarkable under the supervision of Antonio Conte, but still have a way to go before they can be qualified as one of the best teams in Europe. I would also add PSG and Atletico Madrid to your list.

I didn't know such scanning techniques existed and it would be very useful to members on the forum.

One who has gotten scammed is usually emotionally distraught and frustrated and is in an effective state. Psychologically this is the time when they are most vulnerable to fall for other scam attempts. It's similar to what happens during gambling or trading. When you lose money in any of these, some try wildly to get back their lost funds by any means necessary. This would potentially lead to more losses until the victim
Digital currencies are mostly unregulated. While it is possible to pursue lost funds legally in cases of fake ICOs, it is improbable that it would result in the recovery of the lost fund.

My posting habit is relatively the same when I have a paid signature on and when I do not. I find topics I am interested in and join the discussion naturally. However, I would make an effort to reach the post quota if I am on a signature campaign.

I tried to do a check with the previous two weeks when I was without a signature, but that coincided with the festive season and I wasn't posting much on the forum due to that.

Most of the time they're taking advantage of their greed. You do not need in-depth knowledge about a concept in order to avoid scams, you just need to stop looking for get rich quick schemes. Every financial venture is rife with scam attacks so one should always be wary when using the internet. And do not come in with the money first, knowledge later mindset.

Admittedly, there are also well veiled scams which can trap even the most experienced person if they get complacent enough. I always advice one to view everything as a scam until proven otherwise.

I believe that any changes that does happen would be on the ranking system, with tweaks just like the enhanced newbie restrictions. I doubt there would be a change to another ranking system or an extra criteria in addition to merits and activity.
Aside the fact that it would make the profile description beside posts bulky, I do not see any possible need for it.

This case clearly shows the dualism of the forum. The user in question was supported by a lot of well-meaning members including myself when they thought him/her to be a well-meaning and devoted member. But when evidence pointing to the contrary surfaced it was also investigated and acted upon.

There has been a lot of drama in between the line, to whether the merit dump was deserved or the trust flag justified, but it is a system that checks itself and balances almost in the middle, most of the time. So the right decision is taking 'most of the time'.

The trust system is unmoderated and checks itself, so this should invariably create an environment of fairness. The evidence was presented and the majority agreed with it. It doesn't have to be dragged on.
Anyone can leave feedback on your profile just as you did in retaliatory feedbacks and only the person can reverse it, same in your case.

Some advice; don't leave retaliatory feedbacks out of spite, it doesn't help anything.
For now, you've not been banned, so you can use your time on the forum to show your net positive input to the forum, and check back in a couple of months for any possibility of changes to the situation.
Good luck with the forum.

I believe the op was suggesting a stable coin backed by bitcoin, so it would mirror the market value of bitcoin. I believe there are such currencies around.
This is not a good idea for a couple of reasons:
Stable coins are centralized and defeat the entire purpose of the Bitcoin network. Also, it is highly volatile and would be difficult to manage and regulate.

The LN was designed primarily for smaller transactions to reduce the fees involved. As suggested above it's a more appropriate solution.

Posters on the thread seem to be extending the length of the post so as to avoid the 'good project' hammer, but it still low-value contributions.
It does break the rules by offering any form of on forum incentive whether optional or not. Although the bumps do nothing to increase the post visibility as a result of the new pump system.

I just closed a tab that I opened to check the price of bitcoin and it was not a hassle at all. There are so many projects which are in the works and this is not a necessity.

Also, people are on the forum for different reasons, and some may not be interested in the market prices of cryptocurrency at a certain time but want to join discussions on the forum.
If this is ever to be implemented, I would suggest it is limited to the (bitcoin) speculation board for bitcoin prices and (altcoin) speculation board for altcoin prices.

I would also say I've been fairly consistent looking at my previous posts. I had already developed an objective and a posting guideline. My interests may have changed a little over time, but it doesn't reflect much in my posting habit.

It's much too early to decide whether I'll develop this mindset as well. Maybe I'll check back in a couple of years.

This looks very interesting, and I'm going off thinking about its possible applications in my countries health care system. I used to keep my eye on a couple of projects, but these were all ICOs and the emphasis was more on profit, so a couple of them have fizzled out while the rest are yet to take off.

I was also looking into the possible applications of the blockchain technology into (real-time) advertising, can not recall the websites now, also not sure if the projects are still active. Would update this reply when I do some research.

Smerits distribution can be debated on but it is not really an issue the forum wants for focus on (from a couple of replies theymos has given regarding the issue) except the user is a source.
If every 'weird' transaction is to be scrutinized it could discourage some from sending them out to avoid getting backlash for it.

I tend to be stringent with my merit distribution, cause I usually only have a few merits on my hands and like to keep a few till I can earn some more, but I see nothing wrong in giving a huge chunk at a time, as far as it's not a trade, in which case the user(s) would run out very quickly, as the redistribution can only go a few cycles. And while clear cases of merit abuse might not get you a red trust as it's impossible to prove, it could get you on the ignore list of a couple of sources, further reducing their chances of ranking up further.

In my opinion, it's a system that regulates itself.

Bitcointalk Username: Upgrade00
Profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2423488;sa=summary
Rank: Sr. Member
Current post: 1051
Btc Address: bc1q0qkl070tkgap5df0acw2e7ryuamvx0we2vu66f

Thanks for pointing that out LTU_btc, I already updated the OP.
@Pmalek, it was an error, but a couple of errors on bitcointalk has been turned to community slangs, maybe we could add it.

I can confirm that I didn't forget about trust flags, I created a guiding thread in it a few days after it's implementation; here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5156835.msg51544945#msg51544945
However, it's a new system I was particular about the trust feedbacks which has been in place for a number of years and needs to be reviewed periodically as much can change over that time.