Before jumping the gun, let's look at what the person who discovered the plagiarism says. I have asked him to expose all the evidence he has now:

Hey man. On the one hand I thank you for the work you do against plagiarists, but on the other hand I think you should expose all the evidence you have now. I think it would be the most honest thing to do and would save the forum the most work.

Not completely. No government should force users to accept Bitcoin, or Euros or USD or any kind of fiat. But yeah, you've got a point there.

I think it is more to lease out their brand image, kind of advertising:


Source: ESPN Explores Sports-Betting Deal Worth at Least $3 Billion

I don't know what would happen with this if the recent ban on gambling ads in Spain (although not a total ban, it reduces it a lot), becomes generalized and they start copying it all over the world, although I don't think so.

Hey man, seriously? I'm in favor of the gambling industry but to say that there is nothing wrong with gambling seems too exaggerated for me.

Of course there are bad things in the gaming world. We have the problem of addictions, which in my opinion usually come more from a previous problem of the person than from the game itself, but gambling is not like eating vegetables, where we can say that there is nothing wrong with it.

Besides, nowadays we have the problem of the new technologies, which give instant access, that you can play without anyone knowing it, bet very fast and bet practically anything. With the new technologies, there are new problems with gambling: How is Technology Innovation Impacting Gambling Addiction?

And then there is the problem of minors, which has already been mentioned. So no, the gambling industry is not as harmless as the cultivation of organic vegetables.

Hey guys, how do you see if someone has been banned?

I've searched the subject and in Banned Users they say it can't be seen (although it is a 6 year-old post). Also, in another thread, LoyceV says: "Unlike Mods, users can't see if someone is banned."

Any way to see it if you are not a mod? Timelord2067 and Bitcoin_Arena have shown us some people are banned and I don't think they are mods.

I'm not talking about someone who copy-pasted without quoting the source in a dozen posts or more. Maybe someone who has only one case of plagiarism in all his post history and has written like 5k posts.

The question came to my mind because of the latest reported case of plagiarism. Mpamaegbu and Pokapoka124 were recently accepted into the Best Change sig campaign, which, AFAIK, is the second best-paying campaign on the forum. Then:


Only Mpamaegbu has replied so far, saying that it was kind of "by mistake", but I don't want to discuss those individual cases here, because I think there will be discussed in the plagiarism and/or sig campaign threads.

The question is whether we can believe that any plagiarism happens by accident. I have been searching and have not found any posts that are exactly on this topic, although I have found two interesting but somewhat opposite opinions in posts on plagiarism:



What do you think? Is plagiarism always intentional or can there be some specific cases in which it is not? It is not clear to me.

Interesting, I hadn't heard this theory, although I don't know if I believe it at all, as others have commented.

I think it would be better supported by serious studies with concrete statistics but it is difficult to carry them out.

Another thing that has not been mentioned and could make athletes more likely to gamble is depending on their background. I think there could be a relation to:

"According to a 2009 Sports Illustrated article, 35% of National Football League (NFL) players are either bankrupt or are under financial stress within two years of retirement and an estimated 60% of National Basketball Association (NBA) players, 78% NFL players, and a large percentage of Major League Baseball (MLB)..."

Many of them come from poor backgrounds, have not had much education, let alone financial education. Suddenly they find themselves with a lot of money and they just know what to spend. They are more emotional than rational people. So, I think just as they are more likely to go bankrupt, they may also be more likely to gamble and get into trouble.

That's the point. In the gambler's fallacy, which has been mentioned, the bettor confuses the probability of individual events with that of a series of events.

On the other hand, I don't usually play roulette, but playing poker I also sometimes see very improbable events, such as having a poker on the flop and being beaten with a superior poker by an opponent who only had a pair on the flop. What happens is that the less probable they are, the less frequently I see them.

Hey man, seriously, you are in a forum, nobody is going to read such a wall. In other forums, not so worried about quality, you would receive a lot of responses to this post, along the lines of: "didn't read, lol."

For my part, and said a little jokingly, if I were the dictator of this forum, I would put you a temporary ban of one week for such a wall.

Do you find it hard to merit people when you don't agree with what they are saying? I'm not talking about a small disagreement here, rather about completely opposite points of view.

Since I've been on the forum I've made sure to give people merit even if I don't agree with what they say but I recognize that it's not as easy as when you do agree with them.

Moreover, I think that many times merits are given simply because people agree with what the other is saying and not so much because the post is specially worked.

I think another thing that is also hard is, if you have had a heated argument with someone (and at that time you have not given them merit because you understand that those posts do not deserve it), to give them merit in other posts that you find in the forum later on. Again, that's another thing I've made sure to do, to give someone merit regardless of previous arguments, but I think it goes against our instincts.

I try to be objective, except when discussions lead to insults. If someone insults me, I put him on ignore and I won't give him any more merits.

What are your views and experiences about it?

Look, I'm not going to discuss this any further with you because it's clear that we're not going to reach an agreement. I don't know if I didn't explain it well in the OP or you didn't understand it well, but when I talk about Bitcoin absorbing market cap of other assets I'm talking about a years long process.

In my view, as of today Bitcoin has already absorbed some market cap of gold. Most of the money that has been put into Bitcoin, if it had not been invented by Satoshi in 2008, would be in the market cap of gold today. And for that it hasn't taken people selling nearly $1T in gold to buy Bitcoin.


You have made me think, because it is true that for example gold today is a store of value and practically not used as a currency (unlike in the past), while a lot of transactions are done in Bitcoin every day.

Yes but my point was that no state should force Fiat on anyone either, that's what they do and I don't see many people complaining about it. I don't see people using the Fiat for its "merits" either, apart from the fact that this is what is accepted as payment.


No, you didn't.

Besides, it seems to me that protests will be closely linked to the price. If it goes up a lot, no one will protest, as soon as there is a drop, there will probably be protests again. It shouldn't be like that, and Bitcoin should be valued for its intrinsic properties but it seems to me that's what's going to happen.

And Shitcoin Cash is ranked 15 but it has like 1-2% of Bitcoin market cap.

Yes, that's what I mean. We've just touched $50,400 btw, let's see if we break it today.

That's because we are badly accustomed  to the profitability of Bitcoin. Before it existed, such high returns could only be obtained with very high risk assets, so the potential profitability was coupled with a very high potential risk of losing your money, if not outright scams. To despair when the price of Bitcoin has "only" gone up 500% in the last year is very funny.

And it's happened to me too, eh, but if you think about it, it's a good laugh.

Actually, all news sources are biased to an extent. Information, knowledge, does not exist as detached from our preconceptions. Another thing is that there are outrageously biased sources of information.


I agree but in general, not just with the Afgan conflict.

I don't see mentioned that in poker, unlike other casino games, there is another reason to implement kyc, apart from the typical anti money laundering reason: to avoid collusion. If you don't identify individual players with a different identity each, you can have two or three players at a table who are playing together from the same place ( knowing what cards each one of them has.

Me too, I have not seen him answer the previous question:


I myself have used casinos for the privacy of my coins. When you deposit you do it from one address to one address of the casino, but when you withdraw, the casino sends it to you from another address different from your address which is also usually another address, so you lose track of it. They usually have one or a few addresses with a large balance, and the addresses that contain small deposits they consolidate from time to time.

So if you deposit today in a casino and withdraw the money tomorrow, most likely the money you deposited is still in the address you deposited it and the casino pays you from another address that has a large balance with only one input.

I don't agree with that. In every country in the world they force us to accept Fiat, they force us to pay taxes with Fiat, so for a country to do the same with Bitcoin seems great to me.

And the photo you put is a laugh, it is not the first one I see of "massive" protests and there's hardly a soul.