|
Despite there being more hype and thus more people flowing into bitcoin now, this situation is no different than the previous ATH a few years ago. Based on how that played out (people flowed in and then out when the price started dropping) and in the absence of anything "big" occurring, bitcoin will most likely follow the same trend and keep dropping over the period of maybe a year until it reaches something like 400-600... When's the next halving? That will play a factor in bitcoins price as well.
|
|
|
|
|
I love threads that say "this is the real price" etc. There is no real price. Crypto has no intrinsic value, just what people are willing to pay for it. The only price point that one could make an argument for as being the "real" price, would be what miners need to be able to keep their operations reasonably profitable. Given that, the "real" price would be around $400-$600 I think. After the old 1000 ATH, while bitcoin was on it's slow march downward, I did some rough calculations and ended up with a number around $200... And that's roughly what bitcoin got down to and stayed down in that area for several months. Take that for what you will but for some of us that have been around here a long time, we see that as a real possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Pleased to see this has been resolved.
|
|
|
|
So weissratings have decided to also do cryptocurrencies now. https://weisscryptocurrencyratings.com/Bitcoin is rated C+ overall. I can certainly understand that sort of rating given it's made up of a variety of things which include stuff like risk, volatility etc. I REALLY don't get how they then turn around and give etherium a B and some "coins" that are nothing more than pipe dreams or ETH tokens, a higher rating. But there's only a handful of those and the rest are "real" coins. Anyway, I just wanted to highlight that Cloak is on the list as well which is nice to see with an overall rating of C-. Most coins were rated between C- and C+. |
|
|
|
So, in order to increase it we need to make quality post for the readers to like it. Unless some people question someone's merits and so mods take a look at their account to see if there's any abuse going on, giving merits to someone is not going to be moderated. So you really don't have to write "quality" posts. Most people are going to end up treating it like "likes". They like what you posted, they might give you some merit. I've got 1 now. For a 1 line post that I would in no way consider "quality". I caught someone ban evading and called them out and apparently someone liked that (they probably don't like the guy) and gave me merit. |
|
|
|
i but i do feel that there should be demerit as well for post that are considered "shittypost" or "spamming post" rather than negative trust to such post. Absolutely not. Do you know what happens when some popular youtuber talks shit about someone? All their fans go out and harasses that person. They go and post shit on their twitter, they dislike their videos etc. So you go into some coin thread and post some negatives about it or whatever and what do you think is going to happen? You're going to get bombed with demerits from all the true believers, sock puppets etc etc. |
|
|
|
Wow, what a brilliant idea. Great work, Theymos and crew! A thought just occurred to me which I'm sure occurred to the Admin crew before instilling this new merit system, but I'll ask it anyway to make sure it's covered. Are there controls in place to prevent someone from granting merit to their own post?
I know this is all new and shiny and so people are going to play with it.. But giving merit to someone who's already legendary for a post they did 2-3 years ago?
You're over thinking it. Merit isn't worth something to the account holder once they've reached top status levels. Merit is a gift you can give to others to reward their contribution to this community. It's not any sort of "gift" when it's tied to a person being able to rank up their account. There's a limited amount of it available every month. So giving some of that to someone that doesn't "need it", isn't really being responsible with it. |
|
|
|
But giving merit to someone who's already legendary for a post they did 2-3 years ago? Really?
I got merit for a thread I made in 2016 regarding a problem that is still relevant. The thread itself is on the first page of this very section and is updated (edited) to stay relevant. Do I have to give those merits back? If so, where do I send them. I'm sorry for hogging fame off something I did years ago. Wont ever happen again. You're not a legendary yet. I don't know what your post is about but if you keep it updated then I'm certainly fine with that. The post I'm referring to was not yours. But is this the sort of thing we're going to see now. People running around patting all their friends on the back for posts they did years ago. Is that really what it's supposed to be? |
|
|
|
|
I know this is all new and shiny and so people are going to play with it.. But giving merit to someone who's already legendary for a post they did 2-3 years ago? Really? If some good ol boys are going to use it to give ppl that don't need it even more merit, then what use is it for those that can actually use it? At the very least I would strongly suggest removing that as a possibility. In fact, since people are incapable of acting responsibly, I would suggest coming up with some scheme where a person has to spread it around to people with different ranks.
|
|
|
|
The coin has been pretty much dead since BobSurplus did his thing and left it in ashes.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The coin is way far from being dead. Feel free to join the slack channel, Most of the communication is happening there. Really? What I see is code that, other than some bug fixes and a few upgrades, hasn't had much done with it since release. I pop in here from time to time and hear the dev isn't doing anything.. maybe he will one day.. yada yada yada. I was here at the beginning and watched what happened. In all this time, it's gone nowhere. But if you have true believer syndrome, then carry on. I just check in every few months to see who's still holding onto a dream. OMG ,go home mate you are drunk. Prove me wrong by showing me all the new features etc that have been coded and released and are on github. Give me a list of all the businesses that have added (and removed) the coin as a payment method over the last 3-4 years. Show me anything that really shows, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is going to be a real future for the coin. |
|
|
|
My goal when adding people to the Default Trust network was to help clean up the garbage posting on this forum. I understand people are all worked up over sea of red that ensued after my adding The Pharmacist and actmyname to DT2. I would love to hear some suggestions on how to make this fair for everyone. The useless posting makes this place pretty much useless for most people and it needs to get fixed. Most of the red users I have seen are guilty of shit posting for pay. I have also seen some suggestions that sounded good like drop a red for a week and if they clean it up remove the red and leave a neutral. I think everyone should be able to join a campaign and earn some coins, but the spam is out of control and no one can seem to fix it so far...
Maybe I was wrong to add people to fight spam? So far I see no reason that negative trust can not be used to stop these spammers. If I leave a neutral then they are free to continue spamming etc... I look forward to some ideas on what to do here. If you want to have something like this work, you need to have a crystal clear, unambiguous set of guidelines for what should and should not be flagged across the board (those running sig campaigns or not). The people assigned to it need to be capable of removing their emotions from the job and apply the rules completely objectively. From the looks of it, this is not the case right now. Having said that, these sorts of things rarely work out mostly because human beings have a hard time being objective and not inserting their own personal opinions into something like this. Especially as some relish the "power" they hold over others and start to abuse it. Instead, the whole thing should be pushed back to those that are paying the "shit posters". They're the ones that should be policing the posts and not paying shit posters. Then your crew could review the posters of various campaigns and if they find the campaign is not policing the posts adequately, they lose their sig campaign privileges for some period of time. Just a thought off the top of my head. |
|
|
|
I looked at that guys posts and I don't see this "in the case of all the spammers that I have tagged, the quality is the same: a big ol' lump of diarrhea.". All I see is just a typical user having a variety of discussions with people. First off, that's an old rating. Secondly, I'm not taking it off. Do you know why? Go ahead and look through those two-liner tiny posts after the most recent two (which are way longer than his regular posts). If you need a link, here: https://archive.is/5lkD1If you're simply repeating what someone said 2 pages ago, what's the point? Why even bother? You're not contributing to anything. And you certainly shouldn't treat signature campaigns like a job. I looked at about 2 months worth of his posts around that time frame and for the most part, just see regular stuff being posted. Frankly, a lot of his stuff had a hell of a lot more value than a lot of other people I see posting. But perhaps I don't understand this whole thing. i.e. you can post whatever you want even if it's completely worthless as long as you aren't part of a sig campaign. But if you are, then we'll apply some arbitrary standard to you that will vary from person to person who has this power over you. |
|
|
|
|
The problem with anything like this is that you end up with the "old boys club" type of thing. All the friends giving each other merit etc and the outsiders getting next to none. And of course there's the "I agree with you and so will give you merit" that will happen the majority of the time. It's a nice idea but it requires humans acting responsibly... which they don't...
|
|
|
|
Here's the deal. People who I tag consistently post garbage. Will I say that the post hilariousandco was an amazing post? Fuck no.
It's bordering on irrelevant. The sarcasm was used to half-answer a question and poke fun at someone. But am I going to give him a negative trust for it? Not really.
The quality of his other posts counteracts that. However, in the case of all the spammers that I have tagged, the quality is the same: a big ol' lump of diarrhea.
Didn't know people were allowed to use Trust to rate people for their posts. Until I read this post. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2819050.0I looked at that guys posts and I don't see this "in the case of all the spammers that I have tagged, the quality is the same: a big ol' lump of diarrhea.". All I see is just a typical user having a variety of discussions with people. |
|
|
|
|
This would be better off in the Meta section so maybe some mods etc will see it. Frankly, the whole trust thing is screwy on this site if that guy can make himself the content police and use the trust rating the way he did.
|
|
|
|
The coin has been pretty much dead since BobSurplus did his thing and left it in ashes.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The coin is way far from being dead. Feel free to join the slack channel, Most of the communication is happening there. Really? What I see is code that, other than some bug fixes and a few upgrades, hasn't had much done with it since release. I pop in here from time to time and hear the dev isn't doing anything.. maybe he will one day.. yada yada yada. I was here at the beginning and watched what happened. In all this time, it's gone nowhere. But if you have true believer syndrome, then carry on. I just check in every few months to see who's still holding onto a dream. |
|
|
|
 Pretty sloppy community, that doesn't promise much. The competition at verge thread would not hesitate to promote their supported coin.lol The coin has been pretty much dead since BobSurplus did his thing and left it in ashes. |
|
|
|
He was singled out by gangsters who have competing altcoin projects because they didn’t like his analysis which pointed out the flaws in their projects. Let’s see if he attempts to ban those who make criticisms of his project or if he addresses criticisms rationally and factually, admitting any lapses or errors. And singled out by some of the mods who don’t like a person who is confident. Also he was attempting to cross-link from the numerous duplicate threads on similar topics, in order to help readers gain some coherency of issues. The link above to Meta contains all the details for any readers who want to judge for themselves. Reviewing the link to Meta above, you were offended by his very profitable analysis about SegWit, which is presumably why you started attacking him personally (rather than debating the facts about SegWit, BCH, etc). You’re focused on his personality traits (and frankly picking on a man who was incredibly ill with Tuberculosis and MRI-confirmed cysts all over his liver, spleen, and kidney causing delirium and massive fatigue and so I hope you’re proud of your statements about his lack of productivity), not on his technical arguments and capabilities. I hope that works out as well for you, as his capabilities have worked out for him. The proof is in the pudding Sir. (note as for the picking on a man who he was gravely ill, then telling him “despite the fact he's a grown man responsible for his own actions”, that’s not very masculine. If you’re really AnonyMint’s elder, then you shouldn’t be talking smack, because much elder than him is when men decline significantly in all athletic metrics. I mean you don’t see Lebron James talking smack and then not showing up face-to-face to test his masculinity. It’s analogous to not being very masculine to pick on crippled kids instead of other men who are at your competitive level. IOW, grow up and stop the feminine bitching/trolling from behind the safety of the Internet. As @r0ach explained, that is what females do is run away and hide while the men fight to death to see which man can go impregnate her. Men talk for analyzing and to do important actions.) The forum has some “know-it-alls” who are flippantly offended by expertise, without first doing their own research to confirm their often erroneous, presumptuous flippant judgments. And gangsters who for example use a person’s chronic illness(es) to attack a person’s reputation, expertise, and skill level. Whatever. In any case, the point remains there will be no direct communication here because of that outcome. Let it rest, can’t you? If we could, we would close this thread, because its underhanded to ban someone then continue a derogatory thread where he can no longer defend himself. AnonyMint is not the victim. He is the victor. I’m just responding to @d5000 about why there will not be official updates on this subforum where a certain mod runs the show. And congratulations for yet again managing to destroy productivity by inciting a necessarily long-winded, detailed rebuttal. You’re so expert at that. Which is yet another reason to not have official communications here where the moderation and curation features are not sufficiently sophisticated and decentralized (i.e. a self-moderated thread is not objective, but an unmoderated thread has no curation, and that is why AnonyMint proposed a better alternative in Meta which he is now implementing). In a decentralized moderation/curation paradigm, I would simply mark your uselessly inflammatory/truculent post as unproductive and then everyone that trusts my curation decisions would not by default see your post. They could still turn off the filter if they wanted to see all the noise and check to make sure they still trust my curation decisions. And no one would be required to choose me as their curation filter. And then the math/algorithm for making those choices automatic. There are 100s of more good ideas like that in AnonyMint’s brain. Lol. After reading some of "your' posts it's clear you're trying to avoid your ban again. Good luck that with. |
|
|
|
There are updates if you’re resourceful enough to look. Wow... there are lot of OG's in this thread
AnonyMint isn’t allowed to have an official user account on this forum site BCT to give you the information directly. He is permabanned ( archived) for telling the truth too often about flaws in projects and correctly predicting LTC from $6 to $300 and other such transgressions. He was banned for breaking the forum rules. but go ahead and continue making him out to be a victim despite the fact he's a grown man responsible for his own actions. Yeah we see the “I’m the defender of absolute truth” button pinned to your lapel, did you become oblivious to your own short-sightedness. How exactly do you think you’re helping the situation? What Christian productivity are you helping enable or are you stirring up trouble? The quoted link to Meta above contains his responses to that allegation, including your condescending/presumptuous attitude from back then on clear display. I moved the rest of this post to Meta where it belongs, which elaborates on why there will be no official updates in this subforum (and to avoid BCT as a community building medium due to the highly dysfunctional trolling and unproductive “get rich quick” focus).
i think it should be around $7000 - $8000 strong demand will hold the crash
Based on what? Last time it went all the way down to around break even ($200) for miners despite people like you saying.. oh.. it will never go under 500. Oh.. There's strong demand and it won't go under $400.. blah blah blah. No one knows shit and it can make it's all the way back down again which, after the halving is probably now around $400-$600. Why? Cause as long as it is slowly going down (which is what happened last time), people lose interest and leave the market. The vast majority are looking to get rich over night and don't have what it takes to wait it out over some years. OMG you’re sooo expert and deservedly arrogant/smug? Umm, what if there’s more confidence now that Bitcoin is really a thing people all over the world see as real, unlike in 2013 when it was some toy that could just go poof at any time. The HODL demand is more intense by now. See the flattening of the regression fit chart. The majority (which are the greater fools) create the overshoots to the upside and downside, but the core HODL demand increases as adoption broadens. Duh. Must have hit a soft spot with you given all the personal attacks and the PM. Wow, maybe you forgot to take some meds or something today. Carry on though, you're dismissed as not being worth any more time. Edit: Checked out some of your other posts. Once again you're trying to avoid your ban. So sad. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
