I'm afraid this is becoming the case. Trust in general is just being thrown around these days. I'm not saying the OP doesn't deserve the negative rating but, it seems on other notes people have been way to quick to pass judgment and give a negative. I can't think of any specific examples currently but, it's definitely happening.

He's removed a lot of his feedback in the past, or at least changed it from negative to neutral. For example, the whole giving spammers red trust thing. That was a forum issue which he took into his own hands and probably thinking about it now wasn't worthy of a red, but reporting those members for the staff to deal with them would of been a better approach.

Negative trust for account sale isn't normally removed though.

Well, demand is needed. A lot of these boards are covered by other forums anyway. This is a Bitcoin forum and isn't some sort of discuss everything. That would invite the wrong people in and people who just want to discuss random things other than Bitcoin. Many people were against the idea of having an altcoin section, but at least that's related.

The coding section would likely be people looking for help, and that can be done elsewhere. If it's related to programming and integrated a API then that actually fits here.

Off topic is probably fine for gaming related matters for the time being. Just because people have an interest in both gaming and cryptocurrencies doesn't mean that there needs to be a separate section for it. It all my years being here I can't remember too many discussions about gaming and it was normally just off topic discussions about a certain game or asking an opinion about the game.

You could argue that Bitcoin has already changed our world.

This isn't why Bitcoin has impacted the current market. This was already possible before Bitcoin even came into play. The key about Bitcoin is decentralization and how you control your funds. Money can't be just counterfeited and passed off as the real thing unlike fiat currencies.

Would be nice if other campaign/bounty managers followed this approach and were more strict with their participants because a lot of them are just left to do what ever they want and as long as they hit the requirements the managers don't care. Changes need to be made to assure that the managers are doing their jobs and actually managing.

I think it's best left how it is right now. Only sending notifications when details are changed on the account. Requiring a authentication email every time you log in would become very tedious. If it was optional then that would probably suit those who want extra security and those who want ease of access and not jump through loop holes every time they want to log in.

Depends on how they go about it and considering the reputation of Kaspersky then I would think they would be sending an encrypted private key and storing it. Only people with the password will likely be able to access it or they may use a system sort of like PGP.

Let's just hope that this will be optional and off by default. A lot of people purchasing these devices might not know that their key is being backed up automatically and it's always a good idea to have these sort of things off by default when it comes to cryptocurrencies.

This isn't an attack on cryptocurrencies like some people may think this is. This is a good call due to the amount of people being hurt financially by these sort of schemes. We've all seen how many ICOs turn out to be a scam, or collecting data from it's members by running fake sign ups or fake bounties. Malware has also been spread through these shams of a business.

You could say I'm excited to see those who do not believe in Bitcoin jump the boat and move along and stop spreading their shit around. Being serious though I couldn't care who has or hasn't trusted Bitcoin. It's not a matter of trust anymore due to the fact Bitcoin has already reached enormous prices. It's not really trusting the technology behind the tech rather than hoping it surges again.

A demerit or what ever you want to call it could very easily be abused. I'm hoping that this system currently in place once the merit sources have been added will be enough and those who do post quality content will be rewarded. Of course there's going to be a few people who aren't going to get rewarded right now just because there aren't enough merit sources currently. Although, theymos has stated that they will likely be hundreds of them once suitable people are found.

But, I'm against the demerit option for now. I feel it could very easily be abused even if it was limited by certain factors. If it was implemented it would probably need to be restricted to merit sources only to avoid abuse. Certain members would be targeted heavily otherwise. At least right now people can either get rewarded for their post or nothing happens at all. But, if someone disagrees with someone even though their point is valid then they may feel the need to demerit that person when that doesn't really achieve anything and likely will revolve into popularity contests.

Yes there's people at high ranks right now that don't post anything worthwhile but, that doesn't mean they should be punished by losing their rank. Sooner rather than later they will be easily noticeable by their lack of merit points anyway.

Depends what he means by that. If he means by that statement the currency which is used predominately then he may be right but, I'm not one for speculating on things which are out of my control. But, if he's referring to the only cryptocurrency then he's likely going to be wrong. There's always going to be other competing coins which I think is good for Bitcoin in a way.

Define big companies it could be argued that big companies have already started to adopt Bitcoin, some have since withdrew this due to the market instability recently and the fees issues. But, for example Steam is one of these big companies which is used by millions of people and were accepting Bitcoin before they pulled it recently due to the reasons above.

A lot of people who do use Bitcoin on their website, blog or what ever it may be just post their address for donations. Payment gateways do exist such as bitpay which are commonly used for selling goods for Bitcoin and possibly even services too.

In the nature of wordpress I don't think a highly sophisticated system needs to be used and posting your Bitcoin address it probably good enough. We don't always have to over complicate things for them to be good.

If you do have a genuine idea and it's original you'll likely need to get the person interested to sign a non disclosure contract. That's what's normally done in these types of situations where someone has an idea but, is wary of the person stealing the concept. Even then though I would only suggest doing this with trustworthy people. 

Yeah nice one for making this public information. I'll likely add him to my thread Spammers, rule breakers and exclusive bounty users  once I review his posts throughly. By the looks of it he certainly just participates in bounty campaigns and likely fits into the list.

Unless there's a obvious demand for it ie a lot of posts being reported but, not being dealt with then theymos isn't likely to change anything as he stated in the previous thread at the moment there just isn't enough demand for it. Same goes for any other local boards. If you want a new moderator then get reporting and show theymos that there needs to be someone actively dealing with the reports.

A quality post is a quality post and should be rewarded whether the thread is started by you or not. Continue to reward users who are making an effort. Maybe, it just so happens that your thread subjects encourage well thought out responses.

In my opinion as long as there's been a considerable amount of effort put into it they don't even have to be right about what they are saying and you also don't need to agree with what they are posting. Someone who rewards someone on the opposite end of the debate/discussion for their effort in explaining or what ever shows good character in my opinion.

Even though identifying these members is always a good thing, unfortunately these members really don't care about being branded red and those who do want to trade with these people don't care anyway. It's actually a shame and unless the rules are changed to prevent trading of accounts this is likely a lost cause. 

It's all well and good finding patterns but, getting enough evidence to prove 100% that these accounts should be tagged is very difficult. I think a lot of people are too eager around here to plaster their red mark everywhere. A lot of false positives have probably happened through this method.

Report these if you think they are breaking the rules. I'm only adding people who are higher than member. But, I will take a look at reporting these if their posts haven't been dealt with by the time I get around to it.

Thanks to everyone else for inputting too by the way.