In the years the fake "jvanname" has been posting here, he probably was never questioned as to whether he was even telling the truth about holding a Ph.D or being the person he claims to be, until I raised it. He cannot keep up the charade forever therefore he is now resorting to petty insults rather than holding up the facade. Maybe replying directly to him gives him the fuel he needs to keep posting here. Yes. JollyGood is a snitch, except that JollyGood only snitches on good people who have not done anything wrong. JollyGood loves spreading lies and rumors because it is evil.
On what flimsy foundation of self-righteousness do you dare to label yourselves "good people"? You claim your intellectual superiority, but your words speak volumes louder than your self-proclaimed titles: Jvanname is a troll toxic to the entire community, a mental case that calls out that we should all suffer and die a horrible death. Here's a quote: https://ninjastic.space/post/62933000 |
|
|
|
Yeah, in case all threads are self-moderated by default, there should also be an option in your profile settings to create standard and non self-moderated threads. If users abuse their rights and delete the posts of others without a valid reason, admins should have an option to remove the self-moderation ability of those members or punish them with temporary bans or in some other way. But considering that it creates additional workload, I doubt anything will change. If anything, this will go down as another suggestion that has been made but will probably not come to fruition (like so many before). At best, it might get listed to appear in the to-do list for the new forum that we do not know will ever be released. Having said that I do agree with you it will not be considered as a priority and nothing will change. Some users intentionally do not reply in self moderated topics when they are created by specific users (E.G. trolls), because they will end up deleting your posts they feel butthurt by. Thus it will be unfair if this feature was added, as users could reply to certain threads that isn't moderated by the op, and the op later goes on to change it to a self-moderated one and start deleting posts.
In summary, i'd like to know from the beginning if i am replying in a self moderated topic or not. Unless there are exceptional circumstances, I tend to avoid posting in threads that are started by those on my ignore list (including those considered trolls). Add to that the possibility of posting in their self-moderated threads then yes, I am one of those members that would most probably not post in threads they have created therefore I understand your point of view. |
|
|
|
This forum has thousands of members that contribute to it, does that mean if one member from here posts in a different crypto forum claiming that forum is wrong/bad/incorrect but this forum is right/good/correct does it mean that is a representative view of this forum? Everyone doing Wasabi advert supports Kruwed. Shameful! I am wearing a Wasabi signature but I do not support Kruw, I reported his despicable posts in that farewell thread and subsequently have added him to my ignore list. Kruw is not employed by Wasabi and there is no evidence they have ever used any of his code in any of their releases. Kruw is literally a nobody. He is trying to make himself relevant by posting about something that struck a chord with him (Wasabi) but he is a nobody and there is no connection between Kruw and Wasabi no matter how much he would like there to be. |
|
|
|
This thread is 4 pages long and I haven't read any other posts, so my apologies if my question is a repetition. Has anyone contacted the real person that this user is allegedly impersonating and asked if this is them posting on Bitcointalk? I am pretty sure it's not, but just in case. If it's a known University professor, there is surely a way to contact him, and if he is interested, he will reply back. I have not contacted him but asked this fake "jvanname" account to change the profile text in the real TikTok account to prove it was under his control. He declined stating I had to make a payment first because he alleged his time was worth money. Considering all the time he spends in the forum, it seems strange he would ask for payment however what is not surprising is that he did not update the profile (because he cannot as he dos not access to it). And regarding the ban, what forum rules is the person breaking by impersonating someone else? I am not aware of such rules, but I might be wrong. The admins aren't going to take action even if someone asks for money and scams other members. I don't agree with that, but that's what it is. You are right, that is what it is but I asked for the ban because exceptions can be considered. After all, he is dragging the name of someone through mud by pretending to be him. If a member claims to be a lawyer or doctor or police officer or student, it is irrelevant. Having said that, if someone claims to be a specific person while using a real name and then uses that real name in every post while deliberately being provocative and using profanities in an attempt to tarnish the reputation of that person, there should be a mechanism in place to report it. Furthermore, if the perpetrator asks for money in advance in order to prove he is whom he claims to be, that now means a financial aspect has been added. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, the "Kruw" account has not been banned but thankfully the "Bitcoin SV" account has been banned. I hope I played some part in that because I reported many of their posts were not appropriate. Before that thread was locked, Bitcoin SV posts were containing profanities and wishing death. Keeping that aside, to my knowledge "Kruw" is not (and has never been) part of the Wasabi team. I gave that account (Kruw) a neutral trust and added him to my ignore list. development team [...]
As far as I know, he is not and has never been on the development team. |
|
|
|
I would not cite it as rambling, it is a very good suggestion. If there is an option that allows a universal setting it might be productive however on the flip side what would happen if all threads were created with self-moderation by default and the box had to be unchecked in order to create the thread without moderation? I always forget to make it self-moderated at the first chance  and remember after creating the topic. Then I just delete it and make a new one. Imagine if there was a setting in our profiles that we could turn on to make new threads self-moderated by default? That way, you wouldn't have to bother remembering to tick the self-moderated topic option for each new discussion you create. You only do it once in your profile settings. Again, this shouldn't be available to all ranks or not at all. I am just rambling. |
|
|
|
|
These are the games taking place today Saturday 20th January:
Arsenal vs Crystal Palace
Brentford vs Nottingham Forest
There are 15 minutes remaining in the early kick-off, Arsenal are winning 3-0. Arsenal will get three points and then will move up to joint second in the Premier League table on 43 points alongside Manchester City and Aston Villa. Liverpool are leading with 45 points but this season will be one of closest title races in many years.
|
|
|
|
If he thinks by obtaining blocks of code from online sources and posting them here strengthens his case, he is wrong. I would go a step further and state that he is not the person he is claiming to be and he has been carrying on this charade for years. The person operating the "jvanname" account and signing-off all of his posts with a name that does not belong to him means he is impersonating the real person (and that real person is employed at the University of Florida). Words of wisdom noted, I already have him on my ignore list and have unwatched threads he has created. I've kept my mouth shut about this silly debate thus far and after this I will once again shut it, but if you think you're seriously making an impressive display of knowledge, you ain't my friend. The community is telling you so, too.
And guys, if you argue with a crazy person long enough it becomes hard for an outside observer to tell who the crazy person is. Words of wisdom. |
|
|
|
The mixer service would probably take steps of removing any links to the forum and that would be the best thing for all parties. If they will no longer be allowed to post their services here it does not mean their previous historical relationship with the forum should be erased. Personally, if they choose to keep links on their website pointing to the archive in this forum stating the forum no longer allows mixers to be promoted, I see no problem. If a service backlinks to Bitcointalk forum where it shows up as [banned], isn't it the responsibility of the service to explain this to it's customers? Yes, true, it's a policy change of Bitcointalk and likely not in favour of those services, but a website has still it's own responsibility for linking to external sites.
|
|
|
|
I cannot speak for others but in my opinion it is clear Fury will damage his legacy beyond imagination if he pulls out of the fight. Why would he play mind games for the sake of getting to this stage only to withdraw from the fight? I completely agree with you, something does not seem right about the way the lack of promotion is playing out but even more than that the lack of comments from both boxers has been noted too and I do not think it is down to them concentrating on their training. Letting it drag on without promo doesn't make any sense unless there is issues behind the scenes or they're just concentrating on the camp, but something still seems off to me. |
|
|
|
This is a different angle on what some members opt to do when they are leaving the forum (regardless of the reasons). I would agree, the less personal information you share, the better it is. A member not long ago said goodbye and did not disclose what the reason was but returned after a short time citing the situation now allowed him to spend time in the forum. Others have simple left without goodbye threads. Unexpected things happen all the time. For those that want to make announcements about their departure or those that want to remain silent, it is their choice but I would personally err on the side of caution and not make goodbye threads but that stance is a choice. I have reported disgraceful posts being made by "Bitcoin SV" and "Kruw", I hope all posts from them (and others) that are despicable get deleted and they receive some form of sanction. Some people take this forum way too seriously and that's the biggest mistake you can do here. If I were Leo, I wouldn't even create this thread. See what he did? Now he has to read the posts from his haters and get depressed or angry by them like that's what he needed.*
There were other people who died or left the forum without saying anything. That's for the best imo. The less personal information you share, the better it is...
*
“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
We are at war with our enemies even in our last seconds. You should never show your full hand to your opponents. The game continues till you draw your last breath. Fighting from the grave is a cool concept but is it necessary to make your enemies happy while you are alive?
If you want to make this right, just tell people that you lied. You ain't dying, tell the haters to go fuck themselves and disappear when you are ready.
|
|
|
|
I suggest (and no one reply to this please) that we let anyone who has negative words to say to leave them without reply or commentary from the community.
This is his memorial thread; not everyone is remembered fondly, but we don't need to sour memories by discussing reasons here. I think by far the majority of people here would agree with you. <cut>
Perhaps this is a sign from above, foreshadowing the death of BTC Still, this is not the appropriate place to have this discussion. If you don't see that, you are likely an insensitive sociopath. And if it's not a medical condition, then you're a lowlife creep and a disgrace to this community, and humanity in general. Same as that Kruw character. I reported that disgusting post made by Bitcoin SV and thankfully it has been removed. |
|
|
|
Without commenting on the situation with the raffle (as I have not looked in to it), there certainly is a trade for merits and accounts out there, I can think of one website where the forum was being mentioned and prices were set according to account rankings. Imagine being told you will receive a Hero or Legendary ranked account or 'x' amount of merits on the condition you send the money first but then suffer the indignity of getting scammed. If that were the case, where would the victim go? I have seen threads in the past where account buyers posted to say they were scammed but that defeats the object of anonymity if they are exposing themselves. Jesus, are people still buying/selling merits anywhere, not just on bitcointalk but on other platforms? Seems like it's been a long time since I've heard about crap like this. I'm actually curious as to what a single merit is going for on the black market, assuming such a market still exists.
Fuck that member. Even if he had an alt account with merits to give away, my guess is that it was a scam attempt or some other shenanigans.
|
|
|
|
He has every intention of wasting your time and will not engage in an adult conversation. The "jvanname" account has no intention of communicating with anybody in a cordial manner. His prime objective is obviously to use the account to tarnish/destroy the name of the staff member that works for the University of Florida and he does this by believing he has lied for such a length of time that he is believed without question. Also, since you are trying to offend us and call us names, what is even to point of censuring those insults you throw at us? Do you believe PhDs are not supposed to swear or does it have something to do with your experience at college?
I believe you are still on time not to get banned permanently of you showed some reasonable behavior, so let us have a conversation as the adults we both are, doctor. |
|
|
|
It has taken one decision from theymos to create a migration of several higher ranking member to at least one other crypto forum. They simply followed where the money went and to be honest most members here are here for the money too. Overall, I would assume he took that in to account before making the decision and would probably do it all over again even if he knew the outcome because he did not want mixers that do not use coinjoin advertised in the forum. The barometer to gauge the real impact of migration to other forums will not necessarily come down to what happens here because those migrating will keep posting here to earn whatever they can whilst they post over there to earn whatever they can, therefore though traffic should not decrease here but it will definitely increase there. As that (and other forums grow) this forum will not necessarily be the first place for crypto newbies to register. If we have this conversation after on year, it will be interesting to see exactly how much the competitors to this forum have grown versus the rate at which this forum has grown. Bitcointalk isn't a company. It's not operated for the sake of turning a profit and doesn't require revenue to continue existing; at least not for decades, or maybe even longer.
Bitcointalk is not a company and a forum without traffic is not a forum, it is a relic or a ruin, like the Roman ruins that people visit, not a forum. If hypothetically tomorrow there will be no more traffic on the forum, it will surely continue to survive because it will not need money, but it will not be a forum, it will be a ruin. |
|
|
|
That press conference (when he stated that he was not going to quit if the Manchester City owners lied to him) was in stark contrast to the press conference that he made when he was adamant he would quit immediately if the owners had lied to him. It was hilarious watching him change his mind but being unable to justify his actions. 115 charges is a serious matter. The only reason why UEFA could not proceed with their charges was because they related to a period of time which elapsed according to their own rules. The key thing being Manchester City were not found innocent or guilty, the case could not proceed because of a technicality. The Premier League does not have a time limitation based on their rules therefore Manchester City will not be let off the hook. ^ Not denying it's going to be a sad event in football if found guilty. And yup, I've already said that Guardiola was the one questioning the club when the shenanigans hit the news. It's some posts above...
I think there was a time when Guardiola almost called it quits with Man City but then the top brass prolly talked to him and assured him that their loophole was tight. Lmao. Guardiola went on to have a press conference a week later and said he wasn't leaving and that he still supports the club.
|
|
|
|
|
These are the semi-final games second leg fixtures:
Tuesday 23rd January
Chelsea vs Middlesbrough
Agg: 0-1
Wednesday 24th January
Fulham vs Liverpool
Agg: 1-2
Even though Middlesbrough managed that memorable win in the first leg, I think most would expect Chelsea to win the game on the night by a couple of goals and go through to the final.
As for Liverpool, they came back from a goal down to win at Anfield but I am expecting Fulham to cause an upset here and win the game. If they win 1-0 the away goals will not count therefore extra-time will be played and Liverpool should have enough energy in their players to get them to the final.
|
|
|
|
After all the issues Everton had with points deductions at the hands of the Premier League and with trying to fight of relegation as a results of losing 10 points, it will be a stunning season for them if they won the FA Cup. It took them a replay to get past Crystal Palace and it is early at the moment, they are not favourites but as long as they are involved they will have a chance. I will post all 3rd round results and 4th round fixtures later. Everton is in next round, after beating Crystal Palace last night, great goal by Gomes
wasn't easy, and interesting statistics feat - both teams had 11 shots overall, 5 on target, 51/49 possession, so totally equal
Nottingham passed into next round as well, beating Blackpool
Everton is facing Luton on 27.01. in next round, beatable team for sure, but will be more important to win over them in League match in February
|
|
|
|
It could be the case they (Fury and Usyk) will let all this drag on without much fanfare for several weeks more and then go on a publicity campaign to bring more of a spotlight on the fight. Also, eventually when the two boxers get on a stage to face-off at the weight-in, that will be a significant moment. If that is their plan (not wanting to overhype, I think their strategy will fail). If the teams behind the Fury vs Usyk fight are looking at the buzz surrounding the Joshua vs Ngannou fight, they have to accept there is a problem. I think there should be far more anticipation and excitement at the unification fight but Ngannou had added a new dimension to the heavyweight scene (for now at least). Well, I think the hype only started to pick up in the past few days. Before that there was hardly a whisper regarding this fight and it was not being mentioned as much as it should. Regarding who Fury will fight if he wins or who Usyk will fight if he wins, I think beyond Parker and Joshua (and now Ngannou) there are not many heavyweights out there that can either or fill a void.
Even if Usyk is the underdog, he cannot be that far behind because the high standards of Fury have dropped to unbelievably low levels. I still don't think there's been any hype. All we've had so far is a poster and no real comments from anyone involved or an undercard yet. The AJ/Ngannou fight is dominating talks so far and that fights even further away. They need to get the press conference sorted and that's when things will heat up. Fury will be a gobshite as usual wanting to grab headlines. |
|
|
|
I remember having created threads several times only to realise they were not self-moderated, it happens  I have to agree here. In my opinion, allowing the ability to retrospectively self-moderate threads is not a good idea. If a member overlooked making their thread self-moderated when it was created then they would have to either lock it in order to create an identical thread (which they should remember to make self-moderated otherwise they will repeat the initial mistake). Not a good idea. Imagine I create a topic today and then after 4 months I turn it into a self-moderated topic and delete all the posts of those who replied there. Scammers would love that so much. Trolls a like. And then everyone who cares so much about their total post count would be in an uproar, which would then light Meta on fire for at least a month with complaints. Don't get me wrong, there have been times when I've created a thread and then after reading some of the standard bitcointalk idiocy wished I could have switched it to a self-moderated one, but the idea of implementing the ability for members to do that would just be bad all around. Theymos no doubt realizes this and isn't likely to even consider it--kind of like many of the good suggestions that get brought up now and again. (just busting your iron balls, boss man) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
