It's self explanatory on the rating: Account sales encourage different types of shady behavior (scams, spam, account farming, et al.).
There is practically nothing good that can come out of this behavior as we've seen with scammers such as Quickseller. The forum policy is flawed for whatever reason.
Those doubting the validity of the assertion should look into bounty campaign abusers (most often sold/bought accounts that were farmed).  |
|
|
|
|
Should be moved to Meta and the user in question nuked. This isn't suited for the Reputation section.
|
|
|
|
How so, whenever the FUD campaign heated up the price went down massively. I lost money in the crash, and these trolls were partly responsible for creating the toxic envionment that scared traders.
Defamation does cause financial loss that is why there are laws against it, from a technical standpoint it's similar to theft or fraud.
So you're telling me I should sue pretty much any fool or news outlet that spread FUD about Bitcoin / crashed the price due to this FUD? I am just a concerned AMP token investor, and from my point of view I lost money partly due to the FUD. So I am a victim.
You don't seem familiar with the current condition of this forum.
Update: Added missing verb. |
|
|
|
This is not a scam of any kind. Move your thread to the Reputation section. There's an option to do this in the lower left corner of your screen (while viewing this thread).
You can try finding proof that these accounts are owned by the same person/people. That would help your case.
Well it's kind of a scam, because they have already caused a lot of damage to the community. No, that's not how this works. I can't take you seriously if you truly think that "spreading FUD = scamming". I am a concerned investor in the AMP token who already took a lot of damage due to these scumbags, but unfortunately it's not my job to pursue this matter.
Wouldn't surprise me if it were people from another token which also *took damage*. I have just exposed these scumbags, I'll leave the community to decide the next steps.
You didn't expose anything other than random users writing random stuff about a random token. |
|
|
|
I posted the links, he was announced as the escrow and they didn't inform anyone he was not the escrow anymore. They announced him here:
That is not what you've said. You specifically said in the ANN thread. An update post != ANN thread. they kept his name in their ANN thread as escrow. Again, don't need to believe me, ask SebastianJu himself if you don't believe, he is a highly respected escrow in this community.
|
|
|
|
Interesting story line and potential conspiracy theory (not that it would surprise me if it were the truth). Sry, I didn't notice this.
June 15, 2017 - SebastianJu posts about his removal from escrowing.
SebastianJu is removed from the thread. -- he was not removed from the thread
June 15, 2017 -4 to 5 hours later - ICO starts
SebastianJU posted some 4 or 5 hours only prior to ICO start, only then he came to know he was out. Only because of SebastianJU himself some people had time to read the thread and see he was out.
How was he not removed from the thread? You said the following: SONM dismissed SebastianJU as escrow just before the start of the ICO and didn't tell him, yet they kept his name in their ANN thread as escrow. Again, don't need to believe me, ask SebastianJu himself if you don't believe, he is a highly respected escrow in this community.
I'm asking until when it was left in the ANN thread that he was escrowing, i.e. when he was removed from it. |
|
|
|
|
This is not a scam of any kind. Move your thread to the Reputation section. There's an option to do this in the lower left corner of your screen (while viewing this thread).
You can try finding proof that these accounts are owned by the same person/people. That would help your case.
|
|
|
|
Hi Lauda, all I know came afterwards by reading previous messages in that long thread, if you click the link I sent in my second msg ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1845114.msg19574248#msg19574248) you will see what SebastianJU wrote himself, please take the time to read that and some further msgs (and believe me, many invested without knowing SebastianJU was removed in a timely manner because it was just before the ICO in the same day!!!). I need a summarized timeline. Could you fill this in? June 15, 2017 - SebastianJu posts about his removal from escrowing.
date - SebastianJu is removed from the thread.
date +1 - ICO starts
Almedia, can I ask you to focus on facts please.
He has been doing that. You're confused. |
|
|
|
Example: Today >>> 9/12/2017 18:13:20 so at "18:13:20" server time the new period starts?
Time at which the activity updates. I guess you could say the new period starts as soon as it finishes updating, so yes. |
|
|
|
You mean, the same way that you've produced your own *working* hash function?  You imply you can break it? It was flawed and on a level of code that is often produced by high-school developers. MIT did the job for you: https://medium.com/@neha/cryptographic-vulnerabilities-in-iota-9a6a9ddc4367. We found that IOTA’s custom hash function Curl is vulnerable to a well-known technique for breaking hash functions called differential cryptanalysis, which we then used to generate practical collisions. We used our technique to produce two payments in IOTA (they call them “bundles”) which are different, but hash to the same value, and thus have the same signature.
|
|
|
|
If you post a whitepaper in 2015, maybe its your point to prove or show a network without a Coordinator?
We are working on that and will prove everything in due time. This is how it works in the reality without magic beans. You mean, the same way that you've produced your own *working* hash function? |
|
|
|
Grrrr.... Maybe wait for 15.x if you're on a 64Bit Mac?
Wait for the final version. If that does not work, then report the issue on Github. Complaining about it anywhere else is inherently useless. PANTS RECEIVED
09/12 gembitz
09/12 cAPSLOCK
09/12 jojo69
09/12 RealMachasm
09/12 Lauda
09/12 d_eddie
09/12 xhomerx10
*Now accepting short pants, track pants and trousers.
I'll take a bite. Why color are my pants? |
|
|
|
I admit there’s evident logic in your statements, it’s also clear you’ve faced this problem and discussion before.
I think you will have trouble finding someone with my experience/knowledge on the matter. I've been banned for this very same thing, was moderating the forum for a few months and managed (or am managing) some signature campaigns. I've also participated in a number of previous discussions on this matter. Kitty has attained wisdom.  I assume you have your own sight of how it could be solved. Curious to hear.
I could rehash a number of things from previous threads, but what's the point when the administration doesn't even want to comment on the problem publicly let alone solve it? |
|
|
|
Then when I see this (same for all wallet.dat), it means only 1 address in the wallet. Then i check on an explorer and that's it?
I would say yes, that is the expected behavior. I can't fully confirm it with a fresh test though. Have you found your money yet? |
|
|
|
Feels like lift off. Everybody hand me your pants. No time to explain...
Not sure that you really want my pants, but I'm game if you are! By the way, fees are down to 90 sats per byte. https://bitcoinfees.21.co/People are still largely overpaying due to bad fee estimation from their wallets. You could likely get a 10-20 sat/byte transaction confirmed very quickly right now (if not in the next block). Just make sure you're already using Segwit. Keep an eye out here as well: https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Feels like lift off. Everybody hand me your pants. No time to explain...
Bump Sounds about right: Bitstamp | Total bids: 60649077 USD. Total asks: 3011 BTC. Ratio: 20138.58681 USD/BTC. | Data vintage: 0.0182 seconds
It's time to move back to the rightful valuation of >$5k.  |
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong here IMO. Your post should even be removed for that ref. link spam IMO:
This thread is another example (as is the one the quote is from) of you opening a new thread without actually reading into how the forum works. |
|
|
|
SONM dismissed SebastianJU as escrow just before the start of the ICO and didn't tell him, yet they kept his name in their ANN thread as escrow. Again, don't need to believe me, ask SebastianJu himself if you don't believe, he is a highly respected escrow in this community.
Shadiness on a quite high level; I'm certain that there is a fair amount of people who invested in belief that the project was escrowed by him (or just a third party in general). Provide a confirmatory statement from SebastianJu that this really has happened, and a list of accounts that are related to the project. Do you know how much time has passed between his kick and before he was finally removed? |
|
|
|
The idea is inherently useless. Real world equivalent to the *idea*: "We have a trash problem; there's so much of it. What do we do?!? I know, let's take all the garbage from place A to place B so that we can't see it each day. That's a great solution!".
You know moving garbage from one place to another is not so bad idea at all, that’s what we all regularly do in our life. You move it far away from the place which your reside (the forum). You don't keep moving your garbage from 1 room to another or creating small compartments in your house to keep this garbage forever. I think it will help alot. And making up/down vote option available only to legendary and hero members? Of course status just means activities not quality but when I have a question or need help, I get satisfactory and quite objective answer from these guys. They are more than familiar with the forum and have better experience with bitcoin that help alot for newbies like me.
Another bad idea. Most (maybe not the former) legendary and hero members nowadays are farmed/bought accounts and there is absolutely no way to generalize them in an expectancy of reasonable voting. |
|
|
|
It's possible to set the fee to 0, but your transaction might never go through.
Change the settings in Electrum so that you are able to set a fee manually.
Unecessary advice that can be used to stab yourself in the foot with the knowledge/experience that OP has. if you make a lot of trans at same time your fee will be so high i think this is reason
No. That is absolutely wrong and has nothing to do with how the fee system works. Next time do a lot more reading before you post anything. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
