<…>
Quite a track for bounty hunting, with cero added value towards the forum itself, but at least all his posts are self-contained on Altcoin Bounty threads. We could actually find grandfathered active Legendary accounts with the similar bounty hunting patterns. It’s their prerogative, although from a discussion and learning point of view, they don’t really follow a path to emulate. |
|
|
|
<...>
Tenía la duda acerca del contravalor utilizado si haces la operativa de esta manera, dado que puede pasar tiempo entre el momento de venta y el momento del retiro del efectivo. Por lo que se ve, el valor es el del momento de la venta en la web. Si cuando vas a efectuar el retiro el BTC ha subido o bajado, éste hecho no afecta el montante que puedes retirar. Como sistema, entiendo que la ventaja es que el tiempo de la TX lo pasas en casa, y no delante del cajero (pudiendo llevar a ser más o menos largo según los fees elegidos). Menos estrés ... |
|
|
|
<…> Are forum contributors responsible for alerting us if we make an unintentional mistake by failing to understand the rules, or will contributors ignore us immediately after reporting a post?
It’s really no one’s responsibility but that of the poster to comply with whatever restrictions may apply. Some people may point out some wrongdoing, whilst others simply report it, and that’s that. As @Oshosondy pointed out, some cases may not see the light (be reported) until weeks, months or even years have gone by, especially cases where plagiarism is involved. I’d still vouch for clearer visible warnings when posting (i.e. below the emoji row), which would be self-explanatory on its own. |
|
|
|
Este caso que he visto es un tanto inverso. No le ofrecieron invertir en bitcoin, sino que la codicia le llevó a vender sus 14,35 BTCs para invertir en humo: - La persona en cuestión vio un video ofreciendo grandes retornos por invertir en acciones y participaciones. Le interesó, y cumplimentó un formulario de contacto. - Contactaron con él, y desembolsó 250 libras como punto de partida de inversión. Los autores de la llamada además contaban con una web con datos "convincentes". - Más llamadas, más inversiones ojipláticas, venta (o transferencia diría) de 14,25 BTC para seguir metiendo más en la máquina de la codicia. Resultado: desplumado de todo. Y eso que la persona en cuestión tiene estudios (ingeniero químico), un master en informática, un negocio, etc. La codicia no tiene fondo … Ver: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58424832 |
|
|
|
<…>
I too tend to report them for being cero added value post. Occasionally, if the account is a Newbie or so, I may be in the mood to try to point out why that type of post is of now value. Some change their habits, most don’t. Since they can be reported for what they are, there doesn’t seem to be any need for a change (ideally though, all copy/pasted text could/should be quoted for better visual distinction, even when a link is provided). |
|
|
|
A couple of days ago, I saw an article on a survey performed by the Central American University (UCA), whereby over two thirds of the population of El Salvador are opposed to bitcoin being a currency there. 1.281 people took part in the survey, and the technical details on how the survey population was drafted seemed ok (you need to look at the survey itself to see this information). Part of the conclusions state that 90% of the people there do not really understand bitcoin/Bitcoin, and 80% did not place much trust in it, or none at all. 70% believe that their legal system (Asamblea Legislativa) should revoke the Bitcoin Law. 95,9% believe bitcoin should, in any case, be voluntary in accepting payments, not mandatory. The survey (see pdf below in Spanish) goes on to depict other socio-economic factors, as well as more bitcoin related matters. The numbers do not match those seem on protests in El Salvador, but I’m pretty sure that, for the most, the population is still in the blue with regards to bitcoin. See: https://uca.edu.sv/iudop/wp-content/uploads/Boletin-BTC-Coyuntura-2021-2.pdfhttps://www.nasdaq.com/articles/majority-of-salvadorans-do-not-want-bitcoin-poll-shows-2021-09-02 |
|
|
|
<…>
If Merits were to be dependent on the level of Activity one has, they’d be rather much redundant, and would not contribute to reducing spam by incentivising decent content, which is one of the main drivers behind the Merit System. Accounts prior to the Merit System kick-off did receive their initial Merits as a kind of airdrop, equivalent to their rank at the time (i.e. Member -> 10 Merits, Full Member -> 100 and so forth). That took place on the 25/01/2018, and was a one time event to provide consistency to the existing account’s rank at the time. Merits can’t be sent. This is a typical misconception made by many (I believe I thought they were too when I started). The Merit counter never decreases (unless you’ve been really naughty). What you can send are sMerits (sendable merits), which have been discussed both in prior posted content on this thread, and referenced links (no need therefore for me to go into details). |
|
|
|
He procedido a actualizar los listados mostrados en los primeros posts, con la relación de todos los meritados en nuestro foro local, con datos a 03/09/2021. El total de sMéritos otorgados en nuestro foro local es de 9.985, acorde a la siguiente distribución: año mes nMerits
2021 9 29 (mes parcial)
2021 8 426
2021 7 419
2021 6 280
2021 5 258
2021 4 235
2021 3 217
2021 2 168
2021 1 171
2020 12 217
2020 11 306
2020 10 306
2020 9 198
2020 8 153
2020 7 182
2020 6 175
2020 5 420
2020 4 200
2020 3 209
2020 2 301
2020 1 292
2019 12 265
2019 11 208
2019 10 147
2019 9 194
2019 8 147
2019 7 237
2019 6 252
2019 5 147
2019 4 150
2019 3 213
2019 2 160
2019 1 192
2018 12 172
2018 11 217
2018 10 235
2018 9 359
2018 8 140
2018 7 281
2018 6 127
2018 5 170
2018 4 161
2018 3 146
2018 2 279
2018 1 224
¡En agosto de 2021 hemos logrado un ATH (por los pelos)! |
|
|
|
|
Actualizadas las listas en el OP, a fin de reflejar los miembros del foro que cualifican con los criterios reflejados en el OP.
Actualmente, en las citadas listas tenemos con <= 20% méritos para escalar de rango (la Actividad puede o no haberse logrado):
- 2 Hero Members (en camino hacia Legendary) -> @paxmao y @tomahawk9
- 1 Sr. Member (en camino hacia Hero)
- 1 Full Members (en camino hacia Sr. Member)
- 2 Members (en camino hacia Full Member)
- 1 Jr. Members (en camino hacia Member)
A poco que puedan postear, tendremos dos Legendarios más en el foro local.
|
|
|
|
He procedido a actualizar el listado de los top 100 hilos meritados en nuestro foro local, así como el documento Google Sheet con la relación completa de todos los hilos meritados en nuestro foro local, y los top 50 hilos meritados en los últimos 60 días. Datos a 03/09/2021. Mi idea es ir refrescándolo cada mes aproximadamente. En total se han otorgado en nuestro foro local: * Número de Méritos: 9.985 * Número de Enviadores distintos: 196 * Número de Receptores distintos: 494 * Número de Hilos Meritados: 1.972 * Número de Posts Meritados: 5.246 La información también se puede consultar aquí (actualización semanal): https://public.tableau.com/shared/RSGZCW2YR?:display_count=y&:origin=viz_share_linkVeo que estamos prácticamente en los 10K méritos recibidos en nuestro foro local, si es que no se han otorgado ya (mis datos son de las 2AM). A ver quién será finalmente el agraciado en concreto con la recepción del mérito 10K LE … |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for pointing those out. Both are now fixed:
- I’m pretty sure that the date filter on the first chart did work before, as I’ve used it every now and then. It is back to normal now.
- The second chart is now also fixed, and is related to a bug that happens every now and then on some of the charts, whereby I update the underlying imported data tables, and the chart "decides" to give the values a skip, be it for those not on the default filter, or for those that are displayed due to additional datapoints in the timeframe.
These are odd behaviours, and there are two or three I already manually fix every week before publishing due to this type of misbehaviour on Tableau (despite setting the property to always display values). I believe the solution is creating another object that is exactly the same, and replacing the current one with the new one, but I’ve never got down to it.
Note: Any post related variable (post count, merit/post) for the Russian board is unreliable, and has been so with more or less precision for most of 2021. The reason is that, due to the nature of how I obtain the post count (from the forum stats) heavy retrospectively deleted posts affect these variables for the current month. The Russian local board suffers frequent post/thread deletions for what I presume is a clean-up, and thus render these varibles unreliable.
|
|
|
|
<…>
I’ve updated all the tables in the first 4 posts, alongside the Google Sheet doc referenced in the OP. I didn’t check the before and after values for all the lists, but you’ve certainly scaled on the most earned merits in a 30 day running window, which I luckily did not update last week-end, since the implied date interval went through all the way to the 31/08/2021 (thus needing this week's data). |
|
|
|
Data as of 03/09/2021Updated the lists in the OP (and subsequent post) to reflect the forum members that still qualify in each of those lists. Currently, on those lists there are, lacking <= 20% merits to rank-up (activity may not be met though): - 40 Heroes (on their way to Legendries) - 69 Sr. Members (on their way to Heroes) - 51 Full Members (on their way to Sr. Members) - 46 Members (on their way to Full Members) - 208 Jr. Members (on their way to Members) Added this week (6): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
2722098 seek3r Active 1417 630 N 802 Hero Member New Era Newbie =+9 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2722098
662559 dwyane36 Active 3358 1876 Y* 800 Hero Member Hero Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=662559
1035086 NIZZAONE Active 612 612 Y 211 Full Member Full Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1035086
2747752 MAAManda Active 1053 504 Y 206 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2747752
2818190 Bollexz1 Active 636 462 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2818190
1653159 tinopener Semi-active 287 210 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1653159
(*) this week (11): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
943729 skarais Active 3008 1498 - 1006 Legendary Sr. Member =+1 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=943729
1478835 MoparMiningLLC Active 4799 1092 - 1000 Legendary New Era Newbie =+24 / =0 / -1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1478835
1276008 Rengga Jati Active 2745 994 Y* 504 Hero Member Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1276008
2873783 Pokapoka124 Active 524 280 N 268 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2873783
2745549 decodx Active 1212 448 Y 105 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2745549
954323 m.lov Active 136 136 N 101 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=954323
2243418 alanst Active 85 85 N 107 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2243418
2983978 Eclipse33 Active 80 80 N 28 Member New Era Newbie =+3 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2983978
373107 fugit00 Active 62 62 N 12 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=373107
2814688 BitKongy Active 119 119 N 10 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2814688
3300239 Newlifebtc Active 78 56 N 10 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3300239
(*) Due to enough merits for the next rank, or being banned.
|
|
|
|
Update 03/09/2021:The dashboard gives you access to anyone’s complete merit history in the TX tab, surpassing the 120 day limit. Link: BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard. Updated the Merit Dashboard to reflect the most recent sMerit available data: Total sMerit: 972.379 Total TXs: 527.575 From Users: 23.743 To Users: 40.646 minDate: 2018-01-24 22:12:21 maxDate: 2021-09-03 02:21:52 Aggregate awarded sMerit for the last complete week (23/08/2021 .. 29/08/2021) is 6.995, which is up 11,16% from the previous week. In addition, there are 3 new Legendary and 1 new Hero Members this week. efialtis -> Legendary from New Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off. MoparMiningLLC -> Legendary from New Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off. skarais -> Legendary from Sr. Member during Merit System kick-off. Rengga Jati -> Hero Member from Member during Merit System kick-off. Note:
-Copper Members and non-native ranks (staff, etc) are displayed as real (regular) ranks.
|
|
|
|
<…>
Paypal ha implementado la misma mecánica de compra, gestión y venta que en EEUU, tal y como indicaba en un post anterior. Por ellos, bajo el punto de vista de negocio, lo harían en todas partes donde están operativos. No obstante, las distintas normativas de cada país y su manera de clasificar y considerar las criptomonedas lleva a que su implementación deba ser gradual, estudiando país por país para ver a qué aspectos legales de han de atender. No es tan sencillo … |
|
|
|
He visto referenciado en artículos de hoy, una encuesta de la Central American University (UCA), por la cual más de dos tercios de los Salvadoreños rechaza el uso de bitcoin como divisa de curso legal. Los encuestados son 1.281 personas. El tipo de muestreo de la ficha técnica parece correcto. Se indica a su vez que el 90% de los encuestados no entiende bien el bitcoin, y el 80% no confiaba o confiaba poco en él. El 70% piensa que los su uso como divisa debería ser rechazado por la Asamblea Legislativa. El 95,9% opina que bitcoin debería ser aceptado de manera voluntaria, no de forma obligatoria. La encuesta es mucho más amplia en términos económicos que sobrepasan el alcance de la Ley del Bitcoin, adentrándose en el terreno socioeconómico de El Salvador. Si alguien la quiere ojear, he localizado el pdf abajo enlazado. Ver: https://uca.edu.sv/iudop/wp-content/uploads/Boletin-BTC-Coyuntura-2021-2.pdfhttps://www.nasdaq.com/articles/majority-of-salvadorans-do-not-want-bitcoin-poll-shows-2021-09-02 |
|
|
|
|
Yo diría que no hay nada nuevo del todo bajo el sol (sí adaptado al entorno cripto lógicamente), pero si un aumento del volumen de gente dedicada a intentar sisar a los demás, auspiciado por las posibilidades y facilidades que da el poder escudarse detrás de elementos semi-anónimos (correos, webs, llamadas por IP, etc.), y a lomos de la nueva ola donde hay ecos de riquezas cacareadas en los medios que aún suenan, y cantidades ingentes de desconocedores del subyacente.
|
|
|
|
<...>
I recall a thread on Russian Voters’ Data on Sale After Blockchain Poll. It’s possibly a different case (Twitter link is from September 2020, and the incident in the thread I reference happened in August 2020), and although the problem resided on a complementary poll identity control system, and not on the blockchain itself, it does go to show that there are more things to consider overall. I also recall some cases from 2018 depicted on the forum, although not country wide: Blockchain technology in election polls. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
