You are free to your opinion, but my "opinion" is invalid and is deserving of a negative trust rating is it? Sounds rational to me.
You're not being red trusted for holding an opinion. This is what the referenced link says: Reading up made it evident that you are dishonest, a hypocrite and are intentionally trying to distract away from the users that are actually willing to objectively look into this (and apparently attack those as well). You were doing quite a bit of attacking in that thread. Maybe if you would have presented your opinion in a more neutral tone, it wouldn't have been seen as an attack designed to distract attention from the main issue, and possibly silence others. It all really depends on whether the majority of the community agrees more often with you or with Lauda. You'll really have to make a better case for yourself if you want your rating removed. I would honestly suggest being more humble and open-minded - and less hostile - going into the future. |
|
|
|
Of course you are the great and powerful Nutulduhhhh and you get to declare anyone who challenges your baseless conclusions as "dishonest" and "less than honorable", and your baseless conclusions as facts, then justify the use of the trust system in retribution for challenging this conclusion.
To me, all you are doing is declaring "facts" to be "baseless conclusions". That in itself is dishonest. I don't need your approval to hold an opinion on the matter. Neither does anybody. |
|
|
|
You mean the rating I left you for doxing and reporting OGNasty to the IRS that even Theymos agreed deserved a red tag? Theymos also said this: Red-trusting Vod over this is an appropriate usage of red-trust, since his actions here are highly trust-relevant. But I tend to think that since he edited his post and seems to genuinely regret at least the public doxxing part, it'd be best to forgive. So, you are looking to theymos for approval here, but not doing what he considers the best course of action. |
|
|
|
I thought it was interesting. A moment of silence for some of the great, fallen / MIA posters. Piggy
Toxic2040
ICOEthics
kenzawak
bones261
Rosewater Foundation
Kylapoiss
RodeoX
BlindMayorBitcorn
Cryptoqueeen These are the ones I am familiar with, anyway. Then there's a few absolute shitposters that I won't miss at all. Check out Tukang Becak: I remember him because his name means "pedicab driver" in Indonesian. He earned exactly 250 merits before (hopefully) retiring his bounty hunting career in November. He got 32 merits for this post: I'm sure the bitcoin price increase is happening so buying now is a very profitable thing because it will make us get big profits in December or or 5 months away.
This turned out to be one of the worst calls you could have possibly made as BTC sank from $6700 at the date of his post to $3700 by December. Most likely all the accounts sending him merits were alts. Actually, they were, The_Pharmacist tagged them as such. Anyway, this is a good, unique list. |
|
|
|
With all these, we cannot escape the truth that Craig Wright is a person with huge holdings of bitcoin and have a huge influence to people (not necessarily cryptocurrency users).
What? This isn't true at all. So far he's proven he owns zero bitcoin. You may own more bitcoin than he does. As a matter of fact, we all do, as the Kleiman lawsuit has left him on the hook for half a million bitcoin (he likely owns negative 500,000 BTC). He's really only influential in his own cult -- to most of us he's anti-influential, meaning when he says one thing, we assume the opposite is true. |
|
|
|
Summary for variables: temerit_user
by categories of: group50
group50 | N mean sd p50 p25 p75 min max
-----------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50% bottom | 5949.0 3.4 2.3 3.0 2.0 5.0 1.0 9.0
50% top | 5472.0 50.2 85.7 18.0 11.0 45.0 10.0 645.0
1% top | 116.0 1187.2 752.1 1012.0 795.5 1258.5 645.0 6354.0
-----------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total | 11537.0 37.5 151.9 9.0 3.0 18.0 1.0 6354.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That was fast, thanks. I think the numbers I'm looking for here are Number of merits owned by the top 1%: 116 * 1187.2 = 137,715 Number of merits owned by the bottom 50%: 5949 * 3.4 = 20,227 That means the top 1% of posters combined possess 6.8x as many merits as the bottom 50%. The bottom 50% have less than 15% of the top 1%'s ownership. Furthermore, the top 25% of the top 1% still possess 180% more merits than the bottom 50%. That means that 29 members together have almost twice as many merits as 5,949 combined. Its not fair that in this great society, half the accounts on this forum should be expected to live on 9 merits or less, especially when 9 merits isn't enough to earn a Member level status. If I am elected president, I will pledge to fight merit inequality in a system which disproportionately favors the merit rich and punishes the merit poor. Thank you for your vote.  |
|
|
|
|
What is the number of merits earned by the top 1% of the 11,537 legit users as compared to the bottom 50%?
I'm trying to do some Bernie Sanders math here.
|
|
|
|
You dealt with it in the right way (leaving this kind of post in this section); some would say that you shouldn't leave "retaliatory feedback", but the truth is "trust feedback isn't moderated", so it has to moderate itself. I got one from him too: You should learn to worry about yourself and stop cyberbullying others online. which I just ignored. If you look at my trust feedback page, or pretty much anybody who's been around for any substantial period of time, you'll notice that they probably have some b.s. negative feedbacks. His feedback is not part of Default Trust, so it won't show up as Trusted Feedback. He also didn't leave a reference. In short, nothing to worry about. I have opposed his flag on your account. |
|
|
|
EXTRA BREAKING NEWS (its actually 2 days old) Craig claims he was hacked by Blockstream... before Blockstream was founded; is demanding all communications with Ira Kleiman from them.https://beincrypto.com/craig-wright-says-blockstream-hacked-him-to-forge-documentsThe ongoing case between Craig Wright and the estate of his late business partner Dave Kleiman has taken yet another interesting turn. The controversial figure now claims that Bitcoin developers at Blockstream hacked electronic devices to backdate documents and undermine his case.
The information comes from a Joint Discovery Memorandum filed yesterday. In the document, the defendant’s legal counsel requests access to communications between various groups and individuals connected with Bitcoin’s early history and Kleiman’s brother, Ira. These include Greg Maxwell, the Twitter user with the handle “Contrarian,” Blockstream, Bitcoin Core, and mining pools mining BTC.
The defense alleges that those mentioned may have hacked Craig Wright’s electronic devices and created the backdated documents being used as evidence in the case. https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1207327447672401920@Blocksteam hacking Craig, Ramona Watts wants to be paid to be involved in her husband's lawsuit, Tulip Trust... https://twitter.com/Excellion/status/1207463576060907520 Of course, Faketoshi has provided zero evidence that he was actually hacked. You can read the referenced court document for yourself here. There is a 70-page transcript of the latest court hearing here, at the bottom of the page, but it requires a PACER account for purchase... |
|
|
|
"You" proved nothing. Investigating Bidens still makes sense.
What's the reason for investigation? Accusations. Responsibility: FBI Which were the accusations against biden, and by whom, to reason investigations? Who should lead these investigations? Think! I just quote McAfee: wake... the... fuck... UP!
Don't let politicians mislead you to fight each other, even if it's just "heavy debating". It's basically just an attempt to distract you from looking at what THEY do: Stealing your money, your freedom, your satisfaction. If somebody is elected for POTUS because of hatespeech and FUD twitter postings, the nation has an educational problem. This is all true... At the end of the day I believe it only makes a small difference as to who is actually president. The machinations behind the corporate/government complex won't let the system be disrupted out of their favor. Enjoy your new rank.  |
|
|
|
51 deleted posts in total this time around. Here's one of my favorites: A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. Funny how you have to invent competitions in order to have one where you are actually winning. BTC can build a layer that ignores the miners, if BTC ever reaches 20k again it will cost 50$ just to fund a lightning node with an on chain transaction.
This statement highlights the cognitive dissonance of BSVers. How can transaction fees be so high if BTC is ignoring miners? Either transaction fees are high, or miners are being ignored. Both items cannot be present at the same time. At this rate BSV miners will claim a higher reward from transaction fees over block rewards, this is how bitcoin was meant to be.
Average BSV block reward per day minus fees: $148,950 Average BSV transaction fees per day: $125  The only way this could possibly happen (before the next halving) is if transaction fees increase by a factor of 1191 while the price remains the same. This will never happen. Let's compare the same stats for BTC: Average BTC block reward per day minus fees: $14,400,000 Average BTC transaction fees per day: $136,444 The ratio between block reward and fees for BTC is only 105.5, whereas it is 1191 for BSV! Your entire existence has just been rendered absurd. Additionally your last stress test could only produce a block that was 8 MB. Why not just use Bcash? What's the difference? At least the Bcash cult leader doesn't think he's Satoshi. What a joke. |
|
|
|
Opposed both of them and thanks to everyone who opposed them too. You have 10 unsupported Flags already! 10? That's simply astounding. I will have to up my game as I currently only have 5. Just a thought: shouldn't Flags with Insufficient support have a more neutral color than the "normal" Flag colors?
Yes, definitely. It should be a grey color as opposed to yellow or red. That's one of the great things about this community: I don't even have to oppose the flags against me and they would still be inactive. Most people are pretty keen on preventing flag injustices by the handful that are committed to introducing them. Also partly in thanks to this thread, I imagine. |
|
|
|
The threshold to start the investigation is pretty low. I don't have to assume he's 100% guilty. Just probable cause or reasonable suspicion, maybe even less. Just the facts we know about Bidens... it's very fishy.
Hunter Biden getting a job working at Burisma is indeed nepotism, which is as old as politics itself. There was nothing illegal in his hiring. There will be no further Biden investigations, mark my words. The framework and foreign policy standards are for diplomats working for the State Department. U.S. President is above the State Department. He can conduct foreign policy any way he likes.
No, he can't, especially when he's specifically targeting a political opponent. We just proved that. It would have been much more tactful of him to go through diplomatic channels, but he thinks he can do anything. He can't. We both know Trump doesn't care about investigating Biden "for the good of America"; much less for the good of the Ukraine. |
|
|
|
The difference is you think the word investigate means make stuff up.
Woah Tonto! When did I say that? I don't care who's asking who to investigate who, as long as we uncover the truth about corrupt politicians.
Right, so now you're assuming Joe Biden is corrupt... You literally just accused me of what you yourself are now doing. Diplomatic channels? Who cares.
The framework governing U.S. diplomacy and foreign policy standards cares. You should care too. Trump should have cared, but he didn't, and he paid for it. The irony is the only politician charged and tried with anything so far regarding Ukraine has been Donald Trump. |
|
|
|
I would have merited a different post of yours so you could get to that 100 mark, but I'm not a big TA fan. Regardless, this is a nice gesture of you. Bitcoin SV (aka korner) is one of the biggest trolls around, and seeing as how their main account is banned already, I don't know why their Bitcoin SV account hasn't been banned yet. |
|
|
|
It was more symbolic than anything, but at least now maybe future presidents will think twice before asking foreign leaders to investigate their political rivals.
Nothing's wrong with investigating Biden. He shouldn't be above the law just because he's running for President. Should a sitting American president be asking another, newly elected president to investigate his political rival during what was supposed to be a congratulatory phone call? There are separate diplomatic channels for that. The problem is Trump thinks he can get away with anything. He was just proven wrong about that. |
|
|
|
Me and some friends have described Biden as the candidate that the Democrats who vote Democrat down the line will vote for. The people who don't really know too much about politicans, haven't really kept up, but are voting for the name that is most familiar. Most of the time, that name is going to be Biden.
I really wanna see how Pete does in Iowa, could determine if THE BIG MO can drag him onwards. Pretty sure he literally put all of his resources there.
Its not a bad strategy, as Iowa certainly is important here, however I see zero chance of him winning the dem primary. Maybe 8 years down the line... Honestly I didn't care for Biden at all until this whole Ukraine / Hunter Biden / Burisma thing surfaced. It came to light just how hard Trump was attacking Biden, and now I feel its our (anybody who doesn't like Trump) duty to rally behind Biden. Despite some people's assertions that Ukraine spelled the end of Biden's legacy, he's doing quite well in the polls, having his biggest lead over the next candidate since mid September.  Still, anything can happen during the debates. If Bernie pulls ahead of him I won't be upset, or surprised. If Warren or anybody else pulls ahead, I will be surprised, and somewhat disappointed. |
|
|
|
Oh my... 41 new messages? I suddenly got very popular it would appear.  Awww, nope, its just korner (Bitcoin SV) clearing out all my posts from his thread!  BSV - is Original Bitcoin.
In this topic, complete freedom of speech and anarchy
Well, so much for that ethos. |
|
|
|
Today was a great day for America BTW.  Trump finally impeached. He belongs to yet another very exclusive club now. It was more symbolic than anything, but at least now maybe future presidents will think twice before asking foreign leaders to investigate their political rivals. I'ma go ahead and attribute today's pump to this |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
