Due to the inactivity and the premium that comes with having a tag like @Bitcoin it was likely sold was a decent price. Seems like it's probably someone heavily invested in Bitcoin cash. The Bitcoin community over at reddit has been poking fun too and they've also asked the question who owns it. Nobody knows and it's likely not going to come out who owns it either.

It's a shame that the account has been taken over using the Bitcoin name and traffic that the twitter account would have to promote a project like Bitcoin Cash...

Not starting the betting pool when it was originally planned probably worked in my favor, as the results we've seen from the bigger teams over the last few fixtures have been unexpected. Having said that I would still like to be part of something like this are we still planning to launch this?

Heed the warnings and stop using cloud mining services. They've also recently been 'hacked' with the amount roughly around 63 million dollars. Apparently everyone is getting reimbursed. We'll see if they keep to their word in the next few days but, this sounds awfully similar to other cloud mining services getting hacked.

As far as I can see there's only a message stating that the account has been hacked and they have sent a message to theymos. Not really sufficient evidence. If the account has been hacked and the email address it's good from the point of view of theymos that the twitter might be compromised too.

Only a Bitcoin address with a signed message will get the account back.

If you can't provide a signed bitcoin address which was posted or sent privately via a personal message it will remain locked. At least the account is locked and won't be able to use your name to scam etc.

The locking mechanic was introduced to prevent any hacker from ruining the account before the rightful owner provides evidence that it's their account and it get's processed and unlocked by the admins.

You'll need to supply sufficient evidence to either cyrus or theymos to get the account recovered. Only a bitcoin address signed message which has been posted by that account or sent via a personal message will be considered.

Follow the instructions here

Although, the wallet.dat requires keeping it electronically. I would recommend making several different types of copies of the private key and would have at least one physical copy which can be stored a safe location from both natural hazards and theft.

Also, wallet.dat is a file and files are known to corrupt especially when newer versions are released.

I'm looking to purchase a sleeping bag which I'll be using for my trip to Nepal this year after my rab one becoming a little bit too worn and lost it's heat factor over the years.

Must be shipped to the United Kingdom, unless you want to arrange collection/pickup in Nepal. I'll only have roughly 2 days where I'll be able to pickup in/around Kathmandu before heading off to Lukla. Would prefer to have it shipped to me in the UK though.

Escrow is fine. Chuck me a personal message if you have one. I'm looking for a good deal as I get a little bit extra off due to mountain rescue.  (Also looking for a decent Ice axe, but haven't decided on brand yet and this would likely require collection)

Unfortunately this isn't exclusive to newbies for the last few months I've been reporting these types of posts manually every day and I wonder whether sometimes if the staff who have to deal with the reports are getting annoyed especially if they have email notifications turned for reports so maintaining a list like this is probably a good idea. Literally hundreds of accounts each day post these responses as well as other ones like "To the moon" and other insubstantial replies. I pity the mods that have to read these types of replies/reports and deal with them. I lose a brain cell every time I report one of these replies.

Some stricter restrictions probably need to be put in place because as soon as you deal with 1 another 10 users have posted identical replies. Some are bots, some are people who struggle with English and some are just bumping the topic and are likely alt accounts of the ICO. I'm not sure what could prevent this issue though. I don't think any sort of moderation could possibly deal with the amount of replies which get posted per hour there. Possibly making the section self moderated threads only and the topic starter is responsible for clearing out these types of replies and if they don't do it their thread gets trashed.


It's also started to leak into the project development section too.

I don't think introducing a rank would prevent them though. As Hilariousandco said they rake in millions and wouldn't care about paying a small one time fee in to enable them to post their announcements. A service which offered certification would be the best route, though this would need to be run by a person who is considered extremely trustworthy and should probably be double checked by a independent member too as it would likely be susceptible to back handers.

I feel banning them completely wouldn't be the ideal solution, but as I said above I don't think a rank would do much other than preventing the people who don't want to invest anything which you'll see a couple from time to time using free domains etc.

The amount of money they receive through presales and 'donations' is insane and they would very likely be willing to pay a one time fee to be able to post. It could be a requirement anyway, just to cut a little percentage of the users who aren't willing to invest a little into their project.

The criticism that he's received over the whole Blockstream probably had a big impact on him leaving which is a shame that it's had an impact like this. It's probably the best thing he could of done, of course he'll likely be accused of even more things and the conspiracy theorists will run riot, but at the end of the day this will likely be of great benefit for the Bitcoin community overall.

Greg Maxwell has always been one of the stand out contributers and it's good that he'll be solely focusing on improved propagation and signature aggregation etc.

When electricity is extremely cheap in certain countries it's very unlikely that they would be willing to invest the initial money to build and house this renewable energy. Wind turbines are expensive and depending on the size has a few years before it starts paying itself off, at which point mining may not be feasible to a lot of miners.

Renewable energy is only appealing to those with big mining operations and are in it for the long term. The good thing with using electricity instead of wind turbines for example is that it can be cut off any time that you want to quit mining.

I guess so. I'm not a huge fan of using a phone number for authentication though so probably why I forgot that even existed. Even if I was to enter a phone number on an exchange it would likely be a phone just for that purpose.

There's better alternatives out there which were recently discussed over in the the serious discussion section.

That sucks. They should probably think about changing that, as they'll likely be losing out on sales just because they require a phone number. Especially, relevant in the Bitcoin community as you know how paranoid we all are...

If it's created a file named Documents.data then you should probably think about verifying the installation via PGP to assure you haven't complied from a malicious source. 

Where are you putting the wallet.dat file? If you could navigate to the default folder ~/.bitcoin/ unless you have changed it to use a custom location and list whats in there using the command and post that here maybe we could make some sense out of this.

There's dozens of 'review' threads which you can post any posts than you feel are under merited. Although, you can't do this every time you can for the most substantial posts.

Campaigns have always required you to be a certain rank. Very few of the campaigns (excluding altcoin campaigns) actually allowed members and below to join their campaigns. Anyway, if your sole purpose is to join a signature campaign your going to find it very difficult to rank up.

I know several charities which are close to me that aren't considered big ones and some which deal with medical conditions unheard of by the majority. I contacted one of them about accepting Bitcoin and they replied stating they do not accept Bitcoin, although they are open to possibly accepting it in the future funding to get someone who is knowledgeable in Bitcoin and setting it up would cost too much money for very little return based on the amount of inquires they have.

It would be awesome if you/someone could approach these types of charities in getting something like this sorted out for them free of charge.
 Like I mentioned above they probably don't have enough people showing interest in donating in Bitcoin to actually pay for a coder to get this up and running.

There's no fair way of handling the rank system. If we were all put down to 0 Merits then the more established members who have been here from the early days would probably find this unjust. It would of probably been a little more fair if everyone was distributed merit like they have been, but their sMerit was 0 then only those selected as sources could distribute the points. This would of likely meant that a lot more posts would go unmerited because out of the hundred thousands of accounts that are active here around 30 were selected to become sources granted this has now risen to 57.

Higher ranked members got more merit points than newly registered accounts because they are somewhat established and were needed to kick off the system. Otherwise, it would only be sources distributing the points in the early days. Yeah a lot of the accounts that are higher ranked have reached that rank by spamming and only posting nonsense in activity periods just to rank up however, these accounts probably won't adjust to the new system well and will likely not gain much merit from now on.

I think it's unfair to allow people to rank up by spamming and posting in activity periods. This system might not be perfect, but it's already showing that it's effective against account farming and encouraging users to post more constructively.  

Wait a few months until more sources are added and then evaluate and make consider making improvements on the system. As long as your making good on topic posts which contribute to the discussion or bring up important points for discussion then you'll get merit points. If you feel that your posts deserve more merit than they are getting you can post in one of the dozens of review threads.

It's about time that we stop catering towards signature campaigns and start catering towards the discussion of cryptocurrencies. I would have to agree with Darkstar that campaign managers don't have a conflict of interest. In fact if they are reviewing the posts manually then they might be some of the best people to distribute points as they'll probably come across unmerited more often.

I disagree with this as well. In theory this system should work, but it does require those who are getting merit points will distribute them and fairly. Also, because of the way the system was implemented many legendary members haven't really contributed much except for posing in activity periods there's many of these legendary accounts who posted the majority of their posts in bounty threads and the like. Regardless of rank merit points indicate the quality of the users posts.

theymos can evaluate on the system in a few months time when there are more merit sources and people have run out of their initial merits.