Finally there is a video from Usyk, it took a long time. The problem is the amount of talk there is going on in the media. Fury is keeping a low profile with the exception of his recent sparring video and we are scratching our heads wondering where the promotion is. Where is the media hype?

Could it really be a case of both boxers simply being focused on their training to the extent they have almost closed themselves off from the outside world media?

What you have posted is utter and complete nonsense therefore the full message in the OP has been quoted as a reference to keep on record.

What you are offering is something that cannot be proven to be true because there is no formula to make it work.

On the other hand, what can be done is for you to use Telegram to connect with gullible people that will put their trust in you and allow you to ask them to make payments to you for a service that you (and nobody else) proves works.

Reference thread on Stakefast's newbie warning flag.

I have supported the flag and excluded the member (Stakefast) from my trust.

Without delving in to everything he stated in that post (or even the context of what he stated), taking the last two lines literally is evidence enough that the one making the claim cannot be trusted: If you want to start winning, contact telegram

Any person that offers these types of services cannot be trusted, especially when they are hiding behind the anonymity of chat apps they will use to extract money from gullible victims.

Over a period of time, the software behind AI (and there are multiple sources) will improve and become closer to what we could deem as perfect in the sense we will be unable to distinguish between a human or AI when reading the text. In the future, the same will be applied to audio where we will be unable to distinguish of the voice we are hearing is from a human or AI generated.

As for the forum, the use of AI will increase and even though many will use it for many purposes (not exclusively to increase member rank), it will be driven by account farmers who will use it for precisely that reason and/or to try to infiltrate the trust system.

Here are the games taking place today Sunday 7th April:

Manchester United vs Liverpool
Sheffield United vs Chelsea
Tottenham Hotspur vs Nottingham Forest


These are the results from the games played yesterday:

Crystal Palace 2-4 Manchester City
Aston Villa 3-3 Brentford
Everton 1-0 Burnley
Fulham 0-1 Newcastle United
Luton Town 2-1 Bournemouth
Wolverhampton Wanderers 1-2 West Ham United
Brighton and Hove Albion 0-3 Arsenal

Manchester City and Arsenal have shown they are going all out to try to become champions but I still believe Liverpool will win the title if they draw or win their game against Manchester United today. The crucial wins at the bottom of the table were for Everton and Luton.

I also thought about malware, clipboard malware and even using a phishing URL as possibilities behind this allegation because of the amount mentioned ($30,000-$40,000) is huge but there is an update on this situation.

Thankfully a lot of time and effort has gone in to the translation that has taken place. As icopress stated, there seems to be something of substance to the claim: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5491818.msg63911576#msg63911576

A poll cannot be added because this thread is designed for other members to post the names of accounts they deem to have a dubious enough background to not be enrolled on campaigns and then to question why any manager would bother enrolling them in the first place. That was discussion could take place but adding a poll would limit the narrative to just the name (or names) in the OP.

Personally, I would do the same as you but it would be interesting to see how many back that view.

Well, the aim has to be Hero/Legendary rank and the reason for that is obvious. That arimamib account like a huge number of accounts is trying to increase rank as soon as possible in order to join campaigns. Generally speaking, it might not be an issue but when it comes to account farming and using AI, it probably is changing the way the forum operates.

There were are/only two campaign managers that enrolled an unnecessary number of members with negative tags (or highly critical neutral tags). It does make you question theie mindset.

Yee Haa! You sound like one of those tobacco-chewing baddies from a western. I am on it Sheriff  

If was not supposed to come across as rhetorical, I was inviting discussion and/or debate.

As for chatbot spammers, clearly this will get worse over time. If Carollzinha were to take action on many of those enrolled in the Stake campaign, I think it would have a profound effect in helping to clean up the forum.

What it cannot do is stop AI being used by account farmers because before those accounts can apply for campaigns they need to be of a certain rank but at least Carollzinha would be sending out a signal to those hoping to spam their way to Hero/Legendary rank before applying to join the Stake campaign.

The bar seems to have fallen extremely low when it comes to getting enrolled in the Stake campaign but I completely understand your views on the subject about managers implementing their own rules and interpretations. Having said that, what would you do? If you were a campaign manager would you select these two members for campaigns?

The odds seem interesting in that if the fight occurred a couple of years ago, they would have favoured Fury with a larger margin. Now it seems Usyk is making it (almost) even.

Boxing fans seem to have waited a very long time for any heavyweight unification fight and this one had long negotiations over a couple of years before they were supposed to meet. After that, Fury suffered a cut above his eye in training therefore the original date was postponed. Now, the fight does not seem to get anybody excited.

If the media were to get behind this fight and start promoting it by talking about it more, I think the anticipation and excitement level will increase but this simply is not happening.

It is good to see the community engage with their views in this thread.

Overall, we know campaign managers do not have an easy job and can on occasions overlook signs that demonstrate why particular participants should not be enrol on campaigns but Carollzinha (campaign manager for Stake) has enrolled several highly dubious characters that seem to defy logic.

Keeping that aside, as nobody has added any member names of their own to raise discussion and comments on, I will put another name out there for there to be discussion on:


==========
Campaign: Bitvest
Member: Zanab247
Trust:    # +0 / =2 / -0
Reason: Ban evasion and account farming.
==========

I do not know if this can be marked as closed/settled unless we hear from the Rollbit in the absence of the OP but keeping that aside, I guess the most important thing would be for the case/issue to be resolved as a primary concern. The secondary action would be courteous for the OP to post an update. As of now we cannot be 100% sure of what has happened.

I am not being specific to this thread but let us assume an issue has been resolved in favour of any OP that raises a complaint, what I fail to understand is why they cannot post if the matter has been resolved in their favour when they would most probably post to object if a decision was made against them. It happens a lot and it does not help members that have taken time to post in those threads.

The fight is taking place next month and one thing has been almost constant from when the contracts were signed, the promotion is exceptionally muted. I cannot recall any important heavyweight boxing clash ever receiving less news and promotion. When you consider this is the first heavyweight unification fight since 1999, the silence is baffling.

I think it is unfair to make an allegation against any website/business without providing proof. As it stands, it means you can get any traction behind your complaint because we do not know whether you are or are not telling the truth.

Do you have any evidence to back your claim? If you had taken screenshots it would have helped but as icopress stated, a Letter of Guarantee would have been the perfect evidence. Do you have it?

In a nutshell, to answer the question Who is buying like me: nobody is buying like you because you are not buying, you are fabricating.

If I state that it is very hard to believe your story, would that be accepted by you?

Over the years we have seen many fabrications from members that are operating new accounts (but might not be new to this forum) make similar posts with the intention of increasing post count as well as making sure it is counted towards their campaign quota.

Also, grand claims are made almost daily often but always without providing any evidence.

You have made a staggering 182 posts since your last post in this thread on 4th March 2024 therefore more than a month later it clearly does not hold any value for you. On that basis, the thread should be locked while you post your nonsense elsewhere as you try to build up your account to join the account farm.

These are the Premier League games taking place today Saturday 6th April:

Crystal Palace vs Manchester City
Aston Villa vs Brentford
Everton vs Burnley
Fulham vs Newcastle United
Luton Town vs Bournemouth
Wolverhampton Wanderers vs West Ham United
Brighton and Hove Albion vs Arsenal

In the early kick-off game Manchester City travel to Crystal Palace, if they drop points it will give Liverpool and Arsenal a massive boost as they could open a further gap between them. In the late kick-off game I expect Brighton to get at least a draw against Arsenal.

As for Liverpool, they travel to Manchester United tomorrow while Tottenham host Nottingham Forest in the hope of strengthening their 5th place position for the Champions League next season.

You raise a valid point but I know of cases where managers have refused to take up jobs because of either the reputation of the company involved or their previous interactions. When it comes to campaign managers, it is not always about money.

Having said that, there is one in particular that did not stop promoting the Sinbad mixer even though around 5 months prior I created a thread outlining it would be seized because it was operated by a criminal enterprise. I would conclude your words are completely appropriate for that individual and maybe some others but definitely not all.

He clearly does lack in many area yet he is enrolled on the Stake campaign like a huge number of participants in that campaign are.

I guess the criteria required to wear a Stake signature is extremely low therefore if spammers and super- spammers (several that use AI) are accepted on the Stake campaign, the primary person to blame is their campaign manager Carollzinha

What is stopping Bitcoin to go down to below $50,000? If the trend was to dump or sell as fast as possible, the price has to drop. When we enjoy the ride watching Bitcoin reach $70,000 therefore we have to be aware it could crash any time.

Even if Bitcoin could be purchased at $50,000 how much could you buy as per your personal circumstances?

This is a strange one. The OP last posted 20 days ago (on 18th March) therefore his absence could be because this issue could have been resolved. The onus of course was on the OP because he was the one that created this thread but if the OP did not make a comment, Rollbit could have posted to clarify what was happening in order to bring closure. Will they do it now?

Some names to consider:

==========
Campaign: Stake
Member: arimamib
Trust:    # +0 / =3 / -0
Reason: Using AI generated posts.
==========

==========
Campaign: Bitvest
Member: Zanab247
Trust:    # +0 / =2 / -0
Reason: Ban evasion and account farming.
==========

==========
Campaign: Bitcasino
Member: mich
Trust:    # +0 / =1 / -4
Reason: Account changed hands. Previous low quality posts/news spammer.
==========




Deleted posts:

self-moderated to keep this thread clean from trolls, attention-seekers and signature spammers





I would like to start this thread to discuss what possible logic could be applied by campaign managers when they select certain members to participate in campaigns they manage.

Some of us would have great difficulty in understanding the reason why certain members with certain types of feedback (including negative and neutral trust) along with their posting habits would be selected in any campaign at all.

You can all contribute names, in fact I request it. Having said that, I would recommend a maximum of two per post and then allow ample time for comments to discuss those names before other names are posted.

edit: As an example, here is a name to get the conversation started. If you were a campaign manager, would you select this member to participate in any of your campaigns?:

The second post in the thread is where collated names will be listed. You can post the names of any member you have seen wearing a signature that you deem to have enough dubious posts that should really warrant exclusion from enrolling in campaigns and then we can discuss