So basically a guy who works for someone and even supports who has "tortuned and given death threats, had several ban evasions, scams and what not ! " is fine ?
-snip-
Yes, I dont think it matters what yahoo62278 does elsewhere for their position on DT. Whats important is whether or not their ratings are helping.
-snip-
Your second issue I agree with more. There is no reason to leave a negative rating for how someone posts, as this has zero to do with their trustworthiness. Someone having bad posts is the responsibility of the forum administrators to handle not anyone else. I would not personally give any credence to anyone who leaves negative ratings for bad posts.
This(!) is important to me and thus I ask you (yahoo62278) here and now, even though I wanted to do this later: Please reconsider the following ratings you gave. Handling spam, trolls, etc. is what moderators do. You also need to work on your references they seldomly lead to a specific post and its not immediately clear what you are refering to (.new#new at the end of the url). errorcoin22 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=706344 (trolling) brazilcoins - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=681180 ("wasnt nice to me") - the user did scam though, feel free to just change the raing accordingly bapparabi - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=543461 (spam) pearl11 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=817528 (spam) YTBitcoin - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=763846 ("wasnt nice to me") YTBitcoin - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=763846 (disrespectful, fud) Osarman - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=776393 (spam) abhishek.g - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=665701 (incompetent, hassle) - no reference(!) tbearhere - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=246826 (counter negative, over unresolved payment issue) - I dont care strongly if you keep it, but Id like to think you are above these ratings. Fraxinus - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=184873 (spam) siti25 - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=870185 (trying to sell) I agree with KWH Incoming red trust man. You aint getting shit for that account.
No need for Negative, a Neutral will suffice. The said account is not loaded up with green Trust. LeChuckDE - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=818051 - (Accusing me of scamming without knowing the whole situation. Maybe hes trying to be helpful but he obv has no business in the situation) - I dont think its is worthy of a negative either. It seems rather thin-skinned. |
|
|
|
1# privacy, allows users to voice unpopular opinion without fear for the main account.
2# security, users have a separate account for less secure systems.
Those fall invalid as I'm solely talking about signature campaign participants that enroll a plethora of accounts in the same or multiple signature campaigns. I'm well aware of those reasonable use-cases. You said there are none, I present you reasons and you call them invalid. Its fun discussing with you. In this case I would say Im qualified due to my work for BadBear.
I'm not familiar with it, but sure. Of course not. Lets assume it is as you say an the majority of multi accounters are shit posters. Why punish everyone without a way out or a chance of redemption?
What kind of redemption are you talking about? A first time offender is warned with a 7 day ban. #1 What is your first time offender warning period? #2 How do you keep track of possible repeated offenders? #3 How can those that have received it appeal the punishment? Why are you unable to let this get handled by mods?
I'm just going to leave a link to this thread of farmed accounts and put a  in here. All I see is you evading my questions.
Why punish everyone without a way out or a chance of redemption?
I consider Lauda to be a fairly reasonable person. If a person improves their post quality and consistently post that way I see no reason why they wouldn't remove the negative trust attached to the account (as it would no longer be valid). I used to think like that, but there are none of the common safeguards and (my) questions about them get ignored or waved off. Moderations has these in place, neg bombs by Lauda dont. Why are you unable to let this get handled by mods? Why do you claim a duty that is not yet yours, as your rank among staff is not yet high enough?
Who do you think would do the work? Global mods and Admins. The only person Global or above showing any interest in cracking down on spam on the forum is hilariousandco, and a task as widespread as cracking down on spam cannot be done by just one person who already has other responsibilities.
I agree, we need more mods able to handle this. If theymos thinks Lauda is fit for the job, they should make Lauda a global mod with the powers needed to do it. People are getting tired of the mindless spam all over the forum, as I would think you are.
I dont argue against the existance of the problem, I argue against the solution. Negative trusting these users to prevent them from joining most campaigns is a good method of attempting to lessen the problem until the mods/admins show that they care at all.
I disagree. It is getting past the point of it being acceptable. People are joining here specifically to join a signature campaign and spam shit for some coins. That isn't right.
Giving them negative ratings the way its currently done isnt either. Lauda agreed to go after managers, but instead keeps punishing campaigners. Lauda agreed to make a thread explaining their 'rules' for these ratings and how to get rid of them, they did not. They dont even bother to leave a reference anymore. -snip-
@Lauda, could you also put some sort of reference link in the trust report just so it can be confirmed that the account was sold (I think trust seems more valid if it has an appropriate link of evidence attached to it - such as the sec-log data for both the change of password and email at the same time).
I'm not going to do that. The password change is already no longer visible here, not that this is relevant to my methods of uncovering account sales. Keep in mind that Lauda themselves is in this current position of power (DT & Staff) because an admin lifted their ban (for spam). I dont think something like this is possible with the way Lauda currently handles the situation. |
|
|
|
This is an attempt to collect and order every single important, useful or interesting thread for bitcointalk.org.
Noble attempt. But problem with this is new users 98% of time are creating new threads to ask, its easier compared to actually enter this guide which they are not sure will find answer and read through it. So its easier to ask. It will help ~2% of users tho, which reads this kind of topics. Anyway good job. Thanks. I know I can only help those willing so its no problem. |
|
|
|
Can you see the future? Besides, isn't spam a moderation issue and unrelated to trust ratings? An account that's used exclusively for the games and round, with not a single post joining any other discussion? I don't need to "see the future" to know that. Besides, I don't consider spam as purely a concern for moderators or even DT. Everyone should, and can help. Either by reporting it or leaving negative feedback. The account was just very likely sold, my question is: How do you know the new user will spam? Besides: if the posts until now have been spam[1], why isnt the user banned already? Moderation is slow, but not 8 months behind slow. [1] They are what they are for the given threads, you dont post lengthy posts in a prediction thread. |
|
|
|
Wenn man die Adresse kennt und "nur" an den private Key kommen will, braucht man ja nich wirklich die ganze Blockchain. Je weniger Blöcke der Test-Node kennt, desto schneller geht der Start-pro-wallet.dat.  Sowas wie pywallet funzt bestimmt auch, aber damit kenn ich mich nich so aus. Stimmt pywallet is ne option -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34028.0Hab keine Mail bekommen und auch sonst nix mehr gehört, ich nehme mal an das Problem ist gelöst. |
|
|
|
No. There are no justifiable use-cases for the majority. to have several accounts
Sure, several, but feel free to debunk the for me most important ones: 1# privacy, allows users to voice unpopular opinion without fear for the main account. 2# security, users have a separate account for less secure systems. Id even add #3 money to this list, AFAIK no campaign forbids users to have different accounts joined on a different campaign. The occasional constructive user or two may have more accounts, but those are a very tiny minority. The rest are shit posters / account farmers. What do you base this on?
I base that on the time spent moderating + managing hundreds of users in Bitmixer. I'm most certain that managers and moderators (those that are tackling spam in one way or another) are the most qualified people to talk about this situation, unless there are other individuals that are somehow involved (similar amount of time/effort). In this case I would say Im qualified due to my work for BadBear. Lets assume it is as you say an the majority of multi accounters are shit posters. Why punish everyone without a way out or a chance of redemption? Why are you unable to let this get handled by mods? Why do you claim a duty that is not yet yours, as your rank among staff is not yet high enough? |
|
|
|
-snip-
Spam is no longer a moderation issue as I've seen many users being negged for spamming so that they cannot participate in signature campaigns.
Are there more DT members doing this? I only know of Lauda and Lutpin. Leaving it for the moderator or campaign manager to decide the fate of the user/s is not considered any more. The whole TRUST system needs to be remodeled and some rules should be set to avoid this misuse/abuse.
I dont think we need to use this as another excuse the start a discussion about a possible new trust system. If you have a new idea how to solve, suggest it in meta. The last change theymos had a vote on was denied. |
|
|
|
Yes, but I clearly stated that said users would not be spamming or shitposting. So than I take it that it would be okay for such users.
I'm not fine with one having that many accounts regardless of what they're used for. Thats your personal problem though. It is highly unlikely that one has 5 accounts enrolled in signature campaigns and is creating very constructive / useful posts. Anything under this kind of quality for this number of accounts I consider shitposting.
What do you base this on? Considering that you yourself post sometimes 400 posts a month, you could easily split this among 5 accounts and enroll in 5 (different) signature campaigns. The number of accounts do not make a spammer, the post quality does. |
|
|
|
Also how the organizer of the RAFFLE choose a block? Is he do it as the time at which the RAFFLE closes and the current block which is going on or on some other basis?
A (random) number block in the not to distant future might also work. what you meant by your above quoted text? Lets say I start the raffle today and want it to finish some time sunday next week. So I go to e.g. blocktrail and see the current block height is 447073 and there are on average 144 blocks per day. So I go to random.org and let me get a random number between 72 and 144. It tells me 99. I add another 144*7 blocks for the week and say that block 447073 + 99 + (144*7) = 448180 will decide who wins the raffle. I would also require valid transactions to be confirmed in block 448179 or earlier. why a random number is added? And also random number changes everytime whenever i click 'generate' For fun. I generates a new one with each click, yes. yeah but i dont suppose its need of a random number :/ No it doesnt need one, but might as well add one in the mix for fun. |
|
|
|
-snip-
With 'there are no taxes' I meant that with bitcoin transactions no taxes are involved. Maybe I should have rephrased that but I thought it was rather clear. I refer you to an article on coindesk published on the 22nd of October 2015 which says bitcoin is exempt from VAT according to the European Court of Justice (link was removed) if you still don't understand what I mean. If that was the only question on which you base I have very little insights to what bitcoin is I think it is not that bad at all.
Maybe Im just overly critical on you. There are still taxes with bitcoin. E.g. you cant get your salary and just skip taxes. |
|
|
|
|
Keep in mind that a 100 BTC fee is also an incentive for another large pool to ignore the block and try to confirm it themselves[1]. This incentive increases with every halfing.
[1] at the latest you have to broadcast it with the block.
|
|
|
|
Also google findet nur nen KryptoKit Bitcoin Wallet aber nen kryptokid findet er nicht hat irgendwie was von Karatekid  Guten Abend,
hoffentlich habe ich keinen Fehler gemacht. Ich habe kryptokid auf dem Desktop in chrom installiert. Jedenfalls hatte ich ein kleines Guthaben und habe für eine weitere Zahlung dann eine neue Adresse generiert. Wie komme ich jetzt an die BC der ursprünglichen Adresse? Es wäre nett, wenn mir da jemand weiterhelfen könnte.
Nie von gehört, was ist das? Hmm scheint es ja schon länger zu geben, hab mal geguckt. Sieht nach einer Single Address Wallet aus, wenn also kein Backup der "Brainwallet"[1] besteht sind die Bitcoin weg, wie die entsprechende Warnung beim klicken von "Reset Address" auch bestätigt. [1] Das ist im Normalfall keine echte Brainwallet, sondern einfach ein zufälliger String. |
|
|
|
Doesn't google docs displaying address IP of visitors to form creator? That would be serious privacy violation and risk that if you mention u have bitcoins your computer will be targeted for any loopholes. Someone know its secure or not? Better to use regular and known poll sites. I can tell those hackers that I don't own any bitcoin so I'll save them the trouble Thanks for the warning though, will use another site next time The fear was that you are the hacker, not the other way around. |
|
|
|
Guten Abend,
hoffentlich habe ich keinen Fehler gemacht. Ich habe kryptokid auf dem Desktop in chrom installiert. Jedenfalls hatte ich ein kleines Guthaben und habe für eine weitere Zahlung dann eine neue Adresse generiert. Wie komme ich jetzt an die BC der ursprünglichen Adresse? Es wäre nett, wenn mir da jemand weiterhelfen könnte.
Nie von gehört, was ist das? |
|
|
|
Hallo,
ich habe dasselbe Problem und habe die Anleitung befolgt. Es hat auch funktinoiert, allerdings wurde einen Tag später diesselbe transaktion aus meiner bitcoin wallet automatisch veranlasst. Wie kann ich das unterbinden?
Vielen Dank schonmal.
Da Hilft leider nur die Schritte wiederholen und danach dieselben Bitcoin[1] ausgeben, z.B. an dich selbst schicken. Es ist durchaus möglich das jemand anderes die Transaktion neu ins Netzwerk sendet. Du hast aber nur deine eigene Wallet unter Kontrolle, nicht die >5000 anderen die auch Transaktionen im Speicher haben und diese ggf. auch neu versenden können. [1] Am besten vorher mit "CoinControl" auseinandersetzen, damit du nicht deine ganzen Coins nochmal durch die Chain jagen musst. |
|
|
|
Fuck you. Mining Cost
Total Miners Revenue 1,884,717.51 USD
% earned from transaction fees 4.37 %
% of transaction volume 0.69 %
|
|
|
|
Hope btcrecover will suceed.
Send you a mail once it was done, sadly not. Feel free to send me another pattern I should try. |
|
|
|
claiming bonus = farming account ?
An account whose 1st post, up until the 119th were all on the games and round section. And the 120th? Applying in a signature campaign.(surprise, surprise) 121st to 125th are all in this thread. You're seriously expecting people to believe this is NOT a farmed account? Coupled with the timing of that email/password change, Soon as it became Full member, it decides to change email/password and then apply for a signature campaign. All I can see here is it was farmed till Full Member, sold, and would have been used for sig spam. Too bad it got tagged so it's now useless for sigs, huh.? Can you see the future? Besides, isnt spam a moderation issue and unrelated to trust ratings? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
