Don't worry. The people with the hats are all that you really need. When it comes to cycling merits, the people with the hats do it the best. 

You both are wrong. It is clear that the Collectibles Club clearly has the advantage. They may not be overly vocal here in meta, but they clearly are well represented.

      Stingers was removed from being a merit source because he stated that he was going to give merits for the sole purpose of getting his allies enough merit to have votes in the current DT selection process. I don't see how Vod & Lauda meriting my post has anything to do with ensuring that I have enough votes to vote in their allies or themselves. If you believe theymos' ruling against stingers extends to meriting any post that you happen to think makes a good point and you happen to agree with, or from time to time meriting something that you find as entertaining satire, being a merit source might not be for you. After all, I would hate for you to fret over every merit that you dole out, wondering if it can be construed as "political." If you do become a merit source, you should also prepare yourself for being under extra scrutiny since many members here simply don't trust you. I suspect Timelord and many others are going to be all up in your Kool-Aid. (Although they already are.)
   Good luck with your application.

LOT 2: 0.01BTC

Quickseller be like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-crgQGdpZR0

suchmoon, Vod, & Lesbian Cow be like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Tiz6INF7I

Well, tmfp is using the signature space just to convey a message. No links. Also, you need to read a few more of the scam accusation threads, rather than just the ones that pertain to you. You will find other examples, such as JollyGood.

       Quite a few signature campaigns are also avatar campaigns. Some of the avatar campaigns will still pay for posts made in sections/threads that don't display signatures. (Not all though.) Is the OP recommending that we also don't display avatars in meta or scam accusation either?
       Furthermore, there are  a few people who post in the scam accusation sections that use the signature space not for an ad but to direct them to links to a service they are providing or the cause that they are fighting for.
      It does not appear that there is overwhelming support for this idea, at this time. Maybe the administrators will consider when it appears both of these boards are overwhelmed with signature spam, and it becomes a nightmare to moderate.

I want to see how I am spending all of my merits, please.

    To answer your question about anonymint, I'm only aware of his posts under the handle anunymint getting nuked. His posts under iamnotback were not nuked. When anunymint was nuked, I never got notice of all of my posts that were deleted that I made in his threads nor responses to him in the wall observer thread.

   Why does someone need 24 hours to assess whether it is true or not whether the white paper of your project is plagiarized or not? It appears the OP of the scam accusation thread made it pretty clear that substantial portions of the white paper are plagiarized. Also, you are not "helpless." Now that it has been pointed out to you that copy/pasting portions of a whitepaper is deemed untrustworthy and unacceptable, you can take corrective action and redo the white paper. Either cite your sources for the large portions of copy/paste content, or have your team make the needed definitions in their own words conveying their own understanding.
  Also, about the OP post getting merit. It's clear that the OP spent time combing over your white paper and checking to see exactly where portions were copied from. Also, it appears that what they are conveying is true since none of your excuses that you give in the thread refute that the material was indeed copied from another source. Anyone giving merit to that post is distributing their merit in the most correct manner possible.

@ BTCGamblePro making more than one post in a row in a thread in a period of less than 24 hours is not allowed. If you must answer multiple questions, and no one else has responded to the thread between posts, you must edit your original message to include the additional thoughts. I recommend that you consolidate the above three posts before someone reports 2 of them and they get deleted. Since I have just posted on your thread, you may now make an additional comment below.

People are not banned for scamming. The only exceptions is if they post a link to a phishing site or malware. That is what the trust system is supposed to be for. If the person scams, they get negative trust comments and this should hamper their efforts to scam in the future. (Although they can work around this by creating a new account. However, they can create an account to sidestep banning their account, too.)

Quite a few it seems.  Looks like this guy may have scored 1.3250915 BTC from 9 different people for this address alone. And it appears he has been using this address only since 03/26/2019.

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/15pY2U8WBZBJRVxGhh8WRXsdkXQbMKD8k9

I'm very concerned about the new KYC requirements, because the only picture that I had available was one which shows me when I was very angry. Is it against the law to assault and throw a bear?




I admit that I tried to originally cheat the system by presenting a naked picture of my ex-wife. But then I had a change of heart. However, I just got done talking with her on the phone over my back alimony payment, so I am now going to repost the naked picture of her for all to see.





All kidding aside. Just so you know, if you actually sent the form, it was routed to 127.0.0.1, from what I read on other parts of this forum. This address is the loopback address so it should not have leaked outside of your devise.

Just first delete the picture from you 1st picture post and post another picture in that thread(with a different post. Don't just replace new picture in original post.) It should redo the verification and give you another title.  

Thank you for helping me figure out why I couldn't change my tag.  I had quoted a post with an image tag. Now that I removed the image from the quote, I am verified illuminati rather than verified sucker. I think I will keep this one.

Thanks for pointing this out. I went ahead and tagged him.

Not certain why the OP is still at it. He already has the maximum negative score achievable, which was his goal, apparently. More negative DT trust will do nothing to make his score lower.  

I'm sure you can find them somewhere in this video. It's the next bitcoin puzzle game.