Would probably result in more accurate votes, since a lot of the users that are getting voted for haven't actually reported all that much in the last year, which I think isn't just the case for this category, but multiple categories. Users reputation has x carries over through the years, rather than rewards users for that year in particular, which is a shame.

The only issue with that is I don't think many moderators have voted in the past, and even then only globals really have a good view on it all since they receive all reports, and have a much better idea of those that are contributing than me as an example who only covers certain sections, and new users.

Also, remember we're in a recession, and the last time we had a recession some banks had to get bailed out, and some just collapsed. So, check whether your government covers you for a certain amount of money in a bank account, otherwise I wouldn't trust your bank any more than an exchange, and I'd prefer to have Bitcoin controlled by myself. Most Western countries I believe have some sort of protection for banks going bust. I believe it's either £75,000 or £85,000 in the UK. That's for each bank, unless they're controlled by the same company.

The bottom doesn't really matter, a lot of users get obsessed by the bottom, and when is the perfect time to invest. However, most of us would miss it even if we predicted the bottom correctly, whether that's due to the time frame it hits that bottom or just not having the capital to invest. My advice has always been to not concentrate on the news or what's the best time to invest. I think the most important would be to at least hold your Bitcoin for a number of years after your initial investment, since it's deflationary by design.

Also, after this recession people will be looking for alternatives which will mean more adoption for us.

All good fighters, but aren't on the level of Khabib. That might change with experience, but Khabib was a special fighter, not just in the UFC he has quite the background in Sambo, and I believe was also undefeated in that also off the top of my head.

I'm not looking for a next Khabib though, he's a outlier you don't get many undefeated fighters that dominate in such a way. Jon Jones would be the other which I'm hearing rumours of him having a fight in the new year. Has to be Ngannou for me, but I know he had surgery on his knees, so not sure if he'll be ready.

Users won't like to hear it, but we rely on centralisation, and third parties to a certain degree, and that's actually an okay thing. Especially, when you're trying to get more people to adopt Bitcoin. Since, without having the ease of use that these centralised figures provide, people wouldn't adopt. Almost every single new investor that doesn't know much about Bitcoin will be going through a centralised exchange, since the process is streamlined. A peer to peer exchange wouldn't be of benefit to them as there's too many additional steps.

Centralisation, and third parties will always be a benefit, however over reliance on them isn't. People just need to know the risks of these third parties, and the best practices when dealing with them. For example, purchasing your Bitcoin in small increments via an exchange isn't a problem, it's the storing of those coins on a centralised wallet that's the problem.

Probably, and I'm sure the UFC would be up for it, and have probably already had talks about it. Khabib seems a man of morals though, he's pretty dead set on keeping his promise to his mother's after his father's death. So, I don't expect it to happen for that reason.

It's certainly not about money for Khabib, and I'm not sure what could convince him. Maybe, his mother giving him permission, but I can't see that happening any time soon.

Aw, I didn't mean that to sound like it was going to be a Conor vs Khabib fight I think that boat has sailed a very long time ago. However, I do think Conor is gearing towards a fight. I'm not sure who that is going to be against, and I certainly hope it wouldn't be Islam that just doesn't make much sense, like I said I hope it's someone outside the top five, and hopefully not a wrestler. I want to see Conor win again, it'll be great for the sport, and the division.

Conor seems to be gearing up towards a fight, and he did suffer a pretty nasty break. I expect we will see him, but hopefully it'll be someone outside the top five, and a striker as you say. He's still exciting, and tagged Poirier multiple times in both fights, and hurt Poirier. So, he's still dangerous he just hasn't got that same fear factor that he once did.

Not sure what the angle is with Khabib's little dig towards Conor. Also, thought Conor's response was a little deluded, and a bit nasty talking about his father's dream considering what happened.

I'd agree with the meaning diminishing, but I'm not sure how to correct that problem. Ultimately, it's up to the community to decide who they vote for. Changing the voting system just complicates it further, and preventing past winners will just mean the same 2-5 users will be nominated in the retrospective categories. I don't think it's fixable to a certain degree, and it's unfortunate as I do like the initiate of the community awards.

You can edit your voting post if you wish, up until the thread is locked for counting votes.

Most users are voting for well known users, without actually giving much thought into what category.

It might be worth in the future icopress or one of the events team users actually getting into contact with theymos prior to voting next time, and seeing if we can release that kind of information to public in time for the event, so that they can vote more appropriately, i.e most reports in the last year, and potentially most actions by moderators if the moderator vote was reintroduced in the future.

Besides that, I think regularly releasing that information helps users report more. Though, I don't know how much work it's to actually retrieve that data. So, theymos might not go for it. However, it'd be nice if it was a regular thing, and could benefit this event too.

Only theymos, and possibility Cyrus has access to that information. There's been suggestions that this sort of thing gets implemented publicly, but I don't know what theymos' opinion is of that. I'd be in support of it, maybe having a opt out for privacy sake, but considering theymos has had no issue publishing the list of reporters in the past, I wouldn't of thought it be too much of a problem.

I imagine the reporter list hasn't changed too drastically, in terms of users. The reports I receive are generally from the same users.

I think your companies list is a little outdated. I believe both Steam, and Wikipedia suspended Bitcoin payments years ago. There's probably others on that list that have pulled support for it. The thing is, we aren't quite at the stage where it makes sense for all companies to adopt it. Since, the volatility creates an additional problem for many businesses, and then it's the cost of implementing a system to accept Bitcoin as well as hire staff that have the knowledge to help with any Bitcoin related issues.

It's not a bad thing that we aren't quite there yet. We probably won't be there for a while. As long as we have volatility, we'll have the news having a melt down, and companies pulling support or just not adopting it in the first place.

It's the story of every industry. Every company basically expects you to do better than previous years, in terms of revenue. So, everyone is expecting more money, and it's never sustainable. A lot of journalists as an example start their careers off very well, they don't just post for the sake of it, and they don't make stuff out.

Yet, with time the motives for covering stories changes, it's not to tell you truth or keep the world in the know, instead it's all about money. You're absolutely spot on, that it's about generating enough articles that they're meeting their quota. This results in plenty of stories that just don't cover anything new, and they're just reiterating the same bloody story that they've already covered.

Plus, negative news sells. Positive news, doesn't so much. Drama is literally the money maker, and that's why you see these headlines which are basically taking something bad, and turning it into the end of the world.

Bitcoin has been subject to this for years, I stopped following the news years ago. The only time I read the news related to Bitcoin is through this forum. Any other news I only read big the bigger stuff like the Ukrainian war etc. If we all did this, we'd probably live happier lives.

I played the UFC 4 game the other day. Pretty fun I must say. I feel like they could do a lot more with it, but it's pretty fun for a few hours. I wouldn't play it any longer than that. See, this is my expert betting advice now, if you are ever in doubt, jump on the game, and get the AI to play both fighters, which effectively simulates the fight for you .

You just lose that excitement factor of betting on live events, and watching them. Unless, you don't check your bets or the news before watching the fights? Although, it's always nice to look at your betting slip, and see a few ticks, and it not being complete yet as that does get the excitement levels up.

I might consider it for nights like last night for example or events that I haven't bet on. No way will I be doing it for the bigger events.

Probably one of the more disappointing fight nights in recent memory. Obviously, with the main event getting cancelled, but also some of the fights were rather disappointing. I know it happens from time to time, I'm just grateful I didn't need to stay up late. I think it was done by 11pm or somewhere around there. I remember staying up for the Poirer vs Conor fight, and obviously he snapped his leg, and I was absolutely gutted, and tired which made it worse. At least this time I had a good night sleep.

I think I've got to start recording the fights, and like watch them on Sunday morning when they aren't the bigger events. Probably better for my health . Anyway, I'm gutted about Fialho, I was actually routed for him after round one. He's just so one dimensional I think he'll struggle against most of the more technical fighters. He needs to change up his game, and develop it further if he wants to progress any further. At the moment, He's just known for his hard hitting, but people won't remember his name if he continues to just search for that head.

Fialho has a lot of potential, but he's not very versatile at the moment. I remember when he went on that little mini run of wins, and was basically fighting every two week period until he got humbled. Hopefully, he's learnt from that, and put the work in training. He needs to get better at grappling, and wrestling, and not load up on every single shot he throws.

If he continues to do what he has been doing the past year, and a bit. I think he'll lose this weekend's fight. Although, I do like him, as I said I believe he has a lot of potential, which hopefully won't be wasted. I don't think he's champion material, don't get me wrong. However, he's a fun fighter, albeit a little low on the volume side of things.

He's an incredible businessman, despite what users here might think of it, especially since he's in the limelight for Twitter right now. However, he's proven multiple times how good he's at making money. This forum is no different, if it was in the wrong hands, this place could be exploited hugely for generating revenue. Thankfully, we aren't subject to that, and it seems all decisions are considered carefully even when it comes to finances.

You don't hear of a forum or business if you want to call it that, opting to operate at a loss, because of the issue with advertisers, and not being able to verify whether they're safe or not. Which, is effectively what theymos has opted to do recently with the ad auctions being stopped. Alright, we have a big reserve, and if it depleted so much we didn't have anything, I'm sure it would be introduced. However, most businessman I see including Elon, get greedy, and I'm just thankful that hasn't been the case with the forum.

Just some thoughts, if you wanted to keep two accounts as separate identities, you probably don't want to name them something similar, as that puts eyes on you, and starts the allegations. So, while it might be a reverse psychology attempt, it's probably better to just never have that attention on you in the first place.

So, while the usernames are similar that doesn't automatically mean they're linked, and we can't accuse users of that just because their usernames are similar. Well, technically almost identical. However, I'm not sure if that name is known for something? Maybe a character from a show or something? Since, admittedly the chances of having identical usernames is rather low, although a quick search doesn't yield anything. I guess what I'm trying to say is your assumptions might actually be right, and good instinct, but it's probably best we cover all angles first since without knowing all the context, and why they do have similar names we can't jump the gun, and just come to a conclusion based on gut feeling. Something that non admins likely don't have; in terms of context, especially considering the age of the accounts.

Although, that's besides the point. Dr.Osh i.e the Legendary account isn't banned, and therefore it's not like it would be ban evasion in the first place. The only thing that could be going on is a user posing as another user which obviously would be bannable. However, I imagine one of the users probably more likely the newer of the two could request a username change if the situation is deemed non malicious, and basically done unknowingly, since it probably will cause confusion in the long run. I'd have thought theymos would see that as a valid reason. I think there might have even been a case of this before, although I might be wrong on that.

The real question is whether this was an attempt to pose as the other user, which I guess would be hard to tell. Since no public attempts seem to have been made. The only way would potentially be through personal messages, but they'd have to be reported to know that. I guess the admins can take all the information provided, and work it out themselves as they have a little more information to work on. We're all working on an assumption here which probably isn't the best idea. Obviously, it's a good idea to bring this to attention though for all parties.

Usually, users that are looking to pose as others tend to make their moves privately rather than publicly. I've had a quick check over Dr.Osh's (legendary) posts, and they don't appear to be offering any services, that could be easily exploited this way; at least by threads created.

The above is my thought pattern when seeing things like this, and it's usually why I don't act upon any reports that don't have conclusive evidence, since I think it's better that the higher ups if you will, take a look at it instead.

According to users a year ago, it was the end of the world since everyone got priced out of Bitcoin. Now, that Bitcoin has been discounted in time for Black Friday, people are complaining about it collapsing. Don't know about you guys, but we're very much in the good days, and have been for the past decade, and a bit.

Price is temporary, value is permanent. As long as you remember that, you'll have a more positive outlook on things. What does it mean exactly? Price can be influenced by a lot of things, and it does. However, the core values of Bitcoin, and why it's successful in the first place still exist. For example, being responsible for your own wealth, removing the middle man, and tackling the centralised world we live in. That's the value side of Bitcoin, and why there will always be demand for it.

The only thing that truly threatens Bitcoin, is a global ban which is extremely unlikely. Increased regulation sure, but that actually promotes growth, and therefore is a good thing.

I mean, we like to pretend that fighters are invincible, but they aren't. We're talking about the best of the best, and Colby is one of those contenders that could beat anyone on his day. Although, you probably are right the most likely way he'll win is through a decision. However, he's capable of beating him on the feet. Chimaev is powerful, but he's also quite lazy in defense, as we saw with Burns.

Now, Colby doesn't hit as hard as Burns, but it's not all about power. Sometimes it's timing, and Chimaev has some big holes in his defense. He's brilliant at wrestling, especially on the offensive. His defense in his stand up leaves a lot to be desired though, and he does seem like the type of fighter to be complacent.