It's time to celebrate  Big thanks to dbshck who pushed me over the 1000 Merit line. It feels amazing to be the first user (I'm not really counting theymos and satoshi for this  ) to reach this! Now I can sit back and watch DdmrDdmr overtake me. Let's also see if I can be the very first user past the 2000 merit threshold (obviously not including any other members that have already crossed it)  . Congrats of the 1000 merits earnt so far (and counting), I expect 2000 by December... I'm in the same situation like you but missing 4 merit.. We have to make a Self-Made Ranking Up Club I think According to Vod's BPIP, and obviously ignoring theymos and satoshi, there is currently 1 self-made legendary, 21 self-made heroes (of which 5 don't have the activity requirements), and 93 self-made senior members (of which 7 don't have the activity requirements), but at least a couple of the seniors are clear cases of merit abuse. It's quite nice to see that some users are getting more smeri for a rank than their actual activity status and shows that theymos set the threshold quite well for them... |
|
|
|
And @thequin, that address dowsn't seem to have too many large depositors, the most I saw was about 0.21BTC. There's a difference between being trusted to store someone's balance and being trusted to store someone's change....
This tx https://btc.com/b3a315142733b3c4aa52a84a2f63b1bc9474d161161850d5e4004d43be5db3b8 from only 5 days ago is someone depositing 137.57465000 BTC and it automatically getting put into cold storage. I mean it'll get good interest, however that is probably someone with a lot more money than sense... Unless it's a start of a larger portfolio they have of investments of course if they were mining quite early on... |
|
|
|
The Trezor has been replaced with a Ledger and as stated on the site that is in addition to encrypted paper wallets. A multisig solution is not any more secure if there is only one owner of the business. Many people do trust us with large deposits, currently over 1400 BTC. You can do some simple blockchain analysis from our deposit address https://btc.com/1Fu3iBR2EMQWeYGi3XvrPmcPUkne8ZWj9h to see how active it is. Multisig is also impractical if you are more than one business owner, because both parties are constantly needed to do tx's and we know this is not the ideal scenario. People get sick or they go on leave or they are busy with many other projects and this restricts the daily operation. Also, what happens if one of the partners suddenly dies? Nah, I still think the hardware wallet is more flexible and more practical in this kind of scenario and the backup paper wallets is the best way to secure the deposits.  You're supporting me without knowing it now. A 2 of 3 multisig is a perfect solution and that is, indeed, for if someone dies... If wetsuit's dead what are you going to do if you have money on there? So with a 2 of 3 multisig you only need to cosigners so you dhouldn't keep having to interrrupt one of them... And @thequin, that address dowsn't seem to have too many large depositors, the most I saw was about 0.21 BTC. There's a difference between being trusted to store someone's balance and being trusted to store someone's change.... |
|
|
|
Cloudflare's "onion routing" wont fix the problem of Endless CAPTCHA. CAPTCHA is served by Google and Google does not like Tor. The problem can only be resolved if you enable a .onion mirror of BitcoinTalk and disable Google's CAPTCHA from login form.
Don't allow that to happen... We don't want a removal of captchas entirely. Although I do wonder what was wrong with the old system (other than I think you had to pay for the captchas and they might have been to clear for bots to detect the writing in them)... |
|
|
|
New circuit works! Thank you! I don't have merits, so check your Bitcoin address that listed in your profile Wow. Thanks man! That’s a nice surprise. I think you have to send those bitcoin to Og now . I just now enabled Cloudflare's "onion routing", which is supposed to fix that, though I have some concerns about it, so we'll see how it goes.
Edit: It doesn't seem to actually be doing anything yet, though. Maybe it takes some time to come into effect, or maybe there's some other issue.
As long as you don't plan on sleeping straight after the update then we're probably good . Captcha can make you think the earth is flat because it drives you INSANE IN THE MEMBRANE.
So that's what that thread is about? |
|
|
|
Thanks!
Apparently members of the forum with an activity of 700-774 was very disappointed.
Thats me. One week after release of Merit system I got enough activity to become Legendary - 775. So, I can say that Merit system was released one week too early . But I can't say that I'm very disappointed. Maybe I'm a bit unlucky, but anyway, Legendary rank wouldn't make big difference for me because it has same benefits as Hero rank in general. And maybe one day, after 5 or 10 years I will be Legendary with 10000 activity Wow! i'm glad I advanced before then otherwise I'd probably be like you now. With 600 merits or something and a hero member status (it's a good status just not as good as legendary :-) ). |
|
|
|
That’s an issue with Tor. There is not much you can do other than selecting a new identity or a new circuit for the website to get a new IP.
New circuit works! Thank you! I don't have merits, so check your Bitcoin address that listed in your profile Hehe, I hope you're not trying to buy merits there . |
|
|
|
So, 2 more months have passed, there are no progress on my question. I'm sorry, I'll have to turn to the Hague Tribunal!  I'd suggest resending the pm and see if you can get theymos to respond to it. If not, post with your new acccount... |
|
|
|
Did they not change the algorithm also or should it be the same (if op tries it and shiny to shine doesn't work)? Finally I'd like to point out that electrum never ever generates bip39 seeds so what third space is saying cannot be true. Current versions of Electrum do use the bip39 dictionary though but a different method of converting the mnemonic to the wallet's private keys.
Yes this is true, they went from mpk's (i think) to the seeds that are now used in v 2.0. |
|
|
|
I'd rather get to the point where we are removing these trash threads than simply just locking them. It's better to do that when they don't have any replies, and before they become a problem.
Agreed, but we run in to the problem of not enough mods again. I frequently report newly created threads for being spammy, low value, duplicate questions, etc. Sometimes these reports aren't acted on for 24 hours or more, by which time there can easily be 4-5 pages of spam replies. The question remains also why a section so heavily moderated such as the mining section gets three mods whereas things like bitcoin discussion gets 1 (and that's a global mod so it doesn't really count) and project developement has no mods... |
|
|
|
Definitely worth it. It pushes actual worthy discussion down the page, and it will then be forgotten in an hour, and never return. You see this all the time. I appreciate it from the standpoint of a user of the forum, and I'm sure a lot of other moderators do too. Unfortunately, I only remove topics when there's not many replies, and they are pointless. Otherwise, I'll lock them, but if they are out of my jurisdiction I'll ignore the report, and allow another moderator with permission to lock it to deal with it.
This is quite true that it pushes things down the page. And jurisiction? We a country now or something? It is a lot better to lock topics with a large number of replies. If you're after not paying people for their sigs, move the thread to archival (they usually don't get paid that way)... I'd rather get to the point where we are removing these trash threads than simply just locking them. It's better to do that when they don't have any replies, and before they become a problem.
Yeah otherwise you get a lot of reports in meta going "welsh deleted my 50 copy-pased posts 50 pages down this spam megathread aargh". There's several threads asking the exact same question or generic statement. I'm pretty sure they look down the page, and take inspiration from previous threads, and can't think of their own content so just use already existing content.
Probably when their "I'm interested in this too!" comment gets deleted  . ...
This is the kind of thread that could have been nipped in the bud by a dedicated board mod looking out for these kind of things. This thread could have been locked on page 5 without losing any quality content. Instead, it remained open for another 1000+ shitposts.
You've persuaded me that locking is better than nuking. While nuking spam megathreads would harshly punish the spammers, it would also discourage those who participated in good faith, which kind of misses the whole point of a forum, hence I am convinced. That said, the thread I reported is still accumulating shitposts... There's also the thing that something that never started as a spam megathread in 2014/2015 has turned into one later down the line. There will be quite a bit of loss in activity points if this happens and a lot of spam in the meta section about how someone's be demoted from legendary to sr or something... I have previously suggested a decent suggestion in this thread. Auto-lock threads after 25 pages because these OPs never return to address the replies nor do they want to discuss the points. These threads are as good as getting an "Abandoned" tag in front of them in the front page.  I did with all the megathreads I made. Still commenting on them every few pages or so... I reported posts on them as spam in 2015/2016 (when spam seemed to be accepted) and then didn't report any ever since because they never got deleted. |
|
|
|
I am wondering if there is going to be just 1 merit source per local section or there can be more? Too many would be counterproductive, but 2 or 3, depending on the board, could help improve the section.
If they understand English too then there can't be too many per local board as they can award the english posts too. Only a few local sections don't have sources now.
That's good! Can you ask the moderators if they'd be interested in doing it? |
|
|
|
yes i know, but if i split and merge my same chips again again and again in the webif did the mixinground increase 1+n ? or is it still only an 1 mixing round cause i get on every split/merge action the same chips again ?
for example:
Fund 1.024 btc :
Choose the button split in 2x 0.512 BTC and then merge back to 1.024 BTC than split and merge again ... and so on
best regards moejoejay
No, it changes nothing... If you split and merge your chips, your chips are just values on the system. If you split the 1.024 BTC into two, withdrew them and put them into different sessions of 0.511 BTC (after paying tx fee and donating a bit to chipmixer) then yes it owuld make it slightly more private but not much as it already does quite well at mixing chips. |
|
|
|
Mining has three child boards without descriptions as well. Anyone have any suggestions for what those could be set as? "Don't post here because your post will be deleted" springs to mind . Mayhe I'm just being bitter though. |
|
|
|
Following the recent discussion, if when I see a spam thread I start checking all those one-liners’ posting history and I see it all looks the same, can I report him for that? Even if the posts have some sense? Something like: “one-liner shitposter, look at the post history". I mean, I know that I can report anything I want, but would that be useful?
You can spot many of those in the last pages of the thread, they write a one-liner and they have earned no or little merit.
I do that quite a lot especially on bounty threads in the altcoin section. If there's a lot of them, I like to leave a note in my comment to say "last page full of shitposts, could do with a bit of clensing" something like that. |
|
|
|
|
As a bit of constructive criticism, coinmarketcap isn't really an exchange it's just a price tracker of altcoins. Think of it as a price comparison site rather than a marketplace...
You can also do exchanges for bitcoins and other currencies from your token on this site. Although a lot of the time if a token isn't yet listed it might not be a token that is widely accepted here to be valuable...
|
|
|
|
|
I've thought since the merit system came in that very moderator should be a merit source.
I think that would have worked quite well as a system on here, but it might have given them too much of a job to do I guess...
|
|
|
|
|
It's good to see there's a new competition.
Looks as if the prize pot is bigger if I'm not mistaken too - or it will grow bigger because more people seem to prefer eth to litecoin!?
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure that it was unlucky. Those of us who managed to get the merits to become legendaries have a sense of achievement. Maybe we should call them super-heroes. Now that the new merits system has become the old merit system as a result of the improvements. It is difficult to differentiate between "merited" legendaries and "senior" legendaries. Probably time for a new rank to separate the "kids" from the actual "legends" of the forum. I think I remember someone suggesting a rank called Mythical or something along those lines I quite liked. I would say the first 10 people to reach it or have the requirement so high only a few will ever reach it. 10000 merits . I feel so inadequate and undeserving of being a legendary. I haven't created one statistical analysis project. It's starting to look as if that is a basic requirement for legendary status. Haha yeah you could do with making one of those, before you can become mythical (or whatever theymos decides for the next rank).
Onto the topic at hand, it could be that the user had posts deleted and thus their activity went down after the introduction of the merit system in january, and therefore were a legendary and now aren't one anymore... |
|
|
|
@jackg:
If i send some Bitcoins to chipmixer and merge and split the same coin third times in the webif ( frontend) .
Do i get an mixinground from 3 or 1 ? Is this just the same split merge transaction in the backend ?
regards moejoejay
I'm not sure I understand you but I'll take a stab anyway. Splitting and merging doesn't do much to make your coins private (other than make multiple outputs out of the inputs you put in). If you split 1.024 BTC for example, you'd get 2x0.512 BTC chips, you could then split that again and get 4x0.256 BTC chips and so on... If you go with the last option and split each chip twice, tehn you'd get 4 private keys with 0.256 BTC on them. It wouldn't be recommended to go too low as chipmixer can only handle a certain amount at a time in it's online wallet - I think a lot of the recent issues have been from too many people trying to make a large number of small chips and withdraw them. Did I explain myself correctly or do you want to ask the question again but worded differently so I can get what you're getting at? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
