Maybe.

That's a rather vague statement. I could simply mean they get first shot at them, or that they get them first, all the way through control of product marketing. Without seeing the specific language, we have no idea what is exclusive to them.

use these links. I have no mac, so haven't tested that, but the rest work. https://gitter.im/earthcoinproject/earthcoin

I think this may be the most constructive post in this thread!

While I see your point, the problem of rules being arbitrarily applied and ambiguous leads to more problems than it solves. It puts me, as a user, in a bad position because I never know what to expect. And I can be quite provocative when I want to. I try to do so in an honest and intellectual manner, but sometimes I just dash something off. While others have, in this thread, spoken of being selective, I have not other than NOT doing anything against obvious scams. I have instead pointed out that it is not nearly selective enough. Arbitrary enforcement of rules makes for revolutions IRL and bad policy on the 'net. Right now BCT is king in the Crypto world, but that can change, and it will change if/when somebody with a better schema for moderation and sufficient money for advertising comes along. There will indeed always be those who deliberately break the rules, but in this forum, you can not actively determine which rules apply until your post comes up deleted.
I would actually like to see that wall of text, mostly out of curiousity. I cannot think of a single reason NOT to moderate scams. As the husband of a lawyer, I would think that the very opposite would be your policy as failure to do so can be seen as accessory to the crime in most jurisdictions.

As for mprep, I have a serious problem with his attitude. As to whether it is he who has deleted the majority of the deletions I've had (some of which were indeed on topic, relevant, and in no way that I can see in violation), I have no idea. Simply because he and I have clashed in the past, I do think of him first. But with the complete opacity, there is frankly no way to tell. To my knowledge, you and I have never had an issue. You warned me to chill out once, a long while ago. And I was drunk at the time, so you were right I rarely drink. Moderation should be moderate.

EDIT: I made a mistake above, in that I did point out that with no hard and fast rules, moderators (I pointed it at mprep as we have had the argument before) are BY NECESSITY self selective in what they moderate by the very fact of their not being hard, clear rules. It reads like a lie. It was in fact an out of coffee error. Sorry

Alright. I'm pretty much done. This is the fourth or fifth time I've addressed this issue, both with you and the other mods, and, indeed Theymos. I don't like you, I find you smug and insulting. That in itself doesn't make you a bad moderator. The "I'm just following orders" while indeed being QUITE selective about what you "moderate" (remember, nothing REALLY goes away on the web), however, does. It's not so much that you deleted an offhand comment. That, it iself is a minor annoyance. In truth, in my time here I've maybe had a dozen posts deleted, one of which I agreed with. If Gmaxwell hadn't deleted it, I would have. My problem remains with the entire system. Yes, I do have an issue with you. But it's minor by comaprison to the REAL issue, which is that there are NO hard and fast rules, so you never know if something is going to be deleted out of hand. Relevance to the topic is only occasionally a criterion.

Further, on a website who's MAJOR FOCUS is an emerging monetary system, legitimate discussions of business and economics as pertaining to a particular coin are frequently "moderated" (read deleted) for absolutely no defensible reason. I chose the example I did simply because it was the most recent.

Theymos, I know you have followed this thread. You have three choices.

One, you can let things continue as they are, with the concommitant damage to your reputation and website.
Two, you can drop moderation altogether and let the chips fall where they may. With the concommitant damage to your reputation and website.
Three. You can lay down real rules and get your moderators to follow them exactly and precisely, rather than abritrarily and capriciously. This is the optimal solution in my opinion.

This isn't some ultimatum, it's just the only courses of action that I can see as available to you.

Oh, and yes, mprep, I have run BBS's off and on since the late 1970's. I am hyperbolic, and the comparison to a war crime is deliberately over the top, but illustrative. When there ARE NO concrete rules, you most assuredly DO choose what to enforce and what not to.

Take a REAL hard look in the mirror and ask why it makes your blood boil. You and I have gone rounds several times. I stopped bothering some time ago, because you will neither be persuaded nor bother with anything like logic, reason, or frankly, anything aside from snide remarks and the nuremburg defense. Never forget that the aforementioned "defense" mostly led to hangings. It's not considered valid. "Just following orders" never works as a long term defense.

You are a weasel. And the scams ARE REPORTED DAILY. I've done it, many, MANY others have done it. yet they stay. But a bit of humour in a thread that you have no interest in, well, now, that just has to go, doesn't it?

I'm assuming you're the author of the latest deletion. From here forward, I'm using the "just following orders" defense as well. I reported it. And I will continue to do so. I prefer discourse and debate, but what the hell. I can fight dirty.

While we clearly disagree on method, I am actually making the assumption that I have bolded. I've been on fora with very heavy moderation and not found it offensive. Because it was open, consistent, and the rules were not ambiguous. This simply is not the case on BCT. I wish it were. Despite my bitching here, this is my favorite forum.

The problem I see here, and many others agree with me, is that there is NO consistency. Even the "official" rules are listed as "the official list of unofficial rules". See what I'm saying? You, Gmaxwell, and SaltySpitoon have always seemed very even handed to me. Mining Buddy and I have never had any direct interaction that I am aware of, so I have no opinion. The aforementioned mprep gets under my skin. but in ALL cases, even the mods I like, the application of "rules" (in quotes because they are NOT well defined) is arbitrary and capricious. I think in some cases malicious as well, but I can't prove it. I can prove, very easily, the arbitrary and capricious nature of it.

I personally would not have an issue with the moderators being VERY strict IF THEY WERE ON THE SAME PAGE AND CONSISTENT. It would change the nature of BCT for the better. It's not moderation I object to.

Problem with that is, again, anonymity. In the unlikely event of a response, the odds are I'm making my case with the other aggrieved party as judge. If we knew such a button went directly to Theymos, it would be useful.

You being one of the three mods I don't find offensive, this kind of pains me to say it to you. But frankly, there SHOULD be a target on the back of the mods. Or on the front. You take policing actions, it's what you do. If you cannot do so in an open and above board manner, then you WILL receive a great deal of grief. If what the mods did was consistent, constructive, and served to better the community, the problems would be minimal. It is unfortunate that moderation is NOT consistent, NOT constructive, and frequently detrimental not only to this community, but to the digital currency ecosphere as a whole.

If a thing or action cannot withstand scrutiny, it is false.

You make a good point. However, it doesn't apply to me. I don't use sock puppets, and my real name is known with just a little searching.

My main problem, whether or not it's anonymous, is that the deletions (and other moderation operations that I have observed) seem arbitrary, capricious, and often petty. They serve no purpose in "policing" the forums, but seem almost intentionally to be abrasive.

As I have said, and others have noted, it is COMMON for obvious scams to be left completely alone. Yet make a comment ON TOPIC that is a bit tongue in cheek, or as Crestington noted, a reference to claws and cigars, and it get's "moderated". The particular "incident" that he was referencing was a bit off topic, but not terribly so. Several of us had achieved "hero member" status within a short time of each other. We're all known to each other (some of us IRL), and we had about a five post go at each other about what sort of super hero we were. It was just a bit of fun, nobody with an IQ larger than their shoe size would have been offended, and it ended as quickly as it began. It was FRIENDLY, and it was removed. Yet some jackass spewing vitriol and slander gets to keep it on site forever. The disproportionality of it is amazing.

The message being sent, whether intentional or not, is that being an ass is ok, but having a sense of humour is not. It's also been rather clear in my time here that open scamming is perfectly ok, but legitimate business will be heavily monitored. Is this REALLY the message we wish to send to the world via the largest cryptocurrency forum on the internet? If so, good luck with mainstream adoption.

When I (guardedly) invite people here, I tell them that Bitcointalk is Mos Eisely. A Wretched hive of scum and villainy, but with some of the most brilliant minds and ambitious people you'll ever meet. That's obviously said with some poetic license, but I defy ANY of the mods to deny the truth of it.

Bull. If the moderation were serious, instead of removing a bit of humour here and there, and if said moderation was for any LEGITIMATE purpose, then anonymity is contraindicated for the very reasons I stated. It gives the mods the ability to take out a bad day on people for NO reason. I'm not a young man, and I am not gullible. Make a credible argument. Your mods, with a very few exceptions, do not do a good job. They do things like this, and leave scams and libel so obvious that a dead man could see it to go on. One might get the impression they're in on it. Many have. If self moderated threads are not going to be self moderated, then there really is no point to their existence, is there?

At the very least, it would be prudent for the mods to state WHY a post is deleted rather than doing a hit and run. And if anonymity is de rigeur, then at the very least there should be a reply option. Preferably one that goes directly to you, because I doubt very much you would tolerate their general behaviour if you had to deal with the fallout from it. mprep in particular is a weasel. If you are not fully aware of that, just read any five of his posts. His "arguments" don't even make sense in his head, let alone in any sort of open forum.

Short form. If the mods must hide what they are doing, who they are, and why they are doing it, then they are NOT doing a good job and ARE under suspicion of deliberate malfeasance. I generally find you reasonable, but you are totally incorrect on this one except in the fact that you own the forum.

I chose one example of several over the last month. And yes, I do assume it was mprep, I just can't prove it, because NOWHERE in the message does it say who made the decision. I'm not surprised, I'm annoyed. Either the stated rule that self moderated threads are moderated by the owner of the thread is true, or it is not.

Since the mods do not actually give two shits and a fuck about scams, what is the point of deleting comments like that? If Presstab (in this instance) finds my post to be problematic, he would be the one to delete it, not the moderator who Cannot Understand Normal Thinking. In this particular instance, I am completely sure that the OP had nothing to do with it, as he is a personal friend. In others, I suppose it's possible... except that on a self moderated thread if the OP deletes it, it SAYS SO.

This was in the Hyperstake thread, which is a self moderated forum. It was NOT off topic, and was not considered off topic or detrimental by the leaders of that community, who I am well acquainted with. Allegedly, you only moderate self moderated topics in the event of complaints by the thread's owner (doesn't apply in this case or several others of late) or egregious abuse of forum members. Compleatly non applicable.

Obviously, as a private forum you have the "right" to do as you please, but if you lay down rules and then deliberately violate them, you NEED to be accountable. If moderators are going to do this, then it should not be anonymous.

Let's be serious for a moment. You do NOT EVER moderate known scammers, nor do you seem to give a tinker's damn about content, intellect, or even the ability to construct a sentence. But you will moderate off hand comments like this for no visible reason. And in a self moderated forum where it is not offensive to the community so moderated. It has become a source of running humour and contention among your users.

At the very least, if you are going to remain anonymous, state your reasons for deleting a post. That in itself would likely make you hesitate, as it often seems the only justification for deleting things is "somebody pissed in my wheaties this morning". If you have a real reason for it, then you should have no problem identifying both the reason and yourself (via screen name). If you are just playing god, you should just stop.

I would be more concerned if I didn't know and trust the operator of acidpool, but it remains a problem. Over 80 percent of the network is on ONE pool. I cordially invite you all to solo mine, load balance between mine and his, or set up a pool of your own so that we are more secure.

Thanks!

Yeah, I was aware of that Press has slowly culled them, it was a lot more early on. We still occasionally conflict on p2p and rpc ports too. The development of the two coins has diverged significantly. I'm in to both, though at current my highest holding in any coins is GMC, followed very closely by HyperStake. I had a fair stash of TEK, but I managed to kill my backup drive AND my main drive. Might be able to recover that, might not. I never had a lot of TRK, which was also lost in that debacle. Also HBN.

Y'all take a lesson from this. I failed to practice what I preach, a mistake I won't make again. Make regular backups of your wallet.dat file, and make 'em to CD or other permanent media. In USD terms, I probably lost about 600 dollars in this debacle. Totally my fault, too. Well, I didn't break the drives, that was my damn cats in the case of the backup, and simple mechanical failure due to age and abuse on the other one. But if I'd had proper backups, I'd have lost time and that's all.

Sure, go for it. Be prepared to have it picked apart. If it holds up to that, it's a good idea. If it don't, you'll know how to revise it

It was actually a quote from the Christian bible. Which when applied to the bible as a whole, shows rotten fruit. But Christians don't (want to ) see that. It seems to me the same with Islam. I have friends who are muslims, and they respect my lack of faith and don't try to convert me. It's futile anyway, as once you break an addiction, you don't EVER want to go back.

It has been my contention for a long while that most people are decent human beings in spite of their religion. But it takes religion to make good people do bad things. Because "if god be with us, who can stand against us" is a very powerful and destructive meme. As I stated before, the so-called extremist, regardless of what sky daddy they believe in, are usually the MOST adherent to a religion. Those with a vague or even fairly strong personal belief, but not "affiliated", or not taking the church too seriously, seem to usually be ok people. Though I observe the most hypocrisy in two major human groupings (which often overlap). The piously religious, and politicians. Unbelievers tend to think that THIS life is worth living, not caring about an unprovable and likely fantastical afterlife, and thus make more of an effort to be useful humans. Exceptions abound, these are not set-in-stone truths. But the tendencies, I think, are quite obvious.

I think I can illustrate this in a manner that most religious people have a problem with. Or at least a great many I've interacted with. I am an anarchist, and I am an atheist. I have been asked many times if I would kill for my beliefs. The answer is no, I would not. This seems to bother the religious mind a great deal. They then go on to accuse me of not being a strong believer in the things I hold close, which is untrue, or of being a pacifist, which is even more untrue. I do believe quite strongly that killing over a difference of opinion is foolish, and murder. OTOH, you come after me, my family, or my friends, yes, I would kill. Without remorse or hesitation. But it's not to defend my beliefs. They either stand on their own merits, or they need revision.

Pool is now tested and working correctly. Tried PPS, and it was too much of a hassle. MPOS works great for PPLNS, which is now what it is. All previous registrations are gone, as the old pool and the block chain disaster caused a major DB problem. I believe everyone who was owed has been paid out. Tell me if I'm wrong. New pool is fully functional, but has a lot of cosmetic work to be done yet. So expect it to look a bit different from day to day. All mining functions are tested and working good. Everything I change from here out will either be cosmetic or additional functions like an IRC chat window.

I also want to mention that gmc.acidpool.com is run by noise23, and is also a very good pool. Let's try to get the hashrate spread around between at least those two. I'm not really in it for the profit (though I certainly won't mind ), so anyone wants to put up a pool, GO FOR IT! If I'm able to assist, I will. I know MPOS and crypto-expert stratum very well. NOMP, in my arrogant opinion, is an abortion, but UNOMP looks pretty nice for that type of pool. No clue on P2pool, but it would be cool if GMC had one. My pool's link is in my sig, and if you go directly to gmc.cryptocloudhosting.com, you can also link to the block explorer and a continuously updated bootstrap file.

Happy Mining!

don't forget this one http://hyp.cryptocoinexplorer.com/rich

... "and ye shall know a thing by it's fruits"....

It's just a "time in service" thing. Take it back a few hundred years, and you have Joan of Arc being burned at the stake for FAR less offense. Islam has a seven hundred year deficit in their body count and civility. Christianity lost it's teeth during the reformation. Go back 700 years and see what you see.