Vod's feedback in your case was a little bit harsh, given that you tried putting up collateral--I don't know anything about cargocoin tokens, but apparently the issue is that they're not traded on exchanges yet and therefore if you defaulted on your loan, the lender would be stuck, hoping that eventually he'd be able to sell them.  Does that about sum it up?

Did you get the loan you were asking for? m0gliE looked interested in doing it for you, but there's no followup in that thread.  I can't speak for Vod, but there might be an outside chance that if someone loans you that 0.1BTC and you pay it back on time and to the lender's satisfaction, Vod might reconsider the neg.  But calling him names and spamming his trust page with retaliatory negs, calling him a scammer won't work in your favor. 

People get tagged here for offering worthless collateral, because if the lender accepts it, they can very easily get scammed since the borrower (especially if it's a new account) has nothing to lose by defaulting on the loan.  In your case, Vod judged it as that kind of situation.  I said the feedback was harsh, but as I said I'm pretty ignorant about cargocoin tokens and whether they can eventually be sold or not.  If there's no chance, then the feedback is certainly appropriate.

I'm surprised you've missed all the commotion cryptohunter has created, but take a look at his post history and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.  I've seen lots of trolls in my time on bitcointalk, but he has to be one of the worst in terms of bizarre logic, denial, personal attacks, insanely long rambling, and he's even gone so far as to create an alt account, Chosen Username, who magically appeared on 12/21/18 right in the middle of a thread that cryptohunter was rambling in and getting no support--once Chosen Username started posting, it was the written equivalent of an Englishman trying to disguise his voice on the phone by speaking in a very contrived Mexican accent and thinking he's fooling everyone.

The alt account would be *mildly* amusing had cryptohunter not gone so far as to give Chosen Username 2 merits. 

He's a troll who thinks it's everyone else who's stupid, and by trying to rebut his accusations/attacks, I got sucked into the argument(s) far longer than I should have.  Since he's attacking other reputable members, I created this thread to basically appeal to people to stop feeding a malignant troll.  I've got him and his alt on ignore, and I'm not going to peek at their posts or respond to them and will attempt to not reply in threads either one of them have already posted in.

Some trolls are funny, some are ones you can just ignore, but this guy is off his rocker and is so toxic that he should be communally shunned IMO.  But hey, everyone is free to do as they like.

All the mathematics I've learned so long ago is somewhere hidden in my brain, but that info is contributing to my intuition, which is drawing the same conclusion. 

I just don't understand enough about the Fed's money-printing and how it actually works and whether that contributes to the "linearity" of that 30-year chart jjjfff displayed.  I would imagine that interest rates and many other factors are at work, but it appears jjjfff is tunnel vision about the Federal Reserve.

Thanks for replying.  I'd like people to post in my thread or his.  If he's full of shit, I'd like him to hear it and he's not going to if it's all posted in this thread--and it would be way off-topic anyway.  Thanks again, though.

Seems like there's a little flame war in progress here, but when I was thinking of where the math geeks and TA people hang out on bitcointalk, this was the first thread I thought of.

I made a thread in Economics asking for some smarty-pants math analysis of another thread I was posting in, where the OP (jjjfff) seems to be getting things wrong--but as I explained in my own thread, it's been a long time since I've applied math to anything and don't trust my own analytical skills to figure out what's wrong with what jjjfff is saying.  What he posted about (the Fed printing money and the stock market's response to it and so forth) is interesting to me, but that little voice inside my head is screaming that he's a nutty conspiracy theorist who might be getting his facts wrong.

My thread in Economics is self-moderated and only got two replies so far, only one of which was a little bit useful.  That section is a shithole and I'm sure my thread is getting buried under a mountain of garbage threads.  I'm offering some merits to anyone who can give me some insight into jjjfff's claims, i.e., whether they're correct or way off base.

If anyone is interested in maybe earning some merits and knows math and can explain some of jjjfff's assertions with math to back it up, and also knows a little bit about inflation, the stock market, inflation-adjusted stock charts and TA, please read both my thread and the one by jjjfff that I linked to above and respond in my thread.  I made it self-moderated due to the shitposting problem, but I won't delete posts by anyone who puts some effort into their reply.  My sMerits may run out, but if they do I'll keep track of who made informative posts and merit them when I get more.  I know I'm not offering a huge reward for this, but I hate when people post wrong information.  I'm just not 100% certain jjjfff is wrong. 

Just as an example:  jjjfff made a statement that the slope of the 30-year DJIA chart=% gain, and I know that to be false.  I tried to rebut that, but he said I was overthinking it.

Thanks in advance for any help.

I was unaware that OP had recently tried to sell an account until this thread got bumped and I happened to take a look at his feedback and saw the neg by owlcatz.  That's seriously frowned upon here, OP, so I just added another neg to your collection.  

You don't care about this forum in the least, but there are some of us who do.  That's why you got all those negs--because you keep doing things that are considered shady here.  

Also, F.Developers, if OP really did scam you then you should open up a scam accusation with all the details if you haven't done so already.  I don't recall seeing one, but I might've forgotten or missed it.

I'm not trying to hijack this thread, and this will be my last response unless a new thread devoted specifically to this issue is opened up, but this statement needs to be addressed.

All that positive feedback you've received over the years is nice, but you should know damn well that there are quite a few members who've had the same and ended up getting tagged by DT members.  Also, all your past feedback has nothing to do with your actions while you had Lutpin managing your campaign.  You're basically saying that you're a victim because of your trust history, and you are quite mistaken about that.  

Anyone who's thinking about joining one of your campaigns should be warned about you.  Part of it was indeed Lutpin's fault, but you treated all your campaign participants like shit by not communicating with them to keep them apprised of what was happening--and there's a good reason for that.  You were doing nothing to get the campaign participants paid.  They were advertising for you in the hope that eventually they'd get paid.  They didn't speak up because of your reputation, which you used to your advantage.  A bunch of signature campaigners who are very likely desperate for money aren't going to complain when the campaign was started by a Legendary member who's been here since 2011.

For weeks you did nothing to make things right and finally when Lutpin got off his ass and did his job, some participants started complaining that they hadn't been paid for all of the posts they'd made.

And after being told that there would be a new campaign manager, now you told people that this wasn't a campaign manager transition at all, that these are totally new campaigns.  You thus fucked over members who had faith in you after they found out that they're no longer in one of your campaigns.  That's lousy management on your part, at best.  You earned that feedback I left, my friend.  It's unfortunate other DT members apparently don't feel the same and keep silent about all of this.

Having said all of that, I have no doubt that Hhampuz will do an excellent job as your campaign manager.  It's not him I have concerns about: it is you, Lightlord.  I'm hoping your bad practices don't start affecting him and his reputation, since you're basically his boss.  Don't know him personally, but I think he has enough integrity to work for you and not end up pulling any funny stuff at your behest.

Edit:
I happen to believe that, and as I said I have no issue with you whatsoever.  The issue of restarting the campaign without including the previous ones isn't the big issue anyway, although when you say that there were very few posters left at the end, why do you think that was?  The members who'd stopped posting were probably very happy with the way the campaigns used to run but had given up after the BS that lightlord and Lutpin pulled.  They did the smart thing, but I would guess that many of them were loyal to 777Coin and Bitvest for quite a while and probably should have been invited back. 

Whatever.  Moving on from that, I've seen how you manage campaigns and you do an excellent job.  All I'm saying is that you've got a boss as well, and I'm hoping none of his previous behaviors get repeated.  But since the debacle of those two campaigns resulted from a combination of lightlord and Lutpin's actions (and inactions), I have faith that the new campaigns run far more smoothly.  Good luck.

I'm assuming you didn't just lose that 400 euros, because I saw your post in May basically saying the same thing.  It's a good thing that you warned people then and now, because I also think Yobit will or already has gone full-scam.  But I think they provide just enough legitimate services to people that not everyone is ringing the alarm like they did when Cryptsy went rogue.

Anyone who's reading this should take heed and avoid Yobit like the plague.  Their customer service is essentially non-existant, and a lot of people have scam accusations open against them.  I used to use them to trade occasionally, but I stopped a long time ago after reading all of those accusations on bitcointalk.

Are they still doing this p&d thing?  When I first heard people talking about it, I thought it was either a hoax or that Yobit had gotten hacked.  Is that seriously their new thing? 

For an exchange to pick a coin to pump and dump and then go ahead and do it is absolutely unethical, and I wouldn't trust any exchange that did this to execute legitimate orders properly.  Who's to say that they wouldn't give fake price or volume data or be guilty of some other breach of ethics?  That should scare away any person with a brain.

STT, I don't think you read the other thread in its entirety, much less all of my OP here that clearly stated that I'm looking for some mathematical analysis and a critique of where I'm right or wrong in that other thread and whether the OP of that thread doesn't know what he's talking about--and why, backed up with math. 

Most of what you wrote I already know.  I won't delete your post, because it's not a shitpost, but it's not what I'm looking for so I won't merit it.  But thanks for the input and bumping the thread for me.

How would making a huge profit be out of reach for me if I bought an index fund in 1989, which is where your "linear" graph begins?  You're saying that the Fed's money is benefiting the stock market, correct?  If that's the case, then everyone with any money to invest (including 401(k) participants) can also benefit.  And in your second sentence above, you seem to be implying that there's no inflation--and that's demonstrably false.  The price of everything is higher now than when I was a kid, and so are the wages people are being paid. 

I'm going to hold off on posting anything else until I lure someone smarter than me here to look at what we're both saying.

I don't think I am.  This thread is interesting enough such that I'd like to hear what some math geeks think about it, and I've created a thread trying to get them here to scrutinize what you and I have written.  No responses yet, but that's about what I expected for a self-moderated thread in a spam-heavy section like Economics, even if I'm tempting people with merits for intelligent responses. 

I told you I agree with you about the inflation after the dollar was taken off the gold standard and I don't argue that the Fed is printing money like mad.  My contention is that the Federal Reserve is not "rigging" the stock market exclusively by doing that.  That's why I wanted to see the inflation-adjusted data.  That's why I want to see if the linearity you're talking about is mathematically sound (and relevant) and I don't trust my own judgement on that.  I want to hear from some people who know math and economics.

And again, if the market is "rigged", it seems that everyone should be able to take advantage of that by buying index funds.

Can someone please take a look at this thread and the claims that the OP is making and then specifically take a look at this reply of mine?  I've done a lot of chemistry mathematics in my life, but it's been a hell of a long time since I've done calculus and although I took a course in econometrics in college, that also was a long time ago and it didn't teach me much about TA and how calculus is applied to stock market analysis.  I suggested that the chart he presented wasn't inflation-adjusted and that the Dow components have changed over the years.  I'd like to hear some smart people's opinions on that.

Specifically, OP is claiming that the DJIA is linear from 1989-present and that
...and if I'm not mistaken, that's completely wrong, as I explained in my last post there.  I'd like to know if I'm correct from some people who know how to do serious math as it pertains to the stock market.  I know we've got a lot of brilliant folks here and I'd like to know if what I'm reading in the linked thread is a bunch of BS or if it has some validity.

Since Economics is full of spammers, this is going to be self-moderated.  Shitposts will get deleted, while thoughtful posts that teach me something will most likely earn some merit.  I'm a merit source but I'm not sure how many sMerits I have left.  If I run out and think someone who posted here deserves merits, I'll keep track and merit him when I get topped up.

Did you look at the article I linked to and see the chart of the inflation-adjusted DJIA?  From 1916-1994, the market was NOT linear.  After the internet boom, the DJIA shot up to the moon, but it still doesn't look linear to me.  I am no mathematician, but I think you'd have to do a linear regression on the data and see what the r² value is with the best-fit straight line is (it's been a long time since I've done that) to see exactly how linear the market behaved.

In addition, I mentioned that the components of the Dow get changed and that also affects things.  Poorly-performing companies get dumped from it, good ones get added.  I'm not sure how a broader index, i.e., one with way more than 30 stocks, would look as far as your hypothesis goes, but I'd be curious and I think it'd be a better test.

Also, you're saying that the slope of the index (price vs. time) is the % gain.  That doesn't seem right simply from a unit analysis [slope = d(price)/d(time)], whereas % gain is p₂/(p₂-p₁)*100 .  You'd have to do linear regression to get a curve and then take the derivative of that--and the result isn't the percentage gain.  Maybe someone with a stronger background in math could give some input here.

Yeah, and I'd also like to read a response from OP (or anyone) to the post I made in this thread pointing out that the chart is not inflation-adjusted--but meanwhile, OP has begun a new thread ranting about how the Fed is rigging the markets.  Makes me wonder if OP really wants a discussion on this or not. 

But hey, this is Economics, right?  The section that's almost as bad as Bitcoin Discussion, where very few people read posts.

Yes, because it's not your forum or your rules. 

It's not honest for you to do so, and that's not what the rules are suggesting except maybe inside your own head.

Surely you're not exaggerating just a little here, even if Vod did come give you a conjugal visit with you on the receiving end.

Go watch some porn, have a beer, smoke a joint, get away from the computer and bitcointalk in particular.

I'm sure it's in the works, just like your next ban evasion is.  We're all relaxed here.  Nothing but peace and potato chips and swirling zig-zags in our collective peripheral vision.  Maybe Reddit might suit you better.

So in other words, it would be extremely smart to buy index funds with those savings.  Seems to me you're saying the markets are rigged in such a way that an average person can make money in stocks.

I assume that chart isn't adjusted for inflation.  Do you have data that shows what it would look like when the DJIA is adjusted for inflation?  

Also, I'd like to point out that the companies that comprise the DJIA can be added or deleted to make the average look better.  The list of DJIA corporations today looks a hell of a lot different than it did when the DJIA was created, and you can check this link to see what I'm talking about.  That doesn't mean the market is rigged, though, just that the indexes can be tweaked to buff them up.

Edit:  Just found this article, haven't read the whole thing yet, but it does have some interesting charts.  Looks like the 1989-present graph isn't quite as linear as OP presented it, but the explosion that happened around the end of the gold standard certainly does look real.

If I'm not mistaken, I think I voiced some disagreement about that feedback on mdayonliner.  I happen to believe he wasn't intending to scam but wouldn't rule out the possibility of it happening if someone actually sent him that $100k (or whatever the number was).  I also think he's learned his lesson about doing stuff like that and don't think that feedback removal by hilariousandco would be a bad idea at this point--but there's also the ponzi stuff that other members feel strongly about, and I don't think that feedback is going to be removed.

Most of you may not believe this, but I do believe in second chances and removal of feedback if the member has learned his lesson.  I've removed lots of negs from account buyers/sellers if they've not repeated the behavior and have shown evidence of being a valuable member of the forum. 

I may not have made myself clear in my previous post, but I am not arguing that LoyceV should remove his feedback.  I'm saying I don't understand the explanations given by bountyhunters.io enough on a technical level to judge whether what he was doing was the only option (which is what he initially seemed to be arguing) or whether he was caught in a lie.  I get that asking for private keys is a no-no.  I also get that a member with no escrow history who's not on DT offering to escrow $100k is a no-no.  Both of those things are huge red flags.

In my previous post I said that if bountyhunters.io changed their method to one that doesn't require private keys and if they haven't scammed anyone, LoyceV's feedback might be worth removing.  But suchmoon's point I hadn't considered before writing my post:


If they've got a bunch of people's private keys, they still could scam if they wanted to.  It does make sense to me now to leave the neg intact.

I don't mind this either, but I don't think every neg needs to be discussed and voted on.  If you're on DT, you ought to have good judgement to begin with and faith in the strength of your convictions--at least enough such that you don't need to seek advice for the feedback you leave (but there are times when it's necessary, and I've done it myself).  This issue is more complex than other ones IMO and it's good that advice is being sought.

In this case, I think LoyceV was pretty justified in giving a neg to someone asking for people's private keys.  That, in my opinion, is an even worse offense than being a newbie and asking for a no-collateral loan or to buy bitcoin with PayPal, both of which can and do earn those newbies negative trust (usually from Vod).

However, my ignorance of all things ETH-related kicked in pretty quick while reading that scam accusation thread.  But what grabbed me is that if this post is true (which was responded to by bountyhunters.io in the next post), then I would say the neg is completely justified and should stay because that would mean bountyhunters.io outright lied.  But the explanation they gave sails right over my head.  I do understand quite well that asking for someone's private keys is a big no-no, but in this case it seems like the suggested solution of creating a throwaway wallet would solve that problem.  The only thing with that is that we (and certainly bountyhunters.io) know not everyone will do it.

My current understanding is that they've fixed this issue now, is that right?  People no longer have to give up their private keys?  If that's the case and it's also true that they haven't scammed anyone, then feedback removal at this point might be appropriate.  It could be a case of them being naive about how their initial system that required private keys would be perceived, i.e., that people wouldn't think they were scammers.  Unfortunately it's impossible to know someone's intentions; we can only judge people by their actions. 

Holy crap!  I know you've received a lot of personal merits, but how do you still have that many sMerits to give out?  I've been a merit source for a couple of months now and have also received quite a few earned merits as well and I haven't even come close to having that many sMerits to give away--and I don't think you're a sMerit hoarder by any means.  Are all the merit sources getting the same amount every month?  Do we have to use up our source sMerits before we get replenished?  That's a little bit off-topic, but I don't recall ever reading an answer to either of those questions except maybe the second one and I can't recall the answer.

I made a post or two about Venezuela citizens using Dash a few months ago, because I thought the situation was an interesting one and that their hyperinflation crisis might be benefited by crypto and had read that more merchants were accepting Dash in that country since the whole debacle began.  I was curious about the extent to which Dash (or any cryptocurrency) is being used in a real-world example of hyperinflation, and I think I asked for some input in my post, but nobody answered my question.  I'm not looking for your merits, but you might want to check the threads I posted in to see if any of the replies deserve some.  Those were in the Economics section, where the posts tend to be better than what you typically find in Altcoin Discussion.

It's one thing to hear that merchant acceptance of Dash has grown by X%, but I want to know how much it's actually being used.  I tried searching the internet for that data, but all the google results spit out Dash-pumping websites or news sources that didn't answer my question.  Jet Cash, if you come across a thread or post that has anything about this, keep me in mind and drop me a PM if you would.  I have Altcoin Discussion on ignore and might miss a new thread about it (I did search that section when I was trying to read about the Dash/Venezuela thing).

You ended up meriting a lot of shitposts in that thread.  People quoting huge blocks of text or only the OP in threads may be annoying, but giving out merits just because they didn't isn't a very good way to distribute your sMerits IMO.  That was a stupid thread to begin with (but hey, it's B&H, right?), and I bet that at least some of the replies were by alts of the OP. 

Hopefully your new year's resolution isn't to lower your standards as much as you did in the linked thread.  I don't know how many sMerits you get as a source and from other members, but you'll run out of them pretty damn quick if you keep doing that.

What did the ban message say?  Did it say what the ban was for or if it was a temp-ban or a permanent one?