Hm... Here is the comment that was left for you. muy pobre  Here is the comment that was left for you. cya there  Here is the comment that was left for you. A room for improvements--layout and contact. Here is the comment that was left for you. WORST EVER Here is the comment that was left for you. I don\'t use chats. Then don't review. Here is the comment that was left for you. Site com utilidade para o mundo bitcoin mas os comentários que vi aquando a realização deste questionário, deixaram muito a desejar pois falar de hamester\'s, super mário ou até mesmo fazer comentários sobre Chuck Norris, não é propriamente falar de assuntos relacionados com Bitcoins. Translated: Site with usefulness to the world bitcoin but the comments I saw when conducting this survey, left much to be desired because talking Hamester \ 's super mary or even make comments about Chuck Norris, not exactly talking about issues related to Bitcoins Actually helpful. Here is the comment that was left for you. Nice work I'm going to skip the rest now. Most of them are useless and not reviews. Some of them were genuinely helpful, but that's very rare. Heh, so far that's 3/3 of us getting crappy reviews. People who did that should really be docked for it (ex. be banned from future reviews) and have their funds removed. |
|
|
|
Thanks to a report from someone on the forums about layout issues on the site (and an image to back it up) I have found and fixed the problems! Enjoy,  . Everything should now look alright even on smaller resolutions! Please report to me if there are any issues. |
|
|
|
How many views do you get per day?
I sent you a PM as I would rather not publicly state this type of information. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Update! As of right now all three banner slots are taken. The rest is still available though!
|
|
|
|
What do you think about minimum reviews. Pay the lowest amount - expect poor quality 25 character views. Pay a bit more get 100 Characters etc
I also think being able to dispute reviews is important, bland traffic is one thing but poorly constructed reviews just to get a bit of money is different.
One last thing, is it possible to view old campaigns?
It says they last 7 days (not long enough IMO) I think it should be 3 months minimum for each old campaign so the webmaster has time to react to the changes. My campaign has already been deleted
Having a character requirement or word requirement per amount of pay would work to a point, but it still needs to be on topic. This would be resolved by allowing a built-in dispute system, or even better an actual rating system the campaign owner could run. Sort of like this: I start up my campaign You review my site The review goes in to a queue for me to look at. While it is in the queue, your funds are in a "pending" state If I accept the review, your funds are released. If I dispute it, it goes to the site owner Site owner has final say on what to do (I hope they are fair to both parties in this) Now, a concern would be "what if the campaign owner doesn't accept or dispute the review?" This would be resolved by setting a timer, of say... a week? If there is no response from the campaign owner in that time, the review is then automatically accepted. I think this is the most fair system to use, and it would help keep people from doing horrible reviews. If someone was disputed a certain number of times (like 3), they would be disabled from reviewing future sites. This, of course, only matters if the dispute went in favor of the campaign owner. If the reviewer won the disputes there would be no change. As for your question about old campaigns, I would actually prefer an unlimited time one, or even better, the ability to have a PDF and XLS of all the data emailed when the campaign is over. This would allow for easier record keeping and analyzing. |
|
|
|
Thank you for the feedback.
I do have a two more free sites to add, but I do need your username and your url both..
I am kind of stuck at a crossroads here.. On one hand the better the quality and the more requirements I put in the system, the less likely people will review for the .0001 BTC they get for their review.
If I set the minimum Cost Per Review to a higher number, then the advertisers won't purchase.
It is a hard line to walk, and I will take your suggestions to heart and see what changes I can make to keep everyone happy.
As for Authority, it refers to a websites credibility and knowledge on a specific subject. Would you consider this site and authority on the subject.
If you do review some websites as a member I do spell these topics out in more detail. I will need to add more information on the advertiser side.
Thanks again!
-Bitvisit
Alright, here's an idea... and really the only way I can see this working. Allow tiered pricing. Ex. the higher pay that's offered up, the more strict quality requirements there are. More or less creating the distinction between quality based on the price (which makes sense when you consider it). I am really not sure how to handle that though... just figured I would toss out the idea and maybe some brainstorming could go into it or something like it. |
|
|
|
|
/\
/| |\
/ | | \
/ | | \
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
/\
/| |\
/ | | \
/ | | \
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
Yes, but it's a lot shorter, easier to remember, tweet, text, type on a software keyboard, or write down.
Firstbits:
Many firstbits are unavailable or mass taken by resellers
Encourages blockchain bloating
Requires computational power or money to generate
Additional security risk in generation of vanity address
Relies on trusting third parties for firstbits lookup
Identity not verified - anyone can claim 1mtgox
1v.io
Lots of usernames available
Does not encourage blockchain bloating
Takes a few clicks to generate
No additional security risk
Relies on trusting third parties for username lookup
Identity verified - only someone with a @mtgox.com email can claim mtgox.com
Ahhh, cool. Thanks for the explanation. We can still use inputs.io as the address though, right? I actually find that easier to remember, lol. |
|
|
|
Oh, and we also have just purchased 1v.io for our users.
Can your qt or blockchain.info do that?
I don't follow... you just mean a new domain? |
|
|
|
Oh, ok then Really don't know what you expect to get from trolling like this but I hope whatever it is, you achieve your goal so you can move on and do something more productive with your life. And TF, sorry for the semi-spam, hopefully the free bumps take up for it, lol. |
|
|
|
Alright, I want to post a public review and a suggestion for the site. Please understand that this is NOT an attack on the site, nor bitvisit himself. This is solely with the people that are doing the reviews. Out of 18 reviews I have gotten for my site, only two. Yes, that is *two* of the people have taken it seriously. Sadly, one of those didn't even read the page though (they gave a real review, unlike giving all random ratings and then saying something like "perfect site!" while rating most things low), and instead made suggestions based on features that are "missing" even when they are on the front page... One person actually went through and evaluated the site, and their information was helpful. I would love to get in contact with this person if there was a way to do it. Rather than call them out directly, it was the person who ended their post with "Good start, but keep going." That person (if they read this and choose to disclose their identity that is fine, but I did not want to do it without permission and I have no idea how to get in contact with them) was the only person I could see that did what they were supposed to. Out of 18 people. That's a 5.56% rate of people who actually care, and that's pretty sad. Guys, if you are going to review someone's website, take it seriously. Posting random crap or bringing up things that have nothing to do with the website does the owner no good. Throwing up random ratings and then praising how perfect things are does no good. I would have NO issues if someone rated the site all 1's (the lowest possible) but actually gave input on why they feel that way. You can't simply say "I don't like it" because then I have no idea why. What part is it you don't like? What would make it better? Liking something is subjective; what I like you might not. Therefore I can't possibly sit around guessing at what you may or may not like. That's the whole point of the site reviews to begin with. So my rating here is going to be pretty low for the rating service and how it's currently run. Again, that is not bitvisit's fault, it is the fault of the people who are spamming through the reviews hoping to get easy money off it. I sincerely hope that bitvisit keeps up with these and starts revoking earnings from people who do that. I sent him some of the reviews I got that were pretty ridiculous and I'm hopeful that he will deal with them. Realistically, he should be removing the earnings from 17/18 of the people that have reviewed the site so far. I'm not asking for more free reviews, either. I think the person I listed above that did what they should have deserves the payment for the 17 that showed they didn't care. |
|
|
|
Wow, just went to the site today and saw new features. A bar that lets you know when the last time you logged in was, and also now this:
----
Technical Details
Previously, we never knew your password and your browser hashed it before sending it to us. However, if our front webserver was compromised, an attacker listening on our server will be able to see the hashed password and be able to login with that hash.
Now, we store your password securely in our databases but also require a key derived from your password (which is never sent to the server after you register or complete this upgrade process) for sending Bitcoins. This means that even an attacker who has compromised our web server will be unable to send your coins.
----
I'm really loving all this security. It kind of scares me though, lol. Feels like a personal guard force is protecting me at an ATM.
this post=shameless plug I don't quite follow. Care to elaborate? a plug is self promotion. saying something is a shameless plug is like when a user promotes a service nonchalantly in an effort to increase interest in that service. I know what a "shameless plug" is. I'm curious as to how you interpreted my post as such. I was just taken aback when I saw the two new things. As a result, I thought I'd share. |
|
|
|
Wow, just went to the site today and saw new features. A bar that lets you know when the last time you logged in was, and also now this:
----
Technical Details
Previously, we never knew your password and your browser hashed it before sending it to us. However, if our front webserver was compromised, an attacker listening on our server will be able to see the hashed password and be able to login with that hash.
Now, we store your password securely in our databases but also require a key derived from your password (which is never sent to the server after you register or complete this upgrade process) for sending Bitcoins. This means that even an attacker who has compromised our web server will be unable to send your coins.
----
I'm really loving all this security. It kind of scares me though, lol. Feels like a personal guard force is protecting me at an ATM.
this post=shameless plug I don't quite follow. Care to elaborate? |
|
|
|
FREE BTC ? Hmmmmm i go to mining
You can do both! |
|
|
|
No I mean I could get similar "service" for free-- oh why am I even bothering.
I'll do it for free and all you have to do is call me your pretty princess during it! |
|
|
|
If you are not mining LTC at the time a block has been found on multipool.in, but you still have hundreds of thousands of LTC round shares when an LTC block is found, I would have thought you would receive a payout for some of those round shares. These seems not to be the case. I watched the last two LTC block be found according to the Last 30 Blocks Found - LTC table but received nothing for my round shares which are of course going down all the time. This doesn't seem fair as the pool switching is not up to me.
It's PPLNS. Pay Per Last Number of Shares. This means that, say it is based on 10k shares, 10,001 will remove share 1, 10,002 removes share 2, etc. It evens out to be the same reward over time. You could have hopped on near the end, gotten 50 shares at the last minute, now you only mined for a minute and got a big reward. That's not the issue, the issue is the LTC round shares are not being turned into unconfirmed balance each time an LTC block is found. So my LTC balance is not rising unless the auto pool is actually mining LTC at the time a block is found. Hm? I've had 0 issues with mine being credited so can't help there... |
|
|
|
If you are not mining LTC at the time a block has been found on multipool.in, but you still have hundreds of thousands of LTC round shares when an LTC block is found, I would have thought you would receive a payout for some of those round shares. These seems not to be the case. I watched the last two LTC block be found according to the Last 30 Blocks Found - LTC table but received nothing for my round shares which are of course going down all the time. This doesn't seem fair as the pool switching is not up to me.
It's PPLNS. Pay Per Last Number of Shares. This means that, say it is based on 10k shares, 10,001 will remove share 1, 10,002 removes share 2, etc. It evens out to be the same reward over time. You could have hopped on near the end, gotten 50 shares at the last minute, now you only mined for a minute and got a big reward. |
|
|
|
hey Flound why you steal our money I found block mnc at 14.06.18 h and nothing in blocks founder?
Flound already responded to your claim with proof, but I want to toss out that I have had absolutely no issues with the pool paying out as it should, nor getting credit where it should. Please don't spread false rumors like that without any substantial evidence to back it up. |
|
|
|
Campaign is up and running. Thanks! Got my first review but it was more spammy than anything (I sent a response to the email to report my reasoning as well). Wish people would take things more seriously. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
