My first posts on the current page were updated again. There is no new Legendary or Hero Member this week.
Three new Senior Members have ranked up: Xal0lex, mdayonliner, vit05. Congratulations!
Hey, thank you. =) It was a lot harder than I expected. What I realized is that it is not enough to have a normal participation. It is necessary to create content that helps other people. Seems like we both are standing on the same boat now    267 - that's where we are standing... I wish you win the next rank before me. At this stage I really don't care about rank and stuffs. |
|
|
|
Why ban all three? Multiple accounts is not exactly against the rules, although it's frowned upon.
Only the account caught should be banned, IMO
25. Ban evasion (using or creating accounts while one of your accounts is banned) is not allowed.[e] Although this rule is for after the ban when they create another account. In these case the use already have his alts. Perhaps a call from the community will be interesting.
update: ...using... Ok, seems like we have our answer. All three can be banned if one is banned. |
|
|
|
This forum should be a great place for a business that accepts Bitcoin to advertise its products. Just imaging, if Starbucks do start to accept Bitcoin, this should be an ideal place for them to advertise for new customers. They aren't going to do it if their advert is going to be buried amongst all the underworld adverts.
Theymos could create an automated advertising system for the forum for few selected spots like hilari spotted. This could really bring some good amount of revenue which could spend on hiring more staffs or any other positions that could eventually help the forum. Anyway, we all know theymos is not bothered with any of these (generating more revenue, hiring more staffs or having an in-house developer team etc), so talking about this - is kind of pointless. |
|
|
|
Kindly move your thread on Reputation board from lower left. It's not belongs to Meta. I think I have seen plagiarism issues on meta section. Never seen any of them in Reputation yet. So, I am hoping it's on the right board. OK, what am I missing here? Where is the source included in this post[/url]? That looks totally plagiarized, since I don't see any citation there. I do not see any yet. So, to me it also plagiarism. |
|
|
|
LOL you guys  I laterally spent 15 to 20 minutes to figure out that it was planned  |
|
|
|
Seems like you prefer simplicity over privacy.
In real world how much we care about privacy? We like simplicity, user-friendliness. Seems like privacy only needed on this site (I mean the forum) or they will rip you off when they will have their chance. Even they will not leave your family aside. They will make fun of your spouse, unborn child etc. They will show up to your door and will ask why did you do this and that in the past! My experience is - keep your identity hidden for BitcoinTalk. |
|
|
|
~
I am not an expert either however this is what I did.... I filtered the address with the Sent transactions https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z?filter=1Scroll down and... First sent was on 2017-07-01 19:06:18 Tx: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/b478196f3a535f8a2a8a250ce1ebe97dabc97055bd1f2fd8798d7742185ad199Amount 16.04376017 BTC to 34QigSdFmqDNSdCjZs5sSDQYYewDGh5LLd If you trace the address then you will see Ultimately the fund comes back to the main address. I assume funds were sent to different addresses of the same wallet. So, total received = 3,405.40731067 - 16.04376017 = 3389.3635505 BTC2nd sent was on 2017-07-01 19:20:36 Tx: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ba568d7cf8c7ea025ad68b16960ac18cb23fc61abd0986ac7181c9d7a8fd02e8 Amount 0.57566755 BTC to 32DMGN7hiEG2gVYZt9gVVPgJTYhndx7GSv Again after tracing the address the conclusion is sent to different addresses of the same wallet. 3389.3635505 - 0.57566755 = 3388.78788295 BTC3rd sent was on 2017-07-01 19:31:44 Tx: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/52b71cce22168c76c354ddbc17c9feb36439ef31ae8b0282e5a67a331bbe0c1dAmount 0.00228457 BTC to 3KA7s4Nqw1KvksUY2KtpmzCEdxkfjQ22bH and 149ZiYcFKsjcT1S1Ef4WwAihXQxXQds1YA I can not figure out the end of them so lets say they actually gone out. So, we still have: 3388.78788295 BTC4th sent was on 2017-07-01 20:33:40 Tx: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/32cbb8f451c6129067fb40ac93628e8f6337c699c466a0336a6e5b9da0b38111Amount 0.42851301 BTC to 36UNCAdXYUditQoyKJKfwszafnkKFCcAwQ Eventually it came back to the same address 3388.78788295 - 0.42851301 = 3388.35936994 BTC5th: 0.18467903 BTC 6th: 0.05086859 BTC 7th: 0.04060566 BTC 8th: 0.05862002 BTC 9th: 0.0086241 BTC 10th: 0.03419528 BTC 11th: 0.00701132 BTC 12th: 0.00927396 BTC 13th: 0.01638622 BTC 14th: 0.01053424 BTC 15th: 0.00536235 BTC 16th: 0.00096287 BTC 17th: 0.00255258 BTC 18th: 0.00036839 BTC 19th: 0.01025788 BTC =================================== Total: 0.44030249 BTC 3388.35936994 - 0.44030249 = 3387.91906745 BTCAfter exploring 20th tx it seems 1,497.22395444 BTC came back to the same address. 3387.91906745 - 1497.22395444 = 1890.69511301 BTC21st tx eventually adds up to this tx. So, nothing to deduct. 22nd does the same. Again nothing to deduct. 23rd assuming it really gone out. 24th gone out as well. If you have an address that received 1k coins, and you send it to yourself 4 more times it will show 5k BTC total received. The number of received coins on explorers are not a valid metric.
So, if my manual checking is correct then the address (3AiGej11G8jUXvEBPvQKPLiHXC7ruUCp1Z) actually received 1890.69511301 (+/- 0.00228457) BTC in-total.
PS: Guys, since this is a manual checking, I could even miss some of the transactions while I was tracing. So, don't consider it as a solid calculation of the received coins. |
|
|
|
~
Finally I got it...  I had to search with the URL... site:https://bitcointalk.org wall observer Anyway, seems like this should not be a correct search criteria. Search criteria should be based on the keyword. From the keyword the engine should bring the site name. I was interested to see how the search result reflects using only the following keyword... No result after going through all the search result. I tried with another one... wall observer bitcointalk No result found however interestingly - the indexing has other sites which mentioned BitcoinTalk.org but not bitcointalk.org page has indexed  
So here is my pick... You will need to know the domain address to find a keyword on duckduckgo |
|
|
|
All we know is this guy, nothing else? Anyway, like AdolfinWolf said - you need to move the topic to the Scam Accusations board. This is not a meta board topic. Please add some information about the guy so that people can spot him. |
|
|
|
Never thought of it! You are absolutely right. I just tried with "Wall Observer BTC/USD" on duckduckgo with a hope that I will get this topic on the result but I ended up having the following domains... https[:]//forum[dot]bitcoin[dot]com <== we all know who these f**ks are! https[:]//ohiobitcoin[dot]com https[:]//reddit[dot]com/r/Bitcoin etc... Ref: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=+Wall+Observer+BTC%2FUSD&t=hj&ia=webI am still wondering...  |
|
|
|
|
I noticed the number of ICO launching are decreasing. It's not very high like it used to be at the beginning of the year or like last year. I personally invested on few ICOs and most of them are not even closer to their ICO price now.
I assume the new ICOs are just buying time to ensure the market goes up then they will start pitching their project (?)
PS: There are few good ICOs around though.
|
|
|
|
ALL of spreading does help  Remember everybody used to bite Nickel
Now everybody doin' Bitcoin |
|
|
|
I hope theymos is not having a headache with many suggestions made on this forum so far.
theymos is having a blast in his head after seeing all those suggestions and stuffs from last few days LOL He needs a 4 weeks long holiday |
|
|
|
I think this is just normal behavior of SMF. What you could do is hold CTRL + Click "report to moderator", and report it that way. Then you can just switch tabs once you've sent the report. That's how I used to report anyway. I use my middle mouse button for the same result, it's easier. Or, I use my right mouse botton, open "Report to moderator" in a new window, and handle it instantly without losing any of my other browsing. I use the right mouse button too. Right click one the link > Click on Open link in a new tab After reporting I close that new tab, don't even bother to see which page I have redirected to. Solved!  I knew there are few other methods to open a new tab from a link (ie: like Welsh said - CTRL + Click) but I guess I am too comfortable to try others PS: Have I just created a redundant post which did not add anything new at all? I just repeated LoyceV and Welsh |
|
|
|
It would appear that the mods don't know the difference between an s9 and an s9 hydro
Man, It's the same Samsung device! It's just that the hydro version can be used underwater, in your bath, etc... we all know that!Sometimes the most experienced fella in the herd can miss the very basic ( ) In that case I guess - the explanation from Jet Cash had a point.
@jack: I am sure there will be some explanation from the mod who deleted it. We better wait for him/her.
I am having another thought. Look at the URL... I hope mod didn't think that pid=00020180824185106363KYTqeq8S06C4 could be referral link? I can assure you that sometimes (some) mods don't even check the full post before they delete it. |
|
|
|
|
There you go. Another one! At-least you are not someone who will not know about the stuffs of getting a post deleted. AFAIK you are one of the member who is well aware about the rules of the forum, you are not a random guy here.
Anyway, mods and users can make mistakes. I am sure there is an explanation for that.
Update
When you are saying thread meaning you are saying it was your topic?
|
|
|
|
Mods can make mistakes.
And so can users. May bad for not adding the users (sorry). In the very post you say "whoops" and realised it was already answered. Redundant. Sad that you did not even read the post before deleting it Anyway, not a big deal, it was just an innocent post, isn't it? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
