I disagree that bitcoin price exists as an isolated thing. Sure, TA and chart patterns have an influence, but fundamentals matter as well. Sentiment regarding different scaling solutions effects general market sentiment.
Did I say it was an isolated thing? I have not. Discussing the technical aspects of certain solutions has zero business being in this section. If you have a problem with the way that sections are set up or with the forum rules, then you are complaining in the wrong place. This thread is not a chat-box, and you can't post whatever you want, wherever you want it. This applies forum-wide. Additionally, censoring such discussion only contributes to the myth that moderators here are unfairly targeting big blockers.
As confirmed by Holliday, both sides get deleted because they are off-topic (not because of the content). Forgive me if I misunderstand, but may I ask why discussion of Segwit is not allowed?
Surely it does affect the future price of Bitcoin, which is a topic that I would have thought falls within the bounds of the 'price movement tracking & discussion' contained in the title of this thread.
Read the small update here: Discussing the price effect of either Segwit/BU/other would be on-topic, although it would likely also spiral into off-topic really quickly.
These posts would remain and hopefully not go sideaways too much. |
|
|
|
Yet, all of the anti-semitic hate speech is just fine.
I can not keep track of each such post, which is off-topic here (but not against the rules AFAIK). I have also reported at least 1 person for constantly posting off-topic replies in regards to that. However, I can not issue bans for higher ranking members so this is not up to me. You can complain about individuals to certain global moderators (e.g. hilariousandco) and the administrators (Cyrus is your best call). I just don't understand how the issues surrounding the scalability of bitcoin are off topic, particularly in this lounge-esque thread.
Read:  If you want to discuss Segwit or other technical stuff, then 'Bitcoin Discussion' is more appropriate for this kind of discussion (other sections may be as well, but the thread would be moved to the right one in that case). Also keep in mind that I can not keep reading all of the posts made here, thus please use the report function. So what? I've had just as many posts, speaking out against big blocks, deleted from this thread. It has nothing to do with big/small blocks and everything to do with being off-topic. Pretty much all of my posts that have received moderation over the years come from the wall observer thread. It's nothing new.
I have tried to keep an equal and impartial moderation stance (regardless of my views) as much as possible. Keep in mind that I'm not the only moderator who can delete posts here (before someone jumps to any conclusion with specific examples).
Discussing the price effect of either Segwit/BU/other would be on-topic, although it would likely also spiral into off-topic really quickly. |
|
|
|
I can confirm that I also had two posts discussing segwit deleted from this thread on the 25th. I wasn't even discouraging it, just trying to explain some of the opinions I've heard over on that other forum. We will never be able to reach consensus if discussion is not allowed.
How about you start actually following the forum rules? You're discussing solutions on a technical basis which has nothing to do with this thread, nor this section (you should try to remain on-topic whenever possible, even when just posting images). I have tried keeping such discussion, regardless of whether positive or negative, and Segwit/BU/whatever out of this thread. At times, this thread feels like kindergarten.
Regarding the poll: I have removed it as it was really outdated. There is no way to add one as a moderator AFAIK (which is unfortunate since OP's account is inactive). I'll talk to the administrators to see whether there are any options to get this rolling. |
|
|
|
so you will not again active it ..you can see my account is in good condition but just that yahoo have given this trust
It is part of the rules set by Bitmixer before I took over: You must have no negative feedback.
They are there for a reason, and I am actually in support of them.
If you want to re-join, you have to talk to the person who gave you that rating. If they remove it, then you have to PM me to get unbanned. |
|
|
|
sir i am gone out of town for some reason and not able to post for a week and i can see my account show banned
Error! Account banned.
can you tell me why is it so i can solve it and do it
It looks like the system banned you because of this:  |
|
|
|
|
This topic has been moved to Trashcan.
Reason: Illegal.
|
|
|
|
The only real point you made is that a company is paying a maximum amount per user. However this is for budging purposes and it serves no other purpose when looked at on a per account basis.
Why it is bad to allow people to enroll with multiple accounts (in the same or different signature campaigns) has probably been discussed heavily in several threads. Simply put, one is 'incentivized' to post much more than they can handle (in 'constructive' way). This leads to a consistent drop in their posting quality which has a detrimental effect on the forum. We've surely seen a lot of useful posts in threads such as "If you had X Bitcoin, what would you do?". This is the fault of the company for having a bad screening process. The solution is for the company to use a better screening process that excludes those who will make poor quality posts.
I think you should ask for an username change to QuickColumbus. |
|
|
|
If a company is paying for 50 posts then there is no reason to expect more posts then that. If a company is paying one person to make 50 post on each of two accounts then they will pay for 100 posts and will also receive 100 posts. If the person only has one account enrolled in the signature campaign then it should not be expected that they will make a single post above what is expected of them.
A company is paying for X posts per user. However, said company can not know whether user is abusing their campaign by using multiple accounts. Due to this, they will pay out all of their accounts (unless someone exposes the alts in question). Why don't you give a single explanation as to why you want no alts in a campaign that doesn't involve trust farming? And involves properly screening participants.
Which campaign? FYI I'm completely against alts being enrolled in any signature campaign (if user already has 1 account enrolled somewhere). That is a lack of screening of participants. If one person is posting a bunch of spam-like posts, then there is no reason why any of them should get accepted into the campaign.
It is well known that some campaigns either have no process/management (e.g. Bitmixer in the past) or have a very bad evaluation/review process. |
|
|
|
How come using multiple accounts is cheating? Let's drop the account farming and signatures for a second here.
Read my posts before responding: I said for me. There are some valid reasons to have at least 1 alt. My sanity limit would be around 2-3 max (on a case-by-case basis). Others may have differentiating views regarding this.
This includes the reasons that you've mentioned. False. If you are using multiple accounts in the same signature campaign then you are still making the same number of posts with an advertisement underneath it as if you were using a single account. If a company is paying for 50 posts in a month then that is what they will get regardless of how many accounts are used in the process.
Two accounts (same person) x 50 posts per account in (e.g. Bitmixer) = 50 posts total. QS Math. The *only* reason why a signature campaign manager might utilize and enforce a one person one account rule is to farm/build trust.
 |
|
|
|
But still, if 1 - 2 alts are fine and in different signature campaigns,
I said for me. There are some valid reasons to have at least 1 alt. My sanity limit would be around 2-3 max (on a case-by-case basis). Others may have differentiating views regarding this. I know that this also is not a good thing to go with an alt, but I think that if not "spewing nonsense" but contributing with a good heart, there should be a chance for real users whether same or that ^THIRD AUNT^   , Spewing nonsense with a good heart = still spewing nonsense. Even if your intentions are not malicious, you may be a part of the problem. The forum does not need to hear your 'good heart' useless replies. |
|
|
|
But let me ask my question clearly: Alt allowed a chance to post "USEFUL" content in order to get a contribution reward in another signature campaign?
Yes and no. Some campaigns, like the one that you are in have pretty decent limits. There are only very rare cases of people that are able to post >100 posts a week that are really constructive. I am probably okay with 1-2 alts. Anything above that likely causes semi-good/bad post quality. As I don't think that this would be considered cheating or spamming, if they are honestly contributing to the community and being rewarded. Still, what's your opinion on this?
Honestly spewing nonsense != contributing. Can't siblings or families use the same PC and even share their wallets in order to use their accounts to contribute in their own ways?
Big no. This only makes the problem more complex with :"No, that's not my account. It's my sister, brother, mom, dad, third aunt. Ban her, not me." |
|
|
|
But if honest members share their accounts with their siblings or friends, and if they (siblings or friends) use that account to enroll in another signature campaign, will it still be considered cheating?  The forum does not need whole third world families posting useless content in order to get paid. I've always advocated that one should join a campaign to get a bonus for contributing, not to get paid. As soon as you join a campaign solely to get paid, you are likely already doing it wrong (and part of the problem; exclusions apply). |
|
|
|
I don't think creating multiple account here can be called a cheat or used for scamming.
Using multiple accounts (especially in enrolled in the same signature campaign) is the very definition of cheating. In 99% of the cases there is no good reason/enough constructiveness to justify it. |
|
|
|
|
This would give people incentive to start either completely useless threads or half-baked ones. It also may shift the limits of what people find acceptable. IMO it should only be done in exceptionally useful threads with prior approval from an admin (per thread).
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple threads (even if reviewed) is a slippery slope. I strongly dislike the idea, although you did good by asking first.
|
|
|
|
There will be in each AE and loose serial numbered set:
* 35 signatures: 31 coin makers, 2 people that wish to remain secret per request, my sig, Elias sig,
* Bitcoin Penny unique doodle
* defcoins' unnumbered black poker chip
* 25 coin maker holos (The loose sets will not have the bhcoins holo)
* my signed numbered COA with hologram.
The only interesting thing for me it the doodle. Whose ridiculous idea was to include the trash Defcoin poker ships? It feels like an addition of a random (and unnecessary) item. Really a great idea for a great book.
Time will tell whether the book is great (lessons have been learned from the previous one). The idea is rather interesting, but I don't see myself paying $500 for 35 stickers. |
|
|
|
they might be doing to for more then just bitcoin dust, they could be learning about bitcoin as they go along and obviously their working on their typing speed and English.
'They' represents a smaller part of the total signature campaign participants. I'd say that there are more than 10 spammers (account wise) for every genuine poster. That would be true if majority of the weren't in the gambling section repeating what someone else said or in meta/discussion threads posting basic knowledge.
Correct. They avoid anything that requires actually thinking and/or skills to properly contribute. It is easy to spew out half-baked posts in threads of lower quality (I should know). |
|
|
|
I see 500 people repeating the SAME bloody SENTENCE or copying and pasting off of another website on EVERY single thread, especially in the GAMBLING section.
If they are copy-pasting content from the internet (without sources, e.g. Press section), then please report them. This warrants a permanent ban. Monthly income (3 months out of 100 days): $127.30 a month.
So I need about 100 accounts to become rich  Good plan! /s |
|
|
|
I am the only one who lost money- either way.
This doesn't seem to be true to me. If person A was supposed to get a coin that was funded, but it was empty, that person has also lost money (not to mention reputation when re-selling it unknowingly as funded while it was unfunded). When I peel the sticker I will show half of the key, redeem the bitcoin then paste the full private key to see if it matches with the ones I posted months ago. If that ok great if not then please let me know how I can change it.
You should check in with OP via PM (if possible) to see what they find acceptable first, then we can vouch in. Doing something that OP disagrees with won't help remedy the problem. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
