[What happened:]

What happened: martinadoulet promoted a fake website.
Scammers Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2466499
Reference Link: : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5388428 (Archived.)

martinadoulet woke up after a long time of inactivity and started to promote changenovv(dot)io which is a fake website.


Note that I am not saying changenow is a trustworthy exchange. There are several scam accusations even against the original website. ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5])
Click here to see trust page of ChangeNOW.

I have created a wallet on android version of electrum and now I want to create a new wallet.
When I open the application, it only allows me to open the existing wallet and there is no option for creating a new wallet.
For creating a new wallet, I have to open the existing wallet first. The following image is the screen displayed after opening the application.



If I tap on "Cancel" button, I exit the application.
If I tap on the "wallets" icon above the screen, It takes me to a new screen where the "New" button is grayed out. (Shown in the image below)




Therefore, if you have forgotten the password of your existing wallet, there is no way to create a new wallet unless you remove electrum's data from your device.

Is this a bug? I doubt it's how it should be.
I am using the latest version of electrum (4.1.4)

[Craig Wright Wins Bitcoin Copyright Lawsuit Against Pseudonymous Developer]

Craig Wright who claimed that he has created the bitcoin whitepaper, surprisingly wins the lawsuit against Cøbra (Bitcoin.org domain administrator)
Cøbra lost the lawsuit, not because Craig Wright proved his claim. Cøbra lost the lawsuit because he didn't defend himself as he didn't want to reveal his identity.

Visit the link below for more information.
Craig Wright Wins Bitcoin Copyright Lawsuit Against Pseudonymous Developer


We all know Faketoshi (Craig Wright) is not satoshi and I don't want to discuss about that here.
Although it was clear that Cøbra would not defend himself, I did not expect Craig Wright to win the lawsuit.

What surprises me is how Craig Wright could win the lawsuit while he didn't prove that he has created bitcoin whitepaper.
Does it mean anyone else could sue Cøbra and wins the lawsuit without proving anything? It's really ridiculous.

According to the court decision, Cøbra must pay £35,000. How can they get the money from a person they don't know?
Of course, Cøbra is willing to pay the money to real satoshi.

Newbies usually don't have any information about coin control and how extra inputs can make them waste money on transactions fee. If the coins aren't selected by the user manually, they will be selected by electrum automatically.

The problem is that electrum selects the UTXOs based on balance of addresses, not UTXOs amounts.

Let's say I have 1.5  BTC in my wallet. UTXO A is in address A and is worth 1 BTC. UTXO B is in address B and is worth 0.5 BTC. If I want to spend 0.75 BTC, electrum selects the UTXO A and doesn't touch UTXO B. Everything is fine here.

I imported two random addresses into a watch-only wallet.
bc1qnntxhtfa7446euhyx9yxygwjql84rrpsk52c9y and 1KVkFrQyx1C8gxCz461o9ChZjEEDDAbLxB have received 0.515 BTC and 0.043 BTC in single transactions consecutively.
The image below has been taken from "Coins" tab.



Now, I am spending 0.5 BTC. As you see in the image below, electrum is only using bc1qnntxhtfa7446euhyx9yxygwjql84rrpsk52c9y and doesn't use 1KVkFrQyx1C8gxCz461o9ChZjEEDDAbLxB. It's 100% OK.




The problem is when the user has received multiple UTXOs in a single address.
I imported 1ChancecoinXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXZELUFD into a watch-only wallet.
The address has received 480 BTC in 267 transactions.
The image below has been taken from "Coins" tab.



Now, I am spending 0.1 BTC.
As displayed in the image below, electrum is using all the 267 UTXOs and makes the user waste a big money on transaction fee.
This transaction could be made with only 1 input.




Have developers designed the default coin selection in this way for a reason? Or you think they should change it in the next updates?

Please take a look at merits sent and received by bitcoinermatt.

bitcoinermatt sent 2 merit to Grafftz.
Once Grafftz received the second merit and his first smerit, he sent back a merit to bitcoinermatt.






bitcoinermatt sent 3 merit to mr_ROBOTT and 26 minutes later received 3 merit from him.






bitcoinermatt sent 5 merit to hossamdz and 2 minutes later received 5 merit from him.






bitcoinermatt received 10 merit from mrob82. About 1 hour later, sent 8 merit to him and 6 minutes later received 4 more merit from him.








bitcoinermatt sent 3 merit to Sparrow96 and about 4 hours later received 3 merit from him.






Again bitcoinermatt and hossamdz.

In less than 10 minutes, bitcoinermatt sent 7 merit to hossamdz in 3 merit transactions and received 10 merit from him in 4 merit transactions.

[1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN]

1HZwkjkeaoZfTSaJxDw6aKkxp45agDiEzN

brainwallet is using the address above as a demo address for signing messages.


https://brainwalletx.github.io/#sign

(This address can also be generated if you don't enter anything as passphrase in brainwallet address generator and actually is the weakest brainwallet.)

There are some users in the forum that have used this address for signing message.
 
To all admins and recovery team:
Please don't accept recovery appeals made using the address above.

To all users who have signed message from the address above:
If you are still active in the forum, sign a new message from a new address.


Users below have used the address above for signing message.

RagingBull (signed message, archive)
shahzadafzal (signed message, archive)
hitrawal91 (signed message, archive)
bitcoinermatt (signed message, archive)
Singertime637 (signed message, archive)
Martin958 (signed message, archive)
hammad745 (signed message, archive)
Martin958 (signed message, archive)
Michael CF (signed message, archive)
thsaudtl1 (signed message, archive)
THINK2b44 (signed message, archive)

Three more users founded by Pmalek:
dYnamxX (signed message, archive)
smartcontracts100 (signed message, archive from loyce.club)
vareole (signed message, archive from loyce.club)

Two users have used the address above in their profile (Founded by TheBeardedBaby):
$crypto$ (archive)
Michael CF (archive)


PS:
I used Ninjastic.space to find users above. Thank you TryNinja.

If you don't know how evil score system works, click here to read the post made by theymos.


In the past few weeks, you have probably noticed the large number of posts made by spammers including links to live sport streaming websites.
Their posts get deleted, but they don't stop. They create new accounts and spam again.

If you don't know what I am talking about, you can use the tool created by LoyceV to see the list of bad posts. Just search for one of following words.

Code:

gitlab
game.tv
deviantart
247sports
raftingsort
ec.europa
battlefy

I just searched for words above (using CTRL+F) in the list of bad posts and found 1100 posts.
Note that these 1100 posts have been made only in a period of 14 days. Also, there are many other posts that are not showing in the list of bad posts. Because in many of their posts, they are using links to reddit. For example, this post.

I guess that these spammers are making at least 2,000 posts weekly.

How do they manage to create that high number of accounts and make posts without paying evilness fee?
Why don't their IP addresses become evil? Is the evil score system working as expected?
Even if they use several VPNs, TOR browser, etc, they shouldn't be able to create that high number of accounts easily.

Theymos (or any admin, if you have access to IP logs and evil scores), can you please check their IP addresses and the evil scores associated to them? Is the evil score system working?
Below is the list of a few of these spammers.  There are hundreds of accounts.

medomedoed
turfoptimization
iyouyoued
Miyaoxc
Raseldomingoss
hdshshdsh444
Mosat
Mikehasan
Danielphillipss
aolanisjena

[davincicode666]

davincicode666, keketex144 and saladin7000 are owned by a same person and cheated in Betnomi and BetBTC competitions.

davincicode666 and keketex144 posted a same BTC address.
See following posts.

恭喜发财，红包拿来！
1K8RkDgiymB9H7RTrMNkH1FFoqKiwx76ka

Archive

username: keketex144
btc address : 1K8RkDgiymB9H7RTrMNkH1FFoqKiwx76ka

Archive

saladin7000 is also owned by a same person. Click here to see the reference.

Both davincicode666 and saladin7000 participated in second round of Betnomi competition. (Archived)
Both davincicode666 and keketex144  participated in BetBTC competition. (Archived)

[Proof:]

Both tracyhayley and myjulie92 participated in the first round of Betnomi's competition and are owned by a same person. (Archived)

Proof:

BTC address posted by tracyhayley:

Bitcoin wallet address: 1MfdxC2MPCYNY9UxZ8cLPJrdFHgwnefHrJ

Archived

This address has already been used by nasashi which is proven alt of myjulie92. (Click here to see the reference.)

Bitcoin Address: 1MfdxC2MPCYNY9UxZ8cLPJrdFHgwnefHrJ

Archived

myjulie92 and 15 other accounts were involved in abusing a football prediction contest in 2017 too and have already received negative trust from marlboroza.

In addition to Betnomi's competition, this person abused following competitions in games and rounds as well.

★BetBTC★ Sportsbook & Casino | NFL Wizard - Win 0.05BTC every Sunday , (Archived)
★BetBTC★ Sportsbook & Casino | Soccer Wizard - Win 0.05BTC every Sunday, (Archived)
★BetBTC★ Sportsbook & Casino | UFC Wizard - Win 0.05BTC every Fight Night, (Archived)

Below is what I am trying to do.

Let's say someone made a transaction and marked it as RBF. Then he bumped the fee and replaced the transaction with a new one. Now the first transaction is invalid. How to find the details of the first transaction (including hash, outputs, fee, etc.)?

I am looking for a block explorer that shows invalid transactions (more specifically, transactions that have been replaced by new transactions using RBF method) when I search the address.

[Don't we need a strict policy against them?]

A few days ago sujonali1819 made a post in Reputation board regarding accounts hired for bumping Crybet ANN thread. (Visit the link below)
15 accounts hired for bumping the Crybet announcement thread?

I also made a similar topic about another bumping group making fake volume in ILCOIN ANN thread (Visit the link below)
Fake volume in ILCOIN ANN thread

There are probably more topics and more bumping groups.

Both of these bumping groups have also been active in bumping other threads before making posts for their current projects. (Check their post history)
Some accounts have been active for more than two years without any problem.

I know with implementing new bumping system, those posts cannot bump the topic. But even the topic is in 10th page of the board, there will be some newbies think that the project is popular and trustworthy.
Some people might visit the ANN thread through the link in the website of project and doesn't matter whether the topic is in first page or 10th page.

I reported both topics and asked moderators to lock the topic.
My reports are still unhandled and I feel they will remain unhandled forever.

I think those topics haven't been locked because there is no strong proof that the volume is fake.
This is exactly why those spammers continue to spam. They know that no one can prove that they are linked together or they are paid to posts.
Even if they are banned, they can create new accounts and continue to post.

Don't we need a strict policy against them?

Shouldn't moderators trash Crybet ANN thread and ILCOIN ANN thread or lock them at least?

I made a google search
I searched for "Bitcointalk bumping service" and excluded bitcointalk.org results.

There are many services offering bumping bitcointalk ANN threads. They claim that they have several bitcointalk accounts. Shouldn't we stop them? (Edit: I mean stopping them by locking topics)

There are several accounts that are trying to make fake volume in ILCOIN ANN thread without making a single post in other threads.

1. JustMyFewCents: 81 posts since June 27, 2019, Post history
2. shakerbitcoin: 62 posts since June 27, 2019, Post history
3. Tokenized0000: 64 posts since June 24, 2019, Post history
4. Trililing: 66 posts since June 25, 2019, Post history
5. Purobantakte: 68 posts since June 27, 2019, Post history
6. Nocrap: 62 posts since June 25, 2019, Post history
7. romelitounknown: 87 posts since June 25, 2019, Post history
8. MikeGarden: 79 posts since June 24, 2019, Post history
9. AliceWood21: 72 posts since June 24, 2019, Post history
10. grungelife182: 88 posts since June 24, 2019, Post history
11. Brandonkimm: 81 posts since June 24, 2019, Post history
12. not4mike: 58 posts since July 1, 2019, Post history
13. iHODL4; 53 posts since June 27, 2019, Post history


Those accounts registered before June 2019 have made numerous posts in IRONX ANN thread, ENGINEER.AI ANN thread, CryptoRiyal ANN thread, CRYPTOSOUK ANN thread and ReMoneta ANN thread.

In the first page of the forum, when the mouse cursor is placed on name of childboards, total number of topics and posts are shown. But that doesn't work for main boards.

Why doesn't that work for main boards? That can be useful especially for those who are interested in statistics.
I am sorry if it had been discussed before. I hadn't ever noticed that.

Two days ago, a user posted in Meta about a topic that had been moved to another board by moderators. I don't mention that user and his topic, so I don't help him to advertise his service in Meta. But all of you know what I am talking about.

That topic is now on Services board again. It has likely been moved by the OP. I don't think moderators have been convinced to move the topic.

I have two suggestions.

1. After a post is moved by a moderator, the OP shouldn't be allowed to move that topic again. He can only ask moderators to move that if there is a legitimate reason.

2. Meta board can be abused to make a topic more visible. Sometimes it is needed to trash the topic made in Meta or lock it at least.  

A while ago, theymos changed bumping system is some boards. But in Service Announcements (Altcoins) board, it is still possible to bump threads with shit posts.

Take a look at this thread and see how the thread is bumped by newbies. Many of these posts have been made just after registration.

Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6, Page 7, Page 8, Page 9

Edit: the topic was trashed.

Take a look at merit history of  oceanriver

Here is the list of recent merits this user has received.
(All of merited posts have been deleted.)

44 from skysblu
50 from buyinbtc
16 from rekinthis
7 from fravia
2 from universe_
3 from ontrackk
2 from funbarrel
3 from fireball4
3 from coin_gambler
4 from Nimbulan
3 from useless4
2 from purebitco
2 from angryswamp
5 from potatopower
4 from takingthis4

Then oceanriver has sent back 50 of smerits to skysblu
skysblu has also received 42 merit from buyinbtc

The abuser thinks that there is no way to track merits if he deletes merited posts.

Notice to IDs of these accounts and see how close they are.
88178, 198181, 547405, 547412, 547602, 548943, 548945, 552972, 552974, 552978, 552983, 552985, 553235, 553238, 553242, 553575.

All of these accounts have one owner.
Not only these accounts are abusing merit system, but also they are abusing Yobit campaign. All of them are wearing Yobit's signature.

Yesterday, I reported 12 posts made by this user.
The user is advertising his/her website in other threads from one year ago and has not banned yet.  All of the 524 posts made by this user should be deleted. So, the user should be nuked (Archived.)
Here is the comment I wrote in all of my reports.
Advertising using external links. Please check the post history of this user.
But only reported posts were deleted.
Should I report all 524 posts?

Edit: Reporting all post is annoying to moderators (and very time-consuming for me as well). That's why I didn't do this and I wrote a comment in my report.

This user is advertising an exchange everywhere in the forum. Almost all of the posts made by this user should be deleted. (Archived)
I reported one of the posts made by this user and in the comment, I asked the moderator to check the post history of the user as well. My report was marked as good and the post was deleted. I expected all the posts made by this user to be deleted. But only the reported post was deleted. Reporting all the posts made by this user is really time-consuming. Because we have to open each of the threads that the user has posted in.
My suggestion is to add "report" button at bottom of the posts shown in the posts history.  (Something like the following image)

I am sorry if it has already been discussed. I couldn't find any thread about this.

[suspicious]

Recently, there have been some discussions about those who send 50 merit in a single transactions.
You can visit the following threads.

50 merit for an non-contribute topic
Posts: 0, Activity:0, merit: 136
Does this tread really deserve the attention it has got?
Reduce 50 merit limit per post.

I provided some data with the help of DdmrDdmr merit dashboard for a 100-day period (from September 24, 2019 to January 03, 2020)
In these 100 days, we have 26 merit transactions that contain 50 merit. ( I didn't consider merits sent in the art contest)
Numbers in parentheses are number of earned merits.

from TMAN (1195) to The-Devil (102)
from TMAN (1195) to Vispilio (761)
from TMAN (1195) to Vispilio (761)
from TMAN (1195) to yogg (1109)
from TMAN (1195) to tk808 (537)
from TMAN (1195) to tk808 (537)

from franky1 (577) to gmaxwell (2040)
from franky1 (577) to theymos (6388)
from franky1 (577)to 50 to gmaxwell (2040)

from suchmoon (3467) to tk808 (537)
from suchmoon (3467) to LTU_btc (295)

From theymos (6388) to eaLiTy (162)
From JL421 (0) to Newbie1273819 (136) suspicious
From phr0stbyt3 (0) to Newbie1273819 (136) suspicious
From emberbekas (0) to Isildur (official) (80)
From Vlad2Vlad (167) to Nasakioto (133)
From gjhiggins (105) to BitcoinFX (253)
From Rw13enlib88 (25) to Hal (681)
From abctc (4) to BCNext (53)
From Deathwing (209) to Vispilio (761)
From Jalum (0) to Neovitadi (252) suspicious
From asdalani (0) to Neovitadi (252) suspicious
From stripykitteh (1) to Neovitadi (252) suspicious
From MicroGuy (11) to satoshi (2397)
From Mitchell (433) to Royse777 (591)
From marcus_of_augustus (191) to infofront (909)


According to these data, I don't think there is a big issue. I mean there aren't many abusers.

TMAN, franky1 and suchmoon are only users that have sent 50 merit in a single transaction more than one time in the 100-day period.
There is no doubt that there is no problem with these merit transactions.

There are 15 users that have sent 50 merit in a single transaction in the 100-day period.
It's obvious that, JL421, phr0stbyt3, Newbie1273819, Neovitadi, Jalum, asdalani, stripykitteh have abused the merit system.


Edit: while I was writing, tranthidung made a post and provided some data too.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215884.msg53555092#msg53555092

The second post by tranthidung with some clarification:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215884.msg53557181#msg53557181

Yesterday, Blitzboy posted about a user who had sent 50 merit to a newbie for a post that didn't deserve any merit.
Now, I want to draw your attention to a user who has earned 136 merit while has zero post.

Newbie1273819 has received 136 merit from phr0stbyt3, JL421 and dancingnancy.
The merited post has been deleted. Merits have been sent recently, but as the merited post is an old post created before LoyceV started to archive the posts, I couldn't find it using Loyce.club.