OP signed up under his friend´s affiliate link - they are also co-workers
--> this is a NO-GO and clearly violates their Terms and Conditions (not just with Nitrogen but with every affiliate program out there). And in my opinion this is not some shady term hidden deep in the terms to f*** up affiliates/players, it actually makes sense and is absolutely understandable.
You shall not register as a user or make deposits to any user account (directly or indirectly) for your own personal use and/or the use of your relatives, friends, employees, agents or advisors, or otherwise attempt to artificially increase the affiliate commissions payable to you or to defraud us. Violation of this provision shall be deemed to be Fraud Traffic.
This does not mean what you think it means. Read it again. It means you should not register AS your (listed relations). This does not mean you can not use the affiliate link of somebody you know to register your own account. |
|
|
|
- snip -
Edit: They lifted my support ticket ban, will contact them and see what happens.
Edit 2: Ok they forwarded it to Vincent and will have reply "tomorrow".
Thank god we can influence and give oversight on company actions, otherwise just imagine what they would be doing. Depending on how this gets resolved it may have adverse effects on Nitrogen. Once you start talking again with them via support please screenshot everything and send here (remove any data that may be personally identifiable). |
|
|
|
Is any moderator or mister Theymos going to take second or first look on this case?
Or we are just talking to a wall here?
Now is going to be worse. If forum moderators accept this appeal and unban RegulusHr account, then opens the possibility for new discussions with contradiction like this. it is not to be expected to happen. I can assume confusion if there was more ban appeal positive solved. What are you on about? Many people got unbanned for various reasons, including for what OP got banned. |
|
|
|
Curious - what do people feel is a good amount of BTC where you'd want to have at least one hardware wallet to protect it? Do you feel safer with a Secure Element and would you be willing to invest more in storing your keys with an SE?
There is no right answer to your first question, it should be in % of your money. Storing everything at one device regardless of its security is not the best method. The Secure Element part is also not of vital importance, because it is not as secure as you think. |
|
|
|
Dude close this website and enjoy your life...
No wonder you will not ever get anywhere in your life. Stop shitposting. |
|
|
|
|
Flag supported. Watching.
|
|
|
|
Jollygood's false scam accusations caused my investors to lose millions of dollars. I don't know how he's not banned. He's a complete idiot and extortionist.
QFR. Where is your proof? |
|
|
|
The reason duplicate reports are marked bad is because it would be easier for users to pad their report counts, as well as being extra workload of staff members.
First the report count is useless for anyone other than theymos, nothing is to be gained from this. Theymos could easily double check if majority are from double reports (Therefore this reasoning of yours is nullified). Second, in most cases deleting the post is all that is required and the reports will be automatically be marked as good (therefore, not really extra workload). |
|
|
|
Most of your reports are still in the queue. The ones that were seemingly marked as bad were the conovairus ones. There's two reported as shilling on posts from 2015 that have been marked as bad in the Romanian section. No idea who handled them but contacting Cyrus would be your best bet first.
I've marked several GazetaBitcoin's reports as bad since they were duplicates (as in he reported the same post several) times. IIRC I didn't handle any other reports of his. Since when are duplicate reports being marked bad? Sounds like this could hurt the accuracy of those that mistakenly sometimes do it. No? |
|
|
|
The Blockstream propaganda of "Cobra is evil!" really has you totally duped.
Amusing that I am seeing this many years after I had first seen it used for "X is evil" (unrelated to you).  |
|
|
|
Would I be right in assuming it's not the existence of forkcoins you oppose, but rather just the false advertising part to sucker in new users? Because I'd argue that being opposed to forks unconditionally simply isn't practical. If people vehemently want to incorporate ideas into Bitcoin that are fundamentally incompatible with its underlying principles, do we really want them to stick around forever, still desperately trying to inflict their delusions on the Bitcoin protocol? Surely it's better to excrete such toxins? It's never "dilution" to release waste. Let them build their faulty clones and pretend it's the real thing. I'd argue it's still preferable to an alternative outcome where no forks had taken place and the toxic "blocksize debate", instead of being a footnote in the annals of history like it is now, had still raged on to this day because those people never got what they believed they wanted.
The fact they still market their shitcoins as "Bitcoin" is inexcusable, but they're off doing their own thing now, leaving us to get on unopposed with our thing.
Forks are good, forks claiming that they are Bitcoin or have Bitcoin in their name are evil (even if they were 100x technologically superior) and anyone making pro-such-fork-statements is evil too. |
|
|
|
According to you, the whole Turkish community is filth.
Wrong, just you and your friends are filth. Many of the people that I appreciate and respect are Turkish. Maybe there is a very good reason for which I consider you filth, maybe. |
|
|
|
I hope you mean the US. THe northern people in North America are very intelligent - we manage to outperform the US in per capita production despite the hardships of living in a frozen wasteland.  Sorry, I have corrected it. You are very right about this! |
|
|
|
Right now Cøbra is sitting back laughing because with this split he has absolutely zero obligations to the very people that think they're bitcoin bigshots in this thread. Sorry theymos.. 100% your baby now that you've nurtured and let fester.
AmericaThe US and brains often don't correlate. |
|
|
|
Anyone reading the actually comment would not agree. Very likely you are a pedo? Is that neutral enough for you?
How would you view that under the guise of a neutral tag?
Not that i believe you are, but I hope you get the point
As long as it's not negative and puts a -1 in my account to new members - people can write whatever they want in feedback - it's not moderated. The exact point of neutrals is that you can rant whatever you want in there, anything that is not a valid reason to give somebody a negative. Theymoses rules. |
|
|
|
If memory serves correct I think Kalemder manahged to get on to the Chipmixer signature campaign and lasted just days before he kicked off it, I cannot be sure maybe someone can confirm. Strange that even after he made it on to that campaign he managed to mess it up. Oh well...
This is correct. Many complaints were sent to DarkStar_ informing him of the actual character and nature of this individual and he was swiftly kicked out (he only posts for profit mostly). |
|
|
|
It's people like you that make this forum so unwelcoming. By the way, thanks for your negative trust feedback, funny that you only mustered up the courage to do that after I was no longer owner of bitcointalk.org, perhaps you understood negative trusting the owner of the domain of the very site you're using would be comical.
It is neutral feedback. Lying, as expected of you. I did not do anything out of respect for theymoses mistakes, one of which was trusting you very early on. This is no longer necessary. Doesn't sound very neutral to me: Refused to decentralize Bitcoin.org control very likely due to long term malicious goals. I would not trust this user until proven otherwise (Not doing evil is not proof of good). Neutral - Other comments.
The correct non-neutral wording would be to remove the 'very likely' which I will surely regret for putting in there down the road. Very rarely do I make a misjudgement of this kind. No, you didn't do anything before because you were scared it would have consequences for you (it wouldn't have), or that it would make you look stupid (it would), so you only acted now, which is cute.
You could have not done anything and you know it, because I have known it for a long time. Try again. "Random", I wish. |
|
|
|
My reputation is fine, most people just don't care about these things
Living in a cave or refusing to admit it, either way works. Keep at it. Nobody respectable in this space, familiar with your words and actions, trusts you with $5. It's people like you that make this forum so unwelcoming. By the way, thanks for your negative trust feedback, funny that you only mustered up the courage to do that after I was no longer owner of bitcointalk.org, perhaps you understood negative trusting the owner of the domain of the very site you're using would be comical.
It is neutral feedback. Lying, as expected of you. I did not do anything out of respect for theymos and his mistakes, one of which was trusting you very early on. This is no longer necessary. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
This is his account: 
