There are several coins with locking for interest, including HODL, XDN, and STEEM. XDN may have been the first, or at least the first I know about so far. A number of other coins besides BTC have implemented CLTV.

It is proposed that when ETH switches to PoS that will require locking to be a validator and earn whatever it is that validators are going to earn.

The rules, interest (or staking) payments, etc. are different between them, but in general terms the concept is similar.

Any others?

The only opinions that count here are forum mods and admins. Which are you?


That's right. If it had been open for discussion, it would have been a duplicate unmoderated discussion thread, which it was not. It was a warning about specific and well-documented deceptive threads.

Would it have been better if I made the thread self-moderated and then deleted all the replies that didn't agree with mine? Why would multiple posts all in agreement with the original be better than a single warning post?

Steem is a blockchain-powered social media platform. Steemit.com is a social media web site in some ways similar to Reddit or Medium and powered by Steem.  Access to the Steem blockchain requires a minimum account balance but Steemit.com offers free signup only by linking a Facebook or Reddit profile.

For Bitcoin community members who do not want to link a Facebook or Reddit profile, I'm offering free or reduced cost funded Steem accounts to established members of the Bitcointalk community, and at-cost accounts for lower-level members. The accounts include an quantity of locked Steem coins (details below), allowing full access to the site, but this is not an offer for the coins as you won't be able to access them easily anyway. The primary purpose of this offering is to allow access to the Steem/Steemit social media platform.

Offer details

. If I know you and have interacted with you: free
. Hero/Legendary: free
. Sr.: 0.0025 BTC free
. Full: 0.005 BTC 0.0015 BTC
. Any: 0.0025 BTC (reduced!)

Payment in advance (equivalent in any top 10 crypto is ok). Prices are subject to change based on market conditions.

You will receive a new account with the required minimum powered up Steem (amount of powered-up Steem subject to change according to network rules and market conditions). Powered up Steem gives you access to the network (bandwidth), voting power, and earns interest. It can't be powered down (converted to liquid Steem that can be traded on an exchange) until you reach 10x the minimum account balance. Powering down, when possible, is 1/104 of the balance per week.

PM me to get your account.

I took a quick look. This appears to be a multialgo PoW coin with Tor and i2p support in wallets. Bitcoin fork I assume (forked from which version and are upstream improvements being merged)? Anything I missed? Elevator pitch please.

Then there would likely be an ETH/XMR pair!

This would make sense somewhat, but the price of ETH at almost 1/30 BTC is a bit high for it to be as useful. The main use for the secondary pairs is trading lower value coins where XMR's 1/500 BTC is a better fit. The only lower-priced coins with higher volume that would be a good fit for the role would be Factom (barf) or now Lisk (if the volume holds up). Over the two years, the pattern has been for XMR volume to sustain while other temporarily-hot coins come and go. ETH will probably break out of that pattern, but I'm less confident about the others.

It was not though. I realize we are hampered here by not being able to see the post but it consisted of a paragraph or two warning users about the use of aggressive self-moderated threads as a deceptive promotional tool by a particular coin community and one link to another thread. The bulk of the post was not duplication it was writing on a specific point, and given the topic being multiple, all self-moderated threads about a coin, I would think one post to with one link to one unmoderated thread would in fact be less duplicative.

But if the problem was the link I would be okay with reposting without the link and just suggesting that users view the unmoderated thread (which they can find on their own) to see the only unfiltered discussion on the topic here.

EDIT: Here is the post retrieved from google web cache:

That blog post was well researched and well written.

I see them as completely different markets. Exchanges offer real time trading, but at the cost of custodial risk, less privacy, and possibly higher fees. Even without Bitsquare there has always been a steady stream of OTC trades of Monero (and I assume other coins) but Bitsquare should make it more convenient and possibly safer, and therefore increase the volume.

Has anyone tried the site (Monero or other coins)? It sounds like a great concept, but I haven't seen any user reviews.

That's off topic but in any case there are no Monero threads with aggressive self-moderation that deletes opposing points of view. Every Monero self-moderated topic is moderated for only to keep it on-topic which is also a forum rule (meaning forum mods would delete off-topic posts anyway, but it would take longer because the forum mods have the thankless task of handling the entire site). For example on the speculation thread you can find literally thousands of negative opinions about Monero. There may well be more negative posts than positive. The Monero mining topic may well have never deleted a post (I'm not sure but I'm not involved in moderating it -- I just don't ever remember it happening, certainly not often). Simply put, your comment is a lie.

Anyway, back to the topic here....

The claim of misleading people seems silly considering the OP states it is a fork of digitalnote and links to digitalnote and all of the source files contain a digitalnote copyright.

I have no idea why they did not fork via github, but that doesn't make the project not a fork. The concept of forking open source code predates git/github. I agree with you it makes it harder to share code including in very useful cases like bug fixes and it raises the question of what hidden changes might exist in the code that would be more obvious if it were a github fork.

This thread refers to a post of mine that was deleted at the request of another user. Original meta topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1484321.0

The thread in question was not spam promoting a coin. It contained relevant, documented information warning readers about aggressive self-moderation of a set of threads by a particular coin community (deleting all questioning or critical post leaving only their own promotion), and, also, provided a link to an unmoderated discussion thread as an alternative. The thread was locked because otherwise it would be another redundant unmoderated discussion thread for the same coin.

It was bumped no more than once per day in accordance with the forum rules:


Previous bumps were deleted in accordance with the forum rules:


How did this topic violate forum rules leading to its deletion?

There is no difference and furthermore the official announcement posted prior to any tweets from him I can find, clearly stated there as an ommitted check error in the code (i.e. exploit) so you are still lying.

I'm still waiting for tweet timestamps proving his involvement (i.e. not after a public announcement) as he claimed and challenged us to debunk. Until he provides a link to such a tweet, he is debunked, but then let's face it, he was debunked as soon as it was discovered he ripped off the Bitcoin code and lied about writing it from scratch and claimed a lot of other delusional nonsense.

That tweet is the next day after the bug was already publicly known. I proves nothing about john-connor's claims.

I asked for a him to show a link to a tweet (not a screenshot) with a timestamp prior to the bug being publicly known, proving his knowledge as he claimed could be done via twitter, and got crickets. I'm still waiting.


You


Are you lying too or just incredibly retarded? Denial of service (DOS) is a type of attack that can, under the right circumstances, be performed using an exploit. They are two words for (or two aspects of) the exact same thing.

If the attack had progressed to the point where funds were lost, or information were improperly disclosed (not applicable in this case) then it could be called something other than a DoS. In reality the only impact of the attack was that some exchanges suspended service (i.e. denial of service) until it was patched. There was not even a persistent chain fork because hash rate accepting the invalid block was below 50%.

tldr: there was a bug that allowed someone to propagate an invalid block, indirectly denying service for a short time. The Monero team discovered the attack, diagnosed the cause (with no assistance from john-conner or anyone else outside the team, though genuine assistance is certainly always appreciated), and released a fix before any serious harm occurred, and john-connor tried to take credit for it with no verifiable evidence whatsoever.

If you are actively using the system, you want VESTS (now called Steem Power or powered-up Steem). They determine your influence in upvoting (which can include upvoting your own posts) and downvoting, and also the amount of rewards for voting.

If you are holding longer-term as speculation on the value of the platform, you want to hold SP not regular Steem because the former earns interest (literally anti-dilution payments) and the latter does not.

The disadvantage of SP is that it can't be transferred between accounts or traded on exchanges, and it takes two years to convert SP to Steem (1/104 per week).

Use either this (closed source): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0

or this (open source): https://github.com/wolf9466/wolf-xmr-miner

I'm somewhat sure that is false for the idea, though I cant be 100% sure. FreeTrade asked about existing coins offering deposits a while back after it was clear he was already working on the idea. I identified XDN to him and it didn't seem to me he was already aware of it. I can't comment on the UI.

Exactly. Basing it on what one guy does in an arbitrary time window is meaningless. Sometimes I pay attention to opening issues and sometimes I don't.

Also, we changed the development process a bit recently (discussed in one of the dev meetings I think) where PRs which don't blatantly break something but raise potential issues are merged after opening an issue rather than holding back the PR. Many of those issues reference a PR or vice versa.

Personally I haven't seen anything wrong with Decred (though I haven't really looked). I wouldn't want to apply guilt by association without more evidence. The case against Vanillacoin/Vcash and many of its supporters when acting in that capacity is quite clear though.

More often? There are 2047 commits and 214 issues (combined open and closed)

Get lost scammer