Time will tell if you are right about whether or not he will be removed.  And it may be that he does some good "busting scams".  I only know that I saw him shouting at people and called him out for it then he began his smear-campaign against me.  As I said, I've never seen him back down or say he's sorry so I can't imagine it happening in your case (and, FWIW, I don't really know all the details of your case to begin with).  I mainly just see him intransigent and exploding every time someone says he's wrong and I know that's not the kind of person who should be trusted with authority.  I think the best we can hope for is that some of the other mods and people on default trust take a close look into how he interacts with people and decide whether they want him on their trust lists.

I haven't seen anything near the trolling name-calling nonsense from Blazr.  Yes, he has taken you to task here about browser security and you guys seem to be in some sort of "I'm cooler" bluster-war, but if it was quickseller, we'd see the usual "you are an idiot" "what an idiot" "i am the greatest" which he puts in every other post.  Blazr's language is much more measured and while he's arguing with you, he's doing so with quite a diferent style.

Here's the deal: it's absolutely pointless to argue with him.  I've yet to see one example of a case where arguing the facts with quickseller led to him backing down.  It's his personality, he doesn't back down.  Once you've openly crossed him in public you are not going to get any respect from him unless he sees you as more powerful than him.  Those are literally the only people he shows any kind of humanity or deference towards.  Anyone else is SOL.  This is going to continue until the people above him recognize that allowing this guy to take a scorched earth policy with people who disagree with him is problematic.  However, because QS remains deferent to those above him, they don't actually experience the bullying, quicktempered, impossibly-arrogant side of him that the rest of us have to deal with.  Look at my case, he went after me with two different accounts leaving three negative feedbacks and we've literally never even traded or interacted beyond the fact that I called him out for his hot temper and had the audacity to argue with him in public.  He didn't need any evidence to do this to me, why would he need evidence for anything else he does?  This will last until someone above him corrects the situation by removing him from their trust list(s).

Funny, but I seriously doubt it.  I've interacted with you on and off for over a year and I've never seen the quicktempered, hotheaded name calling from you which is bacsically QS's calling card.
So, I guess you know how he's farming some of his accounts because of your "various ways" or because he told you.   But that doesn't really say anything about the ones you don't know about.  That is, just because he's somehow farming some accounts in a "non-shit-post way" doesn't really say anything about how many accounts he actually farms and what he does with those.  Right?

Meanwhile, lots of crazy bluster and mudslinging between ebzec and blazr seem to have totally derailed this thread.  I guess there's been some intersting reading about browser security, though.

He doesn't need evidence.  He does this sort of thing as he feels.  He laid multiple negatives on me using alts and with zero evidence.  As the mods say, "the trust system isn't moderated".  Huh, what can you do?

Should also allow kleene star (or kleene +), and it looks like it also does the extentions of {2,5}... etc.  So if you wanted at least two words from your wordlist file you'd need:

1(w1|w2|w3...){2}

But I think you can't get that with just the flat wordlist.

First, thanks a lot to Shorena for arguing in a reasonable tone.

To some of the other things we've heard here:


I'm not implying that boxlite was correct in linking these particular farmed accounts to quickseller (did he actually make that link?  I didn't see it) but I do want to ask what evidence you have that Quickseller "always made decent posts and didn't 'farm' in this way"?  How do we know what he did or didn't do?  He's been incredibly secretive about which accounts he sells are farmed and which are traded.  He says that once someone knows an account is an alt or a farmed account it gets negrepped so he doesn't reveal this info (but he *does* go around negrepping other accounts all the time, even ones he hasn't traded with or had any business with, like mine---I'm convinced this has in part to do with the conflict of interest in inherent in both selling accounts and in being on default trust, but that's another topic).  My question to hillarious here is on what evidence do you know what accounts quickseller farmed or how he farmed them?


Ahh, if I had a bitcoin for everytime quickseller flew off the handle calling someone who disagrees with him an idiot....alas, I'd be richer than Satoshi.  There should be a fun game on this forum where if you find quickseller flying off the handle you get 1pt. and when you find him doing forum masterbation ("I am the world's greatest", "No one is more cool than me",...,etc) you get 2 points.  If we could start flagging these trolling and nonsense masterbation posts perhaps he'd settle down a bit.  I know that the only reason my account has negative trust at the moment is because I had the audacity to call out quickseller for his temper---telling him to calm down and stop being an ass and he basically flipped out, spent two days trolling me with alts and looking for some kinda dirt.  In the end, the only thing he could find were some false accusations from Tradefortress from years ago.

In any case, boxlite seems to not be able to argue without getting too emotional, in that sense he and quickseller are a good match, they can have a "you are an idiot" mudpit fight and we can watch.  Thanks again, Sho, for talking reasonably.  I'm certainly of the opinion that the buying and selling of accounts is basically a complete inversion of the trust system.  As long as people can buy and sell accounts, trust means nothing.  As long as there are trust-rangers who are also in the buying and selling of accounts business, the whole thing is obviously a corrupt joke.

There was some nice discussion in another thread recently about possibly changing the text of the trust warning to something less inflammatory and more descriptive, Salty says he's going to bring up the idea with Theymos, we'll see what happens with that.

I appreciate the offer.  But I wouldn't want to set anyone to doing this work without offering some sort of bounty, and as I'm basically just screwing around, I don't really have money to offer for it.  Again, thanks though!  If you're inspired to do this work on your own and you can also write in C, perhaps you'd consider submitting a patch to the vanitygen repo


Thanks Steve, I may screw around with that const depending on just how much fun I feel like having this afternoon

Okay, I admit it yes  I didn't expect it to be efficient, though, just thought I'd see if I could make it try (Note: for me I'm almost always interested in first finding out what i can do and then, afterward, evaluating what should do separately).  I'll put the 16,384 hypothesis to an empirical test.  Thanks, TheRealSteve

EDIT:

You were right!

This works great (in general).  Follow up, if I have a really long conjunction of |s in my pattern, I get "No patterns to search", but a shorter list works fine.


My question is what is the threshold?  Is it the number of conjuncts?  Or is it the length of the file in chars?  I'm guessing its the actual length in chars but I haven't trolled about in the source code enough to figure it out.  I figured someone on here may know offhand.

Thanks again!  I'm having a lot of fun with vanitygen.

You may be right that they've grown enough to consider expanding their staff.  I know that the one time I had an issue with a PD withdrawal.  I had to wait a week or so to hear back.  Then I wrote again and I heard back soon after.  My issue was resolved without issue (apart from the waiting).

Thanks guys.  I guess I never saw that but now I do!

I had in my mind the idea that the forum software was telling me something about the thread by the icon (if it was popular or something).  Anyway, my question is answered.  And I've added an icon to this message! 

I'm wondering about the little icons I see next to threads in the forum listings.  I see thumbs up, smiley faces, and many others.  I hover my mouse over them looking for a tooltip but nothing-doing.  Is there a list of these icons and what they mean?

What's the argument against moving Bitcoin Core to HD?  Are the principle developers against it for some reason?

You guys are hillarious.  And you are right to ridicule the way Steamingoff uses "gay".  Nevertheless, I think going down the rabbit-hole of ridiculing Steamingoff for his blockheaded use of language distracts from the serious point this thread makes: ie, it's okay to purchase a trusted account, and it's okay for trusted members to farm/sell/buy accounts, but somehow it's not okay to purchase trust directly.  I really have a hard time seeing how the latter is any more problematic for the trust system than the former. 

(Note: I've never bought/sold/farmed accounts or trust, but I have been abused by an account seller who is on default trust (for now).  As far as I can tell, this was in part motivated by said account-seller's market interests in driving up the purchase price for farmed accounts.  However, I won't be purchasing any accounts to try to undo the wrong which was done to me (this would be submitting to blackmail).  But this experience has highlighted for me how much shady-dealings there are around here in terms of the trust system and account purchases/sales.  That's one of the reasons why the satire in this thread resonates so strongly with me.)

Seems like this proves that there's a forum bug in the case of TheGambler.  He still shows up as Hero but, as you say, Spoderman, has dropped to newbie.

Pues yo sí hablo castellano pero no estoy jugando cada dia.  también hable con lorenita, es italiana pero hablo español sin problema, y ella está jugando casi cada día.

You're already outbit anyway.

Lol, indeed it's not too good to beg. 

The deal is this, if you're hanging around a lot, you may be on there when someone throws a party.  Or you can throw one yourself

Actually it was 5 billion.  But yah, a milestone.

WRT to shutting down to US customers, what Stunna actually said was that deposits wouldn't be availble to US IP addys.  IIRC, there was nothing said about withdrawals.  So, for a withdrawal, shouldn't be any issue whatsoever.  Also, fwiw, you can always use TOR or a VPN service to get a non USA IP if you still want to deposit and play.  But this gives Stunna plausible deniabilty in the case that he gets trouble from USA gmen or whatever.