The trust system isn't moderated, you're better off addressing this to Blazed (assuming you're talking about who I think you're talking about). Also, if you think their feedback is so bad, you are free to exclude them from your trust list. The initial intent of the system was for people to make their own trust lists, not solely rely on DT.

Hey, just wondering if this has been resolved yet. I saw kripto offered repayment, but it doesn't seem the OP has replied?

Is there proof of this?



He won't be banned, the trust system is un-moderated.The only recourse for leaving poor feedback is being excluded from other people's trust lists. Personally, I think it's a bit far to give a negative rating to someone who isn't even enrolled or trying to enroll in a signature campaign. A neutral rating seems far more appropriate, at least in your case.

The jackpot is progressive- it depends on the site's profit, and since LTC has only been around for a week, it's understandable it's still comparatively small.

At this rate we're going to need a megathread for all these complaints  Good to see another active member in DT who isn't afraid to take hate. Been a while since anyone new was added it seems, but I guess that makes sense if things need to be "sanctioned by upper level members".

Just wondering, I am considering investing and obviously would feel more comfortable if I knew you'd been around a while, that's all.

Are you the same flux who played on just-dice back in 2013/14?

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Personally, I would never trust a single cent with a website using a .biz domain name, and I suggest you do the same.

Actually, theymos has a financial incentive to allow their advertisement, since, assuming they outbid others, it would increase revenue for the forums. If anything, his bias would be for, not against. And don't you think your opinion might be even more biased because you run a website dedicated to Bitcoin forks? Or should you not be allowed to post because of your status 

I should note that the withdrawal has since been processed. I contacted support about it and was told I needed to respond to an email they had sent me. I had received no emails for FJ since the time I made the withdrawal, so I asked them to resend it and they did. It simply asked me to confirm the withdrawal because my IP had changed recently. While I'm happy they have this system in place, I'm not quite sure why I didn't receive the initial email in the first place.

To be fair, this is the only withdrawal I've had that has been delayed, which is why I was surprised. I made another one today that was instant, so I have no complaints. As for the signature wearers, you can't blame them for being positive, they're getting paid .035 BTC a week 

No one needs your holier than thou nonsense. I've been following Bitcoin since 2013, so trust me, I know what it is. During that same period of time I've seen it drop from more than 90% market share to just over 30%. Moreover, I agree with you that most people buy coins for the wrong reasons. That being said, it's foolish to blindly assume that Bitcoin will end up being the dominant cryptocurrency just because it was the first to become popular. Cryptocurrency is a revolutionary invention, but it remains to be seen in what way it will ultimately succeed. Personally, I have the majority of my holdings in BTC, however, I hold a non trivial number of alternative cryptocurrencies that have similar aspects (decentralized, mineable). Many of the coins being created recently have little to no use, yet receive hundreds of millions of dollars in investment from people hoping to get rich. Responsible third parties could prevent this from happening on such a large scale if they allocated these funds more efficiently by doing exactly what you said: looking at what service a coin provides/problem it solves, not looking at the potential profit from doing so.

Bump.

The main reason this is the case is because there are no professional financial services providing investment options with cryptocurrency. Few people create their stock portfolio on their own, they leave it up to a mutual fund or an actively managed fund to do so. There is no option for this with crypto, so people have to build their own portfolios. What you get is the same as if they just blindly picked stocks. It's easy to do well when the market is bullish no matter what you pick, but once the weaker coins start losing their hype, I think we'll see quite a few big losses.

The reason your thread keeps getting moved is because it doesn't involve buying or selling BTC, which is what this section is for.

As far as I can tell, there are two main differences.

1. Bounties seem to be denominated in whatever token they are peddling, while signature campaigns generally pay out in BTC.
2. Bounty campaigns extend beyond the forums to include activities on other social media (Twitter, Reddit, etc.), and include payment for other activities, such as translation or graphic design.

Out of curiosity, does the wording of this thread (fanclub, donations, etc.) actually prevent the SEC from prosecuting this as an illegal security, or is this just due to luck.

Not to mention the website lists the same transaction ID for both deposits and withdrawals. It's honestly laughable how little effort they put in to making this look legitimate. If you lose money to this scam, it's your own fault.

Yes, you are correct, ICOs are legal for accredited investors to invest in. The main issue is that most people don't satisfy the requirements of $1M net worth (excluding permanent residence) or three years of income greater than $200K.

ICO's are available for US citizens, they're just not legal. Don't kid yourself, anyone tech savvy enough to use cryptocurrency is also smart enough to use a proxy. US citizens invest in ICO's all the time.

Sent you a PM.