We can't say sure if BTC will recover in price. I can imagina a look in the past,when BTC was long time up and down for almost a year and finally find a bottom. We need this to recover.
This time it can be different but it can also be same.
Price is already very low in my opinion but I can't predict if it will go lower or not. Nobody can predict. If it goes lower BTC price chart can really be damaged and hinder a fast recovering. It can last years to reach record prices of last year.

ETH can break it's highest record again in my opinion. It has proven it's use case for ICO projects and smart contracts. It's a fast network even if most ICO are build on ETH which means traffic. Network is busy sometimes, but development is fast and will help ETH to get back to high levels again.
I'm positive and don't worry too much about price. Better collect more ETH right now.

LOL, I don't know if there is a big buy going on when Satoshi will login again after a long time here. It will be important to watch his activity if he does.

But it's not very realistic he will do this, isn't it? He logged out long time ago and why should he log in now? Maybe his account got hacked and the hacker is spreading FUD to maniputalte the market. If his account is active again we don't know if it's really Satoshi.

I can totally understand you, especially your good points number 1 and 2. Trading is not a good measure to make money and I agree to your OP. Trading is just too risky and crypto has enough risk itself. Better do a good bounty, it's more profitable and less risk.

Hello Dev!

I'm participating in MenaPay signature campaign and I'm now ranked up to Member. I've updated my signature, can you plz update spreadsheet, line 81.

cheers
bananaunana

Legit question which bounty managers should consider.  

Best way to reward a signature bounty is also in my opinion giving stakes per post. Like in your example if someone has 9 posts, pay for 9 posts and if someone has 13 posts, pay for 13 posts. But set a maximal limit of 10 or 15 posts per week which are paid, this decision will avoid spam. Pay every post would in this limit would be very fair.  

I agree here, social media campaigns like facebook or twitter are a waste of time. Too much participants and too much spam producing. Reports every week are also a waste of time I never really considered to try it. Translations are very good if you can get them, signature is good if you have a high rank.

Agreed, there are many ICO just created for a random reason for the Devs to fill their pockets. It's very easy to spot these projects: no substancial team or a faked one, project makes no sense or projects doesn't need blockchain for success. Often blockchain is olny used to make an ICO. 

Maybe it's to avoid very small transations and this will lead to more traffic or issues regarding to all users. And more questions to clear. Means more expenses. But it's only my guess.

I'm a friend of low entry barriers. Maybe 50$ should be enough. In many countries 50$ can be very much money.

As said above, 1000 investors will cause more question and possible issue than one investor.

To be fair, I agree here, I don't like projects where many rich people hold most tokens or coins, like Ripple. Such projects are not good ones. 

Good to know, thanks for this warning! I generally avoid any suspicious downloads, especially if someone on Telegram PMs me and I should download something. There's a big no for me. Finally it's only a story he spins around this scam to lead you to download something.
The story is just fluff and his argument to send first. Before he requires you downloading the malware download.

Here is a good source to decide which altcoin to invest in. I would never buy a dead altcoin with no development except Doge. Doge is unique and will be successful without much development.



Source: https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/1068856384983363585?s=21

dead alts are:

- Verge
- Holochain
- Bitcoin Private
- Pundi X
- Poet
- Decentraland (MANA)

I would not invest in Ripple (XRP) it's a centralized shitcoin.

And Holo is a dead project, no development.



Source: https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/1068856384983363585?s=21

Doge has also no development, but it's a unique one. Doge will always be valuable.

People said same things some years ago, when a hype was followed by a recession. But it always recovered again and all fudders were proven wrong. There will be still some saying Bitcoin would be a scam when it was at 20,000$ again.

I agree to the first part but I'm sure it will always be a phase of bull and bear market.

Therefore, I always check a link in the left bottom corner before I click it and if the source ist suspicious I never click any link.

On Bitcointalk I also click only links from Newbie members before checking it in the left bottom corner before. To be sure you don't get on a malware site.

Coin-1 made a post here about: [TOP-200] Members who have a lot of earned sMerits

But his table doesn't include the airdropped Merits, only earned ones.

I agree, a fork offers just a possibility to produce unnecessary projects and people dealing with their beef. They should create a new project, maybe on ERC20, that wouldn't affect Bitcoin. They use the fork to get more attention to their useless coin.


Yes, they are affecting the market in a bad way and that only shows how redundant such forks are.


Or create just a new one, if you think it would be better than existing ones.

I did also some reports but one thing I deem necessary is to reduce the waiting time spam between two reports. Right now, I have 11 seconds of waiting time and get this message all the time. I can understand we need it between posts to reduce spammer’s comments for bumping services and so on, but since Merit is received for Jr. Member and you can’t rank up just by activity I hope this limit between reports can be reduced or removed.
It’s so time consuming sometimes even it’s only 11 seconds for me right now.

Here are my stats, 0 bad reports 

Of course, there are many platforms where information needs to be traded with caution. Such like Twitter and Facebook but also normal blog websites or ICO rating platforms which can be paid to rate a project better than it actually is.

Good comment. The crypto bull market in late 2017 brought lots of hype speculants and new rich kiddies into crypto which were only willing to gain a fast profit. In addition, most on them were very unexperienced and their advice was not helpful at all.
Lack of knowledge and hype/greed can be a very dangerous mixture.

Crypto YouTubers are a very popular source for many ICO participants to get news for promising ICO projects. The result is a new business model of YouTubers to promote ICOs to a large number of followers. There are various channels in English but also in local languages.
Generally, you should trade all the information provided there very carefully and always doublecheck to other sources.

To give you an impression why you should trade crypto YouTubers with caution, here is why. There are different categories where the schemes can be divided in:


YouTubers getting paid directly from the project

The majority of the big YouTubers are getting paid from the project itself. The project hopes to get more investors due to this video because many followers trust in their YouTubers and believe them everything even it makes not much sense at all.
For a high payment the YouTubers will only mention positive facts and forget often to inform about risks and flaws of the project to get many followers in.
The review will most likely be a very biased one if the YouTuber gets paid.

Famous hype channels are Suppoman for example:


Would you really trust people like him?


YouTubers which try to distribute their referral link

A significant amount of YouTube videos is made on the purpose to collect money by referral-links.
Similar to the category mentioned above especially the advantages of the project are highlighted. In the description below the YouTube video you’ll always find a referral link which will lead you to the official site of the project where you can register and invest. It should be mentioned that the youtuber gets a reward if you use his link and join the project and invest, often a percentage of the amount you invest in. Therefore, the YouTuber will be interested that you join and invest in this project and review the project in a positive way.

A famous hype channel was (or still is) Trevon James, who advertised heavily for the Bitconnect Scam.


You’ll mention soon the interest of conflict between a serious analysis comparing both sides, negative and positive ones and a version of review to get you as an investor.

As a first impression these channels can be reviewed, but you should always trade the provided information with caution and never make an investment decision solely based on YouTube reviews.
It is always important to compare all available sources you find out there to consider an investment. Most YouTube videos are based on hype to get you as a new investor.


Of course, not all YouTubers are bad and everything is false information. There are a few good channels which are doing very detailed reviews and don’t support every weak ICO. It’s just important to know how ICO business on YouTube is made to avoid wrong investment decisions driven solely by hype.


What are your impressions of crypto YouTubers and your tips to avoid wrong advice?

Done: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1926895.msg48450286#msg48450286

I don't know if it's useful to report such cases for plagiarism, they will just create a new account and start spamming again.