This is not about you. Nor do you have any standing to lecture about the trust system.

I can't see how Trump's ego would allow him to not run. And if he runs I can't see anyone being insane enough to run against him in the primaries. I mean anyone who cares about their future in the Republican party. Someone like Liz Cheney might have a go at it

So yes, I'm reasonably sure he'll be the nominee unless something catastrophic happens.

Ukraine elects a pro-Russian president: "picked"
Ukraine elects a non-pro-Russian president (after the aforementioned ran away): COUP! COOKIES!

Despite the actual facts (not Kremlin fantasies) - like the laws Yanik tried to push through - that point to him being a wannabe-Lukashenko and trying to create a puppet totalitarian shithole for Putin.

But how could Ukraine not want to be like Belarus. Unimaginable.

That was my initial impression too but it turns out that at least part of it is true.

Every time Hurts is throwing to AJ you must be punching your TV

Luckily for you he didn't do that on this last touchdown so you still have a slim chance.

I understand this as the initial motivation. I don't understand the cover up when you got outed. That was the time to say "yep, it's me, not really a secret because many more users know this" and move on. You knew at that point that this secret has no chance so what was the plan?

And yes, I misunderstood the posts of some other users earlier in the thread... I thought they were saying "we know who CC is and it's not Royse777" but actually they were just playing along with your charade. So you didn't deceive them as I initially thought. You just deceived everyone else.


Well, see above. According to Royse777, everything and everyone is wrong except Royse777. Benefit of the doubt usually comes with remorse and humility, which is severely lacking here.

Anyway, let's backtrack a little bit. If I was considering investing in whatever this CC project is I would surely want to know who is involved in it. Wouldn't you? So we could find a lot of reputable members linked to it but one important member was hiding. That's kinda sketchy in its own right. Then it turns out it's Royse777, recently involved in a scammy casino. I would consider this whole scheme very dishonest and deceptive.

And that's me - someone who didn't really consider Royse777 guilty in the BitLucy debacle. Now imagine if someone thinks Royse777 is a scammer and they get deceived by the presence of all these reputable members in the CC project and put their money into it, only to find out that a scammer (in their view) is involved and said reputable members hid that information.

I don't think that's right. I don't think that's how you rebuild reputation. I think being honest is how you rebuild reputation.

I might be wrong though. Maybe sockpuppeting and lying about it and blaming others is the Bitcointalk way.

Then I'm totally confused now why this was such a big deal with 5 pages of cover up. How could you possibly not have seen that trying to keep a secret that was impossible to keep (given the number of people involved) would backfire and make you look like you're scheming something fishy.

Who are all those who knew it?

With Newsom they might actually have a chance. Obviously he's done enough shit to fill Republican negative ads 24/7 for two years, but at least he's not a mumbling stumbling grandpa and could make Trump look even more stupid than usual.

Which is to say no, Democrats will not pick him. He'll be slammed as left coast communist in their own primaries. I can already imagine anti-Newsom ads with burning wildfires and LA homeless camps.

It's really sad to see people getting caught red-handed doing something shady and continuing to argue it on "procedural" grounds. It doesn't matter how offended or betrayed you feel, Royse777. Not in this context anyway.

I don't understand the logic of not disclosing your sockpuppeting to people involved in the project but disclosing it to outsiders, if I correctly understand what's happening here. Regardless of how it leaked, I'd be pissed if I had any dealings with CC and didn't know that you were CC.

Now it sounds that you're not regretting your own behavior but the fact that you got caught, which is what scammers tend to do.

Yeah I think there is not much of a benefit in doing something like that.

Staked addresses are useful for e.g. recovering an account or some other proof of identity. Staked truth (or lie) doesn't really benefit a truthful person and surely doesn't benefit a liar.

BTW tagging, let alone banning, for lying - not something we need IMO, unless that lie has broader consequences causing "high risk" in trading with the person. Which is a whole other thing beyond the scope of such thread and again, slim chance that "criminals" would incriminate themselves in said thread.

There was a shooting at a military base in Belgorod region. I mean the bad kind of shooting, not like a training exercise. Two or three armed individuals (according to RF MOD - "terrorists", according to some other reports - mobilized soldiers) fired at other mobilized soldiers and killed between 10 and 22, injured 15 or more. MOD says the "terrorists" are citizens of CIS, meaning the moribund post-Soviet union involving Russia, Belarus, etc, but in this case they most likely mean a person from Central Asia. If they were among the mobilized, that would explain how an armed foreign (presumably dual) citizen managed to get into a military base. Motive was allegedly religion-based, which works well for Russian propaganda - islamic terrorism and the entire evil world against the righteous Russian dictatorship. They might try to tie it to Ukraine as well.

https://ria.ru/20221015/terakt-1824340408.html

More pressure may result in more merit-whoring threads similar to this one, or attempts to post in more merit-rich boards in general.

I doubt that users would objectively improve the quality of their posts to any significant extent. More likely the campaign would have a higher turnover rate until it (possibly) settles on higher quality users who consistently earn merits.

I guess if your last name is "Bitches" you kinda have to name your child like this:




You might want to take a break. I don't see how digging your hole deeper makes any sense for you now.

As for harm, there was something about bonuses that you tried to double-dip with your sockpuppets. I can't be arsed to look it up, but again - stop digging or someone won't be so lazy.

The problem is that sorting is done by the Bitcointalk server, and our extension works entirely inside the user's browser. So there is no easy way to implement sorting by merits. We could sort the current page but that doesn't help and might even be misleading, since the threads on other pages might have more merits. A more robust option would be to keep a list of threads on our (BPIP) server or perhaps use TryNinja's site to grab all threads for the board, but then it's complicated to display the result with all the other columns (i.e. last post etc).

I'd make it some sort of running average though. Maybe 5 or 10 merits over the last 4 weeks. There is a lot of variance in how merits are sent and I can imagine an otherwise decent user falling short of it in one unfortunate week.

For example I earned 10 or so merits on my last 20 posts, so that seems like 0.5 merit per post but only 3 of those 20 posts got merited. I'm quite sure I've had streaks of 25+ posts without merits.

It's gotta be Hillary. Both candidates could replay their greatest hits from 2016. Her e-mails!!! It'd be epic.

Or Democrats could choose someone with a pulse and win in a landslide but where's the fun in that.

It looks like our match will be a proper bottom-of-the-barrel duel

I had to get two new RBs off the wire for this week because I have two injured and two on a bye. My only hope is that Kelce will massively outscore whoever you're gonna get for TE.

I did want to get Robinson but got confused with the misleading wire date on Yahoo (October 15). Obviously he's not going to be available until Wednesday (October 19) and no use for this week.

Apparently all they want is cookies.

But for some inexplicable reason Putin can't give them cookies while (allegedly) being capable of boosting Crimea's economy and the imaginary Russian side of the future split Ukraine.

It's almost as if Ukrainians don't like Russian cookies. I wonder why that is.

Or maybe Ukrainians just don't want to be in or with Russia, just like nearly all countries in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet block.

You can yell "cookies" all you want but anyone following politics in the aforementioned countries for the last 30 years could see that these countries had all sorts of issues, pendulum swings left and right, pro- and anti-EU/US/NATO etc, but most still somehow ended up on the western side of the newly-being-erected iron curtain, with exceptions being authoritarian shitholes like Belarus and the like.

There are many good reasons for this, all vividly illustrated now in Ukraine. Who could have know that people might not like to be invaded and ruled by a KGB psychopath. But wait, no, it must be some evil US plot. Maybe Clinton installed Putin back in 1999 and is puppeting him into doing all these evil things.