Having been here when the campaigns first popped up and became huge (PD comes to mind), there has been such a huge decline in the signal-to-noise ratio on this forum. I used to find topics and discussions that were meaningful, insightful and interesting - but now a lot of the posts are just pure blather and unengaging. There was a stage when I could have a long debate in threads, now I make a point and no one bothers to reply, instead spouting the same old crap time and time again meaning that nothing new interesting emerges.

From a forum standpoint, I think it might have been too late to change things back. Most of the old guard have left - and probably won't come back (except from time to time) even with the removal of signature campaigns. Furthermore, without signature campaigns I can guarantee that a majority of posting would stop (which would be good for the signal-to-noise ratio as only actually relevant stuff would be posted) but the forum would probably slowly die.

Despite whatever ethical arguments anyone has - the remaining escrowed funds should be given as per outlined by the original escrow agreement (usually the original owner of the funds). Not doing so (even while it might be viewed as justice for scammers) would be a violation of an agreement, meaning an escrow can't be trusted to do what they agree upon.


He is doing what looks to a fair resolution - the signature campaign has ended with the closure of the site and he's paying you for all the days you were present in the campaign. Just because you choose to advertise beyond that point doesn't mean you are owed anything. Secondly, unless he has a clear intention to keep the coins - I wouldn't assume he's try to avoid paying out - he's following what makes sense and is fair - your being paid for the term of the agreement which has been cut short.

Finally, once again it isn't simply just because OP is a scammer that you can claim a full payment. It is irrelevant - you are being paid for the services you rendered and the time course - which has been shortened and hence a shortened payment.

Honestly, you can keep trying all you like - I don't hear anyone else agreeing.

We have a bigger issue if a true AI (rather than just a well coded program) is actually created. For it to actively look for new implementations it would need to be able to replicate thought patterns (in the same way humans think at least) which presents the possibility that it outstrips any conventional barriers or failsafes we code.

In reality, I'm not sure if we'll actually ever have AI, but if we do there'll be much more use in other fields rather than new crypto implementations. Much more likely humans come up with new solutions. As for as ASICs go I honestly don't really see the problem, what are you trying to do by making ASICs obsolete (make everyone use a CPU?).

TBH once you have confirmed that a user has a history of scamming - adding another accusation really doesn't make a difference aside from improving awareness for the general community. Adding proof could be useful - but I honestly doubt it makes a difference, moriarty has been proven to be a scammer over and over and he hasn't made a single effort to deny to prove otherwise. There really is no real need for proof in scenarios such as these.

TBH I trust sites less when you are forced into using a downloadable client - because I can't consistently monitor if the client is doing anything else it isn't supposed to be without a considerable degree of effort. It doesn't hurt to have the option of both a web client and a downloadable client to users - who can then choose what they want to use.

Haha, classic greed - somehow users manage to convince themselves that they deserve the whole pot just because the campaign went bust.


Oh the irony, trying to claim the remaining escrowed funds for yourself when you don't actually fairly deserve them isn't the getting the 'maximum profit' for yourself? Please, at least have some common sense.

You are correct - there is nothing to say that any newer blocks which we haven't attributed to him haven't been cashed out and that he is leaving the ones we do know about alone so as not to draw anymore attention. It could be that he already has a RL job that pays him well enough without having to actually use the BTC he has - or he doesn't wish to have his identity exposed (take the whole Dorian saga for example) so would rather not risk it.

Yeah for a loan this size - unless you know a couple of members IRL personally you might want to look to your bank (it'll probably cost you less in terms of interest than what you're offering here). It'll also be hard to find collateral of that value - you might need to engage a lawyer to draft if you find someone.

The concept of bonus farming per se isn't a scam - but OP's motives are probably just to try and gain referrals and get a free backlink to improve his site SEO.

As far as bonuses go, in the past on blackjack sites you could play blackjack with basic strategy and reduce the house edge to around 0.5% so that you could use it to reach the rollover requirement to withdraw your bonus from your deposit. Same deal with rakeback farming (i.e. on old FullTilt) or ocassionally sports betting.

Haha, well you can't really argue it isn't exactly true. Not to mention it never hurts to fairly point out how you stand out from the competition. I wouldn't get too worked up about it.

If you can't find what you're looking for through a google search - you're not going to have much luck at a longer script without paying a decent amount. Website scraping isn't as easy as you think it is - nor is storing and retrieving the results in a timely manner.

It doesn't fit the definition of a ponzi hence is not one.

It doesn't pay new investors using old investors funds or guarantee a profit either of which are required to be actually classified as a ponzi.

Legality isn't the big deal here - it's the ethics and morality that are lacking and the herd mentality. No one dares to stand up for fear of retribution and no change is instilled. But yeah - it's easy to sit here and judge with us in a society which actually got to the point where we can talk about morality openly.

Religion isn't to be blamed. The reality is that some people are just shit and have no moral compass or ability to think for themselves or the courage to stand up for what they believe. Hence these atrocities occur.

Considering that it has already been revealed that the NSA is actively looking into Tor (and they have some of their own exit nodes IIRC) - I'd be more inclined to think a seedbox created from scratch on a VPS in a grey jurisdiction would be the best. Next best would be in countries with little need to comply with DCMA (ie. few treaties) such as eastern Europe.

Secondly, it depends on where the VPN's are actually located - can't build a case on evidence that hasn't been legally obtained. You'd need a warrant first to get the logs and no unauthorized surveillance would stand a chance in court.

Sure they could change the code to anything they liked - but in reality, it is only relevant if the whole community agrees and updates to this new version. If not, for all major changes (ie. adjusting the supply limit) all you would do is create a fork between the people using the older Bitcoin Core and the newer one.

Most of the big changes would cause a price collapse (I can't think of a major change that would be agreed upon which would cause a price increase) - which would inspire the mass of Bitcoin users to reject a new update. On that point I do agree - most are motivated by financial gain rather than coin itself, but luckily so far these are fairly aligned.

It would go on with new devs - maybe worse off but not dead. Reminds me of the Truecrypt project that packed up and instead got taken up by a number of different groups of devs.

But isn't it self-defeating if you have to have exchanges in order to actually spend your Bitcoin? What's the whole point of having Bitcoin if you need to convert it back to local fiat to actually purchase anything without getting ripped off? The reality is that it isn't a lack of anonymous exchanges, but a lack of ability to actually spend Bitcoin for any and all items with relative ease and without additional costs.

I wouldn't bother to be honest. The place is dead aside from freerolls, and the freerolls are a waste of time (people apparently rebuy over and over - it is unlimited) and the withdrawal fee is the same as the freeroll. That is 10x greater than a tx fee - which means the freeroll isn't designed to be a freeroll.

Because he needs a figure to indicate that the market capitalization of Bitcoin has increased - best way is to peg it against one of the most commonly accepted currencies for financial transactions in the world.

USD may not be useful to you if you don't live in the US - but they are important for all exporters/importers and a significant number of financial structures and companies.

Well that's a rather specific definition. I haven't mined in an eternity because it is no longer cost efficient nor fits my lifestyle - doesn't mean I can't do other things like run a node and be a supporting part of Bitcoin. Network security is maintained by the fact that generally most miners don't want to see all the mining to occur at a few specific pools (with the potential for 51% attacks) and that they want to make a profit. It's like saying you should make your own CPU and motherboard because you can't trust that the NSA hasn't tampered with it. At some point things become too difficult to live in land of golden principles - reality doesn't fit so well.

Agreed - the amount you get (last I checked) were so low that you could spend a year doing them over and over and would make about BTC0.01 which is just over $2.4USD at time of posting. It really is only useful for newbies who wish to experiment initially before moving onto bigger things.

Also, IIRC having dust in your address means that you might actually require a larger tx fee to be included in a block anytime soon - which itself might outvalue the value the of dust you have.