Lol. I didn't know that but yeah it seems a good motive not to put them on this list.


Well, I don't think that's such a good reason anymore, since there are meme coins that have been quite successful on the Internet, albeit seasonally.

That is the logical decision, especially if bitcoin has a clear legal origin. For people who can't prove the origin because for example they mined it in the past and don't have the logs, or bought it P2P paying in hand, or saved it from signature campaigns without declaring them, the issue is a bit more complicated.

In those cases there are people who choose to hide it from his wife because it is something that can be turned against him in a potential divorce case.

To be honest, very early on, 5 or 6 years ago, when I first became interested, I was wondering if this was a ponzi scheme or something like that. The first thing I saw was that it was linked to the purchase of drugs and forbidden things through the deep web, then the mt gox scandal appeared, so the first information I had was not flattering.

But in the end, I decided to investigate a little more, I read Satoshi's Paper, some videos of Andreas, and more sources of information of this style, informative, and I dedicated myself to get involved.

So, do you two think that in the future, to run a campaign without having received the funds from the company is a case of force majeure? I don't think so.

In this particular case, I understand. It is a relatively common practice, when a campaign has been running for a while and you have not received the funds for the week, to continue it because you trust that the company will send you the funds.

I think that the manager of this campaign has been unlucky and has been caught in the middle of this situation, and I also understand the people who out of solidarity say that they don't need to be paid.

But in the future, if the campaign managers are going to put a disclaimer that removes them from responsibility I don't think they should continue a campaign as long as they have not received the funds.

Don't worry about that. The only thing is, I'm not sure this is the right section for this thread. Maybe the goods one would be better but I think in general there people sell goods P2P and not through third parties. Anyway. welcome to the community and if you want to promote your work, stay on it and make positive contributions.

If you look at people's comments in the campaign thread, all indications are that it is an exit scam. So it's going to have to be added to the list in this thread.

I am curious to know how much they may have scammed, as it seems they had been operating normally until now. Is it worth scamming people when you can continue to do business honestly and make money on an ongoing basis? We don't know the specific circumstances of the case.

What about BetterCallRaul.it?

I think it should be on the watch and will probably end up on the list of scams. They have stopped operations in a strange way, to say the least.

I am not surprised that the price at this point in the month is in line with the poll, which was slightly bullish but trending sideways. It looks like we are in a dull phase and will remain so for a while, but as we get closer to the halving the price will tend to go up to come the best after the halving. In the meantime, let's wait and see.

Yes, they are.


I do remember that one, yes. In the case at hand, at least it's an elaborate story, that if you don't stop to read carefully you don't realize it's BS.


I've just reported it, but I don't think it's a matter of reputation, at least for the moment, because it is just one case. It's one thing if you catch someone who constantly makes up stories, but for a single post I think it's not even worth a neutral tag.

It would have been more believable if you had said that everything you were going to write was a parable, and not just the first part.


Here it is not entirely clear from the way you put it whether the supposed friend (whom you call simply a friend in the other thread) won only for 3 days or for two months. From the way you express it it seems that you don't know it, but that it would be something in between, that he had a winning streak of up to a month or a month and a half.

3 days alone can't be because it doesn't give him enough to spend all the money you claim to spend or for, ahem,


Then there is something else to consider. The way you describe it, he is not a millionaire who has a big bankroll in the casino of, say, $50K and is making bets of 1% or less managing his bankroll. As you describe it he is a working man who making $700 a day for a while changes his life. So we can assume with high certainty that the money he went to the casino with on the first day is easily a few hundred dollars and at most a couple of thousand.

In other words, no one who knows how a casino works can believe that story. Which makes me think that most of the people who have commented in the thread have done it simply to meet the posting quota in the gambling section and/or have no fucking idea how a casino works.

Every time you bet in a casino, the odds are against you, and in the imagined story we can only have three scenarios.

The first is that the protagonist is betting with little risk, as in roulette on red or black. The other is that he is betting with high risk, which gives him a potentially high return on his bet, as when betting on a single number. And the third is a mixed scenario.

With the first scenario he is not going to get rich and there is not much to explain. As much as he can have winning streaks of flips a couple of days or three, winning streaks cannot be prolonged for much longer and it's not going to change his life for a couple of months. As for the risky scenario, if you play roulette on a single number, the odds of winning streaks after 2 or 3 days are much lower.

So this possibility is BS as well. And the mixed possibility is BS because the two scenarios on which it is based are BS.

Thanks for your answers, but the one that convinces me the most is the one from nutildah. On other occasions I seem to remember calling it BS myself or seeing it from other people to a story that seems clearly made up but doing it on the front page, where it has more visibility.

I guess I'll do it later and take the opportunity to report the thread by putting my explanation as a link.

I locked the thread but I thought better to unlock it, in case someone wants to read my reasoning.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5450275.msg62283971#msg62283971

So, I took a look at the gambling section and saw a thread that is based on an OP that is simply false. What is told in it does not stand up to the slightest rational analysis.

I would like to detail it and I have been hesitating where to do it. I have thought about the Reputation section but it would seem too tough against the person who makes up the story I think and I've been known to be aggressive enough lately. I have also thought to call it BS in the same thread but the comment would be lost on the umpteenth page and people would keep spamming the thread no matter what.

Then I have also thought of doing it in Meta, as it is a meta-reflection on that thread the analysis I plan to do, but here I'm sure someone will tell me the typical thing that I should just report the thread, but I don't want to just report it but analyze it and see what the other forum members think.

What do you think?

In the end I sent him the PM just to let him know the facts. It is true that Zilon strictly speaking did not break the rules of his signature campaign but I believe it was reasonable to bring the facts to the attention of his manager.


I don't think it is (a bit) off-topic.


I wanted to emphasize the "just" because actually getting paid to write works as an incentive for those of us who wear paid signatures, but there is a considerable difference with those who write just for the money, than those who consider the money an extra for doing an activity they like.

Regarding the quality I had not commented anything but I also think that his posts are quite generic, although in a campaign where half of the 20 required posts are required in the Gambling Section that style of writing is usual.

Get your facts straight because to begin with, signatures are not subjects that can commit crimes. If you don't express yourself well you are not helping your case.

I don't know why you have so much insistence on something that was already discussed at the time: mixers are not banned today, therefore to wear the advertising of a mixer or any other service that is not banned today is not illegal.

The order of theymos to the staff seems more a move of extreme caution than anything else, because the moment the mixers or any other service that is advertised in signature campaigns in the forum is declared illegal in the USA especially, the signatures of that service will be banned from the forum.

I have reporting stats similar to yours but I don't know why you are worrying about that. Especially when reporting you get the message:


It may have been reported wrongly by you or even an error by the moderators in rating it, but it's okay either way.

I don't know if any moderator will PM you or give an explanation in the thread but I imagine they wouldn't want to give explanations every time for the ratings they give to the reports.

I have seen some curious behavior from Zilon. This week he was several days without writing in the forum, and he has written a lot in the last couple of days to meet his post quota.

With two days left in his campaign week he had only written 6 posts. On the 19th he wrote 8 posts in one hour and 12 minutes, which comes out to a gap of 9 minutes between posts. Yesterday he wrote 6 in a similar period of time. That makes a total of 20 posts, just enough to get paid, although in the spreadsheet I see 21, I don't know if one has been deleted by the moderators.  

Thanks to this he was able to pay back the $50 loan to sashan.

Hhampuz has a rule in other campaigns not to count more than 5 posts per day that I have not seen in this one. In the Duelbits one for example:


I don't know whether to send him a PM for his consideration.

That's what I thought, I don't think that people who today have 10 or 50 Bitcoins to donate, which means they have many more, are so stupid as to fall for such a crude scam.

The bad thing about scams is that if only one person falls, it is very profitable for them. Sending one of those emails does not cost them much, and although in this case I don't think anyone will fall, in others there is usually a clueless person who does not realize the scam. Only with one person, or a few, falling into the trap they have achieved their goal.

You mean that the bans have no effect, the title is not well expressed in my opinion.

In any case, the regulations that are implemented in this regard have a great influence on how the market evolves. I prefer a regulation like the one El Salvador has for Bitcoin than the one the EU has in development, where it intends to KYC all transactions.

Where do you get that from?

Do you really believe that the The 1913 Federal Reserve Act, by which The Fed was created was passed as a consequence of the interest of citizens? I don't.

I am not saying that it is not so in all cases, but in other cases, the legislation obeys the interests of pressure groups, voter groups, supranational entities and a long etcetera.
Or the social credit legislation in China. In this case, I do not believe that the legislation Pakistan is going to implement is a consequence of the interests of the citizens but rather obeys the interests of politicians, who are more in favor of CBDCs because they can control them.

You get off to a bad start.


In other words, you've got a paranoia that you can't even imagine by a simple site error, and even though you have obtained your funds you recommend against Rollbit?

Go to sleep. And quit gambling.