They are not the only ones. Nowadays with how decentralized the system is and how many people there are in DT it is not uncommon to see negative feedback on people who write quality posts and also the feedback sometimes has nothing to do with trading risk.

That's why you will see in several campaigns a phrase saying like it's not allowed people with "legitimate" negative feedback and things like that, so the manager, if he thinks someone is worthy of entering the campaign, reviews the feedback and decides if he agrees or not.

That is the classic definition. Typical would be a stock that pays you dividends, but whether an investment is more passive or less passive depends on how much time you spend on it.

If you are a landlord of 100 properties and you don't work on them at all, but you hire people to run them, meeting with them maybe a couple of times a year to review accounts, you have a more passive investment than if you have two properties and you are the one who is on the phone, the one who is in charge of going when there is a problem, preparing the house when the tenants leave and others are coming, etc.

Normally a large amount of capital makes it much easier for the investment to be more passive.

As for Bitcoin, and following what I have explained, you can also get passive income, which would not be what is called typically passive income, but it does not take more work than a few clicks.

I don't know about you, but I prefer to have passive income from Bitcoin, which gives me a return of 100% per year on average or more, than from a stock that pays dividends and gives me a net 5%, or -7%.

No. From the beginning I am talking about having my holdings or rather the management of my holdings divided in two places, that is to say that they would take 50% of my holdings. If we add the layers according to the advice of the thread it could be less.

Anyway. If you have a lot of bitcoin and they know it, if they are bitcoin savvy people who think you have 50 Bitcoins, they are not going to stop cutting off your body parts because you show them 0.3 Bitcoins in your HW.


Yes, I think so. The situations that we pose are movie situations, violent or even horror, but it's always good to be cautious. In any case, they are not going to come to cut my legs off to get my bitcoin because most of my net worth is in KYC assets that are not instantly transferable, but in this forum there are those who have a very important part of their net worth in Bitcoin and also have a considerable net worth, so it is understandable that they are concerned about their privacy to the maximum.

No, I have no misunderstanding. Someone who buys bitcoin at $20k and sells partially at $40k, $60, $100k etc gets passive income, as he just has to click.

As for stocks the same thing. Typically dividend paying stocks are considered passive income but if you have a stock that pays 3% a year but loses value at 5% a year you are better off buying an S&P 500 index fund for an average 10% annual return and making partial sales in bull markets.

You are not going to tell me that making two clicks to obtain income is active, are you?


How went those projects?

In the end, what I think is that if you are not sure what business or activity to start that ends up being passive, the best thing to do is to save some income from your active work and invest for passive income.


It seems to me that we don't have the same idea of what a passive business is. Nor of agriculture either from what I remember from your previous posts. Chickens, and the eggs they lay, require active labor, and if you want to take it as a business activity even more so. The only form of passive labor I can think of in farming is typical of large landowners. Buy a lot of land and pay people to farm it for you, checking in only once in a while. 


Well, actually, I am quite satisfied, but, without obsessing, I always think of ways to earn more because I believe that earning money honestly is good, and it gives you more options in life.


I put the blog as an example, but I don't think it's the best time today to start a blog. Maybe it was ten years ago.


Not really. If you want weeds or stones, a lot. But if we are talking about products that people demand and of good quality, they require a lot of capital investment, time and work.


Yes, the cases you mention are jobs that were first active and then became passive for the owner.

The typical example is a business that you set up, in which you actively work, and when it is successful you decide to franchise it.


I can. This is only said by those who have not had to earn their wages in agriculture. Having a small farm where you plant a couple of things to entertain yourself and get some exercise from time to time is cool but if you have to make a living from it you're going to get fed up to the gills.

And it is not passive work, which is the subject of this thread, unless you are a landowner as I have commented above.

I think that also depends on location, previous searches and perhaps other factors.

Bump.

As usual, I see that after the initial success, things have slowed down. I just put on the signature to support the cause and I encourage the rest of you who are not currently wearing a signature to do so.

I have googled for "bitcoin cleanup" and the greenpeace one comes out first, while bitcoincleanup.com comes out 10th. Let's see if we can get it up a few positions.

Active investments require work and follow-up in order to yield results. A day trader needs to be actively buying and selling to make money, while a buy and hold trader invests in a more passive way.

In the world of cryptocurrencies, someone who buys or sells trying to guess whether the price is going up or down makes a more active investment while someone who buys Bitcoin not to sell until at least the next cycle makes a more passive investment.

We can apply this not only to investments, but to work as well. A lawyer or surgeon, no matter how much they earn, depends on their work to earn money, while someone who writes books, invests his time in a more passive way: once the book is written, he has invested some time, but the book continues to sell for a long time afterwards (assuming it is successful).

There are ways that are neither black nor white. Someone who has a YouTube channel or a blog with some success, the old videos or posts continue to get views and generate money even though he no longer spends time on them, but he has to actively continue to update the channel or blog so that it doesn't decline.

I used to follow a blog a while back that had a lot of views and was monetized. The author suddenly stopped updating the blog without explanation (not sure if he died or what), and it continued having visits and generating money but little by little, with the passage of time, the visits were declining and I guess that today will be close to 0.

I have relatively passive investments like buying stocks or Bitcoin to hold, but in terms of time invested, in terms of work, I've always done active work.

I've been thinking about in the future starting some project that can bring me passive income once the work is done and so I'm curious to see if some of you do such work and/or what ideas you have about it.

Normally the problem with work that can bring you passive income in the future is that you have to be working for 0 for a some time to possibly monetize it in the future, so it is better to be focused on a topic that you are passionate about and do not mind devoting free hours because you may spend a year or more on the project and end up monetizing nothing or very little.

Leaving aside whether he is a shitposter or not, what page do you want him to post on in that thread? Those kind of threads, like in this case of the German soccer league, have many pages It wouldn't make sense to open a new thread every week.


How do you know they are alts?

I have never applied for this campaign but I do not rule it out in the future, so I expect a scrupulous scrutiny from you if I apply and get in. 

I didn't want to start focusing on specific cases, but in that campaign for example we also have your friend, who sometimes writes quite interesting things and other times has also given me the impression that he hasn't read the thread very well and writes the answer to complete the quota.

Apart from that, the member of that campaign I named before, who I think writes pretty decent, constructive posts, despite writing many posts throughout the week is this one:

Hispo

You are surprised at the merits he gives and not surprised at the long posts he writes? For me you have looked only at the merits and have not read his posts.

While we're at it, I wanted to say that I've always pictured JJG drinking large amounts of coffee or something. I can't imagine someone writing those long, detailed posts without taking some sort of stimulant.

I have already said in other threads about Buffet and Munger that they simply come from another era and at the brink of death they are we are not going to make them understand what Bitcoin is.

And it's not that they don't understand this. They didn't understand tech stocks either. Only very belatedly did Buffett buy Apple stock.

Besides if they talk about "cryptocurrencies" they are not that far off the mark: there are currently a total of 22,505 and growing, 99% of which the only thing they are going to do is fleece the savings of the unwary who invest in them thinking they are going to make 1,000x in a short time.

You haven't been looking very hard, then.


Oh, OK. Conspiracy theory about the DT system and stuff. Whatever.

What I believe is that the conclusion you express does not follow from the premise.

At least in some cases, the quantity of posts does affect the quality. Someone who is a decent poster making 25 posts a week, if he enters a campaign like the one we are talking about and wants to reach the maximum payout, it is normal that on average his posts have less quality than when he makes 25.


Generic posts? I don't know for sure but I guess you do other things apart from writing in the forum, I don't know if it's a main job or what, but if you had no other job than writing in the forum couldn't you write more than 100 posts with decent quality? Normally you write more than 50, although some of them are updates of your threads.


You are right: you don't get it. Do you think that the target audience of that campaign needs quality to drive them to gamble in the casino?

What is said is not nearly as important as how many times advertising appears on the forum. I know you don't go there as much as I do, but I can assure you that the average user is quite mathematically illiterate, something you can check in threads that the same people who wear casino signatures, who are also customers of the casinos, open. Like:

1) They have tried the umpteenth variant of martingale and think it is bad luck that they have lost their money.
2) They create a thread regretting having lost too much money.
3) They naively believe that with bonuses and promos, the house gives them an RTP over 100, lol.

And things like that.

This forum never ceases to amaze me. This happened because a member who was ban evading stirred the pot?

I know you moderators are the ultimate interpreters of the rules but I don't agree with what was done, for me he was not "begging", and I donated.


Completely agree.


While we're at it, I'll also tell you yahoo62278 that I saw a curious thing that made me decide not to donate to you again, but I'm going to wait until you are in good health to comment on it.

Thanks but I'll keep it open. I think I've already moved on by simply taking it for a laugh.

When I blew the wistle on Casino Critique and red tagged Royse777, I expected a lot more in terms of people removing me from their trust lists and even expected some retaliatory negative feedback like saying I was trust abusing or something, and in the end a lot less happened.

Regarding your analysis of the first part of the feedback I fully agree:


I even regret not blowing the whistle sooner.

As for the second part, I don't think even he believes it. When he says "It is believed that..."  that's because he knows he has no proof or even if the client really told him that, he knows from my reaction that I didn't say anything.

Right now I doubt 50% if Royse777 opened that thread falsely (e.g. sending that message to himself or having a friend send it to him), intending to leave me feedback, and the other 50% of me believes that actually the client sent him that PM but as an excuse. Simply when he saw the mess he wanted to get Royse777 off his back by saying that.

I've got mixed feelings about that campaign. On the one hand I think indeed incentivizes participants to make a lot of low quality posts, and I have seen some who write poor posts. But on the other hand, I have seen some pretty decent participants. The other day I checked that one I see quite a bit had written about 70 posts over the week and to me they are of decent quality.

We don't know if that person doesn't have a main job, for example. If I didn't have a main job I think I could easily write 100 posts or more a week.

In any case, most of them write in the gambling section which is what it is. Many of you don't like it and it is not a paradigm of quality but it has been and is very important in the history of this forum even though most people write low quality posts there.

I simply don't deal with them. If they are so dumb as to play roulette instead of betting on a sure thing with Bitcoin, I don't bother to refute them. Time puts everything in its place.

Betting on shitcoins makes some sense if you know what you are doing with knowledge and diversification, but this is not the case for most retail investors.

Or if you are one of the creators or promoters of the coin.

I only hold Bitcoin and don't worry about the rest.

So, why is OP not banned?

I guess this is one more question for meta, but given what happened with naim027 it seems that management is taking a soft, very soft approach to ban evaders.

Edit: Ok, I've seen the meta thread.

Well, here I will be updating statistics, putting hands and commenting some things.

Today I wanted to comment on a hand that has left me thinking



Opponent is aggressive, 29/21, 10 for 3bet, AF 4 and 58 steal from BU.

I pay with JQo, standard, for 3bet I prefer them suited and even in that case I would balance, sometimes making 3 bet and sometimes calling.

The flop I play check raise due the opponent's small bet because there is a flush draw. When he pays, I reduce his range to qx, 5x, flush draws, that I think is the most likely, and some low pairs that do not quite believe the raise, as 66-99.

When I bet on the turn and he pays I reduce the range to a completed flush, 5x and some qx. Mainly hands that beat mine.

The doubt I had was if it was not better to check call on the turn, because betting after the raise only gets me paid with hands that beat me and I make fold his bluffs, but on the other hand if I do not bet I do not know where I am and that kind of rival if he bluffs me on the turn, he will bluff me again on the river and playing check call I can not narrow the range as efficiently as betting.

Edit: Given the success of the thread, which has not elicited a single response, I am locking it.

Basically, the ones that come out of crises best are the ones that stay strong at the lowest point. And if we focus on Bitcoin, they would be the ones that take advantage of it to buy more instead of crying. Look back at the history of Bitcoin and see what happened to those who cried and sold at the bottom of the market and what happened to those who held on and bought more.

Bitcoin has unique properties and has been very profitable, but if you cry instead of trying to see the opportunity at the bottom, you stand to lose.