Bitcoin Forum
May 29, 2023, 11:53:13 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 24.0.1 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 ... 418 »
681  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 278 on: May 31, 2019, 08:49:15 PM
Auction ended, final result:
Slots BTC/Slot Person
2 0.26 CryptoSlots Casino [flattened to 0.18]
1 0.26 sapta [flattened to 0.16]
1 0.20 ColorlessK [flattened to 0.14]
1 0.12 BoXXoB
2 0.12 acarli
2 0.10 lightlord
682  Economy / Reputation / Re: Feedback needed on risked amount on: May 31, 2019, 06:48:22 PM
The "increase risked BTC to increase the strength" thing only applied for a brief period of time. It didn't work well, so I removed it. It has no effect on anything, and I will probably remove "risked BTC" entirely in the future.

I don't think that it's a big deal to put ridiculous values in that field, though probably you shouldn't. For reporting something second-hand, there's never been a standard, and as far as I'm concerned you can do whatever you want. Since it doesn't actually affect anything, it's basically the same to have riskedBTC=1 with a comment of "he stole BTC" as to just say in the comment "he stole 1 BTC".
683  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 278 on: May 31, 2019, 03:50:27 PM
SlavaVendo informed me that he has to cancel his bid. Current status:

Slots BTC/Slot Person
2 0.26 CryptoSlots Casino [would be flattened to 0.18]
1 0.26 sapta [would be flattened to 0.16]
1 0.20 ColorlessK [would be flattened to 0.14]
1 0.12 BoXXoB
2 0.12 acarli
2 0.10 lightlord

The auction continues.
684  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 278 on: May 31, 2019, 03:28:53 AM
8 @ 0.26

I don't like changing policies suddenly like this, especially after you managed to get your (unrelated) red trust removed, but seeing your bids in light of the bestmixer situation gave me serious pause. Your site reminds me too much of bestmixer, with roughly the same method of operation, claims, ability to log, etc. Therefore, I feel that your service is too high-risk for forum users, and I won't accept your bids. I will add a rule to future ad auctions prohibiting this entire class of service.

2 @ 0.028

I have no idea what you're going to advertise since you didn't PM me, and also I'm not sure whether I should interpret your bid as "2@0.28". So your bid is rejected.

Current status:

Slots BTC/Slot Person
2 0.26 CryptoSlots Casino [would be flattened to 0.18]
1 0.26 sapta [would be flattened to 0.16]
1 0.24 SlavaVendo [would be flattened to 0.14]
1 0.20 ColorlessK [would be flattened to 0.12]
1 0.12 BoXXoB [would be flattened to 0.10]
1 0.08 bit-endian [tentative - may be rejected due to insufficient info]
2-3 0.08 acarli

The auction continues.
685  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Which Mixer is getting axed next? on: May 30, 2019, 07:49:41 PM
Yeah. i've looked into that and still am. It looks very promising, but i don't really understand it up to a level where i'd be able to confidently explain it in a fashionable way yet.

Blinded bearer certificates (bb-certs) are a very old and fairly simple technology, though for some reason it's never seen widespread use. It basically allows a "bank" to issue tokens which can be transferred 100% anonymously. These tokens could be something like "IOU 1 BTC", or they could indicate other things like "whoever holds this token is entitled to a copper membership". Unlike Monero or Wasabi, bb-cert transactions aren't merely mixing coins around to make the transaction graph (hopefully-)prohibitively difficult to follow: transaction histories simply can't exist at all. A bb-cert system would also be very scalable -- easily scaling to Visa-level volumes --, and with instant confirmation of transactions. The main downside is that it's fundamentally centralized, since each cert has to be issued by some entity (though this entity could be a multisig arrangement).

I wrote a little article here with several example use-cases. Note that since I wrote that:
 - I learned that Cloudflare implemented an anti-captcha bb-cert thing in the form of Privacy Pass, which is really cool, though it doesn't work perfectly yet and it seems that there isn't that much attention on this.
 - Someone started working on hookedin, which is a project for a complete bb-cert-based BTC payments system, though it's in the very early stages of development and isn't really usable yet.

I suggested bb-certs to ChipMixer in 2017, but they weren't at that time interested. (Not too surprising, since I wasn't offering to create it for them, an easy-to-deploy solution doesn't exist yet, and ideas are a dime a dozen.)
686  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: CoinJoin: Bitcoin privacy for the real world on: May 30, 2019, 03:09:09 AM
Congratulations to the Wasabi and JoinMarket developers! JoinMarket pioneered a lot of CoinJoin science (and BTW, belcher wrote an excellent & comprehensive wiki article on privacy), while Wasabi is the first wallet that implements CoinJoin in both a highly-usable and sound way. As both a signer and a donor to the CoinJoin bounty fund, I'm thrilled that these two pieces of software exist!

For everyone looking to improve their privacy, I highly recommend checking out Wasabi, especially over centralized "mixers".

Further work is still necessary toward achieving default-fungibility, which is IMO the end goal. Even with Wasabi, you need a fair bit of expertise to maintain privacy, and the vast majority of people are using wallets that are terrible privacy-wise. Without intending to say that the bounty fund will reward people for these specific things, I'd personally like to see:

 - Improvements to make Wasabi more of a complete wallet.
 - CoinJoin integration in other wallets, especially Bitcoin Core.
 - Research on doing CoinJoin in decentralized ways. (Wasabi's method is pretty secure, but requires a centralized coordinator.)
 - Other research (and, perhaps more importantly, usable products) for improving day-to-day privacy.
687  Other / Meta / Re: @theymos - Request: Multisig addresses for treasurers on: May 26, 2019, 12:07:11 AM
One feature of this forum is there's no order of succession should theymos disappear. The forum's server is controlled by theymos, the forum's funds are controlled by this multisig set up and forum's domain is controlled by me. Should theymos disappear, I really have no idea who to even consider as's legitimate leader (even more so if there's widespread disagreement on the topic).

If the treasurers and forum staff are interested, we can collectively sign a contract agreeing on some sort of process to agree on a person to lead the forum should theymos disappear, and pledge to obey and follow that persons instructions in order to avoid splits or multiple organizations/sites claiming to be the real BitcoinTalk. Is that a good idea?

It's best to leave it somewhat distributed. It wouldn't be ideal, but it also wouldn't be the end of the world if the forum split into several pieces. And since political processes are ripe for corruption, I prefer to leave these things a bit vague and let all of the involved individuals figure it out to the best of their abilities.

Should I disappear, Cyrus and/or others-I've-established will take over day-to-day operations and decision-making. You and the non-profit organization would act as checks upon them and each other to ensure that the forum doesn't just turn into some business, but would continue to have a "soul".
688  Other / Meta / Re: @theymos - Request: Multisig addresses for treasurers on: May 25, 2019, 07:56:40 PM
Done. I've been thinking about this for a long time, and I started working on it in earnest last month.

I very much appreciate OgNasty's willingness to perform this high-risk role for years! Returning 500 BTC is a more trustworthy action than most people will ever do.

I think the current BTC0.5-per-month fee is ridiculously high and having 7 treasurers wouldn't require paying each one a similar fee.

I came to 1.2% yearly by looking at gold storage companies and commodity ETF/ETN fees. GBTC for example charges 2% per year, plus a significant premium, etc. Some past treasurers were paid about the same rate, BTW -- it wasn't just OgNasty. It should be BTC-denominated, since their risk and responsibility varies with the value of what they're protecting. In a multisig any fee should be split several ways, though, not multiplied.

Nowadays the fee should maybe be a little lower, since the ecosystem is more developed/competitive. But mere hundreds of dollars per year for what OgNasty was doing? Anyone who would accept that is either willing to act as an unpaid volunteer, essentially, or they aren't properly considering the risks.

Is there an overview of past returns from treasurers? I know one was lost, but I don't know how the others did. I'm curious if it's been worth having treasurers over just Admin keeping the funds.

paraipan was the only loss. Past treasurers John K., Garr255, Ian Knowles, Rassah, Ryland R Taylor-Almanza, and now OgNasty all returned the funds with which they were entrusted.
689  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: [Guide] Decent mixing methods on: May 23, 2019, 08:46:07 PM
(Talking about blinded bearer certificates:)

I'm just curious how this would work exactly in practice though. - Every time someone tries to cash out their shares, 80% needs to agree manually? Wouldn't that be/become a hassle?

In that system there'd be an expectation that people would usually keep their BTC in the bb-cert system, so redemptions could be batched and only occur once per week or month. If you needed the BTC faster, you could sell the cert on the market; it's sort of like how fiat-backed stablecoins are supposed to work.

How exactly does this prevent the original owner of the shares from spending the shares back to the bank? Is there some mechanism in place that "changes" the certificates upon transfer to another person?

Every time you transfer it, you have to register it with the bank. The bank:
 1. Checks that it previously blind-signed the cert (but doesn't know when/where it blind-signed it, making it anonymous).
 2. Checks that it hasn't already been spent by checking a database that it maintains.
 3. Adds it to its spent database so it can't be double-spent.
 4. Blind-signs a new cert for the recipient. When they want to spend it, they'll start at step 1 again, but it won't be linked to this event due to the blind signing.

It'd be cool maybe to build this ontop of bitcointalk somehow

Doing it in usable-currency form has too many risks/challenges. It's way out-of-scope for the forum. I have thought about doing it as a purely-for-fun demo system, but it's extremely low on my to-do list.

Someone's working on a usable version here, but it's very early:
690  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: [Guide] Decent mixing methods on: May 23, 2019, 06:51:49 PM
Binance should also work fine, right? Even though they require registration, I think you could easily use fake information and just create multiple free emails through email services like ProtonMail[1]. As far as I know they don't lock suspicious accounts, though I'm really not sure.

Then binance can link together all of your outgoing BTC, which serious hurts privacy. Also, as mentioned, these exchanges all seem to randomly hold users' BTC hostage. It's best to use no-registration changers like or
691  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: [Guide] Decent mixing methods on: May 23, 2019, 03:39:59 PM
Any guides on how to do this?

You want to use a KYC-free, no-registration coin changer. seems the best right now, but these services tend not to last long KYC-free.

Note that although bisq is decentralized and therefore more likely to survive long-term, it's pseudonymous, so an observer can link together all of your bisq transactions. This is very bad for privacy.

ChipMixer follows a completely different approach which isnt bad at all.

If ChipMixer keeps logs (which you can't possibly know for sure), then they know exactly where the coins are coming from and going.
692  Other / Meta / Re: [Ban Appeal] bill gator on: May 23, 2019, 03:58:44 AM
This is part of why account trading is strongly discouraged. Usually we won't even consider this excuse, since only admins can properly investigate it, it takes too much time, it's often too ambiguous, and you really shouldn't be trading accounts anyway. But especially for very veteran members, we do occasionally look into these claims and reconsider the matter based on them. This isn't the first case like this: there are a surprising number of notable members who originally bought their accounts.

After looking at the logs, I find it likely that this story is true, so it wasn't him personally who did the plagiarism. Trading accounts is strongly discouraged, but not against the rules. Therefore, the ban is removed.

This action may be controversial, and now I'll probably have everyone appealing based on "I bought the account from my neighbor!" (Which I'll nearly always reject...) But even though it is largely bill gator's fault, I just find it on the whole too unfair to treat him as though he did something when I'm looking at evidence showing that he didn't.
693  Other / Beginners & Help / [Guide] Decent mixing methods on: May 22, 2019, 10:18:50 PM
Most "tumblers", like the now-defunct or even ChipMixer, aren't great because they are needlessly expensive, you're trusting the service not to run away with your coins, and you're trusting the service not to keep logs. Maybe they're the best current solution for small amounts where lasting anonymity isn't mission-critical, but in most cases you shouldn't use them.

Anonymity is very difficult, especially with blockchain-based systems where so much data has to be public, but also in other areas (eg. there are several known weaknesses with Tor). You should always operate with the expectation that any anonymity system you use will eventually fail you. If you're ever confident in your anonymity, then you're wrong.

That said, there are two halfway-decent mixing methods currently:

#1 - Wasabi wallet

The Wasabi wallet uses CoinJoin in order to anonymize BTC.

 - Pros: Easy to use; fairly cheap ~0.15% fee; pretty good privacy; automatically uses Tor
 - Cons: ~0.1BTC minimum; with a great deal of effort and investigation, transaction analysis may still be possible, especially if you leave other traces; the coordinator could possibly do an active sybil attack against specific coins

#2 - Monero

Monero is not a magic black box which provides perfect anonymity! If you use eg. to buy XMR and then quickly sell this XMR on again, it is blatantly obvious to what you've done (if they keep logs), both due to the amounts and the specific Monero inputs used. In order to get decent privacy, you have to do something like this:
 1. Convert BTC to XMR (using your own Monero wallet, not a hosted wallet).
 2. In two or more transactions of random amounts, move XMR from that wallet to a different wallet/account.
 3. Optionally, you can repeat the above step with additional wallets/accounts for greater anonymity.
 4. Preferably in two or more transactions of random amounts, convert the XMR in your last wallet in the chain to BTC.
Ideally, all of the above should be performed over as long a period of time as you can tolerate.

 - Pros: Possibly the best anonymity, especially if you're able to stay within the XMR ecosystem to some extent
 - Cons: You should use Tor with Monero, but you have to set this up manually; it's all more difficult; you're exposed to exchange rate risk; transaction fees may be significant

Anonymity comparison between the two

Both Wasabi and Monero can be thought of in terms of "anonymity sets". If you're spending some BTC with an anonymity set of 50, this means that an observer can see that the sender is one of 50 people, but they can't tell which. So someone investigating a particular transaction you sent would have you "in their sights" to a certain extent from the start since you're among the 50, but in order to prove that you sent it, they'd have to either eliminate 49 other people from consideration or find some other evidence linking you to it.

Wasabi always aims for an anonymity set of 50 when mixing. Monero has an anonymity set of 11 per transaction. If you cascade transactions as I suggest above, then this multiplies, so after two transactions you have an anonymity set of 11*11=121, and after a cascade of three you'd have an anonymity set of 1331.

The quality of each member in the anonymity set isn't quite comparable, though. Monero is able to hide transaction amounts, which is helpful, but I tend to consider the quality of Monero anonymity-set-members to be lower on average, since many are probably owned by hosted wallets or other possible global adversaries.

See also

If services like ChipMixer operated based on blinded bearer certificates, then they'd be in many ways superior to both of the above mixing methods. Someone should work on this.
694  Other / Off-topic / Recipes on: May 22, 2019, 04:07:27 AM
I'm not usually much of a cook, but I wanted to share this bread recipe that I created after months of experimentation.

Peer-to-peer power bread
This protein-packed bread will give you the energy you need to fight the corrupt establishment!

1.5lb loaf - makes 6 2-slice servings
Intended for bread makers

 - 297g water (286g if using honey) at 105F (40.6C)
 - 54.9g brown sugar or 67.7g honey
 - 8.4g salt
 - 375g whole wheat flour
 - 31.5g vital wheat gluten
 - 13.5g vanilla whey protein powder (w/ approximately 110 calories per 31g)
 - 6.5g active dry yeast

Due to the very high protein content, you have to knead it double or it won't rise well. In my bread maker, I start it, wait for it to go through one ~30-minute-long kneading phase, then restart it so that it kneads it again and then rises etc. Use the whole-wheat, 1.5lb-loaf setting.

Per 2 slices (1/6 of recipe)
Calories: 273
Protein: 12g
Fat: 1g
    Saturated: 0.3g
    Monounsaturated: 0.2g
    Polyunsaturated: 0.8g
Carbs: 57g
    Fiber: 9g
Potassium: 8%DV
Sodium: 553mg, 23%DV
Calcium 5%DV
Iron: 15%DV
Magnesium: 20%DV
Phosphorus: 25%DV
Zinc: 14%DV
Thiamin: 21%DV
Riboflavin: 12%DV
Niacin: 19%DV
B-6: 8%DV
Folate: 11%DV
Vitamin E: 1%DV
Vitamin K: 2%DV

Do you have any favorite recipes?
695  Other / Meta / Re: Improving the current ban situation on: May 20, 2019, 10:53:59 PM
Merely forgetting to quote things is not plagiarism, and if we read it that way, you probably won't be banned at all. For it to plagiarism, you have to have the intention of passing the text off as an original work by you. In all of these recent cases (unless we make a mistake, which is rare), it's extremely obvious in context that the person is copy/pasting to make money. Usually they're copy/pasting someone else's post and not adding anything else, in fact, which makes it very clear. Here's the most recent one:
I really like how the project is developed, we hope to get very far and that.Everything goes well and the group of developers keep us posted on everything.
I really like how the project is developed, we hope to get very far and that.Everything goes well and the group of developers keep us posted on everything

All of the recent cases are ~exactly like this, since this is what the bot looks for. (Thank you to the bot designer!)

If at any point you had a mindset where you'd treat the forum like a dumping ground by worthlessly copy/pasting other people's posts in order to make a tiny amount of money, then my default reaction is GTFO, and you have quite an uphill battle to earn even a 2-year sigban instead. No warnings, no statute of limitations.

I know of one case where someone was banned for plagiarism in the recent massacre, but a very careful reading of the context showed that the person actually did just forget to quote, and by "quoting" the post they were expressing an actual point even if it constituted their entire post. This person was unbanned without any sigban, since this isn't plagiarism.
696  Economy / Auctions / Advertise on this forum - Round 278 on: May 20, 2019, 08:58:35 PM
The forum sells ad space in the area beneath the first post of every topic page. This income is used primarily to cover hosting costs and to pay moderators for their work (there are many moderators, so each moderator gets only a small amount -- moderators should be seen as volunteers, not employees). Any leftover amount is typically either saved for future expenses or otherwise reinvested into the forum or the ecosystem.

Ads are allowed to contain any non-annoying HTML/CSS style. No images, JavaScript, or animation. Ads must appear 3 or fewer lines tall in my browser (Firefox, 900px wide). Ad text may not contain lies, misrepresentation, or inappropriate language. Ads may not link directly to any NSFW page. No ICOs[1], banks, funds, or anything else that a person can be said to "invest" in; I may very rarely make exceptions if you convince me that you are ultra legit, but don't count on it. Ads may be rejected for other reasons, and I may remove ads even after they are accepted.

There are 10 total ad slots which are randomly rotated. So one ad slot has a one in ten chance of appearing. Nine of the slots are for sale here. Ads appear only on topic pages with more than one post, and only for people using the default theme.


- Your ads are guaranteed to be up for at least 7 days.
- I usually try to keep ads up for no more than 8 or 9 days.
- Sometimes ads might be up for longer, but hopefully no longer than 12 days. Even if past rounds sometimes lasted for long periods of time, you should not rely on this for your ads.


Exact historical impression counts per slot:

Info about the current ad slots:

Ad blocking

Hero/Legendary members, Donators, VIPs, and moderators have the ability to disable ads. I don't expect many people to use this option. These people don't increase the impression stats for your ads.

I try to bypass Adblock Plus filters as much as possible, though this is not guaranteed. It is difficult or impossible for ABP filters to block the ad space itself without blocking posts. However, filters can match against the URLs in your links, your CSS classes and style attributes, and the HTML structure of your ads.

To prevent matches against URLs: I have some JavaScript which fixes links blocked by ABP. You must tell me if you want this for your ads. When someone with ABP and JavaScript enabled views your ads, your links are changed to a special randomized URL which redirects to your site when visited. People without ABP are unaffected, even if they don't have JavaScript enabled. The downsides are:
- ABP users will see the redirection link when they hover over the link, even if they disable ABP for the forum.
- Getting referral stats might become even more difficult.
- Some users might get a warning when redirecting from https to http.

To prevent matching on CSS classes/styles: Don't use inline CSS. I can give your ad a CSS class that is randomized on each pageload, but you must request this.

To prevent matching against your HTML structure: Use only one <a> and no other tags if possible. If your ads get blocked because of matching done on something inside of your ad, you are responsible for noticing this and giving me new ad HTML.

Designing ads

Make sure that your ads look good when you download and edit this test page:
Also read the comments in that file.

Images are not allowed no matter how they are created (CSS, SVG, or data URI). Occasionally I will make an exception for small logos and such, but you must get pre-approval from me first.

The maximum size of any one ad is 51200 bytes.

I will send you more detailed styling rules if you win slots in this auction (or upon request).

Auction rules

You must be at least a Jr Member to bid. If you are not a Jr Member and you really want to bid, you should PM me first. Tell me in the PM what you're going to advertise. You might be required to pay some amount in advance. Everyone else: Please quickly PM newbies who try to bid here to warn them against impersonation scammers.

If you have never purchased forum ad space before, and it is not blatantly obvious what you're going to advertise, say what you're going to advertise in your first bid, or tell me in a PM.

Post your bids in this thread. Prices must be stated in BTC per slot. You must state the maximum number of slots you want. When the auction ends, the highest bidders will have their slots filled until all nine slots are filled.

So if someone bids for 9 slots @ 5 BTC and this is the highest bid, then he'll get all 9 slots. If the two highest bids are 9 slots @ 4 BTC and 1 slot @ 5 BTC, then the first person will get 8 slots and the second person will get 1 slot.

The notation "2 @ 5" means 2 slots for 5 BTC each. Not 2 slots for 5 BTC total.

- When you post a bid, the bids in your previous posts are considered to be automatically canceled. You can put multiple bids in one post, however.
- All bid prices must be evenly divisible by 0.02.
- The bidding starts at 0.02.
- I will end the auction at an arbitrary time. Unless I say otherwise, I typically try to end auctions within a few days of 10 days from the time of this post, but unexpected circumstances may sometimes force me to end the auction anytime between 4 and 22 days from the start. I have a small bias toward ending auctions on Fridays, Sundays, and Mondays.
- If two people bid at the same price, the person who bid first will have his slots filled first.
- Bids are considered invalid and will be ignored if they do not specify both a price and a max quantity, or if they could not possibly win any slots

If these rules are confusing, look at some of the past forum ad auctions to see how it's done.

I reserve the right to reject bids, even days after the bid is made.

Price flattening

At the end of the auction, after the winning bids are all determined, I will do a "price flattening" operation. This has no effect on which bids actually win. For each bid, in order of lowest to greatest price/slot, I will reduce each bid's price/slot to the highest value which is equal to or only the minimum increment greater than the next-lower bid. This allows you to bid higher prices without worrying so much, but you still mustn't bid more than you're willing to pay. Example:

Slots  BTC/Slot  Person
    6      0.20       A
    1      0.16       B
    1      0.08       C
    1      0.08       D

Slots  BTC/Slot  Person
    6      0.12       A [step 4: reduced to 0.10+0.02=0.12]
    1      0.10       B [step 3: reduced to 0.08+0.02=0.10]
    1      0.08       C [step 2: same as the next-lowest, unchanged]
    1      0.08       D [step 1: the lowest bid is always unchanged]

Payment, etc.

You must pay for your slots within 24 hours of receiving the payment address. Otherwise your slots may be sold to someone else, and I might even give you a negative trust rating. I will send you the payment information via forum PM from this account ("theymos", user ID 35) after announcing the auction results in this thread. You might receive false payment information from scammers pretending to be me. They might even have somewhat similar usernames. Be careful.

[1]: For the purposes of forum ads, an ICO is any token, altcoin, or other altcoin-like thing which meets any of the following criteria: it is primarily run/backed by a company; it is substantially, fundamentally centralized in either operation or coin distribution; or it is not yet possible for two unprivileged users of the system to send coins directly to each other in a P2P way. The intention here is to allow community efforts to advertise things like Litecoin, but not to allow ICO funding, even when the ICO is disguised in various ways.
697  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 277 on: May 20, 2019, 08:51:19 PM
Auction ended, final result:
Slots BTC/Slot Person
1 0.28 SlavaVendo
8 0.26
698  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 277 on: May 17, 2019, 11:13:48 PM
Will I be able to win at least 1 slot, only if I put 1 @ 0.28?

Yes (if you're not outbid). That makes the auction status:
Slots BTC/Slot Person
1 0.28 SlavaVendo
8 0.26
699  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 277 on: May 17, 2019, 09:15:11 PM
2 @ 0.27

This bid is pointless. Bids must be evenly divisible by 0.02, and I round down invalid amounts, so your bid is actually 2 @ 0.26. But already bid 9 @ 0.26 beforehand, so you can't win any slots with that.
700  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 277 on: May 17, 2019, 08:58:02 PM
Bids must be evenly divisible by 0.02. I round down invalid amounts.

9 @ 0.24

You have negative trust. I won't accept your ads until that's resolved.

Current status:
Slots BTC/Slot Person
9 0.26

The auction continues.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 ... 418 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!