We're not here to entertain you, Bill. I suspect this attitude or expectation is part of the problem.
This might have been lost in translation to some degree. It's a colloquial saying where I'm from, "humor me", meaning something resembling "Help me to understand" or "Play along". I didn't mean to come off pedantic or flippant. Yeah, I'm saying that Danny added nothing to this thread/discussion, and you started your first post praising Danny's comment (which repeated the original post) rather than praising Woterry for his original sentiment.
It seems there will be reciprocity in our concessions here, because you're right in this instance. I was praising Danny without a word towards OP and this should not have been the case. It was the newbie's idea, and I should have worded my opening statement differently. This is a fair criticism of my post. |
|
|
|
True decentralization would be giving everyone equal power in a consensus, but currently this is basically impossible to achieve. Afaik Bitcoin's future is being determined by less than 0.001% of the entire population on Earth, other people simply don't own the required mining power.
Exactly. This is what I was getting at, and I don't believe there is a "true" decentralization solution at the moment that would get us more decentralized in a realistic manner. Bitcoin is being determined by a ridiculously small number of people, but the opportunity is decentralized and there is no barriers in the way of interested outsiders from taking part. It is as decentralized as a voluntary system can be, while utilizing the technology necessary; at least this is what I've concluded. These solutions take longer than they should to implement though, I can agree to that. It might be the case that developers and miners are inherently intertwined and it also might be the case that there is more profit for miners if a solution isn't implemented. This alone would heavily influence development direction and speed. |
|
|
|
It would be great if you and Danny didn't commit a classic faux pas in newbie posting - repeating a point made earlier in the thread. You guys are both just repeating the OP.
Instead of acting like you're teaching something, you should be praising the OP for his call out of those that ask/beg for merit OR shutting the f*ck up and moving on to a thread that you can contribute something new to.
The etiquette of post quality apply to all of us, remember that
We've both expanded upon a point made earlier in the thread. That's the point of a discussion; to ebb and flow a conversation about an idea to see whether or not it has any credibility. The small portion of my post that was a "repeat of OP" was to lay out a premise and was only to show the direction for the rest of my post. I explained an entirely new framework that someone could opt to view merit through and approach their newbie status from a different perspective. I attempted to explain that their status is more of an opportunity than it is an obstacle. I'm confused as to whether this went over your head or if you fail to see this as differing from OP. Either way, I'd have to say you're wrong about this. Entertain me and clarify; are you saying Danny and I have added nothing to this thread/discussion? It would appear your post is without any value, unless you are attempting to call us hypocrites and claim our posts are without significance. I fail to see what you've just contributed, by your own criteria. |
|
|
|
|
Danny put it excellently and if I could put it in context or give a reference I would love to attempt to make this even more clear and salient. Activity acts as a participation trophy for taking place in forum discussions while maintaining a bare minimum requirement not to spam and some other criteria. Merit acts as a trophy for a contribution deemed worthy by another member who has also contributed to the forum and now is able to pay it forward.
Asking or begging for merit would be like a fighter asking or begging for the title and belt without making their mark. This is like an actor looking for a nomination without playing a significant role.
This is a much broader mindset and it can be applied when looking at any endeavor, but you must be willing to be the fool. Be honest with your limited starting knowledge and do not be afraid to be the fool. Everybody starts somewhere and as long as you are operating on the same base principals and core foundation as the rest of us have agreed to then you are free to progress past being the fool with your own determination. Do not expect to earn merits, ever, rather hope to assist, contribute and inform others in a way that is meaningful and significant. Challenge yourself to learn more and be more, merits will soon become representative of what you have brought forward to the community. In my case, I believe I have been over-merited for my contribution so you might even find yourself lucky in that regard.
|
|
|
|
I'm going to say I agree with everything HabBear just said and would like to add how ridiculous it looks that VertCoin is #1 when I first open the site. I don't know if it is ordered randomly, but I cannot figure out what the criteria for ordering is. There should be a second page for each currency that has a price chart, or past prices represented somehow. Clicking through 5-pages does not feel intuitive or convenient, maybe you should create an extra URL for each coin to make checking the price very easy. I would just put all of them on a single page, people would rather scroll down than click to another page IMO. Something like : http://pricesofcoins.com/BTC
http://pricesofcoins.com/ETH
http://pricesofcoins.com/XRP
Probably should order the coins in terms of something that would resemble popularity, Market Cap, Transaction Volume or something around there. The idea is there, the interface is pretty clean; small improvements could make this site very feasible as a competitor to other price checkers. |
|
|
|
Correct, we don't need centralized speed.
At least there's one reasonable, critically thinking individually poking their head up in the thread. Pro-tip, when you want to post twice in a row like you just did you can easily Edit the first post to include what you would've made the second post. That way things are less messy. Bitcoin has been determined as semi-decentralized due to the big miners out there controlling most of the network, and the fact that it hasn't receives rapid development, it might be much harder to update a decentralized protocol than we think.
By that logic there can be no true decentralization. The decentralization will become broken down to some extent if you analyze it based on inequality of hash power among miners. At some point, unless everyone is running an equally powered mining rig / full-node then the best we can hope for is semi-decentralization without a radical change in the foundation. Even if everyone was running an equally powered rig, we would also have to somehow nullify any influence that someone may have over miner(s), because this could be abused as if the power was the influencers, if the influence is great enough. I might be going off on a tangent, but my point is this: Even if we agree that Bitcoin is only semi-decentralized, then it would still be a better option than anything centralized. Harder to update, because of the requirement of consensus among the development community in my opinion has kept Bitcoin healthy all these years. |
|
|
|
Sure, some coins made x10. In the time BTC made x 2
I don't know if you're talking about price volatility or the number of transactions processed. If it is either of these two I would say that is irrelevant to the longevity of the currency or mass-adoption. A currency that is more volatile from a centralized organization/company would only imply that the development team is exclusively developing for the sake of personal financial gain or that they cannot maintain faith from their investors, something like that. A currency that has processed 10x more transactions than Bitcoin would be rendered obsolete by a simple tweak in the blocksize and maybe a couple other parameters. Do either of these scenarios sound like something that will stand long-term? Alt-coins that are popular or developed simply because of problems that Bitcoin already has solutions for, whether or not they've been implemented, are coins that are good for pump-and-dumps and that's about it. Unless I've missed one of the possibilities of your point, in which case, please enlighten me. |
|
|
|
|
If I see some valid vouches from users that have placed and received their orders from OP I would happily take back every criticism I've voiced so far.
You mentioned that you have an even more competitive price on Motherboards: I'm wondering if you have access to or can provide Z97 Motherboards?
Would love to get an order planned, and if everything goes well with others I would be happy to give you the chance that vendors deserve. Although, it is not reassuring that there is another user claiming you have a history of scamming. They haven't provided proof though, so I won't jump into the witch hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
The way you explain your questions allows it to be summarized pretty neatly; it seems like you are asking which is preferable:
The ability to move your coins around quicker with a centralized project
Maintain the fundamental decentralized philosophy and develop Bitcoin to move transactions faster (blocksize, etc.).
My vote will be on decentralized Bitcoin every time, otherwise we might as well just stick with Visa and Mastercard. Once Bitcoin makes the changes to move transactions/coins quicker, the other alt-coins that have been developed and garnered attention specifically for this reason will disappear.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had a couple of people asking me about 1:1 and I'd like to make it clear that this does not interest me. I'm not trying to rob anybody. Free time is rare these days; there only needs to be minimal reward and I'll hook you up.
I'm around, going to be available pretty much for the entire day.
Fill out the form and get exchanged in minutes.
|
|
|
|
I don't think we should be encouraging members to post for merit.  We should be encouraging them to post for information/interest. Merit comes as a surprise. I am not attempting to encourage members to post for merit, at least this is not my intention. My intention is simply to spread my sMerit as efficiently as possible, in the sense that I would like to review as many posts of people that believe themselves or their posts to be under merited as possible. This is one of the options available for the people whining about how the merit system has failed them. If a user is not posting something informational, helpful, contributory or interesting then they do not receive merit from me. It often is very surprising when I find a post submitted that gets a merit, so I'd say it's a surprise for both me and the submitter.  |
|
|
|
I swear I'm not procrastinating; I spent the last few days getting my miners set up and dealing with some government agencies. It has been a hassle, but I will do all of these very soon. It is a conversation that needs to be had, but it this is not a conversation that I can dish out merit for. If you are able to suggest or educate more members and actually prevent scams then I would be more impressed and able to give you a merit. The first submission looks mostly like a Copy + Paste of some terms that everyone mostly knows. I'm sure this might come in handy to some people, but I will leave it for them to merit you for this. The second submission is the 100th+ reply in a thread and does not add any new information to the discussion. I won't delete the post, in case I need to reference/link your term thread; if I have to link it I will throw you a merit. I can't even follow what you're trying to say in this post. I'm not sure if it's because I'm tired or if you're not making much sense. Either way, I don't see it being in line for merit. The first submission is just explaining what an airdrop is, plus it has already received merit. I don't merit these type of posts, but it looks well written at least. The second post just reads like a long conversation, and while it might be helpful it is not concise or universally helpful in the way I'd like it to be. It's nice to see the approach you take with things, write very well, but I would expect merit in these situations to come from those you help. I want to give you a merit, but this is mostly just information that users should be able to gather from reading the stickies already plastered around the forum. If this wasn't fundamentally the same information that is in those, I would've given you a merit. |
|
|
|
I recently did a successful deal with philipma1957 to get my hands on a 1080ti; I have my eyes on another 1080ti and my current rig is full so that means one of my cards has to go. I'm taking offers for my MSI GeForce GTX 980 Ti GAMING 6G https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127889 ; if you offer me something fair I will take it. There is no urgency, so if I do not receive any good offers I will just keep it for myself. It has just begun mining lightly (keeping it under 65c) yesterday and before that it was only used for light gaming. Philipma1957 will be the escrow or you can send payment first. Accepting BTC and Ethereum; not sure if philipma1957 would escrow Ethereum, will double-check. Will ship insured with signature required. Feel free to shoot me a PM or post below with questions, offers or comments. |
|
|
|
|
I can exchange your ETH for BTC if you are interested in that; it seems like you have been mostly exchanging for Paypal and Skrill. If you are interested in exchanging your Ethereum for Bitcoin though, that is my specialty.
|
|
|
|
I hate to do this to you, but you've submitted 6-links and that breaks my 5-link rule. I had to make an exception out of someone that regularly posts wonderful posts, so I can't let anyone slide by on it; feel free to resubmit. You have already received merit for this, a lot of merit; I will not be giving merit to this kind of service. I don't read through your entire post history like QuestionAuthority does, I wish I had time to handle such a task. I have all of my rules laid out in the OP, but the post you've linked doesn't get any merit from me. This is just a compilation of airdrops; definitely not something I am interesting in giving merit to at this point. It is an interesting read, but you've already received a merit for this post and it's more a conversation with another user. I might have merited this post had it not already had one. |
|
|
|
|
Right now it doesn't seem that Ignore Board applies to Patrol. This is frustrating, because I cannot efficiently patrol when the majority of my time is spent trying to find a post I can read. Ignore Board applies to everywhere else as far as I can tell; is there a reason Ignore Board does not apply to Patrol?
|
|
|
|
Hi sir won't it be easier if there would just be a google form and spreadsheet for submission of post link for revision? Just an idea though.
I appreciate the idea, but I don't think it would speed up things at all; my biggest problem is finding the 30-minutes per post to review everyone. Making a google spreadsheet to help organize it wouldn't make that any faster. I already have it pretty organized, just haven't found the time. Your first submission is a very interesting read, so thank you for that; but it has already received some merit, and it mostly is just a conversation about something I don't know too much about. Either way, I don't believe it to be under-merited. The second submission seems to sit on the fence and agree without saying too terribly much. Again, mostly a conversation and something I don't understand terribly well. Your last post is mostly in the same category, but again they were all interesting reads so I encourage future submission for sure. Broke a local-rule, using url tags makes it a headache to go through your posts; feel free to resubmit. I have given this post a Merit; it is well structured, it is highly informative and I can see this helping out a lot of users. It taught me some things, and even though it already has been merited, I could definitely see it deserving of another. Maybe I am naive, but this is something I expect people to already know when using the tags and embedding images. I will be considering this for future merit, depending upon whether or not I have to link somebody to it in the future. Very solid work, if it hadn't received any merit yet I would have given you one for sure. I'm also down to my last merit at this point, so I'm being very conservative about it. No hard feelings I hope. |
|
|
|
Otherwise, if you did copy and paste it, can you post the source and link to it, please?
How Does Blockchain Technology Work? by Nolan Bauerle https://www.coindesk.com/information/how-does-blockchain-technology-work/Quora.com - Blockchain (database) - Can blockchain technology be hacked? Aug 1 2017 https://www.quora.com/Can-blockchain-technology-be-hackedSeems to be the only sources as far as I can tell. To OP's credit, they mention their sources in about the middle of their post. Just didn't bother to link them, it seems. I would have liked any beginner's guide to Bitcoin to have begun with the Bitcoin Whitepaper, or at least suggesting preliminary knowledge of some sort. Might be a good idea for you to add a reading list to accompany your post. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
