Up to 3% you could be erring, due to the ceil function of the accuracy rating.

I want to say that most "bad" reports are due to duplicates, unhandled ones (surrounding spam) are in relevance to "sort-of on-topic" posts, which merely pass or rest on the edge of substance.

---

The quote was from 2016. And even with new data, you're just outside of the top 50:

Well, exactly... isn't that the point?

To facilitate the same output given identical outputs? In order to inspect a system for reliable processes that hold minimal bias given that inputs are individuals.

---

ChiBitCTy already got a signature ban, IIRC. They are also an avid collector and most of their time is spent in the Collectibles section, like most people who participate in the sub-board.

Brevity would do you some good, the post is a little tough to follow and laced with rhetoric.

3.78BTC
5EUR
6 USD

The threshold required for a ban is up to debate. I've seen various users with several hundred reports + deleted posts that still post on by with the same quality that got their replies deleted. The forum is quite slow at dishing out restitution given theymos's policies. I'm curious as to how many bans are given out nowadays for insubstantial post quality - used to be quite high a few years in the past, no?

Is there a point to this thread? I fail to understand why you wouldn't post the information redundantly across multiple channels, thus ensuring maximum visibility.

I'm kidding, of course. I understand that your attention-deprived soul needs the gaze of an audience. You wish to be contacted for a full list of these individuals yet at the same time "don't have time to list them all"... so, you have it or you don't?

What would be the point of anyone contacting you if you could just display the list on the thread? Ah... for that delectable, ravishing social contact...

Makes sense. We should, then, trust the verified step A of your archival message prior to that of the unverified step B of a supposed private key hack. Given the massive change in prose and post quality, I don't see any reason to grant disbelief to OP.

I've reported several dozen users' post histories and have seen a few times reports marked as 'good' despite a post having not been deleted. Moderator's discretion.

---

Accuracy really doesn't matter and though duplicates are annoying, they don't come up that often. I have 1103 bad reports with a 97% accuracy. Probably around 40% are from duplicated posts (network or human error)

Scroll up a bit.

---

Plus, why wouldn't you (as an advertiser) want to keep your advertisement up at the top of a board?

Seeking a pattern in the unknown, uncovering the essence of mysteries: that's the goal.

Curious beasts, those humans.

29.

Weird, there's a [list] tag at the very start of my post (even prior to the quotes). Must be some strange bbc interaction while I was previewing the post. Not trolling this time

---

Considering the BCT page I think it's fair to say he's burned this bridge. Especially with the harsher entry requirements, I think the two forums are unequal in accessibility.

Just apply a friendly splash of cognitive dissonance sauce!

• I have red trust from game-protect
• I don't like red trust on my page I like having red trust on my page

And join me in the martyr-like nature of collecting negative feedback. Consider it a badge of honor for all the bullshit you deal with (:

---

I'm going to actually say that game-protect won't make an astounding return. Anything that comes out of them on the forum will be in the form of dribbles - posts that most of us will never see - gp is most likely going to move on to another, more susceptible forum. Sunken cost fallacy subjected them to continue the facade here, but now that the bridge is fully burned... well, there's no reason to continue the illusion of control.

I fail to understand why you must find a replacement before removing a site.

If a site is bad enough to be removed, then it should be removed immediately. Unless you have a different reason

In all fairness, JC's response had a different rationale in comparison to the former. The two differ in reason and are thus different ideas. The derivation of hypotheses changes the very nature of the hypothesis itself. For example, consider the FE gravitational belief of the Earthly plane moving upwards at 9.8m/s² as opposed to another belief in gravitational forces between matter.

---

That being said, there is a lot of information parroting and unclear sources unfortunately do not stop the spread thereof.

This point is completely irrelevant. Have you actually taken a look at the reports, or do you simply dismiss them as indignant losers?

[Trust page] aside, it seems incredibly dangerous to simply associate well-known sites with trustworthy sites. The idea that "they wouldn't possibly scam others" is precisely why you'll see large sites do exactly that. Consider: if you are able to pocket free money, given that any retaliation will result in an overwhelming majority of users defending your side, isn't that just the simplest decision to make?

Here's the thread that the flag upon the bitstars.net directs to.

Welcome to the problem of political science. Figuring out a system that can't be abused, yet is actually useful. It is pretty tough to find an equilibrium between the two, which is probably why theymos goes with the "dismiss merit abuse, bigger fish to fry" focus angle.

I thought it up since it would be better to reuse a pre-existing asset in the forum rather than create those reporter badges or titles. But yes: reporting for the sake of cleaning up the forum is good and that was primarily my reason for doing so. Plus, I had some extra time to spare, so why not?

It's good to see criticism because it offers you the chance to view new perspectives. Our unseen biases dictate the flow of our stream of consciousness, so we may miss branching paths as we rush past through the rapids.

And I think that as a topic develops, so long as there's a clear sequence from the ideas of one post to another, we can't really call it "off-topic"... otherwise, all replies would have to directly respond to the first and that would surely be a horrible forum of discussion.

Whoa whoa whoa! Hold your horses... your thread? Is that the only place you'll look for complaints regarding your sites? Did you even bother taking a simple search engine result for each of your sites? I have severe doubts for an affiliate site that doesn't have the decency to perform their own research before placing casinos on their front page.

Do a quick lookup of "bitstarz scam" for me. Cheers.

Never said that. In the past, there have been proposals of a potential reward.

It's easier for members of higher rank to report more quickly due to the shorter post interval. For members that have yet to buy the copper membership, it could be another way of obtaining it. Think of it as an added incentive to the act of reporting.

---

I bring up the subject of abuse because it is something that is often zeroed-in on, given the nature of how users operate on the forum.

From a logistic side, newly-created accounts for the sake of abusing this system have no draw towards it, since there are less time-consuming ways of maximizing revenue. You would not want to compromise high-rank accounts' post histories (though a lot of the current users should be reported) due to their potential for campaign funds, thereby reducing your profitability if reported. On the other hand, the aim is to mass-create Newbie accounts to create posts to report, not only does this draw great suspicion on the reporter's side but it is another huge waste of time in lieu of purely ranking up the individual accounts.

Regardless, this proposal was more for the sake of increased reporting than any supplanted use for Copper Membership. We've still got an overwhelming amount of spam flooding the boards.

Here is something that would be interesting: giving copper membership in return for x amount of good reports. The difference between this and a monetary reward is that there is no real use for abusing copper membership. Moreover, the amount of time one would have to dedicate to reporting would presumably be considered "not worth it" for the delta in time between forum actions that you get from the membership. Why create a new title for reporters when you can refit an old one to this purpose?

This isn't really biased in my favor either, since I paid for my Copper Membership

Should I start snorting hot tea so that I can access my naval cavity, then? Take a look at the anatomical structure of your head...

Done?

Alright, now add in the fact that the circulatory system connects to most of the surfaces there via capillary systems.
Okay, now consider that blood circulates and passes right by your lungs.

---

Yeah, call me a sceptic but this is what I expect to find on my grandmother's Facebook wall.