|
Most failed models of post incentives -> new users result in posts up to the quality that you pay for and since most of the time, the payment incentives are extremely small just due to common pragmatism, you will get pretty piss-poor posts.
The previous peak saw 3 538 524 users. (July 10 2019, $13 000).
One of the local bubbles saw 5 220 637 users. (July 29 2018, $8 200).
The ATH peak saw 4 121 946 users. (Dec 17 2019, $20 000).
The current numbers are 3 350 806... not that bad, comparatively.
|
|
|
|
Great! So your brain should not have any problem to answer the following questions: What was the deal?
When was the concern raised? Especially given that it was a deal between you two, Royse777 should not have to answer these questions.
The €20 000, if even legitimate, is separate from the €210. Pay h4ns the €210, then sort out the problem. |
|
|
|
Just see this post by febriyana and its a perfect example of a paragraph spam and avoiding the one liner spam. If each person have 0.003 BTC, i think that is bad.
First... people will think this Bitcoin is free. I will sell it. So some people sell it. But the problem other people already have it, so why must buy it??
So there is need some creativity, what benefit about Bitcoin?
Maybe if some people trying to buy it then control it, there is also problem, they can manipulate the price.
So i think the best condition is like now, only some people have Bitcoin, so there is still have demand in the market.
Where new people coming to learn about crypto, there is a demand market. Not actually a bad post for its semantics, though. Only in this case, where the user is consistently spamming posts with low depth and investment in their replies, would I call it a spam post. That is, part of a collective rather than the individual. As an outlier, it would be a case of the user expressing their ideas poorly due to lackluster use of the language, not of lackadaisical replies. |
|
|
|
Seems like a few users still report hundreds of posts in quick succession now, and again. Plus, there is still fake conversations going on where a lot users got banned. It has probably dipped down, but I would say its not anywhere near a 50% reduction. I still have a number of users to check (today) and a backlog of users to go through with reports, however I do notice that the spam is far less rampant in the big four sections that I take a look at: {Bitcoin, Trading} Discussion, Economics, Speculation. This is good. Some past notorious users have also either been banned or been able to improve their post quality drastically. |
|
|
|
Interesting, but how did you have a conversation with just one email, which was sent by you? The conversation July 1st consists of at least 4 emails.  Feel free to link that... instead of just one email that comes from you. |
|
|
|
What do you expect? Dyson sucks. |
|
|
|
Interesting, but how did you have a conversation with just one email, which was sent by you? |
|
|
|
Is it fair to say that they scammed 770k when the value of those 110k tokens are roughly 2 BTC now? You can say they scammedI the 110k tokens yes, but assigning a USD value (of their peak price) seems wrong. Is it any surprise that the ICO listing price is neither stagnant nor rising, but rather is always dumped? |
|
|
|
|
CoA, yes.
Just don't make the design look like those 1-cent "physical bitcoin" stock photos.
Keep it user-funded or just unfunded.
|
|
|
|
This guy walks into the room everyday drops his pants and sprays verbal diarrhea out of his ass like a rotating sprinkler. Everyday, unprompted, no one appreciates it, and yet he persists. Sure he may juggle flaming chainsaws every now and then while he does it. But we still are left covered in diarrhea.
Him and his like are an easy ignore in my book. If nothing else you can commend his commitment to vehement vitriol. |
|
|
|
Aryan wannabe - Nazi member r0ach, Editor of the magazine "The Small Penis Society" and founder of "Ilovetosuckdick.com", cannot admit to his Jewish origin & thoroughly mixed bastardized bloodline, but instead trash-posts on WO, busting our balls with dick-less propaganda and whining about the last time a woman talked to him.
Huge strap-on fan. Looks forward to trying the other side of a glory-hole. The power of the ignore button is great, but so is the entertainment value of watching a hooligan post. |
|
|
|
game-protect is unable to navigate the forum by themselves. They must be hand-held through the entire process like someone checking in at the hospice. You will keep getting meaningless deflections until you directly post what you're referring to, at which game-protect will simply cut that part out of the post and respond to something completely irrelevant. |
|
|
|
"Wargames" starring young Matthew Broderick.
This movie drilled that line in my head. It also was the reason for me to start messing around with computers as a young lad.
E.P.I.C Also a good lesson in chance-based gambling: the only winning move is not to play. |
|
|
|
Most of the exchanges have a minimal trading fees of about 0.25%
I see many people discussing trading fees here and there and that how high the trading fees is.
Does 0.25% really make a huge difference if you are earning at least more than 2% ?
Given lets say your profit is 2%, that means that 0.25% eats up to 12% of your profit. If you think about it that way, thats quite a large amount of your profit taken away. Although, if you're not trading thousands of dollars and are just beginning to trade, i wouldn't worry about it. The trading fees are felt by those with huge volumes mostly. It's not 12% of the profit, it's 0.25% of whatever the trading volume is. And if the volume is the same as the profit, then you'll have 0.25% * 2% = 0.005% of your volume.
If your trading volume is N BTC then you have to have a profit of at least N * 0.25% BTC to ensure that you break even or profit. That is, a trading volume of 10 BTC (not very high) requires a profit of at least 0.025 BTC. |
|
|
|
I think this is the biggest issue considering the nature of Bitcoin, and I feel like a lot of prominent users on the forum won't want to give out their information, and then the whole project falls flat on its face as our 1st, 2nd, 3rd choices of users might not want the coins, because of the mentioned issues. I had previously talked to some users about the logistics of this... If post offices started using GPG then we could essentially have a shipper to receiver end-to-end encrypted passage. Quite a few of the truly legendary figures have disappeared or gone mad. It would be quite the grind to decide who's in and who's out. I myself have contributed nothing to Bitcoin itself other than a bunch of knob gags and spending too much of it. Right... age != contribution especially when you look back at the still-spamming account farmers. |
|
|
|
|
Those in the lower class do not have to stay in the lower class. People can shift between various statuses of wealth.
Cast a stone towards the redistribution of wealth only if you expect to be constantly poor... otherwise, it wouldn't benefit you at all.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm starting to become ever the more partial to the idea of holding some deterrence to those that participate in the campaign.
Given YoBit's reputation, would it make sense to blacklist them from your other campaigns?
If so, then what about the possibility of negative feedback (while the signature is active)?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
