Wow, I actually moved up a few spots from last month?  I had been pondering my post history review offer for weeks before finally deciding to cancel it, and during that period I was extremely lazy with the merit-giving.  Aside from o_e_l_e_o, have any other merit sources dropped out?  Seems like I probably shouldn't have been as high as #11 for last month.

Hopefully that isn't a sign that merits aren't circulating as much as they historically have been, though I think there was a thread pointing out the fact that's exactly what's going on.  I will have to step on the gas pedal hard this month.

As always, thank you for the stats Coin-1.  This is never a competition for me, but I do use this thread as kind of a yardstick to measure my merit source performance with and I appreciate it.

Nah.  Bitcoin sometimes responds to events big and small, but in the case of the Hong Kong EFT I think the drop in price was just coincidental.  I can't see any reason why the launch of an EFT would cause the kind of volatility that we've seen since March.

A better explanation is that some of the bigger bitcoin players who made a lot of money from the recent bull run took their money off the table, i.e., sold bitcoin to lock in their profits.  If you look at the one-year price chart for bitcoin, you'll see it hit its ATH and then slowly taper down:



That indicates to me that there was a lot of selling going on, and what better time is there to sell an asset if you're not in love with said asset?  You sell it when its at or near its peak.  But hey, that's just my semi-educated guess.  There's just no telling why bitcoin's price does what it does.

That assumes the thread will even go that far--but if a restriction like this was to be implemented, there would definitely have to be a reasonable time or post count parameter.  However, I don't really think any such rule is needed.  This hasn't been a long-standing problem, and while it might be annoying to some people, there's absolutely no restriction on the accused (or anyone else) starting up a rebuttal thread which ideally would reference the locked thread.

Inefficient?  Yes.  But personally I'm for the fewest number of rules/restrictions possible.

I don't know if it's just me, but there seem to be mixed messages regarding crypto coming from the US government.  On the one hand, the entire space seems to be under a microscope--and that could just be law enforcement going after criminals, but it seems like it's more like a crackdown, that the government is very much anti-crypto.

On the flip side, there are developments like this courtesy of the SEC and whoever they're collaborating with that are positive for bitcoin.  I don't wear a tin foil hat all the time, but my gut is telling me the US government would rather people invest in something traded on the stock exchanges as opposed to outright owning bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency.  That would fit with them trying to protect the US dollar from crypto.

There's one thing I'm curious about when it comes to bitcoin options being traded, and it's if bitcoin's listed price (in the Wall Street Journal or any other financial news outlet, for example) is going to be determined by options/futures traders and not how it currently is, which would be the average price across the major crypto exchanges (I think).  The price of gold and silver is determined by futures traders, not by the price at which those metals are sold to real people in brick-and-mortar stores or online, and there's often a big discrepancy between the two.

Making a thread like that and locking it isn't the worst crime in the world, and I think everyone is blowing that way out of proportion.  Yes, it was a breach of etiquette and the thread shouldn't have been locked, but it's not as though he stopped any discussion about BitcoinGirl.Club's trustworthiness.  He just made it impossible to discuss in his own thread.

JollyGood has indeed shown a pattern of poor judgement when it comes to using the trust system, which is why I had him excluded way back before I wiped my trust list entirely.  In fact, I just realized that when I made a new trust list not too long ago, I forgot to exclude him from it--but that omission has now been corrected.  Last I knew, JG was trying to do some good on the forum and might still be; I haven't looked at any of the feedbacks he's handed out in probably a year or more, but though I don't think he ought to be on DT I don't think he's a malicious, evil motherfucker either.

And to those of you complaining about his wrongly-given trust, just ~ him in your trust list if you haven't already.  If enough members on DT do that, he won't be on DT anymore and his feedbacks won't carry nearly as much weight.  The whole DT system is a farce, but the inclusion/exclusion feature is a voting mechanism and problem DT members ideally should be weeded out through it.

I do remember that badge, but I could swear that it was only a couple of years ago when the idea was implemented.  You're right, time certainly does fly (and to you young'ins, the perception of time zipping away from you only gets stronger as you age--trust me).


Even if you do it for that reason, you're still helping the forum when those shitposts get erased forever.  If enough people report shitposts and other issues, the benefits add up.  I don't know how many posts I reported this year, but it was probably more than the past two years combined.  I don't have as much fire in my belly as I did back in 2016-17, but when I see a generic, poorly-written post I hit that report button speedily and with no hesitation.  The merit system has helped clean up the worst of the mess we had pre-2018, but the problem of members making zero-value posts to make money lingers on.


Wish I had an answer to that, but I'm not a staff member and have no clue what goes on behind the scenes.  You'd think it'd be a simple fix like the one you described, but I suspect Theymos has his reasons for not acknowledging reporters publicly.  I couldn't even hazard a guess what those reasons are, though.

Mmm....that sounds like some straight-up bullshit to me, and you're on a forum where the vast majority of members are not going to take claims like the ones you've made at face value.  People here would argue about what color the sky is (lol).  If you're trying to defend yourself from OP's accusation by making a psychiatric diagnosis (you, who are essentially an anonymous internet nobody) on an anonymous internet forum user, you're not doing yourself any favors, believe me.

FYI, negative feedback should not be given for spamming or shitposting per Theymos's diktat (I don't have a link, but I betcha LoyceV could produce one in 30 seconds if it was important enough).  Then again, in practice anyone can leave negatives for any reason....but there might be consequences, especially if the feedback-giver is on DT.


It's probably a judgement call for the mods to make, but since this is dealing with a particular member and not necessarily a forum-wide issue (that hasn't already been covered, I might add, if I recall correctly) it should stay in Reputation.  But it's not a huge deal.

Since this member isn't a merit source and since merit abuse isn't punished unless there's an egregious case that demands action, I don't think anything needs to be done as far as krishnaverma is concerned.  If all he got was neutral feedback, it's a non-issue.  Neutrals are given for anything and everything and have been for years, and I think Theymos even endorses that in lieu of giving someone a negative feedback.

TL;DR: Meh.  Not much to see here.

Not only that, but I'm not sure why OP thinks ETFs and whatever demand for bitcoin they generate has everything to do with Coinbase.  When we're talking institutional investors, I have to assume that they're looking for the lowest price when they're buying and aren't going to use a single exchange--and that's if they even use an exchange at all.  Those people would probably know whales willing to sell at a reduced price off-chain or something like that.  

I don't know exactly how the big boys buy their bitcoin, and even putting Coinbase aside I don't think there's any sort of liquidity problem anywhere.  What I think is that this thread is based on an erroneous assumption or bad information.

Ha ha.  The Trump comment was amusing, but that last sentence is absolutely true in the sense that bitcoin never does what anyone expects it to do. 

Ugh.  I've been hearing rumors and news and speculation about bitcoin ETFs for years now, so much so that I just tune it all out at this point--though I did just read about a new one in Hong Kong on a financial news site (see below).  But whether that one or any others come into existence, the factors that influence the price of bitcoin have always been opaque at best.  Sometimes bad news is greeted with a huge bump, and other times bitcoin drops or does nothing when there's some kind of fantastic news story (or a halving for that matter).

Speaking of halvenings, I'm not sure what the market is going to do at any point in the future, but there certainly wasn't a new ATH reached right after this last one.  It was reached before, and I have no clue if the two events are even related.  I don't see why they ought to be, but that seems to be the common perception around here.

And on what I find to be an amusing note, this headline was released yesterday, which just shows you how silly it is for news agencies to report on every fluctuation in the price of bitcoin, as the market is still so incredibly volatile ($63k when the article was released, $59.8k as of me writing this post):

quote author=Casdinyard link=topic=5426440.msg64009398#msg64009398 date=1714406179]
and you get a pretty exhausted merit source.
[/quote]

Nail===>Head.  Plus at this point--at least as far as doing post history reviews--I'm a dejected one due to the general mediocrity of the posts I'm seeing come my way and the 98% certainty that I've been meriting members with alt accounts making borderline 'good' posts.  I always tried to be generous, but I've also kept in mind why the merit system was such a blessing from on high (Theymos).  No way in hell I want to start helping shitposters or account farmers to rank up with relative ease.


No problem; you write well and you earned the merits I gave you.  Lol about the chicken nugget.  I'd prefer an extra dipping sauce, but honestly anything free these days I'm grateful for.


Oh yeah.  It's basically just that it's going to be harder to get rid of my monthly allotment of sMerits each month.  Over the years, the closeness of my reading on the forum has diminished due to the quality of the average post.  I've come to expect that most posts here are just crapola written to earn money (which can be seen in the number of duplicate answers whenever someone asks a question; nobody really reads anything anymore, and for the literary-minded I can't say I blame them).  But I'll keep spreading those merits around, believe me.


Nah.  I'm going to do it the old-fashioned way, as I did when I first became a merit source in 2019, i.e., reading and evaluating.


You're welcome.  Your posts are kind of funny, even if your grammar is atrocious (lol). 

...............................And with that, I am sealing this thread with a kiss and burying it in dust and the sands of time....................................

Now you know someone is a native English speaker likely from a 1st-world country when they misuse "literal" or "literally".  You can take that one to the bank every single time.

OP, you got neutral feedback from JollyGood and even if it's wrong it still doesn't do you any harm whatsoever.  Jesus, look at the trust pages of any DT member who's ever taken on shitposters, scammers, or you-name-it; they'll probably have more retaliatory negative feedback than what they themselves have dished out, rightly or wrongly.  Look at mine if you need an example.  

You're right that even members who've contributed positively to bitcointalk can be 'clowns' from time to time, but you should probably know by now that a thick skin is needed if you're going to post an honest opinion here and that most criticism/attacks/trolling should just slide right off your back.  This here forum's always been a prickly one, and take my advice for what it's worth.


That's goddamn brilliant, worthy of being typed by the anger-maddened brain of TMAN himself.

Uhh....actmyname hasn't been active since January, and I'm not too sure he's been active much at all in at least a year as I can't remember the last time I saw a post from him.  I'm pretty sure he isn't reporting posts--or is he?  Can you make reports without the system updating your 'last active' date?  And if so, why would he be doing that?

Aside from that, it'd sure be nice if Theymos did another stat dump.  People who report bad posts are the unsung heroes of this forum, who basically get almost no recognition whatsoever, and yet they serve an incredibly important function.  I won't hold my breath for any data from Theymos, but the top reporters deserve it IMO.

To the community:

After giving this a lot of thought, I've decided to end my offer to do post history reviews for people on request.  The whole thing started off great, but as of late I get the strong feeling that I've been basically helping a bunch of mediocre posters (and most likely their alt accounts) rank up, which was never my intention.  I've also been refusing more and more requests because posts don't meet my standards for merits, and it's just turned into a big time waster that I don't want to deal with any more.

I'm going to take a look at the requests that are still in my PM box, and if any of those members have written decent posts they'll get merits.  Aside from that, I am done.

I'll leave this thread open for a little bit and then I'm going to lock it.

I'm not familiar with ThemePen, his posts, or his merit-giving history other than what was shown here but I agree.  I'd say every local board that has a sizeable number of active members needs at least one dedicated merit source--and I've been of that opinion for years now.  It allows members who might not be able to write in English the chance to earn merits more easily and prevents the main section from being flooded with incomprehensible posts.

I think most campaigns pay for posts from local boards, right?  So that's another reason for local board merit sources.  That said, OP isn't exactly a long-time member, and the merits he has given out have been to a small number of individual members.  If he were going to be a merit source, he ought to spread them out a lot wider if you know what I mean.

Makes me wonder if that's where the government is headed with all this.  I never used Samouai, though I remember seeing it available on google play; they used coinjoin?  I thought it was some other kind of mechanism (neither of which I really understand, to be honest).


We've been in 1984 for a long time now, but new technology is only making the surveillance state more brutal.  Add that to a government (I'm talking about the US here) that wants to see everything you're doing at all times and a population that's more than comfortable putting all of their private life online, and you've got a recipe for a world that George Orwell couldn't even imagine.


Whoops, I read your post after writing the above.  I don't think I've ever merited any of your posts, but that one hit the nail so directly on the head that I couldn't help myself. 

For anyone in crypto, how the hell do we keep away from the strike zone if it just keeps expanding (or we don't know exactly where it is)?

Because crypto competes with other investments and the USD that the government and the banking system they're in bed with don't control, and right now the US government seems to be very anti-crypto under the guise of combating money laundering and all that stuff.

Vote republican, that's all I have to say.  Biden will be lucky if he doesn't die in office this term because of his age; imagine if he ran for re-election?  He's just a puppet, and there are some seriously nasty people who've got their hands up his ass as far as crypto is concerned.  Either way, republicans are generally for less government and are pro-business so that's the way I've always voted.  Except for Trump that is, and his presidency didn't turn out to be the nuclear war armageddon that I thought would be the case.

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq prior to the US invading that country and taking down Saddam, right?  Right, guys??

Governments are the biggest liars, the biggest thieves (with banks in second place), and unfortunately since they make the laws and enforce them and instill fear in their citizens' hearts, they get to do whatever the fuck they want to. 

I've written letters to my state senators about crypto before.  What else can I or any of us who live in the US do?  The crypto crackdown is starting to look like it's being run by Joe McCarthy's resurrected corpse.

I'm pretty sure if bitcoin's price rose the way it did over the years but fees stayed low and no changes were made, the assholes would have barged their way into the market anyway but I say fuck 'em anyhow.

And yes, bitcoin was intended to be a p2p form of cash, but:

1) That was a solution in search of a problem, i.e., there was never a public outcry for an alternative to fiat.  Even in countries that experienced hyperinflation, people just used another stable fiat currency.  Hell, even in 2015 or so most people hadn't even heard of bitcoin.

2) Right from the get-go (at least from what I've read in threads from the early years here) people were focusing on bitcoin's price, though there was discussion about merchant adoption and sales of things on the forum and, of course, on the dark web.  But as time went on and bitcoin kept rising, all that talk about companies accepting bitcoin fell off a cliff and it basically became an investment.  And I might add that nobody forced anyone to think of it that way.  It just happened.


LOL.  I've been here long enough such that I should know things like that, but I swear every time I start reading anything technical about crypto my eyes glaze over.  Not out of boredom or disinterest, mind you, but because I don't speak the language of the technical wizards who wrote the code, did the math, the cryptography, whatever.  I studied the wrong thing in college.

Royse777, I'm reporting member BD Technical for being a complete shitposter, unworthy of being in your or anyone else's campaign.  Just look at this asswipe of a post:


Not only is it horribly written, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  I checked his post history, and it's full of totally generic crap that's obviously cranked out just to get paid.  I'd advise you to get rid of this idiot.