|
481
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: BitcoinStriker [Hero Member] == Tymer [Member, Scammer] (== HueSinger [Newbie])
|
on: November 07, 2015, 11:42:48 PM
|
Lied? No, lying isnt my kind of thing.
I have no real explanation for that since I cant remember why I posted that. Most likely I simply was lazy and decided to use that to create one of those fake accounts to get free bitcoins instead of creating new mails and such.
But yet again, feel free to leave the negative trust, i've already given up.
I tryed to explain over and over again the same thing, if I did indeed scam anyone I would NEVER have used the same wallet and accounts again.
Just to open a fuckin downloaded .rar that I find suspicious I use VirtualBox...
PS: My friend sends his regards.
I don't understand. So you were simply lazy enough to keep calling yourself Tymer when you could've just...called yourself something else? And you were lazy enough to use your scammer friends BTC address when you...had already made an entirely new wallet of your own? Uh, what? You had your own wallet but you were still sending BTC to your scammer friend? What does this even have to do with emails? Or laziness? |
|
|
|
|
483
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: BitcoinStriker [Hero Member] == Tymer [Member, Scammer] (== HueSinger [Newbie])
|
on: November 07, 2015, 11:32:17 PM
|
What did I just post above?
I used my friends wallet and accounts early in the days of Bitcoins. When he got called out for his scamming tendencies and created a new account (which he still uses to this day and is hero like mine) I created my own wallet and accounts... And if I ever scammed anyone I would have at the very least not have posted the same wallet and accounts...
So Tymer does have an alt. Unfortunately buddy, it's checkmate. You just contradicted yourself. The thread where Tymer scammed was made on November 17, 2013, at 04:45:43 PM. Negative trust was first left on 2013-11-19. You were still calling yourself Tymer and using his addresses in July of 2014, over half a year later. You just stated that when he got called out for scamming, you made your own wallet and accounts. You both lied and contradicted yourself. |
|
|
|
|
484
|
Economy / Economics / Re: America's new debt ceiling - $19,600,000,000,000
|
on: November 07, 2015, 11:28:31 PM
|
Yes, deflation for me is monetary deflation: the supply of money shrinks. (in a keynesian system due to defaults, as the debt is the money itself)
In bitcoin we wont see that, we will see however price deflation, due to strenghtening: denominated things in bitcoin will shrink in price : both wages & expenditures.
We already see that: as bitcoin price went up, faucets pay out less, but advertising on faucets is also cheaper.
Uhh we almost definitely will see monetary deflation where the supply of money shrinks, Bitcoin being a deflationary currency is one of its critical foundations. Monetary deflation isn't as common in real life, if deflation does occur it is usually price deflation just due to a shrink of the economy and heavily reduced consumer spending. |
|
|
|
|
485
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: BitcoinStriker [Hero Member] == Tymer [Member, Scammer] (== HueSinger [Newbie])
|
on: November 07, 2015, 11:25:25 PM
|
My friend joined bitcoin world with me in 2013, we were both kiddys and we were curious, we played minecraft for a long time, he had got 3 accounts for us.
Kiddies, huh? https://uk.fiverr.com/tymer007Based on that and your profile picture and services, I'm unsure how much of kiddies you were. Tymer007 on fiverr also is from Portugal and can speak Portugese. Your Tymer account has posts from mid 2014 on the MinecraftCC forums too... Tymer is not me. The end. Do whatever you want, google anything you want, do whatever you want. I give up. I prefer to have negative trust and be called a scammer than having to deal with you people. I'll continue on my life, you will continue yours. Close this please. So why in the bloody hell did you call yourself Tymer so often and use Tymer's Bitcoin address so often? If your story is true, what, were you just bloody giving him everything for absolutely no reason at all? Your story makes absolutely no sense, and I feel if you truly had a defence you wouldn't just "give up". Edit: In mid 2014, too, not 2013. |
|
|
|
|
486
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: The #1 Bitcoin Conspiracy Barn
|
on: November 07, 2015, 11:12:09 PM
|
Actually no, char728292 belongs to the so called "lame friend" of mine.  Keep digging Touche This thread can go on for ever at this rate. Has some one created another thread on this in accusations already? Maybe you should consider creating one in your innocence. Two, in accusations. Both mine, you can probably find them on the front page of Scam Accusations if you have a look, or you can find the one about BitcoinStriker by looking at my post history. |
|
|
|
|
489
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Someone just won 52.800 BTC on Dragon's Tale
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:45:53 PM
|
Wow, I wasn't aware Dragon's Tale was still big. Dragon's Tale was a very popular gambling game back in the older days of Bitcoin! It's an MMO where you wander around the map and essentially you can play on anything there is, even the plants can be gambled with to hope some BTC falls out. I loved it, but whenever I go there now and make an account the faucets are always dead now. |
|
|
|
|
490
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:43:25 PM
|
Question:
How would you rate i.e. a simple (yet popular) dice site which intentionally try to keep things fair and simple and doesn't do any promotions and keep only necessary features (say something like Just-Dice back when they operated in BTC).
How would it score in 'promotions' and 'features' categories? Would you rate it as D-? Or 'N/A'?
The overview looks too green imo. Some could say it's great that all the sites have high score, but if every of them has an 'A', that doesn't do the trick. Maybe, in future, you should consider switching to '1-10' scale, perhaps add more categories etc. Just my thought.
If they don't do any promotions at all they'd probably get a bad rating, yes. That's only fair. If their attraction was that that they are simple, they wouldn't be terribly scored on features, but it still wouldn't be a high score. I'd leave a note in the review. It is quite green, yes. That's the problem, as I'm restricting it to popular sites they're generally all good. Also, if I start making it more relative and giving good sites Cs and Bs, I get a lot of angry PMs calling me a shill from people who see that at the time I may have x or y gambling site ad or be a mod on x or y gambling site (I'm not a mod on any gambling site anymore but I was when I made this thread, and I do sometimes have gambling site signature ads). And in all fairness, they are good sites. |
|
|
|
|
491
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Coinbase is overstepping the bounds we should give it regarding Bitcoin XT
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:33:11 PM
|
The fact that you had to put a disclaimer there says it all about this forum/ "community"
You're afraid of being branded as XT shills, XT supporters even your posts are sound and fair.
I see lots of big blocks supporters do this too, when they only argue about having bigger blocks is needed.
I think censorship does a wonderful job wrecking the community already.
I don't like branding people as XT shills. If they genuinely think an opposing opinion, great. We can have a better level of discourse. When it's circlejerking, we have a problem. Personally I want to see civilised debate about BIP100 vs BIP101 (and other BIPxxx solutions too). On a tangent, as one of the people who loves branding people as dogie shills or even just dogie supporters, you are a bit of a hypocrite. (You said something remotely supporting dogie or remotely defending a claim against him that is outlandish? SHILL!) |
|
|
|
|
492
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Discourse Paradox
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:21:05 PM
|
|
I see your argument, though I think you over-estimate the effects. Posts like that would still be possible, there would just be a limit on them and eventually the level of discourse would be forced to be raised. That's not necessarily a bad thing, the back-and-forths would become more substantial and less like bickering.
Reporting them is definitely a good way, but it's a bit cumbersome with quite often there being a fine line and just so much.
|
|
|
|
|
493
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:18:21 PM
|
Okay, I definitely agree with you on BitcoinRush. That's not something that should ever be done and it's definitely dirty. However, I feel in all other areas they are still trustworthy and they did reply to him, so I will only be dropping their trustworthiness by one fine grade, and that was 3 months ago. I'll review the overall in a few days.
I read up on the Crypto-Games issue a bit and I'm currently getting CG's side of the story from one of their staff. Their rating will remain as-is for now. Edit: After discussing how they handled it, compensation given to investors to fix lost profit, etc, I am satisfied with the way they handled it. Trustworthiness remains the same IMHO, they handled it well, even if they appeared publicly to be a bit harsh.
PRC...well yes, Dean was trash previously. I feel like he's gotten his act together recently though. Trustworthiness for PRC is still only at a B+ and it will remain there, I have no plans to increase or decrease it.
I need a source for the FortuneJack stats faking, please.
No idea what you base this on. PRC is the most trusted Bitcoin dice site and that's a fact. No other site looks after as many Bitcoin of players/investors as PRC does and there's never been any issues with cashouts or losses. If I had to rate you as you are right now you'd probably get an A for trustworthiness. The reason you're a B+ is because I don't agree with what you did in the past (mostly regarding your dealings with BAC). That was shitty. @ETTKS: Found the bitcointalk posts for FJ's stats faking and I just don't feel like any damage was done there. It's not significant enough to me to warrant a change in the trust level. So you mean a dispute over a domain name and affiliate issue of a few satoshis is enough to bring the score down that much when PRC has had 5k btc invested and still has over 3k with no one actually ever having an issue with their investment or balance? Makes zero sense and makes the rest of your list have less credibility IMO. a) There's more than that, you have not JUST had issues with BAC. Dooglus too. b) You are getting on my nerves with how persistent you are because of a B+ for trustworthiness. There is a difference between defending yourself and putting forward a solid argument and trying to discredit my entire list to get your rating bumped. You have done this before and we talked and I eventually upped your ratings as I had seen both sides of the argument and agreed with you. You should've taken notes. |
|
|
|
|
494
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:12:52 PM
|
Hi @DiamondCardz - Nice reviews. Could you please add just-dice review?
No can do, sorry bud. It's been suggested many times, but as Just-Dice is now an altcoin gambling website that uses CLAM as their currency of choice, and this is an overview for Bitcoin gambling websites in a non-altcoin section, I won't be adding Just-Dice to the list. Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
495
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 10:09:38 PM
|
Okay, I definitely agree with you on BitcoinRush. That's not something that should ever be done and it's definitely dirty. However, I feel in all other areas they are still trustworthy and they did reply to him, so I will only be dropping their trustworthiness by one fine grade, and that was 3 months ago. I'll review the overall in a few days.
I read up on the Crypto-Games issue a bit and I'm currently getting CG's side of the story from one of their staff. Their rating will remain as-is for now. Edit: After discussing how they handled it, compensation given to investors to fix lost profit, etc, I am satisfied with the way they handled it. Trustworthiness remains the same IMHO, they handled it well, even if they appeared publicly to be a bit harsh.
PRC...well yes, Dean was trash previously. I feel like he's gotten his act together recently though. Trustworthiness for PRC is still only at a B+ and it will remain there, I have no plans to increase or decrease it.
I need a source for the FortuneJack stats faking, please.
No idea what you base this on. PRC is the most trusted Bitcoin dice site and that's a fact. No other site looks after as many Bitcoin of players/investors as PRC does and there's never been any issues with cashouts or losses. If I had to rate you as you are right now you'd probably get an A for trustworthiness. The reason you're a B+ is because I don't agree with what you did in the past (mostly regarding your dealings with BAC). That was shitty. @ETTKS: Found the bitcointalk posts for FJ's stats faking and I just don't feel like any damage was done there. It's not significant enough to me to warrant a change in the trust level. |
|
|
|
|
496
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Campaings already cutting rates
|
on: November 07, 2015, 09:51:39 PM
|
what these entitled shits dont realize is theyre getting paid, thats right, youre getting money, for typing your thoughts garbage spam on a forum. there arent very many other places where you get paid for typing random shit, with no work experience, and you dont even have to know what the hell youre talking about. just like possum577 up there.
I calculated back when BTC was ~$250 that at 0.0012 BTC per post I would make 30 cents per post. I type at 130 words per minute and it is very easy for me to end up pumping out a decent quality post in 1-2 minutes. I calculated that if I really tried hard and made a conservative 40 posts per hour (even though it'd basically be spam), I would be making $12/hour. For a lot of places that's way above minimum wage. For posting on a damn forum. |
|
|
|
|
497
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 09:41:17 PM
|
|
Okay, I definitely agree with you on BitcoinRush. That's not something that should ever be done and it's definitely dirty. However, I feel in all other areas they are still trustworthy and they did reply to him, so I will only be dropping their trustworthiness by one fine grade, and that was 3 months ago. I'll review the overall in a few days.
I read up on the Crypto-Games issue a bit and I'm currently getting CG's side of the story from one of their staff. Their rating will remain as-is for now. Edit: After discussing how they handled it, compensation given to investors to fix lost profit, etc, I am satisfied with the way they handled it. Trustworthiness remains the same IMHO, they handled it well, even if they appeared publicly to be a bit harsh.
PRC...well yes, Dean was trash previously. I feel like he's gotten his act together recently though. Trustworthiness for PRC is still only at a B+ and it will remain there, I have no plans to increase or decrease it.
I need a source for the FortuneJack stats faking, please.
|
|
|
|
|
498
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites [Up-to-date as of 7th Nov '15]
|
on: November 07, 2015, 09:14:49 PM
|
BitcoinRush = Trust should be dropped even further. See bitcoinrush.com for example
Crypto-Games = wtf? Did you see how they handled the +EV betting? They should be D- at best
PocketRocketsCasino = Trust should be dropped much more, can't think of a bigger liar
FortuneJack = Trust should be dropped further, after their stats faking
Will investigate all of these. LuckyBit will stay on an A for trustworthiness for the time being. I should note that's still very good, they definitely aren't lacking in that area - I just don't feel they rub necks with PrimeDice and 777Coin in that regard. |
|
|
|
|
499
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Buying Steam games with BTC without getting scammed?
|
on: November 07, 2015, 09:08:11 PM
|
|
You just need to find the most trustworthy place you can. There isn't really any properly secure way to avoid getting scammed here as any site could decide to scam you, but I doubt that the most trusted sites will decide to randomly scam you for the cost of one measly steam game.
|
|
|
|
|
500
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Coinbase is overstepping the bounds we should give it regarding Bitcoin XT
|
on: November 07, 2015, 09:05:11 PM
|
but you can all be sure that there will be an increase of the blocksize
Eventually, of course. I agree that will eventually have to happen. But this is not the way if we wish to stay the way Bitcoin was intended. knight 22 and meono are certainly earning their wages recently - relentless pushiness about... 'freedom of choice'
bizarre...
we're all free to do as they say, it seems...
well, i'm not going over to XT, and am now bored with their noise.
coinbase ?
whatever...
Indeed, I am remaining with Bitcoin Core. I am not going to support Coinbase with what they are doing. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
