I voted for "Refund partially, keep the rest" assuming that the project hasn't actually scammed anyone yet. Two wrongs don't make it right so the person should take the appropriate compensation for the work that's been done and return the rest.
Also assuming that there was no "early termination penalty" or anything like that in the agreement.
This. Also I feel that all of the "donate to charity" options are unethical simply on principle: either the user is entitled to keep the money, or he is not. If he is not entitled to keep the money, he is not entitled to donate it, either. Donating the money serves no purpose except to make stealing from a scammer seem less unconscionable than it is. |
|
|
|
In this case, the forum acts as a fraud, as well as the previous owner of the account. If trade in accounts is allowed, then there must be order. Rules create for their execution, for all right? As I understand it.
If you buy a car from a stranger, and you are shot for it on the street, taking for the previous owner. It is right?
No, that analogy is not right. A better analogy is if the previous owner threw sand in the crankcase causing the engine to blow up some time later after you bought it, then blaming the car's manufacturer for allowing used car sales. The moral of the story is, when buying a used car from a stranger, check the oil first, if only to make sure it is in fact oil and not sand. |
|
|
|
Let's see what happens when for the majority of Russian users of the forum, their profiles will look like:
I'm guessing we'll see Russians targeted by known scammers whose negative trust is hidden from everyone whose trust lists are built on petty vengeance instead of an actual need to tag scammers, so don't say you weren't warned. |
|
|
|
For the benefit of anyone from the future finding this thread after having a similar problem, what "actually worked" was using QSize instead of int(s): toolbar->setIconSize(QSize(128, 128));
(Hint: when the compiler tells you one part of a statement/expression is wrong, try changing only the wrong part instead of other parts that may have been right the first time.) |
|
|
|
qt/bitcoingui.cpp:563:9: note: suggested alternative: ‘toolbar’
toolBar->setIconSize(QSize(128, 128));
^~~~~~~
toolbar
As the compiler suggestion suggests, names are case sensitive. |
|
|
|
ask loyce, pharmacist of tman, fox pup, bla bla any of these to provide you with some of their best, insightful and thought provoking posts.... that you would expect such high merit holders to have by the 100's...... and.....
You will get nothing. These fools can not provide any content here except parroting crap they already got spoon fed to spam their sigs.
I don't seem to recall you asking me for my best posts, but if you insist, I am quite proud of my coverage of the 2016 unofficial global moderator election. I do have hundreds more amazing posts, as you say, but I don't want to make this thread all about me. |
|
|
|
On ignore now.. how long can I keep the mouse off the un-ignore?
You can always just use the Show/Hide button like I do. |
|
|
|
Since cryptohunter has taken to using self-moderated threads to delete posts containing facts that conflict with his warped opinions, I'm reposting this here, as I feel it's an important and relevant fact that sane people might be interested in knowing and possibly discussing or debating.
If i tell a criminal that has stolen my money to give it back or else I will tell the police.
That is revealing a secret they have to do them harm. That is not blackmail that is reporting a crime you thick turd.
Putting it in large letters doesn't make it true. What you're describing is, indeed, blackmail. But don't take my word for it: just ask the police whether it's okay to not report a crime because you talked the criminal into returning what they stole. Letting criminals get away with it in this way allows them to commit further crimes, which is why offering these sorts of deals is illegal. You're obviously not likely to get arrested for doing this, since the criminal is the only witness to the blackmail, and they can't implicate you without confessing to their own crime, but blackmail is still illegal even if you won't get caught. |
|
|
|
Approaching somebody to ask them why they distrust you in private, rather than making a song and dance about it is something you consider backdoor shenanigans? You either misinterpret the situation or are extremely paranoid.
It sounds suspiciously like you're trying to quietly gather information on how to get included on more people's trust lists. I don't believe I'm extremely paranoid; just slightly-above-averagely paranoid. I'm just wondering why someone I have never talked to or given any reason to distrust me would distrust me. It's not something I care about in any meaningful capacity, but I am interested in a reason if you'll provide one.
Excluding you from my trust list does not (necessarily) mean that I distrust you, or that I harbour any resentment or ill-will toward you. It simply means that I believe you are a sufficiently poor judge of character that your own trust list and feedback are meaningless to me, and therefore to be excluded. This is not a moral judgement, but a pragmatic one. Due to my aforementioned paranoia, I will not be more specific than that. |
|
|
|
Am I allowed to use this thread to request information (bitch) about your exclusion of me from your trust list?
I for one would much prefer that you did, instead of doing so via PM, which in the interests of transparency I am going to post here: Hello foxpup, I've noticed you're excluding me from your trust-list and I'm wondering if you would be willing to provide me with an explanation? Thanks for your time either way, have a good one.
I don't approve of these backdoor shenanigans; they invite accusations of trust manipulation. Did you PM owlcatz too? (And why do you even care about my exclusions anyway? I'm only DT2.) |
|
|
|
What would happen if you were in a real casino and knew a slot machine was broken in such a way that the casino no longer had the edge, and the casino didn't happen to know that. You use the broken machine to win some money that you later bet on the blackjack table--and you win big there. Should the casino honor any of your bets?
Let me know if you understand what I'm implying to you or if you need bigger and more bolder words to specify what I mean.
I really don't. It makes no difference whether you knew or not, except that if you did, and the casino could prove it, you'd be arrested for fraud. But either way you don't get to keep your winnings. EDIT: Also, the issue here is that verusfides won their 20 BTC on a non-malfunctioning game (Plinko). They got the balance to win from the malfunctioning game. How do you think that should be handled? (which is the whole point that we're debating)
OP couldn't have won any real bitcoins, because they didn't wager any real bitcoins; they wagered void credit, so that's what they won. |
|
|
|
What would happen if you were in a real casino and knew a slot machine was broken in such a way that the casino no longer had the edge, and the casino didn't happen to know that. You use the broken machine to win some money that you later bet on the blackjack table--and you win big there. Should the casino honor any of your bets?
Nope. Says so right on the machine:  "MALFUNCTION VOIDS ALL PAYS AND PLAYS". FortuneJack has the same terms (all online casinos do - they'd be crazy not to), and non-computer gambling games have similar rules about dealer errors and the like. |
|
|
|
I'm trying to remember this other hilarious troll here..
He is a bald guy and does youtube videos and trolls anti-bitcoin but is very code-smart.. Who was he?
RawDog? Yeah, he was somewhat entertaining. Far more entertaining than cryptohunter, at any rate. |
|
|
|
|
If voting wasn't anonymous, all members of the foxhole butt-sniffing pussy-petting trust/merit club/cult/gang would vote the same way out of fear of being punished by Lauda/suchmoon/whoever's in charge this week. As you're such a big proponent of FREE SPEECH, I'm sure you don't want that.
|
|
|
|
Whelp. Looks like I'm on DT2 now. Does that mean all the merit beggars I negged for shadily propositioning me (and failing at it) are going to be out for my blood? (And also cryptohunter, who can't seem to stop chasing my tail for some reason, and who is no doubt going to somehow integrate this new development into the existing foxhole butt-sniffing pussy-petting conspiracy/orgy that I could never keep track of.) Guess this is my life now: youtube.com/watch?v=316AzLYfAzw  |
|
|
|
I started to make an index page for the Bitcoin Tunes on my domain "Bitcoin Tunes". I've chosen a template, and I've listed 3 of the famous songs including "Ode to Satoshi", and "Blame it on Mt. Gox" The site is hosted and the link is below. Bitcoin TunesYou can add What Does Mt Gox Say? to your playlist. |
|
|
|
Also there's no bitches or any other dogs in the pic.
I'm under the lectern, of course. Pay no attention. |
|
|
|
There is no need for me to resolve my problems with them because unless they can get in foxy's time machine and go back and not be a scammer and scammer bitch then why should I need to resolve shit.
You just can't leave me alone, can you? Anyway, time travel doesn't work like that, but I don't expect your limited mind to understand why, so I won't bother attempting to explain it. |
|
|
|
Didn't include Foxpup for the reason I can't find any post of him on cryptohunters thread ( That saves me from doing some trolls on australian accents)
No, I wasn't in that thread, but I was in some other threads concerning him, where I was inexplicably accused of misusing time travel and of sexual impropriety with suchmoon and The Pharmacist. As for the video... I think I'll wait and see what future entrants come up with. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
