How about this modification then.

All money collected from posts is divided as follows:

• 30% goes to Bitcointalk.org
• Newbies get nothing
• Jr. get given 1%
• Members get given 2%
• Full members get 4%
• Seniors get 8%
• Heroes get 16%
• Legendaries get 39%

Note that I'd currently be a Full Member, not a Legendary, under this system.

So, any money you lose while ranking up gets paid back to you in future by any trolls that just refuse to leave

I actually like that alot, getting paid to write sincere posts by trolls

You're happy getting paid to post though, right?


Interesting that the people with advertising in the sigs or avatars are 100% against the idea (thus far anyway).

What I'm saying is: spending >10% of last year's profit on a company with debts and no assets is not something Coinbase can afford to do every day. They run out of money in less than 10 days that way. I don't need any insider information to perform basic arithmetic like that.

No-one would ever have been paid anything if there wasn't valuable advertising space for sig-spammers to use. What gives the advertising space value? Quality.

Visitors to this (or any) site come here because there's good information here. They wouldn't come otherwise, who wants to swim in spam advertising for fun?

Yep. And this is probably one of the most trolled forums on the internet, I should imagine.



Right, but nuking current rankings down to acquired merit rank levels would be very much needed if any free to post rank existed, too many trolls have Legendary accounts already from the old days of the activity-based ranking scheme.


Maybe another way to reward quality members would be universal tipping, everyone is given a tipping address (Lightning again) whether they like it or not (or every account is forced to supply a Lightning address). I don't publish a tipping address, but if I was forced to, I'd take any tips if I was given any.

Tips could easily help to offset the cost of posting, even if Legendary members were paying 0.0001 satoshis per post.

There's an abundance of evidence to suggest that Bitcoin Cash was a small minority of original Bitcoiners, not least the way the exchange rate of BCH has dived and dived. 95% acceptance or thereabouts is the best that could be expected realistically, and that's about what happened. Saying "100 people out of several 100,000's didn't agree" is not much of an argument.

I think something like that could work also. I don't think it would deter the outright trolls though.



Well, it depends how high the fee per post was set. Would you pay 0.0001 satoshis for 1 post as a Legendary member? See how this works? The price mechanism is powerful, if the price was just high enough to erase all spammers aside from the richest trolls, it would be a price worth paying IMO. And it might even lead to identifying the trolls (and wasting alot of their money).

Your posts are pretty good, you would rank up under the idea.



Thank you for endorsing the idea! The fact is, alot of people haven't got much to say. What's wrong with pricing posting to reflect that? Lots of people will hate it; lots of people aren't needed, quality is.

I would. You're not reading these posts, are you?


I also said "this won't be popular", and I'm being proven right. Very few people will stand by the quality of their own posts or how useful the information is in their posts. What a massive surprise, because easily > 50% of posts on Bitcointalk.org are now execrable garbage

If you've got something really important to say (i.e. if everyone else is informed, then you benefit), then you'll be willing to pay. You obviously don't have much confidence in how useful your posts are, either to other people or for yourself.

Make everyone pay per post, based on rank (newbies pay most). Use Lightning too (only suitably motivated people will be able to configure it ATM). Current ranks should be nuked and based solely on merit.

Exactly, there would be fewer people posting: and the posts would be good.

Would you pay to post the above reply? Apparently not. Kind of ironic that your own post is contradicting your point (and validating mine)

This might be somewhat unpopular, but is popularity the goal? A good resource should be the goal IMO, I exclusively read this forum for about 1 year before I felt knowledgeable enough to post at all.


Getting the signal:noise ratio up can probably only be achieved using real resources. I'd be very happy if a BTC cost was introduced for posting:

• Nuke the old rank status for all members, re-adjust according to merit only
• Charge BTC for every post, low rank = highest fee
• Set the charges incredibly low to begin with, slowly increase to tweak the quality level

Lightning payments would be necessary, of course. Maybe I'm taking too hard a line, but if I have to pay even 500 satoshis per post, that would be a small price to pay to improve quality again.

Look at the inverse situation: 1000's of accounts are posting meaningless, obvious, copy-pasta or troll content, only in order to get paid per post by sig campaigns or trolls-in-chief.

Price discovery can solve this problem, it's a geniune "tragedy of the commons" issue after all.

1. $1 billion revenue is not $1 billion profit
2. $100 million is 10% of $1 billion

10% of yearly net revenue is not a small amount to spend on something that's gonna cost more money and produce zero money.

That's almost 100% wrong, you've got no idea what you're talking about


Lightning has been running for a few months now, there are thousands of channels and thousands of nodes

I already said that $100 million is probably quite a significant amount of cash to Coinbase. Why would they spend that much money, whether it's low to them or not, to stop others from buying a company that's all liabilities and no assets? There's not even a brand name, they've basically bought a bunch of debt.

Great plan: spending $100 million on a loser, just so you can pay the loser's bills. You've gotta spend money to lose (even more) money, right!? Riiiight

Signal isn't controversy free, either. The source code is published, but others in the free software community (specifically the F-droid opensource app store) refused to endorse it, because they couldn't get the published source code to actually compile. Open source is no good if the only option is to trust pre-compiled binaries from the same people that publish code that won't compile, this kind of implies their compiled binaries are using different code to that which is published.



Tox is the most advanced thing right now at least. Kind of surprising that it's taken so long for a serverless p2p messenging platform to be developed. Added bonus: Tox can beat censorship that's not Russian too

Do you really believe that every single time a human being invents something new, that existing theft laws aren't defined in a way that just states all theft is subject to prosecution, novelty is completely irrelevant? Politicians would spend all their time writing, debating and passing separate laws every time a new invention comes into existence if that were true


@Admins: we do actually need negMerits, some people need motivation to use the most basic logic

Telegram is a centralised network with closed source software running on the servers.

I wouldn't take anyone (including any so-called journalists) hyping Telegram as some kind of "Digital Resistance", lol


The only p2p messenger network (+ fully open source) that exists today is Tox, Telegram is little different to Whatsapp or Signal

I'm sure there are plenty of intelligence agencies who will want access to the Mastercard ID blockchain so that they can continue to procure Mastercards for their agents with fake identities. Great job, Mastercard.