I'm not sure exactly, but we have seen a  similar situation before. For example, a April fools joke where we were jokingly selling Bitcointalk merch. However, it was implemented a little differently, he basically took back all merit that was spent in that thread. I'm sure if that's possible, it's likely that he could implement it not to show merit, or even not allow it to be sent if a url matches a certain one. I'm not exactly sure the implementation of merit on the forum, so that's just speculation on my end. I'm not even saying theymos would do it if it was possible, but I think it could be worth asking potentially. At the end of the day it's an unofficial event, and the amount of merit being distributed is rather small, so on that side of things he probably doesn't see the problem. I'm coming at it from a integrity of a vote point of view, which again isn't really his issue. Although, as suggested before I like the idea of the event, I think it promotes good habits within the community, and could prove beneficial in getting the community a little more tight knitted, which I do believe we've lost over the years.

Could do that, although that would likely result in a lot of users not actually understanding or reading it, and having their vote not counted, which could amount up. I doubt everyone has read the entirety of that original post. Whether we put that down to their problem is another thing.

Like I said before, there's definitely ways to cheat pretty much any voting system we implemented, the only way to totally prevent that would be to prevent merit being sent in that thread, but who knows some users might try to bypass that on other threads. However, I'm not sure its a problem with the users meriting those that vote for them itself, its a problem for voting integrity that some users have caught onto that, abuse it to get merit, which artificially inflates certain users votes.

I'd just like to think that this event isn't ruined year on year, from this type of influence that occurs. I want to see those voted in genuinely voted in based on merit (not forum merit ). That isn't perfect by itself, and would be hard to get to that point, but in a ideal situation, users wouldn't be voting because they think they can earn merit.

There's also other issues which we definitely can't mitigate, users might vote for x because they're trying to gain trust off of them, you know there'll always be problems with things like this, I just think there's a way to prevent much of the merit issues, I just don't know if theymos can implement it in a easy way, and whether or not he thinks it's necessary.

I'm going for a 2-1 prediction. Think Pukki could be a problem for Southampton, but they should be able to get the job done against Norwich. Norwich tend to leak goals this season, I do believe they've got the worst goal difference in the league, and while I have seen improvements in them recently, it's mainly been against the bigger teams which they can sit back, and hope to soak up pressure. Don't think that'll be the approach against Southampton, as they'll at least have some faith in getting something out of the game.

I'm sure a lot of appreciate the sentiment, and I imagine it's for your own peace of mind too. However, don't feel like you have to explain your every move, just because someone has impersonated you in the past. Most legitimate users will have separate identities to what they're on this forum, and they might occasionally refer to them or platforms they use from time to time, but it means nothing. You've built up a reputation on the forum, it would be rather mind boggling if you were to throw that away with a username that matches your identity on the forum for a couple of satoshi's.

I've tried Telegram before for following news on a custom ROM, otherwise I just decided to monitor it manually after how horrible the platform is. I'm not even talking about the amount of spam, and scamming that goes on there, I just find it completely disorganised, and by default pretty concerning with how it handles privacy settings For example, I believe it doesn't have end to end encryption by default for personal messages.

Don't ever listen to influencers when it comes to investing, they're solely in it for the money that they can generate, and couldn't care less about their followers. This is pretty evident how they sell their soul just to flog certain products/services in order to get by. Elon Musk as pointed out can be quite the troll at times, but also he has to maintain a good image in the eyes of the public, because he owns a company which is suppose to offer a solution to computing, which at the same time is beneficial to the environment. (Lets just ignore the fact he also has a spaceship company which does more than its fair share of polluting).

Anyway, the point is whether its Elon Musk trying to keep company image in line with company policies, or any other famous person, they all have their own motives. If you want to decide what to invest in, take a look at what is important to you, and which cryptocurrency suits your needs. 90% of the time the answer will be Bitcoin.

Yeah, generally newbies are excited when they first get into Bitcoin, and sort of start firing questions in all directions. I know I had a similar experience when I was new. I didn't have a clue, and wanted to gain as much information as possible due to the sheer amount of excitement I had. It's always a little weird when newbies come here, without any experience per say, and start barking out instructions on how to do this, and that. Obviously, there are examples of newbies providing some very good instructions or guides to things, but they are pretty rare. I sometimes get the impression that newbies try too hard in being seen as a good quality user (for various reasons), and due to that they come across as disingenuous.

I don't think many users are accusing others of voting solely based on the fact that they might get merit. Although, I think it has been made quite clear that some are looking to earn merit that way. I'm definitely not questioning the integrity of the user they've voted for, I don't think that's the issue here as a lot of them are actually pretty respectable users, and probably do deserve to get voted in. In my mind you vote for who you want to vote for, I just think the current implementation has room for abuse, and those that are giving out merit aren't necessarily doing it for more votes, its just something that some users have caught onto, and are looking to exploit.

I don't think there needs to be any action taken against anyone voting or anyone meriting for votes, I don't think that's something that even needs any in depth discussion, I just think in order for the event not to be ruined, and made as fair as possible, possibly the admins could limit merit in the thread in future events. I'm not sure that they would do that, I just see that as a solution. By no means if the competition or event official, but I do think it could actually prove beneficial to the forum in the long run. If it becomes a regular event, and is sponsored every year by someone then that could be the motivation for some users to improve on the forum, and personally regardless of the motive I'm in support of that.

It's not perfect by any means, but mprep did a pretty good job of creating some unofficial badges: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5383802.msg59125672#msg59125672

Only now just seeing this; there could be numreous reasons, although I for one don't always look at reports in chronological order i.e in the order that the reports were reported. Sometimes some reports might be a little more complex which requires additional checks, or a moderator might not be confident in deleting it, so leave it for someone else which can sometimes result in a delay. Sometimes, its just left as unhandled, although its very likely been seen. There's so many reasons as to why some reports might be delayed in being handled or not get handled at all.

Although, I think I can confidently say that most reports are seen probably by multiple moderators throughout the day. Especially, if they've been in the queue for a while. It does seem like they were eventually handled though.

My answer to this question is usually, yeah it's possible, but isn't recommended especially if the device you intend on using for it, is your daily driver. I for one can't recommend anyone to use a device whether that's a phone or a computer that they use for anything else which requires connecting to the internet. The exception is Qubes due to the way it's designed, although physical isolation is safer since there could be undiscovered issues in Qubes. Physical isolation you can always be somewhat sure that your safe from most common attacks or mistakes.

For me, when it comes to security there shouldn't be any compromise, unless its a rational one i.e not setting your password to 100 characters long because you'll never be able to remember it. Using a cracked operating system when there are arguably more secure operating systems out there that are free, seems like negligence to me. Obviously, everyone has different threat models, but personally being responsible for your own money, you need to take every rational precaution that you can.

My thoughts exactly, we've timed the attack absolutely perfectly, and it seems that they've largely executed their plan perfectly too. I'm not completely sure on what their intentions were with promoting Bitcoin the last few weeks, and then obviously launching this war between Ukraine, but I can't help, but think Bitcoin has been a part of their plan for a long time.

There's two ways you could probably think of Russia adopting it in such a way; Either they see it as a threat, and could potentially be wanting to associate themselves with it, then carry out the attack against Ukraine which they were going to do anyway, knowing that if they promoted Bitcoin weeks before, and then its people, as well as Russia try to get around the sanctions via Bitcoin, that they thought it would be banned, which could effectively make Bitcoin inaccessible to any law abiding citizens in the West that would tank the price to almost unrecoverable amounts, which would significantly hurt Bitcoin's ability to recover due to now being known as what Russia used to sidestep the sanctions, as it does seem Russia is public enemy number one right now, especially in the West.

That's probably the far fetched end of the stick, however the alternative is they indeed did intend on using Bitcoin to sidestep the sanctions, but not to drag Bitcoin through the mud, but to use it instead of traditional currencies which they know would become difficult after the attack. Again, if the West did decide on banning Bitcoin collectively, that would probably have similar effects on the price as the sanctions, so would they really benefit from doing it?

There's definitely some other theories out there, but the main thing I get from this in terms of how it'll effect the price is negatively if Russia does indeed try to sidestep the sanctions with Bitcoin. If they don't, I actually see Bitcoin benefiting from this, It's not only Russia government that gets hit by the sanctions, but the people. The UK not trading with Russia has an impact on British people, who might seek alternatives. Ukraine's people are currently queueing outside banks in hopes they can withdraw their money, which if it does indeed prove to be difficult to do that, and in fear that their money now is worthless, they could look for an alternative in Bitcoin. This approach without Russia's government looking to sidestep sanctions probably increases the faith in Bitcoin from people, and provides an alternative, where they're securing their money, and any future wars or current wars means their wealth won't be rendered worthless simply because they can't withdraw it.

Even if this was true, the public perception of Bitcoin hasn't changed all that much over the years, actually I do think a lot more people are getting into Bitcoin because of the amount of exposure, but I still see the same concerns about Bitcoin that were around years ago. One of the examples which absolutely infuriates me is people still seem to think that Bitcoin can't be converted to fiat, I've personally had this discussion  so many times, and sometimes it's with the same people, they sort of acknowledge it, and then go back to asking the same questions.

Although, one thing for sure is the media has proven over time that it'll publish articles which aren't true in the slightest to get clicks, I don't know what it's with people, but they love it when Bitcoin has a negative stigma around it. I can only assume this is through the constant propaganda that's published, and people see Bitcoin as a threat to themselves, instead of a solution to a problem that they've been wanting to get out of for years i.e using banks.

The energy issues will likely stick, even if Bitcoin proved it improved ten fold, it will likely carry this negative stigma for years.

Ah damn, I thought the game was on tomorrow, didn't realise it was on a Thursday. There's been football on pretty much every day this week, with the Champions league, Europa League, and Premier League. I'll have to watch the highlights, I actually wanted to watch this game too.

I always expect Arsenal to dominate possession against Wolves, but thought their defense would have held strong. I find if Pepe isn't performing or is missing from the team, Arsenal really struggle with their creativity in the final third. Arsenal have definitely recovered from their early season form though, which was abysmal.

Isolation is always the best policy, wherever possible physical isolation should be the approach, however if that isn't possible at the very least virtual isolation via a operating system like Qubes OS. However, I think one of the more common issues with wallets aren't local wallets, but signing up for a non custodial wallet like Blockchain because of how easy, and convenient it's. However, from my observations with anything to do with security, regardless of whether that's Bitcoin or not is, whenever something is convenient, it's almost always systematically more insecure than the less in convenient way.

Aye, but we live in a world full of hypocrisy. The very people advocating to better the environment, are the same people that rely on the industries which you allude to that are wrecking havoc on it. That's just a matter of a fact, and applies to almost every single one of them. Even the so called green projects are manufactured with the existing bad industries, which means while their product might be green, the process on getting it there wasn't. Yeah, eventually they'll get there, I do acknowledge that, and we should probably be thinking of bettering ourselves, and the environment we live in, but it's infuriating that they basically manipulate the opinion on Bitcoin, just because it's hard to prove that we aren't exactly good for the environment.

I personally haven't seen any hard evidence that Bitcoin is any worse than the multiple unnecessary industries which are polluting the environment. Until then, I don't think there's any urgency when compared with other industries. Do I think we should be looking to improve wherever we can, yeah. However, I think there's far bigger industries where we should be pointing the finger per say before we drag Bitcoin through the dirt.

Yeah, I pretty much always put a draw or win for Wolves, since a lot of teams struggle against them whether that's over estimating or over committing because they've got a solid defense. If I was going to bet on them this week which I'm not going to, I would put a 0-0 down. Feel that Arsenal's run of form will prevent Wolves from getting a foothold in the game in order to score, but I do feel Arsenal will lack that final pass against a well drilled Wolves team. I know 0-0's are often risky, but I'm just feeling it. Wolves are probably my favourite team to include in bets against better opposition.

Yeah, you might be right. Hopefully not since I'm already quite deep in the accumulator, and got some nice wins. Two football matches left, which I'm pretty confident on, and these fights. I'm hoping Brahimaj can get it done before he gasses out, that would be nice.

Yeah, current betting website I'm using since I'm combining it with bet builders on  football doesn't even allow you to select by what finish, so they bundle DQ, submission, and knock out all in one which lowers the odds, I much prefer betting only submission or knockout as it increases the odds, even if only slightly. I'm feeling a Makhachev rear naked choke though.

I can't believe the amount of fans I saw across the internet ruling out Liverpool just a few weeks ago, I think most Liverpool fans, thought there was a chance. There's a famous quotefrom Klopp, that he would turn us into believers rather than doubters, and personally as a Liverpool fan I've never been so confident in this team, than I am with Klopp at the wheel.

We had a bad season last season, however it still wasn't terrible. Klopp managed to get Champions League football, while having over 20+ center back partnerships. If you think about it, that's an absolutely insane statistic, considering it wasn't just the defense we had issues with, our players were dropping like flies, and obviously Covid didn't help a lot in that.

We had some amazing moments in that season, especially the Alison late goal against I think it was West Brom to clinch a Champions League qualifying spot, so I will never doubt the capability of this Liverpool team, unless it's mathematically impossible for them to win.

I said it a few weeks ago, that I was quietly confident, well that confidence now is definitely starting to grow. I don't see Manchester City as the unbeatable team that everyone claims they're, multiple times they've looked vulnerable this season, but as good teams usually do pull it out of the bag, and continue getting points.

Don't get me wrong, Liverpool are very capable of dropping points, I just fancy our mentality against those of the Manchester City players, and the title race is very much on. Awesome result today, and we added a sizeable goal advantage. Remember, we still have to play Manchester City this season, which might be one of the most important games of the season.

Users can make genuine posts without following forum etiquette, e.g formatting, and quoting properly. These sort of things aren't a requirement for newbies, it's always nice to have obviously, but it most certainly isn't something that everyone is going to be familiar with at first. I'd say the very definition of genuine posts is that your posting solely because your interested in the discussion, and not motivated by anything other than that.

Any other recommendations beyond that, probably aren't needed. I don't expect newbies to have the same etiquette as a user who has been using the forum for years. I do expect them to know the majority of the rules, and follow them to the best of their ability, but etiquette is something you develop over time, and isn't  necessarily a prerequisite to posting.

Second to that, is you should either be adding something to the discussion or at the very least asking questions to further the discussion.

Bitcoin is much more scalable than any other fiat currency out there, and if required changes can be made to make it even more scalable, not something you can really do with fiat, unless you massively change the system, with Bitcoin it wouldn't be that big of an adjustment. Unless, fiat completely converts to digital, which would aid the transition to them scaling it, which is a possibility by that time, some people would likely argue that's a given that physical fiat will likely not be around by then. 

Considering USD is going to be worthless by 2140, I'd like to think we would have a little more ambition than that, even if USD isn't completely worthless by then, the naturally occuring inflation that's normal with fiat means that one USD isn't going to be worth what it is today, i.e you won't be able to buy anything with one USD in the future.

Decentralisation is a great way of avoiding censorship in this case, however the popularity of a streaming/video service will largely depend on the amount of money that can be made, which unfortunately in our advertising friendly world, means companies don't want certain words, or phrases associated with their companies, and when they want to advertise directly censor the person who's advertising for them. So, Youtube has adapted to that because by banning these words, they'll earn money from advertisements themselves.

Youtube ten years ago was almost perfect, people were still making money albeit probably nothing in comparison to now, but they pretty much said whatever they liked, without much criticism, or fear of getting cancelled. Anyway, while I do think Bitcointalkshow should probably branch out, and get on as much alternatives as possible, the bread, and butter is definitely going to be with Youtube for the foreseeable future. I just don't see it changing, even if another alternative starts off by correcting Youtube's wrongs, they'll morph into Youtube 2.0 because of the pressure from advertisers that want to advertise on their platform.

The decentralised nature of an alternative will likely work against in terms of money making potential, and therefore popularity.

Yeah, I imagine it's pretty annoying especially for those in the running of winning something. I bet it could be quite easily done to measure the effect of the merit awarding, since there is definitely a reoccurrence of certain users since they have been giving merit, which didn't seem to be in the running at the very start. Although, that could just be exposure, and natural variation, so it probably wouldn't prove much at all. Although, I do believe the OP has the ability to not include anyone's votes at their discretion.