In the perfect world; It would be nice to have those sorts of managers managing the bounty sections, but yeah I think its pretty unrealistic. I doubt many of those managers would be willing to deal with tokens/shares either.

I imagine some trust is still needed for local moderators as well though. It could be argued that they might be able to get away with more malicious actions, because of those reviewing their actions not knowing the language natively.

I think it goes without saying that admins have to have a lot of trust between theymos, and them.

I didn't catch the game live, but I caught the highlights. Looked to me like Brighton held their own, and threatened. Man utd might be shit at the moment, but they should have the players to change the game in an instant. I think Liverpool might struggle. They didn't exactly hit first gear against Crystal Palace, and Brighton are a little bit stronger defensively I think.

I'm not sure how we could go about this. I guess, only allowing copper members from making a bounty thread? Again, they won't care for paying a small fee, because the bounties generate a lot of noise for their project, and they end up profiting from it anyway. So, I'm not sure what the best option would be. Maybe, only allowing a certain few trustworthy members, but that leads to centralization, and I'm not sure whether that would be welcomed around here.

If you report it, and its deleted after then it will be automatically handled, and marked as good. However, if a moderator chooses to deal with it manually before they delete the thread it could be marked bad. For example, if it wasn't accurate.

If its been locked or moved it will have to be manually dealt with. I tend to deal with it right away after moving the thread. But, other moderators might do it a different way.

The forum might not be in a great way currently. There's definitely issues, and everyone knows this. But, honestly I don't see the benefit of introducing something which would affect how users perceive one another in sections which are irrelevant to trust.

I'm not a fan personally. I can see your frustration, but I don't think this is the way to go about it.

We can say it a hundred times, but restrictions need to be applied on those who can run bounty campaigns if we are going to tackle this issue. There's no other way I see the forum dealing with the issues that the promise of free money/tokens brings.

I think removing the ability for new registrations is a little bit extreme, honestly. There's other things that can be tried, and tested before taking the most extreme action. Restrictions on who can wear signatures probably needs to happen, and be put behind a merit requirement.

Yeah, any minor adaptions that you need to make is absolutely fine. It's nice to see users using my templates now, and then because I know its at least being seen, and put to use. Any exposure should be for the benefit of the forum even if its only a minor impact.

Thanks to everyone who's gone into the effort of translating it into your local language, and helping the forum further!

Not really. It would have a negative influence on how users perceive others. In a perfect world users would judge a user on what they have written, but that really isn't the case. We aren't all rational, and users jump to conclusions, and immediately discredit anyone with negative trust. Regarding the signature campaigns, then maybe. Maybe it would be best if we just disallowed them. It would be a pity though.

I mean its not the fact that they are the latest poster for a lot of the threads, because that's kind of normal behavior when you come online you pick the interesting topics/discussion, and normally participate in them in quick succession. Although, they have posted in almost every thread...

Honestly, its the fact that most of his post history is generic comments, and add nothing to the discussion or bring up anything interesting.

I'm going to sit down later today, and just put in my predictions for the next few months to make sure that I don't miss any weeks. I think I've seen enough from most teams to get a general idea of how they are going to perform. I think the interesting one will be Liverpool vs Brighton considering Brighton did pretty well against Man Utd. We'll see if Liverpool are actually title contenders.

Yeah, reporting the oldest bump is good pratice, and include a comment saying that there's multiple old bumps that should be deleted. It's almost always what you put in the comment field when a report is handled bad, unless there has been a mistake, and its fairly easy to make a mistake when dealing with the queue as you can't cancel once you've pressed good or bad.

I don't really care for the reasons behind people reporting. As long as they aren't making alternate accounts, and reporting posts purposely to pad their report count. If they are genuinely reporting posts made by other people, then I don't really care for their motives as it still results in a cleaner forum.

Theymos mentioned recently that he's not complete opposed to delegating more responsibilities onto others for account recoveries. I imagine he would have to make sure that they were capable of it, but I'm sure hilariousandco and the like would be more than capable of it.

Nice one! Anyone else is welcome to translate the thread for their local board as long as it makes sense of course! Hopefully, we can start getting more users reporting site wide rather than the majority from the English sections.

Most of them could probably just be straight up removed, honestly. Most of them have zero content, and are just rehashed replies. Locking them isn't really saying any worthy discussion, and just means the spammers get to keep their post counts.

I don't see Altcoin Discussion as a training ground for Bitcointalk. After all, it is Bitcointalk, and not cryptotalk or something along those lines.

That's certainly a case. For a forum this size I would expect there to be more users reporting. But, there isn't that many users that do report. Its always the same users reporting. Again, its understandable because its a real pain in the arse to do, and has no rewards whatsoever at the moment. But, hopefully with the introduction of reporting badges that will change.

Paying tax isn't the issue. It's what the tax payers money gets used for that is. Anyone paying tax should be able to select what their money gets put towards. Whether this be healthcare, road maintenance or funding of education. The United Kingdom has a free health care service called the NHS (National Health Service). Its often attacked by the masses that its poorly run, and under funded, and some of this may have some truth to it. Yet, I'll defend the NHS to my very last breath, because I've witnessed the good to come from it. At its very core its a good idea. However, its grossly underfunded, and is at threat of being replaced by private healthcare like other countries.

I think its a basic human right to receive free healthcare, and no one should be paying for it. The same as life sources such as water, however the water industry is greatly corrupted, and abused, for example English water isn't even owned by England. It's owned by the Chinese, and Spanish if I recall correctly. England also pays millions per year to Scotland, and Wales for them to send water from their reserve reservoirs. Thankfully, water in Wales is Welsh owned. But, for how long? The fact that external countries own English water is a joke to me. Water should be a basic human right, and not something to profit on. However, I understand the limitations of these services, and the cost of maintaining something like these for the whole country. Therefore, I'm more than happy to compromise on these services as we don't live in the perfect world. Paying taxes is how we go about it. Taxes when funding things like the above I don't have a problem with. The NHS is a system that we should be looking to not only save, but improve upon. Fundamentally, its a great system that is failing because of miss management, and abuse from the general population. Not all of this can be corrected by having a higher percentage of taxes going towards the system, but it will certainly help a little bit.

At the moment, the tax system is a joke, and is greatly misused. It only helps the tax man get richer, and the countries population get poorer, and a worse life style as a result of essential systems like the NHS closing down. When tax is pocketed, and misused its the people who live in the country that pay the price, and not anyone else.

If tax was used solely for the tax payers best interest it wouldn't be a problem. I'm a big fan of allocating a certain percentage to certain mundane causes such as road maintence, but allow the tax payer to decide where their money goes for the rest of the percentage. The only flaw with this is people are idiots, and will support stupid causes which won't benefit the population, and will only benefit their individual needs. For example, not funding free healthcare, because they are already rich as fuck, and pay private anyway.


TL:DR
I'm not against taxes. I'm against how they are put to use.

I'm sorry, but what your saying from a moderation point of view is completely false. Moderators are presented with a queue that as no priority, or formatting to allow us to identify higher ranked accounts easier. The higher your account is has little bearing on how we handle your reports or you as a user if your breaking guidelines.

Plus, not everyone is interested in making money. So, your point about signature campaigns are moot. It's nice to earn from posting you would of done anyway, but a lot of the quality users here were here before signature campaigns were even mainstream.