You need to be a teenager at least before attempting this.

Don't try to rush things.

Ico's are a risky business.

Also first rule about running an ICO

Don't tell people you have no idea about marketing that ICO.

Remember successful icos are heavy on marketing ideas and white papers and ..... well that's all you need. Coding optional after funding round.

Bring full sources or you could get banned. Actually don't make any mistakes at all when doing references or banned.

I personally would take several factors into consideration. In his case I may suggest to him that it could get him flagged if the references were not credited correctly. Although the board rules lay out no exact rules for attributing work to others precisely do they? It simply says do not pass the work off as your own. Is there a format given or is just the url enough?

There is no correct way to do this left handed only.

I have found using 2 hands (formed into fists) is the only way to get  satisfaction (Im female btw).  Passing things off as correct when they are merely a lazy and reprehensible method that is sure to leave one wanting is worthy of negative trust if not a ban if you ask me.

This time I will let it slide if you send me your address and demonstrate to me personally that you are fit to continue training people in this art.

If not then I think most would agree perma ban is the only answer here.

the very best will be

blocknet
komodo

they still need a little polish and such but soon I think these will be the dominant dex's in this arena

In which case you are not passing the work as your own.

I am not sure why you are accused of trying to do so.

I suspect the person did not read this note at the top of your post.

There is no case for a ban here at all.

I would expect you should have the neg trust removed too once this is cleared up. Having read some of your post history through quickly you seem like you often tried to warn new people on safe ways to trade. The fact you now have a neg trust saying use caution to trade with seems to me unfair.

Better to just use full references if you can next time.

This to me shows there needs to be an strict set of criteria for leaving neg trust.

Some person once called me a scammer and left me negative trust because I did not fight for them against a dev that had not come through with his project as promised. Just because I did previously spend hours fighting some of the very largest scams but didn't fight the one that effected him.

I'm guessing English is not your first language. Which could in part be why there is a slight communication loss. Not that is a criticism at all.


Can you give me some examples of "constantly bitching about somebody to implement something is another thing, what is happening here is constant whining: "implement this!". Mob-mentality"  in the specific context of Byteball I mean.

When he added this "I found few different sources that are legitimate and decided to share them with the community for safe trading."

that essentially does mean he is not claiming this as his own work.

However, yes this would be considered a bit of a lazy reference.

As I say.

Coupled with

No obvious personal gain

A post history demonstrating he is generally warning noobs and others to be careful and generally seems like a decent person.

Let's delete that neg trust - he seems like a trader where it could cost him more than he deserves.

Full credits to authors from now on and we're all back on track.

I think some rules can be coupled with sensible human intervention.

Yeah breaking the speed limit does have mitigating circumstances like being forced at gunpoint in a hijacked car to out run the cops. This one is more like doing 41 in a 40 limit trying to take a stranger to hospital who you found lying in the road suffering from being beaten unconscious and robbed.

If i was a noob and had read the compilation of guides he had put together and posted I would be grateful. The fact he said he found them from a few difference sources may encourage me to google them.

As for suggesting he should be banned for this ?

Do you mean to say that it did not say above the guide when you read it :"I found few different sources that are legitimate and decided to share them with the community for safe trading."?

Was this added at a later date after it was flagged?

If so then that puts a different light on it but considering his post history which indicates he generally is advocating safe trade practises I would thing some would consider a ban quite heavy handed.

If it is helpful and you cite sources then feel free.

What useful things can you demonstrate you have done here other than report these kind of evil criminals posting guides so newbies don't get scammed.



Simply saying these come from multiple sources I have found on the net and compiled for ease of use seems to be a very unacceptable here. Fair enough but he has said he didn't realise and I think giving him a pass for good intentions would be best.

Which people have you been training and what kind of training are you giving them?

Seems a tad harsh.

The guy put "I found few different sources that are legitimate and decided to share them with the community for safe trading."

So he is saying he found a few sources and compiled them into one to make a comprehensive guide?  that does not sounds like someone who is trying to claim this is his own work and take credit.

I would have just explained it would be best to bring the exact sources and quote them.

Give him another chance. Seems like he was trying to be helpful.

Looking at his post history he seems like a genuine trader on this site and not one trying to pump his merit or gain some bitcointalk cred.

I would personally consider giving him a pass that time.

Great article. Thanks for posting. Bay is moving a great turn of pace now that most other projects I follow would be jealous of.

Just one thing..

first line says As we are already a dew few

is dew few an expression or a typo?

Totally disagree.

There should be junior boards for bitcoin and altcoin discussion.

Just like the old noob jail. Instead of reporting scams and shills and generally doing negative stuff to remove these types. One could spend time on the junior board rewarding good effort there enabling their entry to the senior boards by giving merit .

It would be a decentralised way to mod the boards.

Of course you will find those that can game it to an extent. They will be deleted and perma banned.

Before the first icos the sigs were not even used by most members. The discussion and environment then was WAY WAY better and more active. Activity by real posters who had real opinions not people just posting anything or regurgitating the same comments for 10 pages.

Ending noob jail was a big mistake but it was of course inevitable in it's old form.

I'm not sure if you got what I really meant by locking down.

If you can voluntarily lock down a proportion of your coins for a certain amount of time. Those that volunteer to lock the most down for the longest time will attain a higher pos rate upon them becoming unlocked. I wasn't still talking about by force locking down those that got huge amounts of free coins. Although if they decided of their own free will to return say 50% of the BB they got for nothing by holding other peoples BTC then that would be nice for us here and could be used for the good of BB too in other ways.

Also you must not conflate changes that the vast majority of holders do not want because they saw that as not sating their speculative greed  (full moon drops terminated) and which they assumed they had been promised....with changes the vast majority would perhaps like to see and were consulted on before hand That is not the same thing and would not kill trust in the same way. 

Why does that mean changing the consensus model?

I didn't mean make it a tiered POS model as such. Just that it could be viewed as being like that. For example if you were to voluntarily lock down certain amounts of BB for certain amounts of time you would be awarded larger reward than those locking down less for less time. This would be how the final 22% was distributed over time. You could even perhaps say if you locked down more for longer and in addtion to this were actively promoting BB (with some criteria to meet for this) and even higher pos rate could be attained.

Anyway just ideas but of course like I said that could not be automated to a level that made it practical or feasible.

I think you are improving nicely on your people skills but the words bitching ect are still not perfect. It is nice to be able to discuss things even with people that you believe do not understand or are asking for unreasonable or even impossible things in a manner than does not offend or sound condescending. That level of diplomacy is a great skill that can only benefit the project in the long term.

Also just explaining clearly why things are unreasonable or impossible with no real upside is better than telling people go fork your own version. Of course 99.99% of people here have no possible way to do this as they do not have the skill set but can still be valuable to keep on side when considering building a big community and creating a network effect.

I like referral systems and I very much like MLM. It can be very powerful.

I can see your point of view from where we are now, and do not argue there is certain merit.

The thing I would say is. Although byteball hodlers (not bitcoin holders) are not expanding effort exactly to futher adoption directly. They are in a different way expanding their influence of the value they hold (in Byteball) to push up the price on exchanges. Which pushes up MC which brings attention, which brings more investors and hodlers in to a spiral.

 It would have been better perhaps if the airdrops could have analysed if byteballs had aged in the wallets for a certain time before being eligible for an airdrop. (not sure technically how easy that would be to have implemented)

Now eventually some one has to use these things we are creating here and the use case and functionality will have the final say. I agree. However, for now the fastest way to bring users/investors on is appeal to the main group that have any interest in CC at all. This is 99% speculators and sadly you must appeal to their greed. This is not a place for just idealists right now - in the long term yes.

When BB is in a form which is clearly finished and polished and will shine when compared to other projects on technical merit alone. This is the time to show those seeking to adopt crypto for function and use for business or whatever. Then eventually it will be more beneficial to appeal to those whose use cases fit with BB's tech.

So although you say " just for linking your address" yes that takes no effort. But to make it worth linking your address you need something in that address worth linking and that requires value/capital.  The fact you can get people to hold their personal wealth in your project to indirectly do your advertising to the only group really interested in crypto right now is worth quite a bit.

This avenue is pointless now I guess because returning airdrops in their old form will not fix the trust broken by stopping them.

I do not think they were stopped for any selfish reasons of the developers. I think they really thought it was the best way forward for BB. I'm not even sure stopping them can really be blamed for the dramatic price fall. Lots of projects have been crushed this much or even more.

Although it is not in the spirit of crypto. Perhaps regarding the way forward just in the short term. The distribution could be done a bit like this.
Those perhaps locking down the most BB for the longest periods would receive the greatest % rewards which were tiered. Sort of like a tiered pos scheme.

Most people think it is a crazy idea but I wonder what a public appeal to those ico managers that claimed huge amounts for free at the start to return just 50% of the bytes to be used in such a tiered POS scheme would achieve?
PR is quite important and those ico managers that have not already distributed the BB to their investors might like to show how fair they can be.  Of course a polite request not to partake in our new pos scheme and suck them all back would be cool

Just ideas, may be technically impossible or just logically unsound.

Lots of talk about the latest shit icos and their white papers (that will never come to fruition) on this board.
Nobody (hardly) it appears has any ideas regarding projects that have come through with their designs.

You can do better. Come on.

Ethereum had discussed it years ago. The first time I heard about it was when anonymint talked about it in 2014. I think these new icos are probably using it (in their whitepapers) to drum up some funds.

Off topic - lol - that you introduced to the thread. This is the kind of madness one has to deal with on this forum.

Like say for instance.... I now claim you should not be able to post here because your mother is too ugly.

You come back claiming your mothers sexual appeal is of no real gauge or indication of your post quality. You post a pic of some model you randomly found on the internet (that I have seen before and that have mated with)

I then say you are off topic my faux son.

The rest of your post is open to all kinds of interpretation and could spawn books of debate depending on your personal views.

Just a little hint and something for you to mull over.

1. what if the billionaires allow you just enough to content your small mind instead of starving you into revolution and prefer your status quo to what you know you could be reduced to if you decided to think a little deeper and tried to inspire others of your type into complaining.

2. what if you are unknowing seeking to be enslaved because you subconsciously know that the matrix is best for your type. therefore constant access to others reinforcing the status quo is comforting and essential. time alone and not hooked into your smartphone can cause you emotional discomfort and a sense that all is not well in the wider world. Giving your mind time to disengage from others and stimuli fed to you via your phone could enlighten you in other ways. Make you more creative. Then again if you are reading these gems via your smartphone that negates a lot of what I have just said. It's all so .....

Not that I believe either of those 2 things are true in a concrete form, but your statements are open to books of debate and endless too and fro until you all end up speculating on things that are above the current human level of understanding.

I have nothing against rewarding success and innovation. However the world is kind of like a monopoly game there perhaps need to be reset button or have a cap  on how much you can be allowed to own regardless of your deserved success maybe a billion. Then again that may not work well either and how to implement it . I guess we just have to wait and see how it all works out.  Somethings are too complex to believe you can offer anything of use to  improve things long term.

Still - I could change my views after my first billion . I will update and let you know at a later time.

I think we are worrying about the wrong thing at the wrong time.

CC is all about speculation right now.

Who is using eos, ada, iota, right now?

Adoption will come later. For now speculators is who you need to worry about. Give them reason to buy and hold byteball. You want to be in the top 10 to top 15 on cmc. Although we know that can be faked and means little because many have such a narrow distribution.

However annoyingly a lot of companies believe in those caps and volume.

Companies will only adopt currencies that have a lot of volume because otherwise they are quite unusable for them.

Also to get adoption you need users. To get users they need to know about your project. The largest form of advertising right now is to get a high cap. Since 99% of people interested in CC right now are investors/speculators you need to get them interested.

My 3 favourite projects right now and suffering not because they do not offer great dev teams with great products that are already functional (if not completely finished) but because of lack of interest. The lack of interest is 1. they are not in the high cap projects so don't get much notice  2. as a result of (1) nobody is talking about them and they can gain no network effect.

Most investors and hodlers (which you need right now) are not conceptual designers nor game theory experts nor coders nor have really any skills to decide which projects from a technical level solve more or less issues and are easily scammed with snake oil blockchain 2.0 3.0 4.0. They follow like lemmings repeating all kinds of snake oil selling nonsense to the others.  I was one of these for years and ended up getting sucked into all kinds of promising sounding now almost dead projects that faded out or were made redundant by the next better sounding snake oil.

The best you can do is find those that can analyse designs and watch their predictions and listen to their analysis and try to use some of your own common sense too. Or make friends with some good developers and just ask for their opinions.
 
Bring your MC up and get more attention, more hodlers, higher cap and more hodlers whilst making your project as functional and ready for mainstream adoption as possible and when companies are ready to adopt you will be in the running and not hidden away on page 10 of coinmarketcap with no volume

I do not think spreading out a few bucks worth to a ton of people does anything. If I had 10 bucks worth I would not be incentivised to work hard to promote or adopt I would likely just think thats 10 bucks I can cash in now or just leave it for another day and likely forget all about it. You are better to get BB in larger chunks right now into the hands of people that have some shove in this arena that will work to promote or bring on development in certain areas. The worst part is the huge chunks are in the hands of people that are leading other projects and have a lot less incentive to work in pushing BB forward.  This will change over time but it has held BB back thus far.

All I am saying is stop worrying about spreading BB out now that is already so concentrated in the hands of a few. Better to increase functionality in terms of tx, scalability etc and interesting hodlers/investors and those that will help promote with a lot of incentive.
Focus more on raising the cap and bringing in interest that way for now. Then more exchanges like coinbase may consider. Then when big companies come looking bb will be in the running. Amazon is not going to look at bitcoin, ethereum, litecoin, and randomly consider something that looks obscure and has 2000 usd daily volume.

Most people only consider the top 100. Many will only invest in the top 25. Anything else is considered high risk. When really the highest risk with lowest returns are the fake higher caps. However that's how it is.

If you are trying to bypass or criticise peoples desire to make money and call them just greedy you alienate 99.9% of the human race. You need these ones to get a network effect at this stage. Later people/businesses will just use the product that is best suited to their needs in a functional way. We are still miles away from leaving speculation as the biggest driver for success which will lead to adoption. Trying to give it out to 10000s of people in crumbs will not bring adoption at this point.

This is just my opinion of course there could be a great counter argument that I am interested to hear.

Too many factors and apparently rife manipulation. How can one (bar possibly the manipulators) offer any real verifiable explanation. Although it does make sense that the automotive industry has taken it's toll. Just as silver was apparently crushed by photography..

I prefer platinum if you are talking watches/jewelry.  I also read that if you put all the platinum ever mined in the entire world into an olympic swimming pool it would barely cover your feet.

I expect $750 ish will be total bottom and I expect a big rise from there.

A lot of what he says is actually true.

Also merit means little here. Most of the super high merit accounts are just a bunch of back slapping circle jerks in meta. Most of them (not all) have never made any big difference in crypto or ever been first to stop/highlight a scam. There would have to be strict criteria for giving merit that was objectively verifiable for it to mean anything. I've seen people give a 50 merit for just a standard post they just happened to identify with. Or 100's of merit for developing some merit analysis tools.

If you critically analyse just simple things with a lot of them the wheels seem to come off. Many of them have pulled total 180's on their previous POV  to the point where i had believed their accounts had been hacked or sold.

I read peoples post history through and see what big/ really useful things they have done in crypto before looking at merit. I look at how accurate their predicitions have been. I don't give much weight to merit at all for quality posters.

It has one small use and that is to weed out the noob that mostly just want to spam and shill.. or perhaps bots.

Read their post history. This is a group of alts pushing the same shitty icos and creating fake discussions.

Do I need to go back to describing people in a room eating cake to you again for you to see scams here.

Sharding is just the guise to bring up their next crap ico on the main board.