deleted

[syxbits]

deleted - not enough interest

[1715070538]

1715070538

[1715070538]

1715070538

[1715070538]

1715070538

[1715070538]

1715070538

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Your first pull request

[bitbook.biz]

Request....

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=154995.0

[joshbb]

Ah, in that case could you white list my sites:

bitcoinbuilder.com
bitmadness.com
cowcoin.com
chunkhost.com
shirtoshi.com (coming soon)

and you should probably just whitelist popular trusted bitcoin sites too so people know they're actually trusted, and not just not in the list at all:

mtgox.com (the B didn't show up until I went to www.mtgox.com?)
bitcointalk.org
bitcoinity.org
bitcoincharts.com
bitcoinwatch.com
bitpay.com
reddit.com (bittip)
wordpress.com
okcupid.com
btc-e.com
havelockinvestments.com
coinlab.com
casascius.com
bitcoin2013.com
ripple.com

Also, shouldn't all subdirectory URLs at a trusted (or untrusted) domain show the B? Like I go straight to bitcoinity.org/markets and reddit.com/r/Bitcoin  or a certain blockchain.info address.

Finally, this guy emailed me about helping him build trust for bitcoin donations for boston at: http://bitcoinsforboston.com/

I trust him, but I'm not sure why, or how he would go about verifying himself to the whitelist. But yeah..

[gweedo]

Can you whitelist http://qcl.me thank you!

[gweedo]

Thanks, I'll add as many of these as I can to the next update. Will try to find corresponding bitcointalk forum posts.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152921.0 here is the bitcointalk forum post for http://qcl.me

[gweedo]

I have to make a call on services, which can have both good and evil subpaths. It's technically doable to whitelist/blacklist specific paths (eg. user on reddit or bitcointalk). However, most of the time a scammer would create an account or shortlink, use it for an attack, and then dispose of it. This whole process can take under an hour and would make this whitelist unmanageable. For now, I will take a stance of not adding these types of services to whitelist (no icon will be displayed), but if a service is clearly being used for scamming then it will end up in caution/bad site section. Hope this makes sense - feedback is welcome.

Code:

'polimedia.us': { result: { code: bit.GOOD, title: 'Good', url: 'https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Buying_bitcoins' } },
'coinlenders.com': { result: { code: bit.GOOD, title: 'Good', url: 'https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=159359.0' } },

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=102333.0 <<proof.

You whitelisted a stock exchange that also host porn or how about coinlenders we have no id of the person running it they can run off with all the coins, yet cause you think people will abuse my shortlink system, which has yet to happen cause I block certain names from being shortlinks and included in shortlinks. I think you need to reevaluate this process. Also my service is not only uses crypto to defend against hackers, every address and shortname are hashed and encrypted so it be very unlikely to be changed by a 3rd party including me the site's owner, unless we had super computers.

[rme]

Please add checkmybitcoins.com

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Are you serious? MPEx and Polimedia.us are listed under caution?

You need to separate drama from scam sites.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Not all criticism is valid however. Most people seem to complain about the 30 BTC registration fee, which, don't pay for it if you don't want to trade there or use a broker. He runs an imageboard with porn on it - so?

There hasn't being anyone willing to say "MPEx scammed me out of my coins". If there is public concern from those who do trade there, then it's worth putting it in caution.