Scrypt Bitcoin Threads NOT Allowed

[SaltySpitoon]

The point of the announcement isn't to deprive the coin of attention, its so that people will know why they are having threads/posts removed. It wouldn't be fair to enforce a rule that no one knows about.

However, you are correct, the announcement will be taken down somewhat shortly after it becomes common knowledge.

[BitcoinEXpress]

The point of the announcement isn't to deprive the coin of attention, its so that people will know why they are having threads/posts removed. It wouldn't be fair to enforce a rule that no one knows about.

However, you are correct, the announcement will be taken down somewhat shortly after it becomes common knowledge.

The why is not real clear. If it was due to possibly being fraudulent, a fraud warning would solve that.

What is thoroughly projected is that Bitcoin SHA256 leadership is threatened by this alt coin, (I seriously doubt is the case) which in its own rite gives a massive amount of validation to it more so than any other shitcoin clone released to date.


~BCX~

[SaltySpitoon]

The why is not real clear. If it was due to possibly being fraudulent, a fraud warning would solve that.

What is thoroughly projected is that Bitcoin SHA256 leadership is threatened by this alt coin, (I seriously doubt is the case) which in its own rite gives a massive amount of validation to it more so than any other shitcoin clone released to date.


~BCX~

One of the biggest issues right now, is with new members. The staff is sort of undecided as to what to do about Alt Currencies and New Members. Right now, many of the alt currency devs are marketing toward new members, which is an issue. People that are totally new to the Bitcoin/Crypto currency scene, that see an article about Bitcoin and come here to find out more about it, don't need to be bombarded by hundreds of other opportunities to get into new coins. We know that most people are smart enough to know the difference between Bitcoin and other Crypto Currencies, however for someone who is totally new to the idea, nothing says, welcome, we will help answer your questions, like introducing thousands of other questions about each and every different coin. The ideal situation would be that they join here, understand the basics, and then adventure into the Alt Currency section on their own.

Now for the most part, people can figure out, Bitcoin is one coin, Xcoin is another coin, etc. However, when there are two Bitcoins, new members could see a thread selling Bitcoins (scrypt) for $100 each and immediately jump at the opportunity to get some cheap coin. The same could happen to anyone who doesn't know that much about alt currencies, and has no idea that there is another Bitcoin.

Another senario, is in the marketplace or in the auctions section. Someone agree to pay a certain price, and then someone trys to scam them by paying in Bitcoins (Scrypt). And with Bets and Bounties, if I say "I agree to pay 100 Bitcoins if I'm wrong" Whats to stop someone from saying, you win, here are your 100 (Scrypt) Bitcoins.

Its just a huge mess of confusion for people who are expecting to come to the Bitcoin forums, and find threads about (Scrypt) Bitcoins.

The first thing I did, was made sure that each (Scrypt) Bitcoin thread had a disclaimer making sure to clarify that it explicitly said it was the Scrypt Version. I then opened the topic up to the rest of the staff as to what they thought, and every single person was against allowing Scrypt Bitcoins here because the mess of confusion would leak out to all of the sections here, believing it was boarder line fraudulent to use Bitcoin's name in such a way.

* The point at which we decided to disallow (Scrypt) Bitcoin threads in general, was after learning that without special precaution, it could overwrite your existing Bitcoin files. At that point, (Scrypt) Bitcoin was incredibly close to what we would consider Malware, whether it intended to cause damage or not.

[BitcoinEXpress]

If the point to ban it was that BTC-Scrypt overwrites your current Bitcoin-SHA256 wallet, that's not entirely true.

What happens is that when you use BTC-SHA256 it "unconfirms" (<-- Sorry English isn't my first language) all the BTC-scrypt coins and viceversa. Both work well if on the same system. To test it yourself simply back up a current BTC-SHA256 wallet, install on another machine, add BTC-S and test it.

I 100% agree with your scamming scenarios, but that's inherent in any coin really.

The newbies thing is an issue. Maybe Theymos should consider making this a private forum requiring 50 post for people to gain access. That would stop all of that dead in its tracks as well cut down on the number of scam sock puppets.

Once again, all I was saying is that by *banning* it, you increase its exposure factorial.

Must be something if they banned it.


~BCX~

[ElectricMucus]

What is thoroughly projected is that Bitcoin SHA256 leadership is threatened by this alt coin

LOL @ calling Bitcoin Bitcoin SHA256

Mission accomplished I'd say.   (No I'm not behind Bitcoin scrypt)

[heatgsm]

Of course there is "something" . When you`re interested only in making profits, not preserving the idea behind the creation of BTC, yet searching for ways to maintain the status quo -  you`re becoming like the 1% of the 1% .

[xan_The_Dragon]

When did this come out 

[heatgsm]

When did this come out 

Ever since some people realized that Bitcoin turned the wrong way )

[kelsey]

4) Putting "Bitcoin" in its name seems like a deliberate attempt to convey an official connection to Bitcoin that doesn't exist and is likely to create confusion. If its developers truly believed in it, they wouldn't do something so cynical and malicious as this.

lol this coming from an Opencoin employee with "20 billion XRP Jed" originally constantly promoting ripple as bitcoin 2 to the uniformed and even stealing the name opencoin from a non profit credible bitcoin group just to gain some credibility for ripple.....bit rich hey? just too funny.

[JoelKatz]

4) Putting "Bitcoin" in its name seems like a deliberate attempt to convey an official connection to Bitcoin that doesn't exist and is likely to create confusion. If its developers truly believed in it, they wouldn't do something so cynical and malicious as this.

lol this coming from an Opencoin employee with 20 billion XRP

If you think I have 20 billion XRP, you're off by a factor of about 10,000.

Jed originally constantly promoting ripple as bitcoin 2 to the uniformed and even stealing the name opencoin from a non profit credible bitcoin group just to gain some credibility for ripple

I never heard Jed do that. If you have a credible source, I'll believe you. But I never heard him do that, nor anyone else claim he did that. I have seen articles that ask rhetorically if Ripple is "Bitcoin 2.0", presumably to suggest that Ripple might replace Bitcoin. But, so far as I know, nobody is making any attempt to intentionally confuse Bitcoin and Ripple so that people think Ripple has some connection to Bitcoin that it doesn't have.

As for opencoin.org being a "bitcoin group", I'm pretty sure they're not. The OpenCoin.org folks have no connection to Bitcoin that I know of and the group became more or less inactive in 2009. And, frankly, the possibility of confusion with that group was one of the downsides to choosing 'OpenCoin' as a company name. Not because there's anything wrong with them, just because you want a name to be as unique as possible so you can choose what people associated it with. That's why names like "Amazon", "eBay", and "Microsoft" are so good.

It really looks like you're trying to start an argument for no reason here.

[kelsey]

4) Putting "Bitcoin" in its name seems like a deliberate attempt to convey an official connection to Bitcoin that doesn't exist and is likely to create confusion. If its developers truly believed in it, they wouldn't do something so cynical and malicious as this.

lol this coming from an Opencoin employee with 20 billion XRP

If you think I have 20 billion XRP, you're off by a factor of about 10,000.

Jed originally constantly promoting ripple as bitcoin 2 to the uniformed and even stealing the name opencoin from a non profit credible bitcoin group just to gain some credibility for ripple

I never heard Jed do that. If you have a credible source, I'll believe you. But I never heard him do that, nor anyone else claim he did that. I have seen articles that ask rhetorically if Ripple is "Bitcoin 2.0", presumably to suggest that Ripple might replace Bitcoin. But, so far as I know, nobody is making any attempt to intentionally confuse Bitcoin and Ripple so that people think Ripple has some connection to Bitcoin that it doesn't have.

As for opencoin.org being a "bitcoin group", I'm pretty sure they're not. The OpenCoin.org folks have no connection to Bitcoin that I know of and the group became more or less inactive in 2009. And, frankly, the possibility of confusion with that group was one of the downsides to choosing 'OpenCoin' as a company name. Not because there's anything wrong with them, just because you want a name to be as unique as possible so you can choose what people associated it with. That's why names like "Amazon", "eBay", and "Microsoft" are so good.

It really looks like you're trying to start an argument for no reason here.

Where would u being, just watch any Jed or Chris early interview promotion of ripple, seen a few where its directly labelled by founders, inner circle as bitcoin 2, here's a 2 sec google and Chris dribbling about it being the second iteration of bitcoin  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH4IqGaYpCU

(and math based currency wtf lol)


anyway I don't have the time to start an argument for no reason, just found it rich you knocking another coin for riding on bitoins coat tail when no matter how you paint it ripple itself did....hell look at the forum you gave the biggest giveaway on...go figure.

Not for a second am I saying such marketing is wrong or a bad idea....hell dumb not to promote any crypto/alt currency along the lines of bitcoin, one of the most widely recognised cryptos.


"If you think I have 20 billion XRP, you're off by a factor of about 10,000." oh I didn't mean it like that, added "" to make what i meant more clear.

[JoelKatz]

Where would u being, just watch any Jed or Chris early interview promotion of ripple, seen a few where its directly labelled by founders, inner circle as bitcoin 2, here's a 2 sec google and Chris dribbling about it being the second iteration of bitcoin  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH4IqGaYpCU

First, that's Chris, not Jed. Second, "second iteration of bitcoin" is a description. "Bitcoin 2.0" is a name. There's a huge difference. Coke can say it's "an improvement on Pepsi" but if it says it's "Pepsi 2", that's a problem.

And really that is a fair description. We started out with Bitcoin's design and source code. We looked at what we thought worked well and what we thought could be improved. That's how we built Ripple.

anyway I don't have the time to start an argument for no reason, just found it rich you knocking another coin for riding on bitoins coat tail when no matter how you paint it ripple itself did....hell look at the forum you gave the biggest giveaway on...go figure.

I'm not knocking on a coin for riding bitcoin's coat tail. I'm knocking a coin for deliberately attempting to create actual confusion in a way that's damaging to Bitcoin.

Not for a second am I saying such marketing is wrong or a bad idea....hell dumb not to promote any crypto/alt currency along the lines of bitcoin, one of the most widely recognised cryptos.

Right, but deliberately creating confusion that hurts Bitcoin and could cause people to lose money is a problem.

[kelsey]

Where would u being, just watch any Jed or Chris early interview promotion of ripple, seen a few where its directly labelled by founders, inner circle as bitcoin 2, here's a 2 sec google and Chris dribbling about it being the second iteration of bitcoin  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH4IqGaYpCU

First, that's Chris, not Jed. Second, "second iteration of bitcoin" is a description. "Bitcoin 2.0" is a name. There's a huge difference. Coke can say it's "an improvement on Pepsi" but if it says it's "Pepsi 2", that's a problem.

no shit sherlock I just gave a 2 sec example of similar cause I cbf finding the various vids of Jed saying ripple is Bitcoin 2, and Chris has also stated the same....you always lose me how your brain works interpreting things however you see fit without thinking about what the person was infering.

(you've even privately infered I'm an idiot based on the penny not dropping for you on a number of things.....you suffer the smartest guy in the room syndrom when you are far from it on most accounts)

[kelsey]

I'm not knocking on a coin for riding bitcoin's coat tail. I'm knocking a coin for deliberately attempting to create actual confusion in a way that's damaging to Bitcoin.

all of the above are opensource  ..... get over it 

[JoelKatz]

no shit sherlock I just gave a 2 sec example of similar cause I cbf finding the various vids of Jed saying ripple is Bitcoin 2, and Chris has also stated the same....you always lose me how your brain works interpreting things however you see fit without thinking about what the person was infering.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I can't possibly know that Jed never said what you say he said. However, I never heard him say it, nor have I heard anyone else mention that he said it. I have seen reporters describe Ripple that way, and it would be easy to connect it to Jed, especially when articles intersperse that description with quotes from him.

You made a very specific claim. I suspect that claim is false.

(you've even privately infered I'm an idiot based on the penny not dropping for you on a number of things.....you suffer the smartest guy in the room syndrom when you are far from it on most accounts)

I can't find a single case where you and I discussed anything except for the "What if the government" thread, where you replied to me and I never replied to you -- mostly because I agreed with you. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=136348.msg2405639#msg2405639

[BitcoinEXpress]

^^^^^^^^^^^

Massively off topic.

The topic is Bitcoin Scrypt threads being disallowed.

I know you two are "Bitcoin Forum" regulars where there are no rules, but here in the Alt Forum...we're civilized LOL



~BCX~

[SaltySpitoon]

Unstickied, because the thread has been up long enough for people to see it. The rule still applies, however it doesn't need to be staring you in the face every time you come into the Alt Currencies section.

[coinedabit]

Bitcoin scrypt has faster transaction times though. Not been mentioned here yet :0) Some Alts will stick around. Keep mining this coin though, you won't regret it ;0)

[kelsey]

So there has been a lot of uproar about the new Scrypt "Bitcoin". I have discussed it with the other Staff members, and we feel it is in the forum user's best interest to not allow topics about the Scrypt Bitcoin on Bitcointalk.

oh u mean forum btc bagholders. not a fan of btc scrypt and not trollin (this time) but do feel its pretty bad taste to pick and chose what scamcoins you allow threads on or don't.

[JoelKatz]

not a fan of btc scrypt and not trollin (this time) but do feel its pretty bad taste to pick and chose what scamcoins you allow threads on or don't.

You oppose the use of judgment?