1933 (111,114 BTC) moving

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Amazingly, this thread is not being indexed, ergo no Google crawl.

<meta name="robots" content="noindex" />

Well spotted sir, but what would you speculate the motivation is behind that?
Also, am I right to assume only mods and/or admin can set this meta tag on a thread?

I think its assigned on every thread isnt it?

Nah, most of the threads are indexed by search engines. Go have a look at the source of just about any other thread page, no robots meta tag...

In fact, Google indexes this forum instantly, unless instructed not to. I just went to a random thread, then copy and paste a phrase submitted minutes ago and searched for it via Google:

https://www.google.com/search?q=I+think+it+is+designed+as+decentralized&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS549US549&oq=I+think+it+is+designed+as+decentralized&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i64l3&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=%22I+think+it+is+designed+as+decentralized%22

[1715641558]

1715641558

[1715641558]

1715641558

[1715641558]

1715641558

[1715641558]

1715641558

[Phinnaeus Gage]

The truth will probably be stranger than anything we can imagine right now. My guess is that the 311k coins that have been moving are still safely under trustee control.
...

Amazingly, this thread is not being indexed, ergo no Google crawl.

<meta name="robots" content="noindex" />

Perhaps I spoke too soon. Not quite so certain now. Good one...

I've noticed it before being in place with other quasi-controversial threads, but opted to not call it out, kinda hoping/guessing that it was an anomaly.

Only an admin would have such privileges, and would have to be available and know that such was warranted.

[joesmoe2012]

It's conditional case.

$context['robot_no_index'] is set on only pages that are duplicates of others, which is said to help indexing.

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=234844.0

So maybe after page 1 it puts that or something? That's what the SMF forum people are saying about it.

[Boris-The-Blade]

Must be nice!

[Phinnaeus Gage]

&lt;meta name=&quot;robots&quot; content=&quot;noindex&quot; /&gt;

Now it just changed to the above, and Google has this thread index, whereupon it wasn't there a few minutes ago, as I have shown and everyone here would have experienced the same thing I did at the time.

[joesmoe2012]

Allegedly its prevent search engines indexing duplicate content, which is very bad for SEO.

Also from briefly reading a couple threads over @ the SMF forum on the issue, in this version of SMF, the search de-duplication doesn't work well.

[lindatess]

I'm excited, as it is someone probably getting ready to dump.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Got it!

Post #4 was indexed, but post #5 onward was when the robot/no-index was manually put in place.

The following thread was just created, but no robot/no-index meta tag is in place: mtgox is really hacked again?

[ivroer]

&lt;meta name=&quot;robots&quot; content=&quot;noindex&quot; /&gt;

Now it just changed to the above, and Google has this thread index, whereupon it wasn't there a few minutes ago, as I have shown and everyone here would have experienced the same thing I did at the time.

Allegedly its prevent search engines indexing duplicate content, which is very bad for SEO.

Also from briefly reading a couple threads over @ the SMF forum on the issue, in this version of SMF, the search de-duplication doesn't work well.

I just noticed when I referenced a different thread from my watchlist (i.e. goto "new" posts) the noindex directive is given. This would support the theory that SMF sets it on "special" pages to avoid duplicate content for crawlers.

When I open the same thread directly from the main forum list, noindex is not in the source.

/end side-track.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

&lt;meta name=&quot;robots&quot; content=&quot;noindex&quot; /&gt;

Now it just changed to the above, and Google has this thread index, whereupon it wasn't there a few minutes ago, as I have shown and everyone here would have experienced the same thing I did at the time.

Allegedly its prevent search engines indexing duplicate content, which is very bad for SEO.

Also from briefly reading a couple threads over @ the SMF forum on the issue, in this version of SMF, the search de-duplication doesn't work well.

I just noticed when I referenced a different thread from my watchlist (i.e. goto "new" posts) the noindex directive is given. This would support the theory that SMF sets it on "special" pages to avoid duplicate content for crawlers.

When I open the same thread directly from the main forum list, noindex is not in the source.

/end side-track.

This is what I'm seeing (below) with having only Page #3 of this thread in view:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
   <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
   <meta name="description" content="1933 (111,114 BTC) moving" />
   <meta name="robots" content="noindex" />
   <meta name="keywords" content="PHP, MySQL, bulletin, board, free, open, source, smf, simple, machines, forum" />

Apologies for derailing this thread, for that wasn't my intent. I am though wondering if there's a direct correlation between the content of this thread and what's being released into the wild, hence this micro crusade.

[rohnearner]

Wait that's horrific.

If you go to the address https://blockchain.info/address/1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a and scroll down, there is a message sent at 2014-01-24 01:44:41

Public Note: send 100,000 BTC to this address 1Ggta18qjjptCiAYwsQB3dmVphuu39aNHp, or i will kill you. I know how you are...

Apart from this one , most of them are just begging ...
begging for house/car/crack/study.. and so on..

[johnvm]

given the large # of gox withdrawls (makes it seem like they bought em on gox...), the timeline, and the large # of btc.... winklevoss twins?

[Rampion]

Could 1933 belong to Theymos?

The plot is now thicker than Karpele's breakfast drink....

[TheFiendishOne]

Wow... This fucker is so rich. I still can't get over the fact that I never invested in bitcoins when it was brand new. Anyone else? F#CK ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm kicking myself pretty hard every day.  You're not the only one

[notthematrix]

Wait that's horrific.

If you go to the address https://blockchain.info/address/1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a and scroll down, there is a message sent at 2014-01-24 01:44:41

Public Note: send 100,000 BTC to this address 1Ggta18qjjptCiAYwsQB3dmVphuu39aNHp, or i will kill you. I know how you are...

evrybody can wirite anything there , does not mean annything.

[encrypto]

Is this the reason why the price of BTC is dropping at Bitstamp?

[Swordsoffreedom]

Is this the reason why the price of BTC is dropping at Bitstamp?

Probably just the normal volatility

[eddy1982]

The amount of btc in the hands of very few people is retaded. If the hacking and stealing continued, all of this currency will be in the hands of thieves and crash.

[E.exchanger]

On the forum iam seeing the 4 post regarding a huge amount being transacted so its difficult to say who's money is it moving around it can't be all of gox one or two huge transaction might be them. So far no clue but i'll update the thread if in case i find any.

[DaFockBro]

Could 1933 belong to Theymos?

The plot is now thicker than Karpele's breakfast drink....

LOL,  I'm guessing Theymos must be one of the few people with 100,000+