Bitcointalk activity rating

Bitcointalk Activity Activity is gained by making posts. Which is determined by the following formula: Activity = min (time * 14, posts). The variable time is the number of two-week periods in which you’ve posted since your registration. Dec 08,  · 14 is the most activity points you can get for each 2 week period. Why i cant use Onion Signature in Bitcointalk? Well, there are restrictions on signatures, depending on their activity / rank. - Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. January 04, , PM: Welcome, login or register.: News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: [].

Bitcointalk activity rating Forum: Bitcoin Community & ICO Announcements?

With Bitcoin, you can be your own bank. Read the original Bitcoin Whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto. See a list of past AMAs here. If you are interested in having your own AMA, please message the mods and let us know. Get Started with Bitcoin. I stopped using that site after I called out a scammer after being scammed, and then have 10 people call me a scammer and leave negative reviews on my profile.

It's a place for scammers, imho. Like Theymos. Sadly that sounds about how the place is now. I remember back in and when it was such a wonderful place. Well, now it's an artificial place where a few masters control the story, and where people go to be lied to. That is how his feedback will be neutered. It is really shameful of a Staff-member to leave a negative comment because he does not agree with your position. Not even a neutral feedback would be justified. Lauda's automatic trust ratings or whatever they are called - Dark Green Member or something like that should be revoked.

Lauda is sitting in DT 2. Roger, you have put yourself between a rock and a hard place by supporting software that forks the network and invalidates thousands of nodes that enforce the current Satoshi consensus. This is why a soft-fork is preferable. I will leave you positive feedback anyways on Bitcointalk. Maybe consider you don't understand what Satoshi consensus is. Roger is for it not against it. And it's just as wrong to give positive or negative feedback on bitcointalk without the appropriate interaction.

But I do agree he's between a rock and a hard place lots of us are but soft forks are not the solution. They are the problem. We don't want a centralized authority changing the protocol while the users are forced to accept it.

That is definitely a wrong use of the trust-rating feedback system, although he is certainly not the first person to be given unjust rating feedback on Bitcointalk. I am still waiting for you to answer my question about which hard-fork has ever been accomplished without central planning? Hard forks only require the software option to be made available. Then people choose to install and run or not. That is not central planning -- anyone can provide those alternative Bitcoin implementations and indeed we have seen several already.

Compare to soft forks where devs and miners can collude to introduce new rules for the network which can negatively impact existing users. And it wasn't even uncontroversial. I personally still think Satoshi put the 1MB in as a 'predetermined breaking point' for the current dev. Something the worse characters in Bitcoin will attach to and try to extract money out of trying to keep this lid on.

Nicely sorting the people along the lines of Bitcoin supporter even if you think you want to keep blocks small, it is simply crazy to put this low of a lid onto the transaction rate now and fiat-paid attempted diverters and altcoiners. I totally agree. It doesn't seem far fetched to think of the limit as a catalyst to test if bitcoin can resist centralized control.

How exactly do you expect a hard-fork to happen without a centralized authority changing the protocol? Bitcoin Uunlimited has a mechanism to facilitate a hard fork, essentially bitcoin rules are enforced by a social contract defined by the bitcoin network of users.

Policy rules should not be dictated by a centralized authority, bitcoin is governed by incentives and the code the network chooses to run. Should I say that you prefer a soft-fork which allows miners to grab all spend-all coins for themselves after rolling back the fork? No, because you assume miners are not going to roll back SegWit. Anyone with half a brain assumes miners are not insanely stupid, and that they won't activate any fork which wouldn't make economic sense.

I can understand your point about the roll-back scenario. Do you really believe that the miners are also that malicious and destructive that they would undermine the economic integrity of Bitcoin as well as network integrity -- when we have a very good idea of where the majority of hashing power is allocated?

The key is that the soft-fork does not fork other nodes off the network that are following the 1mb satoshi consensus and continues to allow them participate in the network. You also know we are having this same discussion for years.

So yeah, if you wait a year before releasing your Soft-fork, it is indeed faster at activating. Woopty doo! If you are really objective and honest, the advantages of a softfork completely disappear. What is left is politics and power play. You cannot seriously care about old nodes, yet be fine with full-blocks economics. Because we are still booting people off the network. I was very critical of the SegWit soft-fork initially, for the same reasons.

I wanted a hard-fork for a long time, and I thought it would be better due to reasons you outlined. I thought the Core developers should do it. Then I began to understand that this Bitcoin project is much bigger than Bitcoin itself, it has to do with developing better systems for diplomacy and collaboration.

There's a lot of support from companies and developers ready to launch products and services with SegWit support. The economic incentive is there for miners. I have seen only two people who want smaller blocks. Furthermore, a small increase in blocksize will lower fees tremendously. Which basically means Bitcoin isn't capable of changing according to the wants and needs of the Bitcoin ecosystem.

To an extent, that means it is failing. Satoshi consensus clearly meant the 1 MB going to be increased in future, so those running old version of full node with hard coded 1 MB and never updating the software making a big mistake. The discussion for bigger blocks is here for over 1 year, and for anybody who dont follow the situation it is recommended to use full node version which follow most proof of work instead, thus Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic is recommended.

Core falls behind in development here and is not secure to use for people who dont follow the situation and not upgrading old nodes. BTW for anybody using software it is natural to update from time to time to get improvements and fixed issues - not updating means you might run vulnerable version, this is how every software works, Bitcoin full node client included.

I know that the process has been tremendously slow. I share your frustrations there. Do you mean like the private, invite-only meetings between chinese miners and representatives of a VC-funded, for-profit company employing most active Core developers?

How is that any different from the corrupt practices of banking or politics I have considered Bitcoin Talk to be "hostile territory" for over a year. It's a cesspool of scamming and hate where any attempt to conduct honest business is met with suspicion and any attempt to conduct a scam is welcomed with open arms. It is a mirror land, where scammers run the show and ruin "reputation" of decent people. I am waiting for the time when they are going to selectively delete posts e.

Satoshi's or those showing big block sentiment. Hypothetical next step up would be just rewriting old posts or inserting falsely dated posts to outright rewrite history. I don't think we can't expect that. I believe I have already seen deletion happening with polls regarding blocksize - these polls of course showing strong support for larger blocks. Can't remember the exact links, though. In any case, everyone should save older, important threads over there - and hash and timestamp them into the blockchain.

As well as using archive. If you have ever bought something from me at memorydealers. I think it is really inappropriate for the staff members there to leave negative feedback for someone they have never done any business with solely for their stance on the block size debate.

You have no clue what's going on, so STFU. That asswipe you consider your 'leader' initiated DM with me, not the other way around. That fucker accused me of lying about something and when I showed him proof he was incorrect did he apologize?

Ahahaha, hell fucking no. I finally told him to please stop DM'ing me. Anything that jerk has to say to me he can say it publicly or not at all. And he or his cronies are doxing Core supporters left and right, so shove that up your azz. And while it might draw the ire of some folks here, I'll have you know I supported Sanders, and voted unhappily for Clinton. Proof or GTFO. Later in a response you call apparently everyone on this sub? I honestly have no clue what you could possibly mean by "cronies" in this context; I've seriously come to believe you're just publicly unraveling blind followers "such as Trump's", oh the irony ; while the only person following people around here into unrelated threads like a mad person is you.

So get a grip, and keep calm. If you have evidence of doxing, you'd do much more damage to "your enemies" by going to the reddit admins, as I'm sure you know how seriously they take this. Alternatively you might even start your own thread; this is an uncensored sub, but for maximum efficacy I think such politically-convenient accusations would be guaranteed to make it to the top on the other cesspool of a sub regardless of veracity.

Either way stop polluting these threads by harassing people because you are breaking the rules, and it wouldn't trouble me in the slightest, morally, to see you be temporarily banned. I am still waiting for a reason for why I was unjustly banned from the censored subreddit.

It looks like we'll never get the answers we want. It is interesting that most of the pro censorship people try to hide their real identities though. I'm sure there are more. Anyone who chooses the screen name of cosmic hemorrhoid isn't a professional in any way. Grow up.

It just pisses me off that theymos is pocketing the thousands of donated coins. I wonder if there will be a class action lawsuit when each coin is worth a million lol. On that forum there are, generally, only 2 types of people left. Scammers and marks. All the decent people who can see what is going on left long time ago.

BitcoinTalk is where the scums of crypto hang out. Most of them cannot even properly speak english, or participating in a signature campaign for a scam project, or creating pages for obvious scam coins.

First of all, the date of that rating is November 11th. It is not "now" unless a month and a half ago is considered "now". Furthermore, trust is not moderated, nor is trust given out by staff members considered anything remotely official.

Trust ratings are based upon the user's personal trust of you, not of the forum's nor of anyone else, but themselves.

Also, this is one singular user leaving you a negative rating because they think that you are untrustworthy. It is not all the staff nor is it a staff opinion but rather one user's opinion who also happens to be a staff member.

The forum also has a ranking structure, based on donations. Any user donating 50 BTC or more is rewarded with VIP status, the online indicator and the opportunity to generate a custom title. Administrator Theymos issues unique wallet addresses for each donation, and both VIPs and Donators enjoy access to the exclusive forum section, a kind of virtual VIP lounge.

A good place for newcomers to start learning about Bitcoin , news is current and the site is a definite BTC community node. The site also enables users to advertise their own crypto-centric websites through signature campaigns. In order to qualify to move up in rank a minimum number of posts must be recorded, and the prime determinant is the number of fortnightly periods a user posted since joining.

A part of the motivation behind this structure is the desire to generate higher paid campaign rates by demonstrating credibility and not just numbers. It also affords users greater credibility when conducting P2P transactions. Further to user credibility, the forum also has a trust system that tallies the trustworthiness of individual users. This trust identity also increases with additional successful interactions.

Unfortunately, should a user be negatively rated, this can also increase until they are barred from participation in severe cases. A possibly poorly-anticipated aspect of signature campaigns on the forum is that there arise poor quality and sometimes even scamming posts by some users.

That said, the forum remains a premier destination for users to gather news and opinions from the cryptosphere, and news pertinent to Bitcoin especially.

Far from a den of scammers, many valuable and legitimate offers abound on the site, as users often entice others with offers connected to their own sites, seeking traffic and commentary. Few Bitcoin-related topics go untouched on the site. BitcoinTalk also acts as a message board for developers and interested parties to discuss progress on the technical aspects of the altcoin. Specialized niches onsite for miners , traders and even crypto-economics are hosted within the broader online community.

A valuable contributor to the cryptosphere and one with the most impeccable credentials, having been the product of the Bitcoin creator himself, Bitcointalk is thriving. The millionth post on the forum happened on July 22, , and membership currently sits at just over 2 million users who post thousands of daily comments and offers. Although the site has given rise to numerous offshoots that have developed into alternative niche Bitcoin forums themselves, none of them have attained the membership and activity of Bitcointalk.

Editorial Team is a gracious group of giving cryptocurrency advocates and blockchain believers who want to ensure we do our part in spreading digital currency awareness and adoption.

We are a team of over forty individuals all working as a collective whole to produce around the clock daily news, reviews and insights regarding all major coin updates, token announcements and new releases. Make sure to read our editorial policies and follow us on Twitter , Join us in Telegram. Stay tuned. E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another. You entered an incorrect username or password. Bitcoin Information BitcoinTalk. What Is BitcoinTalk. Forum: Bitcoin Community & ICO Announcements? What Is Forum?

January 04, , PM: Welcome, login or register.: News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: []. Victims of scams project. Victims of scams project. It hurts when you trust such company and it turns out you’re a victim of scam. The Financial conduct Authority has helped many victims of such scam in recovering their lost investment which is done through a private security and investigation firm. Oct 23,  · Overall rating: 4 Star Rating. To be reviewd. Visit website. Ledger Nano X. The Ledger Nano X is the latest hardware wallet by Ledger. The Nano X’s interface is done through the Ledger Live mobile app (via a bluetooth connection). Ledger’s intuitive design is maintained with this model. This is probably one of the safest ways to store coins. Tags:Bitcoin andreessen, How to sell your bitcoin on coinbase, Btc to wmz instant, General knowledge about bitcoin, What is bitcoin mining means