There are different reasons for using it, for me, it serves as a kind of bridge. For example, in order to use Zenland (escrow platform) I have to connect a wallet, and I use Trezor for that. The simplest way for me is to connect Trezor (address generated only for this purpose) to Metamask and then connect it to the Zenland platform. This makes it easier for me, because I don't have to keep any keys from MM, and the funds are quite safe.

Thanks! I will, and I can't think of a better use than this: I'd like to max out my lifespan please:
I would have waited, but don't want to risk "socializing" my Bitcoins like last time.

@Leahized: I'd like to buy your Hunter's card for BTC3. If you accept, you can also buy a third life.

I'm not supposed to share the details of this spell

I need to put a spell on examplens....

Peasant:

Last Will Card for cryptofrka & ESG please Halab.

Cryptofrka, are you the Chosen One ? Because when you do something stupid, you dodge bullets like Neo ? This time, it’s a random chance caused by LoyceV that save your butt. You avoid elimination.

@Leahized: I'd like to buy your Hunter's card for BTC3. If you accept, you can also buy a third life.

The fee is not stable, you can see 0.2sats/vbyte and used that for your transaction and the next minute you broadcast it to the network, you see transaction surge from other people with over paid fees and it jump to 4 sats/vbyte. Most often, these people that fight for block confirmation don't care about the fees to include their transactions to the next block.

If you are not in rush and can wait, you can wait until the fee drop and your transaction will get mine as quick as possible but like I said, it's not stable. There are days your transaction might get stuck for days before the fee dropped, that's why it's encouraged to use RBF enabled for your transaction to bump the fee later if after waiting for long time.

It is cumbersome but it can become easier if it is done by bot.
DdmrDdmr has such a bot and he has used it for merit distributions very well. If vapourminer is interested in the bot, he can send a PM to DdmrDdmr and try to get any help.

I'm surprised so many people use browser extensions as wallet, and worse, give it access their entire browsing history!

I've never used it, but when I Google it, the first thing I see is this:
I don't trust anything that claims to be the most secure, and common sense tells me an online browser extension can't possibly be more secure than, say, cold storage.

I find that hard to believe, but it's coming from someone who earned 3 Merits in 4 years.

Does that mean you've installed "metamask" in all your browsers?

How many shitposters have you tagged, Ignored and keep an eye on for improvement? I'm not going to waste more time on them, but feel free to check my Sent feedback to see which shitposter you think turned into a great asset for the forum. I can already tell you you're going to be disappointed.

I agree 100% that multi-accounting takes a long time. I don’t know a thing about casino play. I’m just talking sports betting where the bet is a win or it’s a loss. No negotiations are needed and a win means winnings should be paid. Holy says a book can take winnings and that’s when we argue.

Putting all that aside, holy hasn’t met the standard posted by LoyceV for negative trust.

I do sports disputes here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.4440. It takes days. A book makes an allegation. They have to prove that allegation. If they can’t , the player gets paid in full.

Edited to shorten.

I spoke with holy on telegram and gave my opinion, then Ratings Place via pm and both were nice but as you see neither listened. The red tag from holydarkness is borderline trust abuse IMO and should be a neutral.

Rating Place is showing how obsessive and , for lack of a better word, ignorant he can and will be over the tag. No-one wants to read or cares to read the walls of text that he is posting trying to get his point across in a poor manner. It's hard to follow as part of it I feel is only a partial quote and people would need to read each situation to even really get a good sense of what is going on.

Regardless of my opinion, these users are still able to do what they want with their tags or posts. I think putting rating place on ignore is the way to go at this point from the way they are handling the situation they are not going to stop acting insane til the tag is removed and holy doesn't appear to be removing it. I am removing myself from this thread after this post regardless as it's useless to keep giving input on an endless situation.

I'm here to vouch for Vlad2Vlad, and to say this is indeed the real Vlad2Vlad.

Most of you kids don't know any better and that's fine. But Vlad was an early altcoin supporter - IXC was the 3rd altcoin ever - and he is also known as creator of the world's first "Shit Coin", in 2013. That matters to me, because if he didn't, I would have been #1.

Anyway.

For the longest time I never really understood him, and I still don't, but with so many Fake OGs out there, the forum could use a real OG back, and that is Vlad.

If Vlad2Vlad promises to start abiding by forum rules (multiple-posting seems to be the biggest offense), then I encourage moderators to give him another chance as he is a unique voice in a sea of similar voices.


LOL. Vlad's gang:

https://www.joeydevilla.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/the-colonel-and-his-droogs.jpg


Actually I care. IXC is the 3rd altcoin ever. Its okay for people to care about it from a historical perspective.


Wow. What a complete asshole of a thing to say.

Petitions from gangs are unlikely to be considered.

That's #5686 on CoinMarketCap. Nobody cares.

Seems like nobody gives a f**k about anything you feel, say, or believe in.

Just to keep it straight, I was about to write here about four hours ago, after Rating Place finally address a point that is relevant to the title of his topic instead of wall of irrelevant text. I happened to get a phone call from a friend for a quick lunch, thus I can only write this after I'm home. Just to be transparent that I'll address the matter regardless a post or two.

About whether my feedback is an abuse and didn't go in line with LoyceV's guideline, I would beg to differ. I do write to you, yahoo62278 that I'll mull over it, and when I wrote that, I was hoping Rating Place finally address the matter that will "force me" to change my tag to neutral, as I abide forum rules.

Loyce's guide to negative feedback is [I use RP's quote just because I don't want to hunt the original thread and I memorize the rough point, so I know he didn't manipulate that]:


Scam is defined by Merriam-Webster,


My tag is:


Rating Place opened the thead with wall of text, a massive one, that I countered with even more massive wall as mine are supplemented with evidences and basis. I narrowed each part down for easy navigation by framing them into a question to Rating Place, that he can answer as rebuttal. None of it were answered. Not even the simplest one.

Now, let's move to the point where I think the negative tag is correct and is according to Loyce's guideline; the very first one:


As it happened, in beyond abundant and redundant, Rating Place insist that I was misinformed and that he knows better, that flag from provider were just flag, [summarized and freely rephrased] a simple warning that sportsbook can ignore, despite my numerous attempt to tell him that it is not what he thought. I've seen flags from provider, I've asked my contacts of what'll happen if flag was raised by provider.

Now, this is the keypoint: Rating Place insist [and take pride on] that the fund of the flag were going into the casino's pocket and that casino can freely abide the rule or not, and by the sheer public pressure [that also involves in his art of snipping posts and twisting statements, of which IIRC fall under category "deceptive act"] he got the casino to pay.

THIS is where the negative flag instead of neutral tag is based on. His insistence that provider's flag is just a warning and not binding to casinos.

The way I see it, casinos through their representative accounts are also part of the forum members. Thus, they're entitled to the same treatment, protection, and fair judgment as other members. Forcing "someone" to pay, based on outdated knowledge that Rating Place insist as the truth [and that I know nothing about, that the casinos lying to me and I take their words easily], be it by sheer force of peer pressure as result of his "deception act", or [this is where things goes snowballed] the personal behind-the-screen cases and/or cases that he handled on his thread, where he get the sportsbook to pay the player because he deemed the flag by provider was not good, put the member of this forum [the casinos] in financial loss and if people not warned through tag, the practica will continue.

Yahoo62278, I stick to my words when I said I really value your input and would mull over to change the tag. Yet, Rating Place's insistence and negligence to address my points [or even just one of the seven points I raised], especially the one above, is why the tag stays and why I think it should be neg until he learn to stop deceiving people.

Rating Place, you insist that I lied, I can easily disprove that, I've offered this over and over, and you always backed down when you realize the stake is real. If you're so sure that you know how things works in sportsbetting and provider flagging, and that I was being fooled by sportsbook [etc. etc. etc.], why were you so afraid to take my challenge?

Escrow 1,560,000 USD, I'll show you the evidence in abundance. The amount shouldn't worry you as you'll get it back, it is escrowed, I was wrong all this time, now you've publicly proven that I have zero knowledge of sportsbook and provider, and I have to retract the tag.

What stops you?

I spoke with holy on telegram and gave my opinion, then Ratings Place via pm and both were nice but as you see neither listened. The red tag from holydarkness is borderline trust abuse IMO and should be a neutral.

Rating Place is showing how obsessive and , for lack of a better word, ignorant he can and will be over the tag. No-one wants to read or cares to read the walls of text that he is posting trying to get his point across in a poor manner. It's hard to follow as part of it I feel is only a partial quote and people would need to read each situation to even really get a good sense of what is going on.

Regardless of my opinion, these users are still able to do what they want with their tags or posts. I think putting rating place on ignore is the way to go at this point from the way they are handling the situation they are not going to stop acting insane til the tag is removed and holy doesn't appear to be removing it. I am removing myself from this thread after this post regardless as it's useless to keep giving input on an endless situation.

Negative (shown as -1)
If you believe someone is a scammer, or someone is likely to scam, that deserves negative feedback. Please provide evidence.
If you really hate someone and he’s a terrible troll, that does not deserve negative feedback.

a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation

Rating Place, the written contract is still available if you really want to enter and bind yourself to it and prove yourself, as you basically claimed all my statements are wrong and fabricated to side with casinos. Escrow that number, I'll show it here to the entire overseers of this thread that you dedicate to expose me. I have it in my hand that Betby indeed flagged that user for arbitrage, the flag come from the provider.

You can either take the challenge or eat your word and take the shame all over your stay in this forum for pretending to know everything, even when it is factually false.[...]

How about some userscript that collects and halts all Merit transactions created by you, until you make a post? I'm just thinking out loud here, and it's not something I can build, but if this would be possible, you could more or less accomplish what you're looking for.

You've sent out double my number of Merit transactions, to more different accounts, and you often read and Merit old posts:
...
That's commendable, and takes a tremendous amount of effort. You must have one of the highest "sent Merit transactions" to "posts made" ratios on the forum, and that makes the privacy implications for you more than for anyone else.

You could collect good posts in open tabs until the moment you're making a post anyway, but it's cumbersome.

Something that has an immediate effect on any member reading your posts is that many are mostly far too long with quotes and replies. It will help make posts easier to read and understand if you somewhat reduce the size of your posts.

If you genuinely feel he has not helped people have their money back in the previous two years, put that in a legible list of complaints/concerns and ask him to address the points.

Again, if you are alluding to holydarkness taking payments from casinos in order to collude against a complainant then you must provide evidence.

In my unbiased opinion, I can state that I have seen him engage on a regular basis with members that are making complaints against casinos as well as the casinos themselves. He looks at the information the accuser has supplied and asks the accused to provide a reply. Then vice-versa.

If we are being honest here, we both know there are many cases of multi-accounting and breach of rules by those making complaints but that does not apply to all of the cases. Most of them are closed on the basis of that accusation and when made, what is holydarkness supposed to do? How much evidence will the casino show him to support their claim when they are tied in to various data protection laws?

It is the other cases where casinos have selectively scammed members that deserve more attention.

As we both are aware, holydarkness is not paid for his time, he is volunteering his time in an attempt to streamline a process that expedites complaints against casinos and seeks resolutions. He is the so-called man in the middle, he cannot force either party to do anything. If anything, he can express an opinion to both parties but I fail to understand why you believe he can influence the outcome.

I use theymos' weekly data dump to get all data at once, and I use individual profiles if I need an accurate Merit count.

ok, so what about running a merit update once a day or some similar timeframe. only the sender gets an ack, other than that no one has anyindication of merit sent/recieved. then once per period (like a batch update) the forum then will list all the merits and exact time in the list, and also populate the actual posts with its list of merit and givers.

so basically no one will see sent or received merits besides the sender until the forum wide update. at that point everything is the same as it is currently.

better? worse?

I remember reporting many of Vlad2Vlad's posts for breaking rule number 32 and now he is doing the same thing again even though he is surely aware of that rule.
This user doesn't deserve a second chance.


I reported prodigal son's posts too.

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2026/04/19/Ufc30w.png

Which 7 accounts? What makes you think we want you back? Even in this topic you're breaking rule #32 many times already.

Why did you think the topic was deleted? The topic hasn't been deleted.

missing 18 characters from my wif private key

Merit is for posts, not for users. If the post is deleted, you can no longer Merit it. If the user is banned, and the post is still there, there's no reason to restrict it from receiving Merit.

That's #5686 on CoinMarketCap. Nobody cares.

I find that hard to believe, but it's coming from someone who earned 3 Merits in 4 years.

It makes more sense if it's "locked for security", as "normal" permanent banned mean you lose your signature. Unless there's a new type of ban I don't know about.

Which 7 accounts? What makes you think we want you back? Even in this topic you're breaking rule #32 many times already.

as for BPIP etc scraping all that stuff anyway: thats their business. i just would like it changed here.

ill comment more later.

It must have been restored, as I couldn't access my link to this post earlier.

If really no one is buying they should be offloading them already.

I can imagine many companies shredding them for safety.

use Bitcoin Core with pruning mode, which allows you to run a fully validating node without needing more than 700 GB of storage space.
pruning mode, mean approximately 50 GB of storage space.

to enable Pruning open bitcoin.conf locate bitcoin.conf then
 

Are you telling me.. I should trust you?

https://loyce.club/PM_publisher/messages/11618662.html

You should clarify this part: "they must wait for at least 1 week to 1 month after requesting the refund". It looks like a month, but technically it's just a week you're guaranteeing.

As far as I understand, those are only at risk after exposing the public key, although given fast enough quantum decryption that could be enough time to replace a transaction after it's broadcasted and before it's confirmed.

Sorry, promise444c5 and Doan9269, this round is fatal for you. You have lost your last lives, so you are out of the game. It’s not your fault, blame LoyceV for failing to protect you.

Quoted.
You should clarify this part: "they must wait for at least 1 week to 1 month after requesting the refund". It looks like a month, but technically it's just a week you're guaranteeing.
And when that week start, you should probably only start counting from the moment you've added a big red warning to your 2 escrow posts, a new post in this topic, and a (neutral) feedback on OP to make absolutely sure people see it on time!
I like adding the week delay before paying back, it prevents exit scam scenarios like this:

You should have used a new account with Copper Membership for this. That would have allowed you to base the name of your website on something that makes more sense than an old farmed Indonesian account.

For the record: if you share when exactly you became the owner of this account, I can leave you neutral feedback so there's no doubt about it.

I doubt they would want to dump everything once that would be stupid
It would be slow and I don't see it been in the hands of an average man.
It's like picking losing the coins forever and making Bitcoin total supply lower
And Letting it be and increasing Bitcoin circulating supply thereby affecting the price
But Not Your Keys, Not your coins I guess

I'm not really looking forward to seeing 6.7 million Bitcoin dumped on the market. It's going to be one hell of an altcoin season if that happens.

Can you elaborate on this? What did I miss?

just unsubstantiated taking away of winnings, I made 3 bets on sports, all won, I showed them to the community, I saw these quotes in other bookmakers, and you're talking about arbitrage? so how do my bets relate to arbitrage, you're unlikely to prove something that doesn't actually exist. you're just a thief

Since you've mentioned me here: I don't like the banning of arbitrage betting. Even stronger: I think it's BS!....

Yeah, already on it. I've made contact with staff on XYes ....

Great news! If you have a chance ask them about that fake license......

So... I have my talks with their representative that's assigned to me, and we tackled several things. Basically, this thread is divided into two things: OP's main situation of arbing, and a sub-topic of their license, the 2022 GCB thing.

Regarding OP's arbitrage betting activity, I can't say much as I am bound by for-my-eyes-only basis] other than that I've given a glimpse of what led them to struck the gavel and draw a verdict of arbing. Regarding arbing is a smart strategy or prohibited, I won't dive deep into that discussion right now, because specifically for this case, smart or not, they're irrelevant because they're simply prohibited, as per their ToS that I've captured and sitting in my gallery since few days ago:

With above, unfortunately, like it or not, we have to consider OP as breaching the terms he agreed upon sign up. Thus, the casino is within their right to confiscate the rest of the fund.

Now, about license. They told me that it was indeed an outdated one. However, they're in the middle of acquiring a new one from Anjouan. I believe they'll properly update the page with the Anjouan licensing and their seal once achieved.

1. It wasn’t an outdated license. It was a fake license.

2. The rules say “guaranteed profit with no risk” How did the OP guarantee profit?

3. Xyes says this is their outdated license OGL/2022/501/017

Format of licenses in 2022
Curacao eGaming — 1668/JAZ
Antillephone — 8048/JAZ
Gaming Curacao — 365/JAZ
e-Management N.V. — 5536/JAZ

4. This isn't kept in secret since the bets are public. You either have the two arbitraged bets or you don't.

And I've told you, twice, one hinted and one explicitly, if you bother to read carefully, I've seen the evidence. The provider mark him. Hence the "looking at other things" of which I shall assume you're referring the instance of me bringing OP's other case. I am calling for a motive, as it might shows pattern, jumping from one small casinos to another and threaten the casino [this one might got threatened too, behind the scene, though I will strike that out from statement].

the thing is , holydarkness is prone to believe anything that the casinos say -although they are OBVIOUS lies- than the players claims which are supported by actual evidences......

holydarkness, he does make a good point. You have to stop believing everything the casino and casino reps tell you. ......

@holydarkness

If you are so much defending the books for consicating for value betting, do you even realize that 99% of the bets that are being placed are pure value bets for the sportsbook itself?.......

You keep saying that but you are the one that keeps confusing. You keep letting casinos or the casino reps here confuse you all the time. My case also was turned to arb betting by the rep, after he realized that value betting doesn't cause any winnings confiscation by any means.......

Then how about you hand over the evidence of arbitrage betting to the accuser himself? .....

This is not do-able on the same bookmaker (because they have a bookie margin that makes it impossible to arb within the same book) so the 2nd betting slip would have to be from another book (for example Pinnacle) and it would be impossible for you nor XYes to have obtained this.......

.....Speaking in general, the provider sent their flag to casinos about arbing or other violation the providers detect, and the casinos act accordingly to this flag. The casino does not need two bet slips to compare stakes of the opposite outcome of the same events, the provider did this......

I don’t know why you continue to make things up. The provider can’t compare. I have no idea why you are doing this to these players.

......Not to mention that it is not too far fetched to think that it is possible that those providers communicate with each others in terms of crosschecking violators. Everyone hates violators. And enemy of my enemy is my friend, so, is it impossible to think Betby say, "hi Pinnacle, I'm sending you user with this details, can you share me his betslips from date x to y? I'll return with the result."?...

Hahaha, you have absolutely no idea how sportsbetting works obviously. Pinnacle is an ARB-FRIENDLY bookmaker so they are never ever gonna share user details. ......

My purpose is not to sling mud at you, my purpose is to teach you a bit of how sportsbetting works. Because from reading your posts I can see you don't know much yet.....

The one thing that I am confident of is that XYes has no proof. They would have showed it 2 weeks ago to the players and the case would have been settled

3 bets

$94
$151
$259

No one in their right mind thinks you arbed for these amounts and they can’t figure it out in 3 weeks.

I believe this shall be the closing statement of this case:

After a thorough discussion with the casino, as a gesture of goof will and show that the casino listens to the forum and have the forum's best interest at heart, they are agreed to recredit all of your winnings .........I'd like to stress this once more that this is not because XYes has no proof or arbing or anything else. I can vouch with my reputation here that the account did got flagged for arb betting by the provider. Nonetheless, listening to the input that's given by one or two prominent members advice, they agreed to initiate the gesture as they are planning to start their journey with the forum.

that's later revised and added one more point on #176. So, if you want to address anything and clarify your statements or salvage your face, it's post #176. Otherwise, it doesn't interest me to read and address any further demonstration of your incompetency and impotence.

the case is over. I’m not replying to your never ending personal attacks.

I was told (by listening to the Dutch Cryptocast) that Taproot introduced a vulnerability for quantum decryption comparable to legacy addresses with exposed public key.

-snip- and saying that every user is equally at risk right now, this muddies the picture. They are all living under the same eventual PQ cloud, sure, but some are standing in the rain already and some only get wet when they spend.

I was told (by listening to the Dutch Cryptocast) that Taproot introduced a vulnerability for quantum decryption comparable to legacy addresses with exposed public key.

-snip- and saying that every user is equally at risk right now, this muddies the picture. They are all living under the same eventual PQ cloud, sure, but some are standing in the rain already and some only get wet when they spend.

Can you elaborate on this? What did I miss?

I was surprised when I saw that Taproot addresses introduced risks

I was surprised when I saw that Taproot addresses introduced risks that Segwit fixed. But those 5 years, in some scenarios, may even be too late.

Several bitcoin developers and Jameson Lopp are supporting this proposal that would freeze quantum vulnerable wallets, including dormant coins for Satoshi Nakamoto and everyone else.
It is estimated that around 6.7 million BTC is currently held in legacy wallet addresses, that is almost 32% of bitcoin supply!

Useless signature spammer, and the last paragraph just rewrote my own words. Please do your magic @ABCbits.

Donneski

Newbie arzuo was already on my Ignore list, and is a candidate for this topic:
--snip--
I wouldn't be surprised if this is chatbot verbal diarrhea: who writes "flaws and issues" or "experts and users"?

In many cases, the wallet data may be interpreted as something completely different from the blockchain index! Sometimes, during scanning, the scan starts to load due to insufficient data or the estimated search time is longer.
Maybe the reload you were doing was related to some other large data or it could be caused by an error.
Although the apparent reason for this delay is hidden in the scan format or graphics feature, it is not clear what exactly is happening!!

You won't be allowed to quit!

It is Unfortunately, you can't buy a 0.30% bonus