Anyone who says they sincerely love the forum and do everything they can to keep it clean will be considered a volunteer. Moderators (I know for a fact) are paid for their work. Therefore, the most sincere moderators, who manage to maintain order not only in their local section but also in several others, are visible even without announcing themselves. They are modest and fulfill their duties 100%. In other words, they do the job they are supposed to or are required to do, right? Do you see the difference between volunteering and a paid position?

Regarding gender, users have the right to see some people as a different gender, especially when they behave in a way that their stated gender does not typically .

It's hard to believe you're using that argument. What makes him stupid isn't that. What makes him stupid is lecturing people on how the trust system should work and not having started building a trust list himself, which is empty. But it's understandable because between his big ego and his claim that most DTs aren't fit, it's clear that he thinks the DT system should be just him (and maybe the only two or three people he likes)

That's just one of the things that makes him stupid.


Well, if you don't see the point and people continue to exclude him, maybe you're the one who's wrong.

With user like @satofan44 abusing the trust system, this might be a good time to revisit this idea.

I doubt will be a manipulation a big problem or else some DT shouldn’t receive that position for not having a good knowledge to know what’s the proper use of trust system.

I will ask you a simple question. Do satofan44 currently abusing the trust system?

 Yes/No

If yes, why does some DT still backing this user by providing positive trust just to counter negative trust put to this user for trust abuse. Being a non DT is not an excuse for not using the trust system properly or else why the heck he has the feature to put trust on someone profile. The idea is to filter the idiotic trust send by a clown like this user.

Another typical LoyceV shit behaving like Satofan44 thinking that his opinion only matters when it comes to trust.

The user you are defending is handling negative tags to back up his toxic behavior. You are advocating a proper use of trust system yet you are ignoring a user like this just because he has good knowledge on Bitcoin. This is why I always view you as a double standard guy because you don’t have balls to deal with this guy that clearly not using the trust system.

DT with an opinion this kind of behavior is okay for the sake of freedom of speech probably have same behavior to this user deep inside.

I don’t see the point why does removing a bad behavior will be bad to the community. This is the most dumb ass thinking to apply freedom of speech. I will tolerate some profanity but a direct attack to the user as a regular behavior is a psychopath behavior.

And Boohoo! This pajeet will not wear a signature code without being paid. It’s hypocrisy.

Me relembrando como o tempo passa rápido.

6 anos trás...

O theymos era o usuário com mais merits recebidos, 6343. Hoje em dia o LoyceV está quase nos 20k (19750).

Eu fui de 1191 para 8982.

(Whenever I sit down to write a post or PM these days, I always get about 20% of the way through, and then I sigh deeply and think, "Why am I even trying?". I don't know why talking to you guys has become so pointless-seeming, but, it has. Writing this post was its own little exercise in tenacity, and it took around 2 weeks of on-and-off effort and revisions before I finally gave up, deleted most of it, and decided to just mix a few keepable paragraphs with some lightly-edited "off the cuff" thoughts. Anyway, I've done my best to come across as polite and constructive.)

---

Thanks for reading it!

Thanks, JJG. I really appreciate that.

Yup. I can see how you'd feel that way. The OP doesn't really do a good job of making a convincing case that something like what I'm proposing is necessary. It also doesn't do a good job of explaining how it compares tradeoff-wise with every other SNR-increasing device that I've considered. I guess, I'm kind of being lazy and just sharing the blueprint for something that I've thought about for a long time and considered from very many angles, but, I don't really have the energy to expound on or justify it. I'm personally satisfied that what I've described belongs to the very small set of workable solutions given all of the constraints on the problem, and I suppose it's just one of those things where I expect that anyone who examines the issue deeply enough will come to the same conclusion.

All I can really offer you in my current mood is two little thoughts and one recent example (all three of which are kind of lazy, I'll admit):

(*) The first little thought stems from my evaluation of the following two quotes (both of which were written for the Welcome Message, under a section titled "The purpose of the forum"; emphasis is not my own):



I don't know about you, but, when I read those quotes end-to-end and carefully, I'm left both with a feeling of very strong agreement, and with a feeling of very strong disappointment at just how untrue those ideas actually are. I mean... "you are swimming upstream, and you will not be successful in the end"? And, "it will be through innovation and entrepreneurship, not any sort of mindless busywork"? Yeah, right. My foot. Minus a few cool corners, and excluding our long list of resident crazies, all that the forum is at this point is a dwindling core of genuine Bitcoin enthusiasts getting drowned out by an endless procession of "I can make money by posting!?" types who are "successful in the end" doing absolutely nothing but "mindless busywork".

Now, I'm not under the illusion that it's even possible to make the reality of the forum correspond with those quotes, but, I do think that the correspondence would be a little bit better if there were a mindless-posting countermeasure in place (besides moderation, which, if you think about it, sits too close to censorship as an idea, and shouldn't be something that the forum seeks to have more and more of, especially not when there are systemic alternatives like the one I'm proposing; also, I don't like the idea of misusing the trust system for this problem: in fact, this is neither here nor there, but, if I were building a Bitcointalk-like environment from scratch, I'd say that the trust system would be the single thing that I'd be very hesitant to copy or draw much inspiration from, because I believe it has, over time, become a source of a lot more community-wise harm than good). I suppose you could argue that we already have a mindless-posting countermeasure in the form of the merit system itself, but, I think it's obvious to anyone that's been paying attention for the last few years that the merit system is not the "filter" that it once was, and that account farmers and individual would-be sigspammers have pretty much figured out how to systematically work around it.

(*) The second little thought is that theymos and I both agree that something needs to be done:


(*) And finally, the recent example is to do with that obvious account farm that started spamming the forum with AI-slop meant to come across as very human-sounding and relatable/likable (the one with lots of uses of "ngl", "tbh", "idk", "lol", "imo", "xd", and suchlike):

My energy/patience is draining pretty fast, so, I'm not going to unpack the whole thing carefully, but, I will say that if I pick out an account like this one, I'm left thinking, "Wow. You really can just show up on the forum, have an LLM synthesize 178 agreeable posts about nothing, rely on the moderators to clean up ~80% of it, and then be left with a good-looking merit-to-post ratio of 6:29 and a fair chance that you'll now be able to weasel merits even more effectively."

If what I proposed in the OP was already in effect (and if you ignore the later adjustments I proposed to make things nicer for new accounts, which I'm now thinking wouldn't actually be so wise to implement), then the above account would have spent 17.8 merits with their "shotgun" approach, and would be 11.8 merits down rather than 6 merits up. That is, nobody would have to "thwart" that kind of user by madly reporting their posts and getting into disagreements with the mods and fighting with AI-detectors and de-humanizers and whatnot, because strategies like the one that that account farm is employing would just... not work.

(One last thing I'll share in support of this whole proposal is that I think it's very easy to sleep on how well this idea could accommodate a set of tunable countermeasures: I find it very natural to think of 0.1 as a kind of "base cost", and to then consider when it would be appropriate to increase that cost. For example, maybe it should be more expensive than normal to necrobump, and maybe it should be more expensive than normal to post in megathreads, and maybe users should have the ability to set their own higher-than-normal cost for topics where they're only looking for high-effort replies, and so on.)

---

I can't make sense of your post, friend. (But, please don't take that personally; I'm probably as much to blame as you are: I've been in a particularly bad mood recently, especially when it comes to forum stuff, and I don't have the kind of patience that I normally do, so I'm unwilling to carefully sift through your post to try to find the most constructive interpretation of what you might be saying.)

---

I'm aware of all that. You're not telling me anything here that I haven't already considered and tried to account for as much as I'm able to given the constraints on this problem.

Sigh. No. With the system I'm proposing, the per-post payment is recorded as a "carry transaction" that's generated when you submit a new post. That is, once you've made a post, you've already paid for it (effectively, by having a small amount of your merit balance get converted into a form that the rank-determination function will no longer consider to be relevant). Deleting a post won't refund the small amount of merit that was "spent" in the process of that post's submission. So, the deleting of posts has no effect on the proposed system (as in, there is no deletion strategy that can offer you any carry-wise advantage compared to a strategy of never deleting your posts).

This is the third point in-a-row where you've phrased things in a way that makes me think that you don't understand this proposal...

You won't be "de-ranked" if you make 10 posts without receiving any merit. The proposed system plays out over much longer timescales than that (also, it isn't even keeping track of your posts, never mind the last 10). The whole "10 posts" thing falls out of the suggested cost of 0.1 merit per post and the fact that 1 divided by 0.1 is 10. As in, if, for every 10 posts you make, you wind up with 1 less merit (because each of those posts cost you 0.1 merit to submit), then, you'll need to average at least 1 merit received for every 10 posts you submit (or else you're operating at a rank-wise loss because you're spending more merit than you're receiving). Another way to interpret the suggested cost of 0.1 merit per post would be: If a post costs you 0.1 merit to submit, and if you're trying to operate profitably, then it's not sensible to submit a post that has a <=10% chance of receiving 1 merit (or a <=5% chance of receiving 2 merits, and so on).

On the specific point you're making about routinely updating threads with posts that rarely receive merit, let me ask you: If the bumps rarely receive merit, shouldn't you take that as a sign that maybe you should stop maintaining that thread, or learn to maintain it in a better way? As in, things that are honest-to-goodness appreciated by other forum members typically receive merit. That is, if you can't find some way to make those bumps merit-worthy, then I'd encourage you to stop wasting your energy and find something else to post about (or, alternatively, earn enough merit that you can then "afford" to post whatever and whenever you like; for example, LoyceV has so many merits that their next ~200 thousand posts would have to go unmerited for the proposed system to drop them down from "Legendary" to "Hero Member").

---

Hey, dude. I miss playing poker with you, BTW.

I'm sorry to get to you last, when I'm all spent. I appreciate the effort that you put into your post, and if you feel very strongly that it contains something useful, then send me a PM to that effect and I'll try to explain why something like what you're proposing can't really work in an environment like this one. I hope that we get to play poker again one day (you're one tricky bastard, and I have a lot of good memories of our games).

Yeah, although the traditional password model is a "relic of Web 1.0" (even though it's used in Web 2.0, 3.0), how can something be a relic if it's still widely used and is a highly tested, validated, and time-proven model?

Any other authentication method requires association with your identity or biometric device (with the exception of 2FA and MFA security keys, which don't use biometrics, but these are used on exchanges and some other sites and are very rarely accepted). If you lose your biometric device, you'll have a lot to worry about to regain access to your secret, which may be more convenient, but not as secure, especially when it comes to Bitcoin wallets...

This is the dream of every authoritarian government, to control and centralize the internet and user behavior. I don't trust any system created by the government (even less so if it's imposed by force), it's usually full of vulnerabilities and surveillance, leaving any fiction based on the '84 book envious...

You may be feeling nostalgic, but it was a completely new experience for me . I opened the channel after running LND . I was doing everything through just Cmd, so it seemed convenient to visually through ThunderHub. I sent Bitcoin to the lnd wallet and connected the peer and opened the channel. While I was doing all this, I was just thinking that in the early days of Bitcoin, people used to send Bitcoin and create wallet like this. Overall this gave me a new experience.   

I understand that but they were once voted for, and it is easy to see which mod(s) are doing a good job by looking at the section(s) they moderate, and we( mods) all know those that go far beyond their primary task to keep the forum clean. We see and know them.

Honouring everyone else but not the moderators who keep the place clean for discussion doesn't feel right to me. 

We don't know genders here but still vote for the Miss category.

Yes, it's a big problem. 🙍

In my country, things are much worse, as our government is trying to implement a new "supermessenger" (based on China's WeChat). This "supermessenger" is being implemented by force. Traditional user identification methods are being replaced with more dangerous ones (justified by the fight against fraud, although everyone understands that this is a purely political decision). For example, citizens are being forced to link their banking apps (!!!) and the government's qualified electronic signature service (which, by the way, can be used for real estate transactions) to the "supermessenger"...

Frankly speaking, I'm currently trying to minimize interaction with official government agencies. For example, I've introduced self-restrictions (self-blocking) on ​​remote real estate transactions, loan agreements, etc. I'm avoiding biometrics.

In this situation, of course, I need my own fairly simple financial and digital identity management system. Very simple and minimalist.  Bitcoin, cash, VPNs, a list of required websites... And control over every element of this system is crucial. This is done precisely to reduce the number of attack vectors (which you mentioned). The problem is that greedy and powerful people are forcing a complex and extremely insecure system on us... Large IT corporations are little better than governments in this regard.

At the beginning yes, now no. Yet they continue wasting time on this, while they stand idly by when malicious behavior occurs. As long as they don't tag those that pay the campaigns I guess.  


I am not in the DT system, therefore I can not be "wrongly using" it. I am acting according to the "right" use of the "untrusted" part of the trust system. Instead of wasting time on me, how about giving a tag to God Of Thunder also known as naim027 or giving one to the serial scammer AB de Royse777?  

You have actually work to do unlike scammers like God of Thunder, AB de Royse777 and a few other who pretend to be "managers" but who I am not allowed to name without proof for lest the retaliate. But it is clear here who associates with who, they tend to be similar in nature.

You'd be surprised how many users do this. I get notifications on telegram almost daily about some spammer/scammer or whatever being part of my campaign (they're not, just wearing the sig). I appreciate LoyceV for actually checking spreadsheets to confirm this at least, others.. not so much. This is the only reason why I always advocate for keeping open and transparent sheets, can't be arsed with all the drama, lol.

At the beginning yes, now no. Yet they continue wasting time on this, while they stand idly by when malicious behavior occurs. As long as they don't tag those that pay the campaigns I guess. 


I am not in the DT system, therefore I can not be "wrongly using" it. I am acting according to the "right" use of the "untrusted" part of the trust system.

Is that the requirement for the first flag?

Of course, based on the complete history of naim027 it is without a doubt a high risk individual. In these cases it is normal to suspect all forms of cheating, especially since he ran campaigns which gives him opportunity to do activities that are in accordance to his personality and history of behavior. Because if you look at the history of the other feedback you will find manipulation for monetary gain, and kinds of other unethical behavior. Does there need to be a proven case of monetary theft for it to qualify for even the basic flag? If no, why is he not receiving a flag then? Because he has not scammed in the campaigns that he ran while farming up this account? Of course he didn't, how else would he reach a position of trust?

naim027
Dic3L0v3r
Crypt0S0ul

---

---

I've said this to someone, this case presents an extreme failure of the DT members and "gatekeepers" (whoever they can be considered) here. The user has managed to cheat his way with malicious intent to successfully: farm trust, reach DT1, become a "reputable" campaign manager. The only thing that he did not manage was to become a merit source, otherwise his profile would be complete. Meanwhile some DT members waste their time in threads about me. This should be a lesson for future cases..

Huh. Imortant oversight from me. I wonder why anyone would west a paid signature for that long while not getting paid.
At this point I guess I shouldn't be surprised by anything from this guy.

Isn't it a bit paradoxical that he is wrongly using the DT system to point out some things that he thinks are wrong?
Although he has been told several times, he continues to do the same thing, which means that he is not interested in someone's suggestion or opinion. At the same time, he probably expects that someone will be interested in what he has to say.

The issue is deeper too. Many of these are not acting on provable scammers and abusers, but they find the time to complain about my useless tags or to distrust me. Ironically, some of these people have used the argument in the past that someone has enough negative ratings and that this is the reason why they didn't leave more. Completely inconsistent and corrupt people.

It is because you don't give me enough merits LauraV, so I am just sad and refuse to do more work.  


For sure they should pay you, a misinformation spreading shitposter that has never contributed anything to Bitcoin in your life. That improves the state of the forum.

Well there have been many, many trolls on this forum and some have taken a long time to get banned so like Loyce says here, it can take hundreds, if not thousands of ‘Good Reports’ for a mod to finally ban them.

On the flip side, we do have free speech here so maybe take the rough with the smooth. I have been banned on various forums for political views and hurting peoples feelings so the somewhat lenient ban hammer is a good thing.

There is an ignore button for a reason, if somebody annoys you that much and reporting their posts isn’t giving you the desired outcome (a ban) then use the ignore button.

I haven't used it much either, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and that it's non-functional. As far as I know, it has the option of choosing between public and stealth addresses, and it can be considered as having less privacy than Monero.
Perhaps from the point of view of privacy, the presence of coins on the traditional CEX is not important, but it certainly is for the volume of trade, a smaller spread and, in the end, a lower fee for the swap process.

Thank you, I corrected the link this morning. I usually always check links, especially those that link to events. I remember that I completely deleted the link in the raffle template when publishing, but forgot to edit it when preparing the text for ANN.

Again you off the topic, If you worry then you can use forward shipping address and I can use fake name on order instead of your real name!, I can clear every doubt you have privately, but clean your shit please, Thanks

Dont forget to mention that when the cops come knocking, they will have the buyers address and info only abd you will vanish like a fart in the wind leaving the buyer to deal with the legal battle.

I have no doubt the service will provide the item to the buyer, I just doubt the end goal will be good for the buyer.

I`m new here, but I`m old earner at bitoff, If proof needed for that you can get it through telegram only I will not public it..

- You will pay the escrow first, escrow will hold your coins until your order is delivered, escrow terms will be based on tracking info to protect myself too!, I will provide the following,

1 - Purchase proof ( Screenshot from order page showing your item & address with paid mark ).
2 - I will handle to you the tracking info when seller post your item, and I will proof that the tracking info posted on eBay order page with screens & video proof.

You will confirm delivery to the escrow then escrow releasing the coins..simple
 
I hope this clarifies everything!



pass please!

If you want to be a scumbag, take your service to a forum who's members don't care!!! We don't want you r type of service here!!! All you're offering is a way to prison at some point, we pass.

Different merit sources have different criteria to grade as quality posts and there is no right or wrong way here as long as the merit source is not selling them for monetary benefits. Theymos suggested merit sources to exhaust the source merits over hoarding them but again it's voluntary job and if admin think that the merit source is doing a shitty job as being a merit source then he can remove them at any time that is why some of them were removed and new ones were added.

You can use escrow service!..



No comment, However for next people who concerned about how the service done, this post for a paid service not a guide or tutorial!

Thanks..

Tether is the winning bank here, they claimed USDT is backed by fiat,  bonds and treasury bills. Part of this funds are kept by government as bond and treasury bills for some duration and in return they get interest. These bonds are totally safe and are risk free, the interest alone covers company revenue generated.

The chains usage doesn't generate revenue to Tether directly, it gives more impact to the networks, the more transactions of USDT on Tron, Ethereum and other chains, the more transaction fees are burn and more validators makes money from the chain, the more the network becomes busy, Tether get to mint more USDT, money will be flowing to the company, this makes more sense when Tether burn USDT on one chain and mint new on another chain due to demands.

The free transaction on Aptos is a promotion, they don't have much user exposure like Tron, Ethereum and the rest. If you look back, Tether has discontinue it's service from some chains due to low demand, I did move USDT through Algorand one time but now it's no longer there. If Aptos doesn't have much exposure, Tether may cease service from there too unless there is some kind of special partnership between Aptos and Tether.

That's your problem (and that of some other merit sources) because you claim that there are no good posts on the forum and you ask someone to show them to you as if you're not capable of finding them yourself. I don't know what a post is worth 50 merits to you, so there's no point in me even trying to show it.


Of course, the difference is that they are the most generous in this regard.

You can also add Zcash (#ZEC) here. Which also has privacy features and has significantly outperformed many major coins, especially in the last quarter. Plus, ZEC is still present on most CEX, much simpler to trade and manage than XMR.
I've seen on other networks that there's a lot of discussion about whether Zcash can enter Monero territory.

You're absolutely on point. And in addition to that, BIP-39 involves checksum that's in-built. And for a good 12-word phrase for recovery, you don't randomly pull it's final word from list, rather, it involves 4bits of checksum that is calculated and gotten the initial 128 bits of entropy.

I don't know what specific cases you are referring to.


Again, I don't know what specific cases you are referring to. It may be that we DT members are quicker to take action against someone who has no history on the forum than against someone who has a positive reputation. But if there are repeated cases of copy-pasting AI-generated text, they should be flagged.


The DT system is decentralized, so what you think, and even what I think, doesn't matter as much as what the majority agrees upon. You can practice it yourself; I've seen that you've sent some feedback. But unless I'm mistaken, I see that you haven't built a trust list. If you believe someone is using the feedback system incorrectly, you should exclude them from your trust list, and conversely, add those who you believe are using it correctly.

You might wanna have a good look at:

LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system

And this is why people should support and push for net neutrality on legal level. Aside from throttle certain website/traffic, few ISP even intentionally block certain competitor. Unfortunately many country don't have one, where law on EU is flawed and law on US removed some years ago.

But why that? Most USDT are on Tron blockchain and followed by Ethereum blockchain. If you see some other blockchains and later 2 like BSC, optimism, and especially those like Aptos that the fee is almost $0 like someone is not paying any fee, people do not use them up to Tron and Ethereum blockchain if it is USDT.

I think it's my fault. I've been working hard on bbcode for upcoming events for the last few days, and I think in the chaos and the sheer number of drafts, I misplaced the link and sent inspace a template with an error. 

Glad you joined, whilst living in a truck in southern Europe/northern Africa in late 90s i used posta restante/post restant to get parcels in the midst of nowhere anonymously...no clue if it works still that easy

Thanks for your kind words, yes it takes several hours of work to finish a coin like that, but i`m happy i made it in time to give it away to one of the forum members. Fine silver is really a bitchy material if poured in graphite and without vacuum
...please do me a favour & grab a spot in this Raffle. We will manage to bring your prize to you if you win...privately...a train station locker or anonymous PO Box from a friend is just fine

That's actually a good argument in favor of a proof-of-work-only testnet. What LoyceV described could have already happened if the miner disappeared right before the difficulty adjustment.

In the early days there were more ASIC blocks, my script simply ignored them because their difficulty was so low that the block hashes begin with less than 13 zeroes. No, I think the 1/6 rule normally applies. The average ASIC/CPU block ratio since epoch 35 in my metrics (across many epochs) is 11.8% ASIC / 88.2% CPU blocks. We should expect 100/6 = 16.6% ASIC blocks, but consider that this is only true under a steady-difficulty environment where hashrate remains constant.

This is the real difficulty graph since block 82626:



I can't think of the math right now, but I suspect that an increase in hashrate beyond 16.6% is much harder to achieve than a relative decrease in hashrate toward 0%. That explains why, even with average hashrate increase, the ASIC block frequency is less than 16.6%.

I think the forum is not only loosing valuable members, it is also losing some vibes. I feel sorry for people that registered in the past few years, maybe from 2023. There's some part of the forum they are unaware of.
In my newbie days, the following happened.

• DdMrDdMr used to do merit spray that eventually touches almost everyone. At point Fillippone had to ask if he was a human. For some years, I don't see that again.
• Someone like Welsh used to be active and give merit to good newbies.
• I remember The Pharmacist (Sceptical chemist) who gives merits upto 50 and do post reviews.
• Ratimov had two threads to help users rank up.
• There was another version of Nutildah who was doing merit scholarship, but it ended almost the time I joined the forum. But I read the conversation.
• There was Ratimov, nutildah Lovesmayfamilis and others bursting scammers
• There were a set of people who wore bold signature and foxup avatar who earned $300 weekly and everyone wished to be like them.
• There was Ognasty who gives merits for knowing how to sign a message.
• LoyceV has always been there and consistent in the technical board with the likes of o_e_l_e_o, Dannyharminton, BlackHatCoiner, pooya, Charles-Timn etc.
• Franky1 who always disagree with the big guys about bitcoin technical issues, especially with gmaxwell, Ralph or so, who always talk about lightening network.
• Then jollygood, Lovesmayfamilis etc were like the forum police that cheaters avoid. I didn't meet Lauda and Vod but it seems people were scared of them also.
• We had some serious trolls like Bitcoin SV, Smooker face who was promoting 1xbit

And many more.
Honestly, I enjoyed those days and I wish I could return there . Yes, I think it's better because I am not even a Hero member yet, amidst all my experience in the forum.

Indeed good people have left, as well as memories but I believe great things are not all in the past

tem uma solução um pouco mais simples que isso, que é do LoyceV

http://addresses.loyce.club/

Dai voce baixa um listao com todos os saldos em bitcoin de todos os endereços. Ninguem saberá qual voce esta procurando.

mas não é tão atualizado quanto um node...

To be honest, I have this idea that the user changed his name, but I did not have that idea like he used to post plagiarised posts. So that was a big foolish step of him. I mean, I am not much surprised by the way he destroyed his account, and near me, an account does not value more than the person behind it, so what is more surprising is that person destroyed his name and his reputation.


Yeah, that's true, and I agree with you. We have one older member in our Pakistan local community, and he has not been posting for too long, and some of our community members reached out to him through Telegram many months ago. Then they tell us that he is fine and alive, but what thoughts disturb most of the time is that those good users whom we used to interact with most of the time in a good way are not posting anymore. As I told you, he is an old man, so your words perfectly fit here. We always keep them remember in our good memories.


Literally, I love the way you say it. That represents that we still remember them in our good memories. What makes them stay in our memory is that we had a great time with these users who left us and will not come back. What can we do for them? We can just pray for them for the ease of their next life.

And for the last line of what you said, I agree with you, mate; it's now our duty to keep interacting with each other so that we all can spend a good time here with each other and lead the forum further.


And maybe I am one of those users who still don't have that idea, sadly. I honestly did not know it, but a lot of things got opened to me after this thread. You guys know much more about him than I do. And if that is so, there is no doubt that he may be reading our discussion using his alt-accounts.


Yeah, that's the big reality, and no one can deny that.

And I agree with you; every person is way different than others, like everyone has their own personality and the way they talk to others (tone). And these kinds of things make everyone a unique identity, and if it is good, then no doubt we always keep them remembered once they leave us forever.

And in the same way, I would like to relate my saying with your last words that if we end up doing things well, then there is no doubt that everyone will keep us remembered in their memories, and we will then live in their memories. A man's character matters a lot.


Mate, what everyone says is a fact that no one can deny: living on planet earth. Because that is true, and the cycle of life does not stop whether one is dead or still alive. Many say move on. I really know this is the best solution, but one more thing: we cannot deny that they still live in our thoughts and memories, those whom we love the most. Just for example, we say we moved on, but on any random day or any random Wednesday or any random cultural day, those random days you have spent quality time with will make you full of tears sometimes. But we have to make ourselves strong by saying that we have moved on.

All of these users you mentioned in your post were really a great asset for the BitcoinTalk community, and no one is going to forget their contribution to the forum, and they will stay alive in our memory. And if I talk about 1miau, then I would say he was a great user with whom I had a great work experience.


I am still confused. Does that mean this account was managed by someone else? Well, what I understand is that someone else wrote those words on his behalf and the user 1miau is dead. Well, some users are saying that his kitty died; that's why he left the forum. I don't know the exact reason, but what's sad is that 1miau has left the forum and will never come back, as he was a great asset for the bitcointalk community. And we all remember him in our memory.

Grazie mille kenny, le persone che hai menzionato però non sono paragonabili a me, loro sono vere leggende io al max un aiutante 
Ma è giusto menzionare altri italiani che sono di un livello superiore a me, come babo, oppure per altri motivi fillippone gbianchi plutosky. Ho anche scoperto di recente che anche giammangiato aveva fatto qualcosa di fighissimo per questa community! Un bot telegram.
Insomma non sono l'unico e nemmeno il primo ed è giusto omaggiare tutti

Tutti complimenti meritati, sono orgoglioso che tu sia italiano.
Ci sono tantissimi utenti forti come LoyceV se ho scritto giusto, tryninja, fanno delle cose spaziali.
Avere anche un italiano che fa cose così belle, e italiano è un orgoglio per noi

Two days ago I checked his account connection, until I opened this browser tab, this browser tab showed the profile link of the account he was connected to.

He's not just a spammer, he has a huge account farm, here's a proof of connected accounts based on On-Chain transactions.

Main Wallet = Binance Deposit 1 = 0x3952f2Db9Fd33107CE3eff69488Be75011D5f86D
Main Wallet = Binance Deposit 2 = 0x6eb12276c4ce556e2f383a6aad1775a28398e6d8
Main Wallet = Binance Deposit 3 = 0x86323116e4c9410de2368b6706ebc1c258f6b02b
Main Wallet = Binance Deposit 4 = 0x1eDfDDc929322Aa25D9DAaB4E59999378969Bc72

https://bscscan.com/address/0x3952f2db9fd33107ce3eff69488be75011d5f86d
https://bscscan.com/address/0x6eb12276c4ce556e2f383a6aad1775a28398e6d8
https://bscscan.com/txs?a=0x86323116e4c9410de2368b6706ebc1c258f6b02b
https://bscscan.com/address/0x1edfddc929322aa25d9daab4e59999378969bc72

I always like your report, ABCbits, and I logged in today expecting nothing... But damn. Nuked finally as this user didn't seem to stop after a few warning deletion.


This one was archived.

I usually do that. But one of them flood board i usually visit, so i just tried to report it.



Although these days i don't expect too much.

Thanks for the help.


It seems they don't care about multiple neutral or negative feedback and continue to spam. At this point, only permanent ban/nuke can stop them.

I forget BPIP have that page. But when i checked few random user, the percentage of deleted posts is rather low. So IMO it makes sense they're not permanently banned.


You're right. I've edited the thread to make my statement more clear.


It's usually true, but somehow user @Taurox managed to evade nuke/permanent ban.


I hope that's not the case, especially for non-newbie account who perform massive spam.

Well, I've had a look and the feedback is from back 2018 but his recent post history is quite crappy as well. Just generic posts on Gambling Discussion or Trading Discussion where you can say pretty much nothing and as long as it has some resemblance to the title of the thread you'll get a pass.

Also, I smell an alt account here. It seems that the guy behind it stops posting when he can not monetize the account and just comes back when he sees some chance. Also, the only merits he is gotten in the past 120 days are from this thread, where you don't have to do much more than run text through the detectors and publish the result and 14 merits from the run a node challenge. I guess it's to meet the minimum merit requirement that some campaigns ask for.

Thanks for your help and participating.

A passphrase is better for real. Reason is also, you can easily get it backed up and as well stored in several locations. This will handle and minimize risks of failure. Also, when passphrase has been compromised, it can easily be changed.

The barrack will always remain intact. The soldiers in this present barrack that their names are ringing a bell in my head so far are:

@LoyceV, I am cracking my head on how best I can make use of his raw data in a visual format.
@NotATether, I came across the node challenge in beginner group, sadly I am not qualified to participate yet, but I will love to
@Mia Chloe, The name is pinned to my eyes, probably maybe it's because I have quote her twice in the forum

If you understand LoyceV very well, you will realise that his definition of freedom is quite different from yours. LoyceV believes in freedom, even if it has to go against him and his desire. If you support only the positive aspect of freedom, it means that you want to censor someone. I am just thinking if LoyceV actually practices this even in real life. It could be brutal if given someone the freedom to be an asshole, an idiot, a bully or a gentleman.

When I came here newly, I expected everyone to behave decently, but I was just disappointed at a time. But it didn't take long to understand that allow freedom of speech is one of the best things that happened to this forum.

It's 4% and 0.5% currently, and our XMR reserve has been low for a while, it only increased significantly right before this XMR rally. We could perhaps consider a automated dynamic fee 

We do? What's that?

My main problem with being too hasty in distributing merits is this practice is literally responsible for the creation of criminal enterprises that currently operate on the forum.

Aside from this, every other account is somebody's alt account (who, most of the time, is not saying much in particular to anybody BTW -- unless they're specifically fishing for merits, of course), and since there's a good chance you wouldn't be responding to a person* conversing in good faith, why bother engage them in the first place. Let alone give them merits.

*sometimes its GPT output posted by person

---

Let's identify the full arsenal of the average shitposter:

 - AI
 - plagiarism
 - copy/pasting news article translations
 - text spinning
 - ... what else am I missing

It shouldn't be too time consuming to use your own brain when writing on the forum. If it is, you shouldn't be here.

Then we will need to buy XMR from the market with high fees

Thank you for your question. I have had approximately 15+ posts or comments deleted by a guest moderator.

He made some good contributions to the forum... but i dont undertand how moderators allowed him to freely plagiarize so many posts for so long without any consequence.... clearly farming merits and reputation with other people's work..

Probably most users didnt even notice that most of his good posts were plagiarism.

Maybe he is still among us with another account.

That's why Theymos needs to spread out smerit distribution. While his intention and choices may be good, the community complaints continue to grow about merit.

50 merits to one post nullifies (with extreme prejudice) the 1 or 2 merits the average user sends - I tried to show this to Theymos once but he responded by removing my source status.  Less stress for sure, but I am a Legendary member that has more experience here than most - I should be able to identify good posts the same as you.   Instead of giving one person 1,000 smerits a month, he should give 100 smerits to ten people.    We already have a voting mechanism to identify members that use merit properly.

I have an alternative I am launching end of year, but I'd hate to see the merit system devolve further into a private club. 

I try to live like the good Samaritan and follow the Golden Rule. I know I can't change the whole internet, but if I can help even one person, I see that as a success.

I'll explain this for you using the life cycle of suckers. A mature plantain produces fruit and after harvest it gradually withers and produces an offshoot which performs the same cycle again and again. in short, life is a cycle, quality poster will come and go, interestingly, other quality posters will emerge. Life goes on!

So don't consider it as a loss, it's meant to be. I bet we still have good posters everywhere across the forum: @LoyceV, d5000, BlackHatCoiner, lovesmayfamilis, dkbit98, NotATether, Pmalek, ABCbits, pooya87, NeuroticFish, powerglove, JayJuanGee, fillippone, Charles-Tim, Apogio, Mia Chloe, TryNinja, DdmrDdmr, vapourminer, gmaxwell, Rikafip, ChiBitCTy, Cricktor, hosemary, Free Market Capitalist, notocactus, nutildah, GazetaBitcoin, Vod, etc, I could go on and on.

So let's not duel in the past, we better focus on managing the present and the future.

Sure, we are losing good members all the time, simply because people are getting older or they have other priorities.

It looks like bbvious account suicide, but I remember there were claims from other members who said he already sold his account before that, and the new owner was someone else.
I don't know for sure if this is true or not, but there were some indications in that direction when I was checking that case.

Yes, absolutely. In fact, the reason why I haven't released any updates for the search engine is because I'm waiting for my scraper to catch up on the back-log of edited posts. Admittedly, it could take several months before it's finished. I just hope a firmware update doesn't force me to reboot before then.

He managed to fool most of the forum, that's definitely true. When he first appeared on Meta to boast about earning 1000 merits, everyone wondered who this guy was, considering he was a product of his local board. All these "successes" were nothing more than a very good deception that 99% of the forum members fell for - I was not one of them.


My guess is that he decided to burn one account and continue with a bunch of other alts that he probably created - he was a classic leech who was here for the money - if you don't believe me, ask those who organized various contests.

My python script found 27609 ASIC blocks mined in the last 100000 blocks.

Your concern is reasonable, but reality shows that there's just always some miner with terahashes spent on testing bitcoin mining. Sure, there are periods with less than 10% of blocks being ASIC, just as times where it's higher than that, but I don't find it particularly concerning if some epochs just have longer time intervals.

(Also, consider that CPU mining wasn't being taken advantage like this until block 50 thousand something. Before that time, ASIC miners like Portland were mining very frequently at low difficulties using real hashrate. So the metrics start having meaning at around block ~60k.)

Do you miss one of the biggest plagiarists in the history of this forum?

---

Do you think he had any reputation before he decided to destroy himself as you say? When the evidence of his creativity was presented, which consisted of translating articles with online translators and hiding the source in as little visible hyperlinks as possible, he continued as if nothing had happened only because he had the support of the most numerous local community and their moderators.

When the OP says that Rat was a valuable member, I wonder if he lives in some parallel world where some known facts are not available.

Ho Ho Ho !
As promised, here is the latest update before the final results.
Well... It looks like I have lost my place on the podium. With Christmas coming up, I'm likely to end up with the chocolate medal.
The top three are within 50$ of each other. Nothing is decided yet.
See you on January 1, 2026.

Pos	Users	22/12/2025
1	internetional	1 293,89
2	LoyceV	1 273,03
3	paid2	1 247,44
4	Halab	1 164,87
5	GazetaBitcoin	1 040,87
6	sompitonov	935,82
	Bitcoin	884,51
7	DireWolfM14	864,38
8	memehunter	841,83
9	examplens	787,76
10	ajiz138	656,70
11	icopress	605,41
12	n0nce	541,85
13	B1g4udge	493,61
	Average	487,21
14	FinneysTrueVision	485,11
15	shahzadafzal	464,56
16	rat03gopoh	464,03
17	Smartprofit	437,39
18	DYING_S0UL	435,21
19	Rikafip	398,28
20	GrosWesh	394,54
21	Despairo	346,13
22	Saint-loup	339,15
23	LogitechMouse	336,25
24	jokers10	322,65
25	SamReomo	319,95
	Random_but_balanced	297,25
26	Taskford	295,40
27	xandry	285,12
28	tokeweed	281,72
29	cryptofrka	260,26
30	Woodie	221,07
31	klarki	211,34
32	worldofcoins	201,37
33	Buchi-88	199,26
34	bitmover	184,92
35	famososMuertos	181,90
36	libert19	173,76
37	arallmuus	169,72
38	Koal-84	137,54
39	xLays	102,88
40	slackovic	91,29

                  


Line chart race : https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/23486883/
LCR without Woodie  : https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/24269401/

Valuable members will come and go. That is life.

He called himself on his personal text as a margin holder. Who knows he hold bitcoin or some altcoins with 2 to 5x and the coin pumped, become millionaire from it and see this forum not useful for him anymore? Or I think Chipmixer was no more geek he left, the money he was later receiving might be too small and see it not worth what he is posting. People like you on this forum are less than 1%.

He was pressured at the time and all can make him do what he did. Also we do not know what went underneath that is not revealed to us. He was a great member. I did not like him before when he was only sending merit to only Russians but he later changed as his merit allocation increases.

Akda ni: Akda ni: LoyceV
Orihinal na paksa: How to lose your Bitcoins with CTRL-C CTRL-V

---

---

Kakakita ko lang na may bago na namang biktima ng clipboard hijacker malware.

Paano ito gumagana
1. Pumili ka ng Bitcoin address, at pinindot mo ang CTRL-C.
2. The malware changes the address to an address owned by the hacker/scammer.
2. Gamit ang malware ay papalitan nito ang adddress at gagamitin ang address ng hacker/scammer.
3. Pinindot mo ang CTRL-V at kasunod na nito ay wala ang iyong pera.
Kahit na tignan mo pa ang ginamit mong Bitcoin address, may pagkakataong ang ilang mga character dito ay parehas lang, pero hindi mo aakalain na napalitan na pala ito.

Paano ito maiwasan
1. Huwag kayo gumamit Windows, pero tingin ko hindi ninyo din naman ito papalitan.
2. Check the entire address after copy/pasting, and not just the first few (or last few) characters. Check some in the middle too. That's a lot of work, so chances are you won't do that either.
2. Tignan maigi ang kabuoang address bago ito kopyahin/ilagay, at h indi lang basta una (o di kaya ay huling) characters. Tignan din maigi sa gitna. Mas mainam ito gawin, dahil sa malamang hindi mo din iyon gagawin.
3. Mayroon akong naisip: huwag mong kopyahin ang buong Bitcoin address, kundi ay kopyahin mo lang ang ilan sa parte nito, tapos ay i-type mo ang huling mga character. Kahit palitan ito ng malware ay hindi ito tatanggapin (ang maling) address kung gagawin mo ang pag type nang ikaw lang.
Pero kailangan mo pa ding sundin ang Step 2 pag ka tapos nito: At tignan pa din maigi ang address!
4.Gamitin ang pag kopya/pag lagay ng iyong address para matignan kung tama. Kung gusto mo mag padala sa address na ito 1PjpEgknyKxQKXtMcYFDym8odkfohFGkui. Pag katapos mo kopyahin/ilagay, i-select mo ang  "yKxQKXtMc" nula sa inilagay na address, tapos ay gawin ang CTRL-C. Pag katapos ay, gamitin ang CTRL-F kasunod nito ay CTRL-V para makita kung tama ang address mula sa orihinal nitong address. At syempre tignan maigi kung ang pang gagalingan nito ay lehitimo: tandaan kahit ang email ay maaring i-spoofed din!
5. Dagdag ko lang din ang suhisiyon ni o_e_l_e_o dito:

Panatilihing maging vigilante
Maging mabusisi, at laging tignan nang hindi double kundi triple pa bago mag send ng pera!

I really understand your concern and I must commend your effort to fight AI spam report.

Howbeit, if AI usage is detected it's best that drastic measure should be taken against anyone found guilty. Calling me out for no wrong other than being a newbie is you limiting all newbies' level of understanding and comprehension. To some, being a newbie is just a title, not definition of understanding and knowledge.

Personally, I don't support AI spam and I support every decision against it. I put my little knowledge in areas I have interest and knowledge in the bitcoin market. My dislike for AI spamming is a major reason why I commend your effort. My little request is that the stereotype against newbies be lowered a bit. Nobody feels happy being boxed and limited not to sound educated just because he's a newbie.

Regardless, thank you so much for helping the community fight AI spam.

I ask the same question: how do these keyboard people manage in real life? If members do not support the cause, the status quo will prevail.

Now I see, it's more of a battle against privacy but the Government will not come bold to say it. This will like to force me to believe that even if the mixers are not rendering their services to criminals (I mean mixers are only used by genuine people), government will also still try to bring it down. I'm I correct on this?
The government should be aware of everything and if possible control them all. This is becoming clear to me, as Bob will say "Nobody can kill Raggae". We shall all sing that nobody can kill privacy.

Trump is a DT member with red tag. He hasn't changed anything since he returned to DT1.

In addition to that, even if miners have all transactions, it's still not completely certain they'll pick the optimal combination that maximizes their profit. The algorithm used to select the optimal set of transactions is NP-hard. Miners pick a set of transactions that is profitable enough, but not always the most profitable.

So, the right answer is that they'll just choose one, nearly randomly, if CPFP pays around the same as RBF:

Yeah, I would bet quite strongly that the report will remain unhandled or even marked as bad.

Regarding the other issue here is my take: you bought an account recently? You should be tagged. You bought an account 10 years ago and there are no warning signs in 10 years? I don't think we should ruin an account in that case.

It's clear that he's not the original owner of the account, but no one is going to tag him for it.

Let me quote my older post.


Note that i don't know whether image i shown also apply on sustained write, without also using more space.

---

FWIW, some news report OpenAI is the main reason since it's claimed they buy 40% of global RAM supply[1] while the rest are few big AI/tech company. Anyway, i expect cost to upgrade both SSD and RAM could be more expensive that OP's laptop.

[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/dram/openais-stargate-project-to-consume-up-to-40-percent-of-global-dram-output-inks-deal-with-samsung-and-sk-hynix-to-the-tune-of-up-to-900-000-wafers-per-month

The USB ports all seem to be working fine, but I've decided to just go with a pruned node, so I won't be using the external drive anymore.

These are too complicated for me. For now I just want the experience of running a node.

From where I live, those are quite affordable as well, and I guess it would take less effort than replacing parts. But I could also just upgrade the ram of the other laptop that I've mentioned to 8GB. I appreciate all of the suggestions regardless. I'll weigh my options and choose what's best based on my resources.

Until you wrote about it, I had no idea about the $500 or the story behind it. I have no idea why he gave it to you or when it happened but it certainly would not have hurt him to have made that error to a high ranking DT member rather than to a newbie and can be called upon whenever the account is questioned. What are the chances of that?

Hi Folks,

How are you all? It's been a long time since I posted here. Was struggling in-between with Gazeta's revisions.
Finally completed all the changes and found some extra time to work on 2 new translations(listed below).

Here are the 2 new translations -

[1]
Author - LoyceV
Original - How to lose your Bitcoins with CTRL-C CTRL-V
Translation - CTRL-C CTRL-V से अपने बिटकॉइन कैसे खो दें

[2]
Author - GazetaBitcoin
Original - Libertarians -- where are they now?
Translation - लिबर्टेरियन -- अब वे कहाँ हैं?

Cheers,
M47AK16

At a time, I started asking myself some questions about this mixer issues.
1. Did any government even prohibit mixers?
2. Or they simply want mixers to work in their terms (kyc and submitting users data)?

Theymos had a very genuine concern with the situation that surrounded Biden's administration. But with the present Trump, Bitcointalk will not be taking down for promoting mixers. I am too sure that for now....

---

मैंने अभी एक और क्लिपबोर्ड हाईजैकर मैलवेयर का शिकार देखा.

यह कैसे काम करता है
1. आप एक बिटकॉइन एड्रेस चुनते हैं और CTRL-C दबाते हैं.
2. मैलवेयर उस एड्रेस को बदलकर हैकर/स्कैमर के स्वामित्व वाले एड्रेस से बदल देता है.
3. आप CTRL-V दबाते हैं और जो भी फंड भेजते हैं, वह खो देते हैं.
भले ही आप पेस्ट किए गए बिटकॉइन एड्रेस का कोई हिस्सा जाँच लें, संभावना यही रहती है कि शुरुआती कुछ अक्षर एक जैसे हों, और आपको यह पता ही न चले कि एड्रेस बदल दिया गया था.

इससे कैसे बचें
1. विंडोज़ का इस्तेमाल न करें, लेकिन हम दोनों जानते हैं कि आप ऐसा करने वाले नहीं हैं.
2. कॉपी/पेस्ट करने के बाद पूरे एड्रेस की जाँच करें, सिर्फ़ शुरुआती कुछ (या आख़िरी कुछ) कैरेक्टर्स की नहीं। बीच के कुछ हिस्सों को भी जाँचें। यह काफ़ी मेहनत का काम है, इसलिए संभावना है कि आप यह भी नहीं करेंगे.
3. मैंने एक और तरीका सोचा है: पूरा बिटकॉइन एड्रेस कॉपी न करें, सिर्फ़ उसका एक हिस्सा कॉपी करें और आख़िरी कुछ कैरेक्टर्स खुद मैन्युअली टाइप करें. भले ही मैलवेयर अधूरे बिटकॉइन एड्रेस को अपने एड्रेस से बदल दे, आपका वॉलेट उस (अमान्य) एड्रेस को स्वीकार नहीं करेगा, क्योंकि आपने खुद कुछ कैरेक्टर्स जोड़ दिए होंगे.
इसके बाद भी आपको स्टेप 2 फॉलो करना होगा: एड्रेस की जाँच करें!
4. एड्रेस के किसी हिस्से को वेरिफ़ाई करने के लिए कॉपी/पेस्ट का इस्तेमाल करें. मान लीजिए आप इस एड्रेस पर फंड भेजना चाहते हैं: 1PjpEgknyKxQKXtMcYFDym8odkfohFGkui। कॉपी/पेस्ट करने के बाद, पेस्ट किए गए एड्रेस में से “yKxQKXtMc” चुनें और CTRL-C दबाएँ. फिर CTRL-F के बाद CTRL-V का इस्तेमाल करें, ताकि देखा जा सके कि यह आंशिक एड्रेस मूल स्रोत से मेल खाता है या नहीं. और यह भी सुनिश्चित करें कि स्रोत असली हो ईमेल भी स्पूफ किया जा सकता है!
5. मैं यहाँ o_e_l_e_o का सुझाव भी जोड़ रहा हूँ:

सतर्क रहें
फंड भेजने से पहले जाँचें, दुबारा जाँचें और फिर से तीन बार जाँचें!

---

---

इस पहल के तहत अनुवादित :

---

---

Is there any possibility that you somehow stole the IP address data of BitcoinTalk users without Theymos's knowledge? Or could it be that Theymos gave you permission to check the old IP addresses?

Well, -testnet4 then. Should be less hungry for RAM. 

When it relates to the AB de Royse777 aka Royse777 account, I have no trust in him at all. Others have their own opinion however because many campaign participants are always hoping to move to something that pays more, they probably do not want to get on the wrong side of any manager as it reduces their chance of potentially joining a high (or higher) paying campaign by at least one.

For the first point you mentioned, if there was a way to find out from the original owner and creator of the Royse777 account what really happened it would help provide clarity. Clearly the account changed hands back in 2017. How the events unfolded and how it happened is not known yet.

As for the second point, to my knowledge the Royse777 account never posted about firing naim027 therefore that fact along with the fact he is defending (another of the naim027 farmed accounts) God Of Thunder aka Learn Bitcoin shows extremely poor judgement. Exactly why he has that close relationship with naim027 also remains unclear. Regarding the DT members enrolled in campaigns he manages, I have not taken a look but he really does not manage much in this forum now anyway.

This is why my proposal is so simple. If you read the mailing list, you'll see many complicated proposals that have no consensus. We will probably never agree on a single one, so let's just accept the fate of testnet, which is that mining is difficult and non-free, and at least let the game theory determine the usability of the network. It's also the only proposal that respects the "mainnet clone" principle.

The real difficulty, as previously mentioned, is 216 million. That's 1.5 PH/s. It seems a big number, but that's the total hashrate. From bitaxes and small rigs trying to test bitcoin, to even MARA pool with hundreds of terahashes. It still blows my mind, but on the other hand, how much is testing the bitcoin network worth?

I know, but I can't think of any better solutions at the moment.

It would need to resemble mainnet's 10-minute average block generation at minimum (which current testnet fails to do) while also ensuring that some guy with a specialized hardware can't come in and disrupt the mining times for everyone else.

That’s a big inconsistency we have there.

If rules are rules, why don’t both of those accounts get the same treatment from the dt?

One might say, “the dude who bought his account is acting nice and honest. What if he bought his acc, i never saw him scamming anybody, he is as trustworthy as one can get. No need to tag him just because he bought his acc.”

Then the other might say the same thing for god of thunder

“What if he started a new account even though he was a liar and a scammer in his previous life in the forum? He is as decent as one can get now. Imma neva saw him scammin anybodie. He managed many siggy camps successfully. Let the admin decide if he should be banned.”

So… we have 2 acc buyers in that example. One is getting tagged and while the other isn’t. Both never scammed anybody. Both never showed any signs of a scammer. That’s no good. Stuff like that make dt’s ratings also questionable.

I am not saying GoT or the other account buyer that seems to be a nice guy which we don’t know his forum name should be tagged or not but some consistency would be nice to have.

I don't understand how he can 1000x the difficulty in a short time. Just for the record, right now difficulty is 1.3 billion. Multiply that by 1/6 (the "real" difficulty) and you have 216 million. This is 1.55 PH/s. In order to 4x that you need to throw 4,65 PH/s on average for the entire epoch. That's an insane amount of money for this negligible damage.

And by the way, you can make the current testnet4 unusable by 51% attacking it with empty blocks for a tiny fraction of the same cost. You can even make it barely unusable for free, as we've seen!

I personally don't care what others do with their testnet coins, as long as I have the freedom to test the network.

This message is not only for LoyceV but for others too.

I faced it several times in the past and left my logical answer (when it possible) when it came from users I trust and consider has no intention to harm my privacy. But when it come from a manager who deliberately conduct dirty operations against me and my business (contact my clients in private, makes dirty arguments to convince them they are making wrong decisions by hiring my service, autosuggesting them to hire him instead) then why would I trust him? Anyone who knows the relation between him and me can easily see his ill intention in his post to frame me. I would like to question this specific manager that should I share the part of the conversation you had with one of my client a year ago? Let's be more specific in case you are going to convince the community that I am bluffing. It was a mixer on the other forum. Let's specify even more. I am still their campaign manager. I kept it private (except sharing it with some close circle) to give you a chance not to look yourself TOO UGLY publicly and to keep the managers fight minimal.

I think you always try to show yourself "an honest guy" in public. icopress, Shall I bring the message public? A simple YES/NO.

Regarding JollyGood and alt account Satofan44 - these two accounts (or one person having their own conversation) are troll towards me. Anyone disagrees? There are a few other accounts too but seems like they are not actively trolling right now.

---

Let's talk about the concern if this is a genuine concern:
Those who are genuinely interested - first check (feedback, reputation) what I had before November 2017 (August 2017 and November 2017 seems the questionable time according to the Troll) and after send me a private message if you think you need to. If I trust you enough, if I do not consider you are serving a purpose for these trolls and an agent of that specific manager then you will get the answer of YES/NO.

Local rule: I will allow only that specific manager to address and answer his "YES/NO" in this topic. Anything else on this topic from any user will be removed.

That's also my experience, especially if you look for a bit older models which can still be decent. And the second hand or refurbished market should be flooded with laptops that are not officially Windows 11 capable/ready by Microsucks arbitrary set standard.

Many Business laptops are also commonly easier to repair/open/upgrade than consumer models and some are built to last longer, especially when they're easier to clean off some dust built-up in the cooling system.

Either he too is naim027, or he works with people like him or hires them. None of which is a sign of trustworthy behavior LauraV. The swamp is always bigger than you perceive it to be from the outside.

A miner cannot increase difficulty by more than 4x in a short time, because of consensus rule. If he spent a lot of hashrate for a short time and then quit, then the worst he could accomplish is make the block interval 40 minutes long on average, in the next epoch, considering that no other big miner wants to point extra hashrate (which is almost never the case). 40 minutes is still much better than currently.

I don't see how it alleviates the problem. If a 180 min rule replaced the 20 min rule, then we should expect empty blocks every once in 180 minutes.

Based on my personal experience, SSD that use QLC flash type or from unknown brand usually have poor performance on sustained write. And if OP's laptop also contain HDD with big capacity, he can consider using --blocksdir option so blockchain data stored on HDD (while other files still on SSD) to reduce burden on the SSD.