This answer is open to anyone, my question is: when you want to place a long a MtGox do you (a) just press 'buy' at the default price in the text box, or (b) adjust the price down a little.

I've been adjusting down a little, and it takes quite some time to convert the $ to BTC. I usually choose a number half way between the default numbers that gox shows for 'buy' and 'sell'. Is this somewhat ineffective way to do it?


Leave these numbers as default when buy/sell, or make some adjustments?

http://i44.tinypic.com/o5dezd.jpghttp://i43.tinypic.com/sfvt7b.jpg

or..

someone had $6.17 flagged, and when the drop was at 6.17 it triggered a long/leverage/whatever is called, buy up of btc.

http://i41.tinypic.com/9sbjox.jpg

Now the mystery buyer is dumping his loot, and the price drops.

I speculate that its not the expliciit 21/10ers though, because they are still patiently waiting for the next crossover.

(all speculation).

[EDIT] Goomboo, this system is uber-intriguing. I've posting all this stuff here in your thread, because you are the teacher of teh system, but if its too much, let me know.. I can shift on out and make a new space. Although.. I think I'm done for now in any case.

Real time stats (at time of posting):

http://i40.tinypic.com/xqfhfr.jpg

Applying the Goomboo system (I forgot the offical name of the system) it would seem too early to go long because there is no crossover yet (at 3pm)....

I can see the crossover at 10am(ish), followed by a large volume of red. This red represents traders going short in response to the crossover right?

Can anyone speculate out loud here, and just describe what might be happening at the 1pm-3pm. Whis is the cause of all the Green. I speculate one thing -- that it can't be traders on the 21/10 because theres no crossover yet..

Me too now

I think I'm feeling the gist of what you are explaining. Its like the wave of sell and buy becomes more exaggurated. So, the falls in price are steeper and deeper, and the rises are steeper and higher, or something close to that description.

Seems like a good thing, if you can ride the front of the wave.

So, extending on from this; could one say that the effect of introducing the 21/10 cross-over to an increased portion of the BTC trading population; that a more reliable (or profitable) wave of short and long momentum has been potentially created?

Much gratitude and respect Sir Goomboo.

I notice on the first red arrow, the 10/21 didn't actually cross-over, but just met together for a moment. In retrospect, it was the time to sell. So I guess this means the lines don't strictly need to cross-over, but a coming-together can be enough to initiate a sell.

Now look, again (right now as I type this), the 10/21 have met... lets see if the strategy plays out.

http://i41.tinypic.com/bdwndi.jpg


Zoomed (1 day):

http://i43.tinypic.com/de4op2.jpg

Also Goomboo, the question which is probably on the tip of a few tongues right now. Pure skepticism -- I'd like to ignore it, but curiosity has the better of me. Although you instructed people not to use your 10/21 forumla, its almost impossible to expect anyone would not use it (Diffusion of responsibilty). If someone (such as youself) had a hunch that a bunch of people would be working explcitly with the 10/21 system, is there a way that you could use a counter-measure to make extra profits from this manipulation of the trend?

(this question is asked with much respect by the way).

If you decide to use Moneybookers, do it covertly. Don't put any clue in the transaction that your are trading for BTC.

I did email MB about BTC trading, and they said in no uncertain terms that accounts will be closed if seen to be trading BTC. So, not to scare you off, just to say, keep it covert.

Thank you, Sir Jeremy.

5/5 in all respects.

I deposited more than a couple of hundred dollars at lunch time today, and this evening my BTC wallet is credited. If you're Aussie and want to get some BTC, this is the method to look at.

Manipulation of one of the key psychological principles of influence --> Social proof.

If no-one is seen to be donating then the OP is at risk of falling casualty to the bystander effect (everyone conforms with each other and does nothing). Contrary, if others see that people are donating, they too can be influenced by that and feel like chipping in for support.

Wikipedia entries for bystander effect and social proof will explain it better.

Xenland was correct to apply the label of scammer to OP, and buttcoin was a bonehead for applying the label 'bonehead' to Xenland.

I've got a few years old account with Moneybookers and didn't feel like losing it so I email them asking about their policy of bitcoin trades (for bitmarket.eu specifically). They replied:

"Please note that such transactions are restricted by Moneybookers, thus please do not attempt to make payments for them trough your profile as it could be permanently suspended"

I had heard rumors about MB accounts being closed for trading BTC, and this confirmed it for me that BTC + MB = no go zone, if you want to keep account.

^ Best advice possible. Couldn't have been said any other way.

To add my own thought too -- with only 21 million BTC ever existing, we have to also consider that in the long term,  some BTC will be lost from accidentally deleted wallets etc, thus the black-hole will be a naturally occurring phenomenon. To speed up the process now, might have adverse consequences further forward in time.

Thank you for the link good sir. Indeed it answered some questions.

Can someone with knowledge please post an answer for this question from echris1. Especially if you add Tor in the mix, is it not very easy just to anonymize your own coin trail with a bunch of self initiated / self receive transfers?

Its either 1:1 or its not. In this case its not. And with good reason: As casascius already said, its about sustainability. Something I completely agree with as being justifiably necessary. Aside from this, the reason is irrelevant to the fact -- if its not 1:1, and casascius never suggested its 1:1, then I don't see why the point to argue that it is 1:1 or even 'sorta' 1:1.

Cool, I like it. This would be good info for marketing campaign. Also a little instruction guide how to spot a peeled sticker (like with a little comparison pic or something).

OP says: 1.25 BTC per coin for up to 10 coins and better rate for more coins.. Not 1:1 though.

I hope that doesn't mean that the idea is not open to any forms of criticism. I'm not here to do that though, however I do have some curiosity:

After purchase, are the coins intended to be traded hand-to-hand, as per regular currency? (of course I mean within a community of bitcoin aware individuals). If so, are the coins / codes tamper proof, so that any individual who receives one coin can instantly see that this coin has 1 BTC of value (not been used).

If not for hand-to-hand trading, would it be fair to assume that the coins be primarily for aesthetic and novelty purpose?

Skepticism always welcome. I like your train of thought, but the argument is still lacking. My argument against your idea so far is that:

[1] As a natural speaker of English, the IRC conversation looks *very* legitimate. The back and forth looks like it is genuinely two separate people (opinion only)
[2] If sango doesn't compensate the loss to his clients, will his business survive? Will the bad reputation caused by this incident kill the business? Is it worth to kill the business for 511BTC?
[3] As per defxor, Occam's razor would place the burden on you to convince otherwise. Until then, simplest explanation to fit with facts will be most believable. Maybe search for some more facts and you can make your claim seem more persuasive.

If you want to explain something feel free, but your wake-up calls will be best served to the sleepy (yes its an impolite sentence opener). Since you (with 400+ posts) are in the newbie forum, please have some respect and impart your knowledge minus the negative connotations.

Now in proper English, please re-explain whatever it is you are trying to say.

There "can be NO bendavis" in effect has zero meaning. Do you mean to say that "there IS NO bendavis", or "there MIGHT NOT be a bendavis".

Much respect to you for initiating this venture. I hope you can recieve as much ideas and feedback as you need to make it work.

A quick tip of my own: You can have 2 Paypal accounts of your own.. so long as one is personal and the other is premium or higher (the point is, both can be free). This may be useful for your further testing purposes.

Keep up the excellent work. Keep above the scammers at all times. Hope to buy some BTC from you when its out of Beta.

...Or.. Darwinism. The question is: Have the hacked and scammed taken reasonable measures of precaution, and practiced good security; or is this a simple case of natural selection eliminating the weakest links from the gene pool. Sux in either case. CaliforniaZombie I hope you can bounce back and get some more funds together. Keep going strong and don't look back on this ugly chapter except as a reminder how to protect what's yours.

@stalin-chan I stand corrected.

On separate matter: Poor BenDavis was forced into a situation where his moral character was put on the line. He has to choose to return the 511 BTC or keep it -- both of these decisions can lead to serious regrets -- give the BTC back, and regret spending it for being weak (nice guys finish last etc etc) -- or keep the money and lose your moral character to the ideal of becoming a thief. Being human, these are not easy decisions to make for all people. A happy compromise might have been to return most of it (two thirds for example), and keep the remainder as compensation for the heartache of deciding.

If you do read this Ben, I hope you are able to reconsider and give a portion back -- I get the feeling this chapter is closed though for now.

phantomcircuit I hope you can bounce back from this, and make your business more successful then even you hoped before.