Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 70 results by IMadeYouReadThis
Yes, I can understand, there is some misjudgment possible while judging if the poster's are hired by the ANN creator or its just a trap of other competitors to get the thread dumped. But mostly if it is done frequently on a thread with number of newbie bot accounts, I don't think anyone is targeting that thread to be dumped, as this services seems to be paid and no one would be willing to risk it for free IMO.
And ya, you have also made the slippery slope more slopey by mentioning the above idea.
Absolutely agree with you. It's usually for bumping, but I am aware of the fact that this could be used maliciously. I can't recall a situation in which this has happened yet, but if this becomes common knowledge, and we remove threads just like that it could very well become a problem in the future. And ya, you have also made the slippery slope more slopey by mentioning the above idea.
How do you bring it out to be actually bumping the threads based on providing their services or are purposely doing it just for the sake of such threads being removed due to competition? What measures are taken when people are found who do it purposely? Are these guys banned or just warned to stop what they're doing?
I think its just an possible abuse but as welsh said he has not seen it happen often, so I don't think there is any such case until anyways.
Absolutely agree with you. It's usually for bumping, but I am aware of the fact that this could be used maliciously. I can't recall a situation in which this has happened yet, but if this becomes common knowledge, and we remove threads just like that it could very well become a problem in the future.
Thanks for the info, I see Bitcointalk staff acts with a better sense of judgements on such cases. Keep it up !
I think we could kill it by deleting the whole fucking ANN thread, so that the bots could not get a place to lay there eggs. BTW, I have reported the main post.
Usually, if there's enough evidence that they're using a bumping service the thread is removed, and the user might who posted it might even be banned. Although, we have to be careful because if competitors are aware of this they could stage this, and spam to look like bumping services on their competitors, and get their topic removed. It's a slippery slope. Yes, I can understand, there is some misjudgment possible while judging if the poster's are hired by the ANN creator or its just a trap of other competitors to get the thread dumped. But mostly if it is done frequently on a thread with number of newbie bot accounts, I don't think anyone is targeting that thread to be dumped, as this services seems to be paid and no one would be willing to risk it for free IMO.
And ya, you have also made the slippery slope more slopey by mentioning the above idea.
⭐ Merited by LFC_Bitcoin (1)
This looks like a bot bumping services, even if the accounts are nuked and the post's are deleted, more army will come to bump the thread. I have also seen many other projects using such, small and unwanted comments to bump there thread in the announcement section, which is pretty hard to tackle for a normal user. And yes, of course they are a scam project.
I think we could kill it by deleting the whole fucking ANN thread, so that the bots could not get a place to lay there eggs. BTW, I have reported the main post.
I think we could kill it by deleting the whole fucking ANN thread, so that the bots could not get a place to lay there eggs. BTW, I have reported the main post.
Having not read the threads linked yet, I assume this is some sort of protection racket? Am I correct in this assumption?
Yes, protection racket is the perfect reference to what game protect are trying to achieve here, but I don't see them successfully protecting someone on the forum at least, most of what they seem to do is try to attack casinos here.
I'm currently looking for 0.0055BTC at preev 1:1 for PayPal, which would be $65 right now.
I am open to this deal, also sent you a PM, TP !
EDIT:
Had a smooth deal already !
But I can explain that to you
In fact, it is hard to understand why you can't understand it. The simple answer is that they don't particularly care about BTT and neither do most other exchanges out there. But we can still see the Bitfinex thread with Bitfinex representative never showing up again. The inference should be pretty evident and straightforward. They don't give a fuck about the forum any more but they definitely did at the beginning
Apart from that, I'm strongly inclined to think that it was mostly through Hhampuz's effort that Livecoin agreed to run a signature campaign here (given how eagerly he tried to fix matters with this foul accusation). So the real question that we should ask ourselves is how come that they discard the forum as irrelevant as far as their reputation is concerned. I think that should be a reality check for us as to how important BTT is these days
In fact, it is hard to understand why you can't understand it. The simple answer is that they don't particularly care about BTT and neither do most other exchanges out there. But we can still see the Bitfinex thread with Bitfinex representative never showing up again. The inference should be pretty evident and straightforward. They don't give a fuck about the forum any more but they definitely did at the beginning
Apart from that, I'm strongly inclined to think that it was mostly through Hhampuz's effort that Livecoin agreed to run a signature campaign here (given how eagerly he tried to fix matters with this foul accusation). So the real question that we should ask ourselves is how come that they discard the forum as irrelevant as far as their reputation is concerned. I think that should be a reality check for us as to how important BTT is these days
I agree Bitcointalk could be taken lightly and we should think about the importance of Bitcointalk this days, many fake project are just lurking here finding innocent newbie victims. But I don't think this is the case with livecoin, as they were running as I read, a highly paying signature campaign, and it seems they had some of the importance given to Bitcointalk promotion through it. They even had a higher level account here which is not worth loosing really. So, I would not think they don't give a fuck about the forum.
I don't care about the opinions of Jr Members alt accounts. Post under your main account or get lost.
You are just a critical thinking person, pointing fingers, calling alts, protecting a shady exchange... Who is out for blood here ?
I think you should better get lost from here, you sound more ODD!
They've been around since 2014 -- 5 years is a long time to build up an epic exit scam by crypto standards.
Yaa, even I can't understand why are they willing to risk a long time reputation under such an questionable TOS. Why can't they just act right here, unblock the OPs account and return his funds ? I too think there repo is more worth than what OP lost.
People just shut down their critical thinking skills when they are out for blood I guess.
I have never used livecoin exchange, even I have no connection with the OP. I am just thinking as an future costumer of the exchange, if I get into a situation and post a compliant about it on an online forum, they would directly block my account with funds. This is more of an damage to the exchange.
Don't you sound more out for blood here ?
The only winner here is Quickseller. This is exactly what he hoped would happen. Is there any doubt that he wouldn't give two shits about OP's problem if he hadn't been kicked from the Livecoin campaign? He's had this long-running, stupid smear campaign against Hhampuz for quite some time now; I bet he's enjoying every minute of this.
Well you can't really have it both ways.. Either you want unregulated and no KYC (which works in some cases) or you want regulated where KYC is more or less mandatory. Unless you are preaching something else here that I am missing.
I think I sound very clear in my comment, I am preaching non implementation of KYC here, most of the people are in crypto world due to its anonymity and decentralized phenomenon and I think KYC just brakes all of this important factors and turns it back to a centralized value.
You should just take an example of the recent Libra Shit, none of the OG crypto community support's it, I think it includes you right ?
Based on your recent posts, it is very clear that you would be more than happy to keep their signature on if the campaign would continue.
Yes, that's exactly right. Because you know why? I don't consider 1 complaint by 1 user a good enough reason to trash an exchange of Livecoin's magnitude, longevity, and standing.
Look at what this thread is filled with: 12 pages of various DTs and wannabees hemming and hawing over the issue and zero other _actual_ victims. I've given red trusts to scammy exchanges before BUT only after it was apparent they had scammed multiple users. The reason for this is that running an altcoin exchange is a novel, legally murky business, and every exchange worth its weight in salt has plenty of complaints against it.
I gave several concessions during the course of my posts here that blocking the user for the reasons given wasn't right, and also agreed they should alter their TOS. I encouraged Livecoin to consider unblocking the user account and letting them withdrawal their funds. They're not going to do this; this became evident about 30 hours ago -- so what else is left to say?
I didn't abandon the sig campaign 30 hours early because I don't believe I'm at risk of "promoting a scam exchange." I still don't consider Livecoin to be scammers -- if this offends you, tag me for it.
You really have a thrash sense of judgement, this issue is about a service and there reaction to a affected costumer, you are just steering the drama with your bullshit.
I would advice not taking this person serious, he just looks like wiping his ass with the livecoin signature here and accusing for his personal agendas.
Grow up !
I would advice not taking this person serious, he just looks like wiping his ass with the livecoin signature here and accusing for his personal agendas.
Grow up !
~
I don't think we should expect KYC implementation from an anonymous exchange with such an questionable TOS, whose operators are indeed unknown to the users. Its like giving personal info to an anonymous person online, and its a newbie mistake most would avoid. It does not look like do what you preach right ?
Did you even saw how did they attacked OPs, whatever personal info they got, the exchange also reviewed his Twitter account although it was nothing related to him loosing his funds on there exchange. Exchanging Personal info with such type of people's is surely unsafe and investigation action by LiveCoin proves the same.
Anyways KYC is a big SHIT !
Re: Jeffrey Epstein finally arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges
One thing I learned years ago, it is a big mistake to think about these people in terms of "if I were them", because they are not like you. Many of them are physically incapable of empathy, and many enjoy creating suffering for others. They only qualify as human on the most technical physical levels. Monsters are real, they just hide in board rooms, parliament, and in Hollywood among other places in stead of under your bed.
It sounds like an, great teaching from an elite man.
Monsters really exits, one is mentioned in the OP.
Well at least I can say that I tried. I am not happy with the response LiveCoin gave in here and I have given them my notice that the Campaign will end after payments have been sent out tomorrow. And as I previously stated, flag me or neg me I really could not be bothered but I'll be damned if I ever succumb to bullying by users who's entire existence appears to be spreading negativity and putting others down. But then I've come to expect nothing short of just that which is why this forum matters less and less with each day passing by.
@OP. Hope your situation gets a resolution, I'm officially done and I'm out of here.
@OP. Hope your situation gets a resolution, I'm officially done and I'm out of here.
Yaa, looks like a great campaign manager with ethics right ?
Why are your dragging yourself in baseless statements which you could not back up. Done with protecting a shaddy exchange and abusing the trust by claiming me as an alt account of QS! Nice judgement BTW.
Edit:
I see the trust removed thanks for doing the right thing @Hhampuz
~
This is really and interesting statement from an exchange, you are blaming a user for him complaining about you and calling out your shady behavior and using it as an argument to save your repo.
This in no way is going to solve the problems here or inclined people to believe your decisions are right. Its a simple come-out through this situation for you, which is just unlock the person's account and let him enjoy his shitcoins, or compensate the loss with any other crypto.
You would probably get lots of bad reviews on twitter from any of your costumers, that doesn't mean you would get garb hold of all his assets on your exchange. You are just avoiding taking the right step here, as advised by many.
The only winner here is Quickseller. This is exactly what he hoped would happen. Is there any doubt that he wouldn't give two shits about OP's problem if he hadn't been kicked from the Livecoin campaign? He's had this long-running, stupid smear campaign against Hhampuz for quite some time now; I bet he's enjoying every minute of this.
You really have a thrash sense of judgement, this issue is about a service and there reaction to a effected costumer, you are just steering the drama with you bullshit.
I would advice not taking this person serious, he just looks like wiping his ass with the livecoin signature here and accusing for his personal agendas.
Grow up !
Re: Merit Double Spent - experiment and failed - may be we have a clue
Yes, according to your data this looks like only around 5% of the total merit transactions face such merit double sending problems approximately
I agree by looking at the numbers it is not that big of an issue and most of the generous merit sender's would not do such double spending mistakes often.
And some of these will be intentional. I've merited a post, and thought "actually this probably deserves a little more", and have then proceeded to reward more merit. In the grand scheme of things this really isn't a problem, and only affects such a small amount of users. I agree by looking at the numbers it is not that big of an issue and most of the generous merit sender's would not do such double spending mistakes often.
Yaa, its overall not that big of an issue, and theymos's current solution of 60 second's warning seems to be working good.
Re: Merit Double Spent - experiment and failed - may be we have a clue
<...>
Regardless, the number of cases is small really in the big picture. I make it: 713 cases had sent the same amount of sMerit to the same post and person in <= 60 seconds, prior to the 29/12/2018 fix (60 second cooldown time).
431 cases had sent the same amount of sMerit to the same post and person in > 60 seconds and <= 600 seconds.
189 cases had sent the same amount of sMerit to the same post and person in > 600 seconds and <= 3600 seconds.
Out of 209.332 overall sMerit TXs.
Yo cant tell though if the intent was to remerit (i.e I gave 1, but perhaps I should have given 2), or the refresh page effect after periods of time over 1 minute.
Yes, according to your data this looks like only around 5% of the total merit transactions face such merit double sending problems approximately
I agree by looking at the numbers it is not that big of an issue and most of the generous merit sender's would not do such double spending mistakes often.
Re: Merit Double Spent - experiment and failed - may be we have a clue
Redirecting the user to the merited post after the merits are sent could be the best solution for this unwanted multi meriting problem.
60 seconds cool down time is also a better alternative but if a person merits a post and keeps the screen ON for 60 seconds doing some other work, and comes back after 60 seconds and refresh the page to update the content, the merit would be sent again without even getting noticed and without any warning on the screen.
I would support Mr.Pamoldor's suggestion above, atleast he tried touching the wet pants, which requires high motivation anyways.
60 seconds cool down time is also a better alternative but if a person merits a post and keeps the screen ON for 60 seconds doing some other work, and comes back after 60 seconds and refresh the page to update the content, the merit would be sent again without even getting noticed and without any warning on the screen.
I would support Mr.Pamoldor's suggestion above, atleast he tried touching the wet pants, which requires high motivation anyways.
⭐ Merited by yahoo62278 (1)
I am still constructing this thread and not sure when I'll finish this - everyone else should kindly keep your comments away until I finish the lists.
Just lock the thread until then, you cannot stop someone from posting here instead.