Search content
Sort by
Showing 11 of 11 results by e1ght
Wow, this whole thread has turned into a place for people to up their post count.
The original question is from 2011 with hundreds of answers and they're all the same.
You lose your coins.
Why are people still commenting years later?
The original question is from 2011 with hundreds of answers and they're all the same.
You lose your coins.
Why are people still commenting years later?
Re: [ANN][CRW] CROWN (SHA256) | NEW UPDATE! | Experimental Commodity | Trons |
(BTW My account was hacked
) Ledger support is going to be great.
So uh, any updates? 
(New account btw)
(New account btw)
I'm working out the details of a metadata strategy with help from the Slimcoin and Datacoin communities.
Cheers
Graham
-Kyle
The activity number is determined in this way:
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
Rough summary of what this means: If you post once per day on average, then you will eventually get the maximum number of activity points that you can get. Posting more than once per day on average is useless for increasing activity. The maximum number of activity points you can get is 1 per day, but your activity score only updates every two weeks. Therefore, it will take about 100 days to get 100 activity if you post once per day on average.
Activity is updated every hour.
The new membergroup limits work like this:
I'm not 100% sure that the membergroups work correctly. Tell me if you see any bugs.
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
Rough summary of what this means: If you post once per day on average, then you will eventually get the maximum number of activity points that you can get. Posting more than once per day on average is useless for increasing activity. The maximum number of activity points you can get is 1 per day, but your activity score only updates every two weeks. Therefore, it will take about 100 days to get 100 activity if you post once per day on average.
Activity is updated every hour.
The new membergroup limits work like this:
| Group | Requirement |
| Brand New | 0 posts |
| Newbie | (none) |
| Jr. Member | activity: 30 |
| Member | activity: 60 |
| Full Member | activity: 120 |
| Sr. Member | activity: 240 |
| Hero Member | activity: 480 |
| Legendary | occurs randomly between 775 and 1030 activity |
I'm not 100% sure that the membergroups work correctly. Tell me if you see any bugs.
Thanks for very good info
Yes, info is ok, I just don't understand that my activity is 56, since i have 60 posts en i'm a member since May 4th.
Re: Craig W. only claims to be Satoshi, because he knows the real Satoshi is dead?
Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 
No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)To me it's not obvious. Please explain.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.
So you would never spend a satoshi from your wealth and keep hiding? Then what would you do this for?
The gov. should know (as Satoshi should also know btw), that he can't change the bitcoin system to a gov friendly system. It will not be accepted by the Bitcoin community. He has one voice as every developer has. He wouldn't be in danger only because he created a code he can't change anymore. He might be in danger because of the potential money that he holds, but a burn address would delete this problem as well.
It's possible they just don't want to have to deal with the issues that arise after burning is done (and they reveal their identity w/ proof).
Re: Craig W. only claims to be Satoshi, because he knows the real Satoshi is dead?
Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof?
No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)To me it's not obvious. Please explain.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.
So you would never spend a satoshi from your wealth and keep hiding? Then what would you do this for?
Re: Craig W. only claims to be Satoshi, because he knows the real Satoshi is dead?
Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof?
No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)To me it's not obvious. Please explain.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.
Well, I do feel the need to sell some of my alts for btc, but I am holding back.
Who knows where bitcoin will be in a year. I have an idea of where my altcoins will be, so that's why I'm sticking to them.
Better safe than sorry.
Who knows where bitcoin will be in a year. I have an idea of where my altcoins will be, so that's why I'm sticking to them.
Better safe than sorry.
Re: Craig W. only claims to be Satoshi, because he knows the real Satoshi is dead?
Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof?
No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)