Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Christoph Bergmann]

@Mitchell

@Mitchell Just ask yourself these questions:

3. Why have notorious trolls like brg444 not been temp banned?

Anyway, I'll look into brg444.

Add hdbuck and iCEBREAKER. All of them made repeatedly statements that are ugly, insulting and heavily ad hominem. I have never seen a forum that don't ban users who behave like them. And I'm a moderator of a forum who is repeatedly criticized for not banning trollish users.

The small block militia ominates every blocksize-discussion on bitcointalk. But it seems they are protected by "we prefere 1 MB blocks" forum moderation policy.

As long they can do, while many other people are banned and many other posts about classic, xt or unlimited are moved / deleted, there is no sense in even talking about bitcointalk. No one with an interest in serious discussions go to a place where this fanatics are allowed to troll everybody else.

Maybe bloomie will run into similar problems when the mass of users migrates from bitcointalk to this forum. But currently bitcointalk is not usable for discussing things like the blocksize.

 

[Mitchełł]

@Christoph Bergmann, hdbuck and iCEBREAKER have both been banned in the past, at least, I know for sure that iCEBREAKER has been banned before. That guy is probably ready for a perm. ban. I'll look into it.

And I do agree, Bitcointalk is not the place for serious discussions (and probably never will be). I won't ever deny that, as it's filled with trolls, shills and people who post shit just to get paid. In fact, I'll probably move over to this forum for decent discussions. It just sucks that the coin scene is so huge over at Bitcointalk, as I'm a huge collector of physical cryptocurrency stuff. Would love to see more of that on this site.

Anyway, this is way off-topic, so I'll shut up now before @Bloomie kicks my ass.

 

[theZerg]

It used to be. Why do you stay there if it is what you say it is?

Anyway I have neither the time nor inclination to argue with you about these things. My 4 questions were not for you to glibly answer but to think about daily as you continue to support a regime of censorship.

But I do want to briefly address #4:
"4. I can ask you the same thing. You are bashing me and dismissing my opinion based on the fact that I'm a staff member. You are also assuming that everyone agrees with theymos or what other staff members say and do. That's just plain stupid."

I neither "bashed" you nor "dismissed" your opinion. Note I never said anything ad-hominem (i.e. "you're an idiot", "you're clueless", whatever). Note I never questioned whether the temp ban on Adam was correct or not, I simply asked what about lots of other people.

And WRT agreeing with theymos, I believe that his abuses of power are such that it has come to the point where you cannot disagree but at the same time continue to contribute to his forums. To do so reinforces his power. If nobody helped him moderate he would quickly run out of time and energy to do it solo.

 

[Fatman3002]

@Mitchełł

At some level it's not about being wrong or right, it's about understanding what you're communicating. I expected a purge after the miners sided with core, and that's what we got. You can quote rules as much as you want but the way you moderate is part of the rule set, and that just changed.

I also find it curious that you should become so active in your WO thread moderation about the same time as adam started asking some hard questions regarding Core. He's always been sympathetic to their position, but lately he's become increasingly critical. The fact that you don't see a problem with the timing of your actions sounds quite incredible to me.

Btw. You're basically saying that the WO thread is too big to fail, so you'll attack the man instead. And you expect the community to be ok with this?

 

[Norway]

A blog about Segwit vs Hard fork from Sam Cole, CEO of KnC Miners:
https://medium.com/@KnCSam/the-point-of-view-from-miner-9063d9844ab#.4hs4sg9ta

 

[Mitchełł]

@theZerg
That's quite simple, Bitcointalk is still the biggest forum around. It still has an active coin collecting scene and I have a duty to fulfill. It doesn't matter if I agree with theymos or not, letting the forum go to total shit isn't what I want as that doesn't help the Bitcoin scene at all. I take joy from talking to certain people there and doing my job. You overestimate how much theymos does on the forum, but if that's your opinion, that's fine. I probably can't change your mind and I'm not going to bother either.

@Fatman3002,

moderate is part of the rule set, and that just changed.

No it hasn't. It's still the same list that is being used by the staff and those haven't changed in ages.

you should become so active in your WO thread moderation about the same time as adam started asking some hard questions regarding Core

It wasn't me.

The fact that you don't see the problem with the timing of your actions sounds quite incredible to me.

The timing was pure coincidence from what I've seen.

Btw. You're basically saying that the WO thread is too big to fail, so you'll attack the man instead. And you expect the community to be ok with this?

I didn't say that. I said that the staff will punish those that break the rules. For example, the WO is currently being spammed by off-topic posts by pissed off people, which is highly off-topic. There will be consequences, either removed posts, a split thread and possibly bans if people continue. Closing a whole thread because of a few people does not help as they will just go to another thread.
___________________________

It's pretty clear that you guys are convinced by your own opinion, which is fine, but I'm not going to bother anymore as we are off-topic enough already.

 

[Zarathustra]

"It's pretty clear that you guys are convinced by your own opinion, which is fine, but I'm not going to bother anymore as we are off-topic enough already."

Yes, we are, because most of us experienced what it means being 'moderated' by theymos and his team.

 

[Matthew Light]

And WRT agreeing with theymos, I believe that his abuses of power are such that it has come to the point where you cannot disagree but at the same time continue to contribute to his forums. To do so reinforces his power. If nobody helped him moderate he would quickly run out of time and energy to do it solo.

Exactly.

Anyone moderating at BCT or /r/Bitcoin has already aligned themselves with censorship in favor of small blocks / Bitcoin Core.

 

[Zarathustra]

By how much would the txs capacity increase if all nodes implemented xtreme thin blocks?

 

[theZerg]

That's quite simple, Bitcointalk is still the biggest forum around.

"Everybody else was doing it / I was supporting the prevalent social order"

It still has an active coin collecting scene and I have a duty to fulfill.

"I had a duty"
"I was part of a social group"

It doesn't matter if I agree with theymos or not, letting the forum go to total shit isn't what I want as that doesn't help the Bitcoin scene at all. I take joy from talking to certain people there and doing my job.

"I was just doing my job" (unstated: It made me feel powerful to be in this role and I enjoy that)
"The alternative was chaos"

You overestimate how much theymos does on the forum, but if that's your opinion, that's fine. I probably can't change your mind and I'm not going to bother either.

"You overestimate the issue" which then becomes "I didn't realize everything that was going on".


And thus spoke all the people who have supported dictatorships and other repressive regimes throughout history from the smallest to the world changing... makes me sad really. The problem with bitcoin is that is involves people .

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

A blog about Segwit vs Hard fork from Sam Cole, CEO of KnC Miners:
https://medium.com/@KnCSam/the-point-of-view-from-miner-9063d9844ab#.4hs4sg9ta

The more I think about it the less I understand how SegWit is even discussed at this point.

• It doesn't increase the transaction output (per used bandwidth), which is the current issue.

• It is not necessary, after some discussion and reads I don't think there is a reason to implement it in the next years, never would be ok as well, while a Blocksize raise must happen any way.

• It fools the older nodes to think they are still full nodes while the actually do not add value to the network. The older nodes act as if your funds could be spent by anyone, I can't comprehend how people think that this is an "elegant solution" or a "harmless soft fork".

• It misuses the Bitcoin language which smells like bad design to me.

• If 2 MB would be too much (Haha) there could be a hardfork to go back to 1 MB again. I don't know how that could be done after SegWit activated without removing functionality of bitcoin.

Even more than the 2 MB fork it is necessary to prevent a SegWit softfork. It will mess your money up and it isn't reversible.

//edit formatting

 

[YarkoL]

By how much would the txs capacity increase if all nodes implemented xtreme thin blocks?

It doesn't directly affect the throughput, as it works on block level only, saving bandwidth. However, as it helps relaying bigger blocks, it may have a role in future block size limit rise, which will allow more txs per second.

 

[Richy_T]

@Fatman3002, I'm perfectly capable to differentiate between the reason he got banned and "the excuses they used" as you claim.

So is everyone else. Which is why several users have crossed over in the last 24 hours.

 

[cypherdoc]

ok, survived the last shakeout. avg in 6.00, looking good:

[doublepost=1457977313][/doublepost]Big Picture, dollar continuing to drop:

[doublepost=1457977810,1457977193][/doublepost]mlong[9:46 AM]f2pool will be to 20PH end of week. Mark my words :wink:

 

[Erdogan]

@Mitchełł

It is the intervention from the moderators that destroys bitcointalk, and you are a part of it.

 

[cypherdoc]

should be obvious that Adam and the old GCBU thread suffered from the same mistake; posting about blocksize increases and daring to discuss implementations other than Blockstream Core.

at least @adamstgbit seems to have theymos and his corrupt wrecking crew by the balls; they've left his thread up and he is only temporarily banned. to that, i salute you Adam!
[doublepost=1457979537,1457978802][/doublepost]oh my:

Now a layer2 solution will use bitcoin as a settlement layer and while I agree it’s a FANTASTIC settlement layer. layer 2 is not needed if layer1 is good enough.

The blockstream core developers have the power to fix the issues we have today by coordinating and cooperating with the rest of the network on a simple piece of code that will alleviate the current issues. However, they can’t do this, they simply must object to it because it reduces the value of the layer 2 solutions and thus removes shareholder value. Now I’m not saying this is going on, but the conflict of interest is pretty plain to see.



https://medium.com/@KnCSam/companies-6eb2e218379#.x72v1dsz9

 

[sgbett]

@Christoph Bergmann, hdbuck and iCEBREAKER have both been banned in the past, at least, I know for sure that iCEBREAKER has been banned before. That guy is probably ready for a perm. ban. I'll look into it.

fwiw i don't think you should ban either of them, I think its banning people the creates the mess. Shouldn't be done unless it can be absolutely avoided and even then with a huge eye on impartiality.

On open ground Ice'n'brg are easily defeated by sticking to facts and allowing them to reveal their true character. Same with that CIYAM fellow, though I think he really does believe what he is posting, whereas the dynamic duo seem far more interested in just playing the trolling game.

Why these people behave like they do doesn't matter. Speculating leads you into a trap. There are enough people in this world that its likely that somewhere somebody believes just about anything, with no need for any grand conspiracy.

Whats most important is that the best way to refute *those* kinds of arguments is not to be what you are accused of. If one is not a shill, or one is not in the business of spreading FUD, or one is simply not ignorant, then one should not post in a way that might make one look like that. Always remember the pyramid! Pyramids are good right? they bring some kind of order to this new world of ours


If one has faith that the system (bitcoins built in incentive mechanism) will prevail over the weak and corruptible minds of humans, then this a thousandfold easier than if one is afraid. If one has facts, and evidence to support substantive claims one should post them, without snark or pride or arrogance. The truth is powerful. Wield it responsibly.


Please now feel free to scour my post history and point out the multitude of times which I have not followed my own advice I am human, I err. Also people can still have fun out there I'm not averse to a rap battle with Samson Mow from time to time...

[doublepost=1457979616][/doublepost]

@Mitchełł

It is the intervention from the moderators that destroys bitcointalk, and you are a part of it.

yes! far more succinctly put than my rambling post!

 

[cypherdoc]

@sgbett

once again, a voice of maturity.

that's what makes @adamstgbit ban so appalling. he's never been a troll nor adversarial. he's conducted himself kindly and with a jovial spirit on BCT ever since i've known him. to ban him based on a 2MB post shows just how bad BCT has become.

 

[cypherdoc]

i'll admit the 700 Choapa nodes look suspicious. i'm not sure what effect ipv6 addresses has on the ability to spoof nodes. anyways, i don't think they can be entirely dismissed until we find out more facts. it also doesn't seem to matter as if you subtract them from the 0.12 Classic totals, we're still ahead of Core. but we need more ppl to continue adding nodes to make the case irrefutable to miners:

 

[JimboToronto]

fwiw i don't think you should ban either of them, I think its banning people the creates the mess. Shouldn't be done unless it can be absolutely avoided and even then with a huge eye on impartiality.

Amen. Sometimes I wonder about moderators who are quick with the ban hammer. Were they bullied in the schoolyard?

One of the main reasons I spent more time at the WO thread than any other at BCT was the fact that it was self-moderated by Adam and seemed less prone to meddling from the regular mods. I guess I was wrong.

I want to hear every side to every story, not just what some self-absorbed censor decides is worthy. I don't find slightly off-topic posts to be a problem. Even hardcore trolls like NLC, Kwuckduck and MatTheTwat deserve a chance to be heard (and laughed at!).

Adam's WO thread was much more than a mere collection of wall observations. It was the unofficial meeting hub of BCT, a place where Bitcoiners could relax, post silly GIFs, talk their book and share a laugh without being relegated to some goofy Off-topic Section. It also was home to some of the forum's more interesting serious discussions.... and of course, Chartbuddy.