Pages:
Author

Topic: [BOUNTY] 🔥🔥WINNER-GETS-ALL / PROOF-OF-TRANSACTION CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!🔥🔥 (Read 4113 times)

newbie
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.



Update:
Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty
- Akosipepot
- Lodyman
- Rexxarofmoknathal


Click to vote for your favourite debater, and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!!!



Updates:

Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2 "Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed."

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.




Final update: Congratulations to Akosipepot for winning our debate bounty! Please get in touch with us to claim your rewards!

newbie
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
I would like to suggest that the work I have tried to start with the translations has been expanded. Expanded to a possible translation of the site, and even the white paper in the main languages. Today, I can not find anything even talking about the TAU in my language, and I believe that the lack of translations mainly on the site discourages some potential users, like Japanese and Russians for example.
member
Activity: 166
Merit: 10
TAUCoin - fast, fair and secure
A nice article talking about the importance of decentralization. That is the next goal we are want to work on. POW leads to working power centralization, POS leads to asset centralization, what POT leads to in the terms of centralization. We are thinking using epoch to create container of serial blocks, so one super permission less miners can win in all the blocks in one containment, but will not exert power in next container coming up. Just beginning of the thought, excited ...
https://medium.com/multicoin-capital/why-decentralization-matters-a-response-6b4b9a31367f?source=linkShare-24d178ec058f-1538245887
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys
Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....

- my proposed solution to the same issue (address spam / sybil ) was not like what other people presented so it's a unique argument .
- that question was sarcastic question (that is the opposite of supporting something ) as 1 TAU is too little incentive while 10bln coins is the total supply .






BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilized at all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias



Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.

That was clearly a sarcasm loaded note of how you were talking in your previous replies and how non-cevilized your replies was
and i meant to prove that it's easy to use name calling without looking at an evidence like what you did when you called me a cheater
 
I even ended my reply with this sentence :
but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that  Wink




maybe you should look again what consensus algorithm means;

"A consensus algorithm is a process in computer science used to achieve agreement on a single data value among distributed processes or systems. Consensus algorithms are designed to achieve reliability in a network involving multiple unreliable nodes."

none of your arguments challenge the way Tau achieves consensus. keep throwing up your straw men. derivatives, cheating and breaking the rules how can you still be arguing you deserve to win?
full member
Activity: 184
Merit: 101
if you need help , drop me a pm
Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....

- my proposed solution to the same issue (address spam / sybil ) was not like what other people presented so it's a unique argument .
- that question was sarcastic question (that is the opposite of supporting something ) as 1 TAU is too little incentive while 10bln coins is the total supply .






BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilized at all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias



Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.

That was clearly a sarcasm loaded note of how you were talking in your previous replies and how non-cevilized your replies was
and i meant to prove that it's easy to use name calling without looking at an evidence like what you did when you called me a cheater
 
I even ended my reply with this sentence :
but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that  Wink


hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys
Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....


if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias



should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??

Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.
full member
Activity: 184
Merit: 101
if you need help , drop me a pm
Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX  "not forever as XRP as that's called theft Grin "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing . 

that was an issue in the consensus ., and the potential resolution that could potentially prevent spamming of addresses or at-least decrease it by 90% 
   
Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .
 

and that was mathematical model to appose akosipepot's claims ..



If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day
 


this was also a mathematical model for fee distribution and incentives which is also a major part of the consensus

 




BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilizedat all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that  Wink
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.


Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I really think that tau must be trying to cheat a kabayan brother out of his prize.


4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.


Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results are obviously rigged.

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

Hi Diced90 -- thanks for your feedback. You've pointed out some valid concerns and we are going to start looking into whether Lody should be disqualified from the vote.

It is obvious that you are friends with akosipepot since you've never been involved with any of our threads and the discussion before. That's ok....friends should support each other...but saying the competition is rigged is a shithead move. We have ZERO incentive to do that... it would obviously be counterproductive to do so.

The decision to have the vote on twitter vs telegram was an operational one. There are plenty of ways to manipulate voting on most any medium on Earth.

We will have the team evaluate and will either support our decision for Lody's participation as a finalist or his disqualification.



Sorry didn't mean to come across so harsh, I should have worded it carefully. my main issue is that the rules were not followed which left lodyman open to cheat which is not fair since he should not be in the debate since he didn not follow the rules.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.


Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....


4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.


Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX


My answer is .. how about takin a look back to this reply

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.



1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day





my reply was clearly a challenge  .. 

should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??

you asked questions about the mining algorithm and made some statements. very different from challenging the consensus algo.

the rule says you must challenge proof of transaction, you didnt, very simple.

statements are not the same as a challenge nor are questions. next time dont cheat.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define+challenge&oq=define+challenge&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.2257j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
full member
Activity: 184
Merit: 101
if you need help , drop me a pm
Greedy Flock Problem
False Incentives
Those attacks are almost impossible by the current Design ..,

As the harvest clubs can increase their harvest power by increasing their number of members it will be almost balanced forever as more and more people joining a specific club increasing it's harvest power to take over the most incentives .,
that incentive will be divided into more people leading to equilibrium state at the end of the day

Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .

The Bait and Switch

Again after people switch from the club to another the incentive which is payed to the club leader will be decreased as his number of signals will decrease at the same time the other clubs's signals will increase leading again to the point where he only gets what he deserves

Identification vulnerability
Nope !!

People won't give a potato who is the club owner as long as he pays *not even manually * And that voting system is a already a core feature of TAU .
and that timer and self destruct is a good idea TBH

Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX  "not forever as XRP as that's called theft Grin "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing .



It's pretty obvious that @Diced90 is using the last trick he got in the bag
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
either he have an answers for this .. or he shall prove that was kind of jealousy for having an opponent 
full member
Activity: 184
Merit: 101
if you need help , drop me a pm

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.


Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....


4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.


Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX


My answer is .. how about takin a look back to this reply

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.



1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day





my reply was clearly a challenge  .. 

should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??
newbie
Activity: 25
Merit: 0
Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2
Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.
member
Activity: 194
Merit: 29

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.


Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I really think that tau must be trying to cheat a kabayan brother out of his prize.


4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.


Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results are obviously rigged.

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

Hi Diced90 -- thanks for your feedback. You've pointed out some valid concerns and we are going to start looking into whether Lody should be disqualified from the vote.

It is obvious that you are friends with akosipepot since you've never been involved with any of our threads and the discussion before. That's ok....friends should support each other...but saying the competition is rigged is a shithead move. We have ZERO incentive to do that... it would obviously be counterproductive to do so.

The decision to have the vote on twitter vs telegram was an operational one. There are plenty of ways to manipulate voting on most any medium on Earth.

We will have the team evaluate and will either support our decision for Lody's participation as a finalist or his disqualification.

hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 515
Get'em boys

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.


Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....


4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.


Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX
member
Activity: 166
Merit: 10
TAUCoin - fast, fair and secure
Too bad, I can't join anymore... Is there another debate bounty like this?
A bigger “consensu upgrade” debate is about to start when new white paper is out. We are going to debate, fee accumulation and distribution, mobile mining, epochs, club wiring, block interval ... very exciting.
full member
Activity: 386
Merit: 104
IDENA.IO - Proof-Of-Person Blockchain
Too bad, I can't join anymore... Is there another debate bounty like this?
newbie
Activity: 25
Merit: 0
Thanks everyone for the participations!

Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty!
Vote for your favourite and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!
@Akosipepot
@lodyman
@rexxarofmoknathal

The results will be finalised on 1st October, 2018!
member
Activity: 166
Merit: 10
TAUCoin - fast, fair and secure
if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

If there is no miners, the block chain will stop. If there are miners, the reward goes to club members and club leader.
Then I think I might found a problem. If there will be users outside of mining clubs they will eventually run miners into reaching their mining cap and there will be no miners left, so blockchain will stop. Am I right on this one, or am I missing something crucial here?
There will be transactions fee to support incentives for miners. Hope this clarifies.
jr. member
Activity: 52
Merit: 1
if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

If there is no miners, the block chain will stop. If there are miners, the reward goes to club members and club leader.
Then I think I might found a problem. If there will be users outside of mining clubs they will eventually run miners into reaching their mining cap and there will be no miners left, so blockchain will stop. Am I right on this one, or am I missing something crucial here?
member
Activity: 166
Merit: 10
TAUCoin - fast, fair and secure
Any plans to change it? I saw tau ticker being traded on idex. I think its better to alter it before tau x launches.
I love name of TAU, even we change, it will not stop other people to use whatever same ticker we choose. We need smart investors to at least figure out what is right ticker.
Pages:
Jump to: