Topic: Everyone needs to report the @Bitcoin twitter handle immediately - page 3. (Read 639 times)

"You can't deny that it's misleading though" - Please don't speak on my behalf as I don't agree that it is misleading. Go to Bitcoin.com and see for yourself what I mean. By claiming it is misleading, one either is too lazy to read or intellectually dishonest.

"Strictly speaking, Bitcoin Cash is a fork, not an upgrade. This is phrased in such a way which suggests that Bitcoin Cash is a direct successor of Bitcoin when this is not the case. There have been precedents of newbies thinking BCH is BTC thanks to these antics" - Both Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and the Segwit hack are forks. BCH is marketed as the direct successor of Bitcoin, because it continues on the original path as envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto. In addition, BCH is an upgrade as it for one don't prevent the scaling of the Bitcoin system. The Segwith hack and LN deception are beasts of a completely different nature than Bitcoin. It is dishonest to call it Bitcoin. Blockstream and Bitcoin Core are not using the Bitcoin system for scaling, but the Lightning network. They should call it Lightning, not Bitcoin. Blockstream for one are funded by bansters who deliberately prevented scaling of the Bitcoin system through censorship and manipulation.

again i disagree with this and the fork comment below.

bitcoin in 2009 was bitcoin.
1 US dollar bill was 1 US dollar bill in 1862


bitcoin in 2018 is still bitcoin
1 US dollar bill is 1 US dollar bill in 2018


you can't call the 2018 version of USD something else (like Trump Dollar) just because they changed the technique of printing it, the paper, paint,... used in it.
bitcoin of 2018 which you are calling "bitcoin core" is the same thing with new additions.

bitcoin core is also a fork.. it is not following the same rules as bitcoin 2009-2014
bitcoin cash is also a fork.. it is not following the same rules as bitcoin 2009-2014

some argue this
(a)             _________   1
__________/_________   2

some argue this
(b)
____________________  1
               \__________  2

reality is this
(c)
                __________ 1
_________/
              \___________ 2

silly sheeppeople that want to defend a central team are fighting A and B
1 'we are the bitcoin
2 no we are the bitcoin

the reality is everyone is bitcoin. now accept no single team owns the brand because no team should. thats what decentralisation is
so 1 your bitcoin cash
so 2 your bitcoin core

now get on with your lives

This right here, I don't really think it's a problem for Ver to have the twitter account bitcoin and try to promote his coin. This would silence his argument and fail to bring  his side of the community to the table, which is unfair and unlike us I would assume. I'm not a fan of Ver either -- but is silencing him REALLY the best thing we can do.

Let him speak, even if people don't support what he has to say.

yes america has u.s dollar
yes core has bitcoin segwit aka bitcoin core

yes australia has AU dollar
yes ABC/unlimited has bitcoin cash aka bitcoinabc

but no one owns the trademark dollar
but no one owns the trademark bitcoin

by even thinking that core deserve the trademark bitcoin destroys the whole concept of decentralisation
by even thinking that australia cannot have the dollar and only america can use the dollar destroys the concept of australian independance

take off the core defence hat and take a big long hard out of the box look at the debate on the global scale

I know, which is why I said that mistakes could be chalked up to due diligence or lack thereof. You can't deny that it's misleading though, whether intentional or not:


I did acknowledge that what he's doing is legal. Shady, but legal.

They are clearly differentiating between BCH and BTC on their website. So what's your point?

This is a really sad thing and it's painful to see what happened with your friend, the irony of buying bcash thinking it's bitcoins. I'm glad you were able to help him, for those yet confused do know bcash is burning it's own coins, don't be misled by their rhetorics stick to bitcoins only. Bcash has no future for long.

WRONG.
reality:
America has US dollar (USD)
Australia has Australian dollar (A$ or AUD) and 1 AUD is worth 0.77 USD
....
if someone gives you this:

Link
and tells you it is 5 USD then they are committing fraud.
and that is exactly what's happening here. they are advertising something else and giving newbies BCH and telling them it is BTC.


keep telling yourself that. the world saw what happened with EDA fork

"unfortunately bitcoin is not centralized like BCH so there is nobody there to fight our battles for us but us. so we need to take action ourselves" - Nonsense. If anything, it is Core's Segwit hack and LN deception that are centralized. There are more than one independent development team working to make Bitcoin Cash (BCH) better.

"the important thing is that this twitter account is spreading lies and is misleading people into making wrong investments. it is something like identity theft!" - Absolute nonsense! If anything, it is the supporters of Core's Segwit hack who are misleading people and helping Core to commit identity theft.

Well,basically i think there is clear cut conflict of interest hereand Roger is doing what he does to promote BCH(the illegality of his actions i cant tell) but anyone ready to invest must first do enough due diligence,your friend could have done that before buying BCH and im sure he would have ended up buying BTC itself.in any case most people had their BCH from the fork last year and so making BCH look like the bad guy is way below the belt.

ok guys.. think of it this way

america - we have the dollar and its worth 0.81 euros
australia - we have the dollar and its worth 0.61 euros

america - no we have the dollar
australia - no we have the dollar

.... reality..
both of you shut up you both have the dollar. no one can decide who should own the trademark of "dollar" because no one should. even zimbabwee should be able to have the dollar.

Bitcoin.com makes a clear distinction for anyone that cares to read. Roger is doing nothing illegal. If he does, why don't they sue him and see where it ends up?

ok we understand. bitcoin is what users decide it to be independantly without no one forcing the choice or controlling the choice.

so you are saying that the core team is not bitcoin?
so your saying that the segwit node network is not bitcoin?

here is the veil of subtly reverse psychology being burst
by you probably wanting to rebut that core do manage the roadmap of bitcoins evolution and are the 'core.(center) of bitcoin.. you have pretty much destroyed your whole argument of "powered by its users with no central authority or middlemen"

take two steps back when trying to defend core.. and ask yourself this. in a decentralised network nothing needs to be defended because there is no single point of attack. so if your defending something. then you deep down know there is a single point of attack that you need to defend and thus you have lost the ethos of 2009-2013 bitcoin.
and now you have to understand that there is bitcoinsegwit controlled by bitcoin core. and there are other bitcoins

if you are going to rebut that anyone not loyal to core is not a bitcoiner.. again your still defending a central point. and in a silly mindset that bitcoin needs a central point.

remember if is wasnt for the BS cartel orchastrating a non-consensus(bilateral split) by opposing other teams. there would be no bitcoin cash. instead there would be one network and a consensus decision on which roadmap the comunity unite over to evolve the network. remembre before the 2017 bilateral split cores segwit proposal only had 35% at most of the vote.

remember having multiple teams on one network IS decentralisation. but the core team opposed all of that.

now if you are still going to defend core.. you have lost the argument of a decentralised network. and just going to cry about how cored DISTRIBUTED(thre is a major difference) deserves the brand name and control of the community

1. All Bitcoin holders received Bitcoin Cash last year - and those who currently hold BCH all benefit from it. It is not only "Roger and his gangs." Yes, Roger has not sold and/or converted all of the Segwit hack tokens held by him. He is doing this for strategic and other reasons, which is the smart thing to do.

2. There are at least 6 independent development teams working to make Bitcoin Cash (BCH) better. This while many more independent developers are expected to come on board. E.g. Coingeek is funding a project that will see no less than 50 independent developers getting involved (https://news.bitcoin.com/coingeek-funds-bch-blockchain-development-training-in-the-philippines/). The same cannot be said of the Segwit hack and LN deception, where Bitcoin Core pretty much calls the shots. Yet, you whine about Bitcoin Cash having a centralized authority.

i support this movement. BitcoinCash is starting to become a plague again and we need to stop it. unfortunately bitcoin is not centralized like BCH so there is nobody there to fight our battles for us but us. so we need to take action ourselves.


we have no proof so maybe it is best not to accuse anyone.
the important thing is that this twitter account is spreading lies and is misleading people into making wrong investments. it is something like identity theft!

Roger Ver's strategy is quite unique and it is trying to trap all new comers into bitcoin in buying bitcoin cash. So it is really needed that we should help distributing this kind of information amongst bitcoin holders and to the ones who are planning to join bitcoin. This kind of strategy may really affect the future increase of users in bitcoin and Roger Ver must be stopped.

Selling Bitcoin Cash as Bitcoin is fraudulent. Did your friend buy Bitcoin only to end up with Bitcoin Cash, or did he buy Bitcoin Cash thinking it was Bitcoin? The former is a crime that should be reported, while the latter could be chalked up to buyer's due diligence, or lack thereof, despite being a byproduct of legally and morally questionable marketing.

The problem with the Twitter issue is that the term Bitcoin isn't trademarked. It can't be said that the account is pretending to be someone else if there's no one who could legitimately claim the handle. It's free-for-all, and it just so happened that a hostile party got to it first.

That being said, I do hope something can be done about their marketing. They're free to claim that Bitcoin Cash is the closest thing to Satoshi's whitepaper all they want, and I would also have no qualms about them saying Bitcoin Cash should be Bitcoin. Saying Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin, though, is not just outright misleading, but is also regrettably legal (as far as I know at least).

I've done that right now. It's the least I can do for help.
Maybe Twitter should have a policy about fork scams too, not only ICO scams...

If you say that BCash is the real Bitcoin this means you help Roger and his gangs to earn much more money. Think that why he still keeps his Bitcoins if BCash is the real Bitcoin.

Bitcoin (the one and the only real Bitcoin created by Satoshi Nakamoto) is the first decentralized peer-to-peer payment network that is powered by its users with no central authority or middlemen. BCash is not. That's the point!