I wanted to post this publicly and get a community opinion about a few users. I know it's my call at the end of the day, but I would like to see some views from all of you keeping up with the campaign.
I have been banning some users for necrobumping. For those of you whom do not know what that is, it is bumping a long dead thread. IMO timeframe any thread that's been dead for more then 30 days. Normally if you try to post in a thread that has had no replies for 120 days, the forum automatically gives you a warning about the thread asking you if you're sure you want to post in that thread. The only time I have read that it is OK to necrobump is if you are adding something extremely relevant to the thread.
The example I am about to give is not 120 days old, but it is almost 60 days old and could be considered irrelevant. So I would like some unbiased opinions if there are any out there who can do that.
This is the original
THREAD and as you can see, it was posted on September 11, 2019. The thread is fairly active until September 21st, 2019 and then is IMO considered dead until....
Banks can use blockchain technology but it is never going to be in decentralized manner so it cannot be compared with the crypto adoption if banks starts doing transactions with blockchain.Either bank employees may not let it happen sice if the blockchain was introduced then most of the employment in banks will get vanished.
The development era is more advanced and developing and technology will develop, so will the economic development will also follow it and one of them with crypto currency is an economic system that uses technological developments and banks will also experience system development as well.
Thread is bumped by the above user on Oct 31st, 2019, about 1 month and 10 days after the last poster posted. There are 31 more replies after his post and 24 of them are from users wearing a cryptotalk signature.
My complaint or concern is not the amount of users who have posted after he bumped the thread with his comment, but more with some of the replies. See below
Hey.
Yesterday I read an article about banks that began to use blockchain and there was pretty impressive list.
They're also described successful cases of using blockchain in banks (if you're interested -
here's the article), so I may assume that using blockchain in bank's system is only a matter of time (and money, of course).
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
Without legal using bitcoin as currency maybe we can't see banking industry in blockchain, many scammer cases using bitcoin and altcoin as investing make government very careful to adopt bitcoin and impossible without legalization bank industry with blockchain in some country, I hope next year have innovation with bank to adopt blockchain and member can saving bitcoin in the bank.
Hey.
Yesterday I read an article about banks that began to use blockchain and there was pretty impressive list.
They're also described successful cases of using blockchain in banks (if you're interested -
here's the article), so I may assume that using blockchain in bank's system is only a matter of time (and money, of course).
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
Without legal using bitcoin as currency maybe we can't see banking industry in blockchain, many scammer cases using bitcoin and altcoin as investing make government very careful to adopt bitcoin and impossible without legalization bank industry with blockchain in some country, I hope next year have innovation with bank to adopt blockchain and member can saving bitcoin in the bank.
Without the approval of each government we cannot really have this future banking industry, and as of the moment, we cannot control what's on the mind of our government officials, but we can do our part to unite and to let them know its advantage and how blockchain could change the life of the currency system in the future.
We will still have many years to come to develop and for the adoption period, we just need to be patient as everything will be at its place soon.
Hey.
Yesterday I read an article about banks that began to use blockchain and there was pretty impressive list.
They're also described successful cases of using blockchain in banks (if you're interested -
here's the article), so I may assume that using blockchain in bank's system is only a matter of time (and money, of course).
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
Certian banks have earlier shown their interest in adopting blockchain technology as it is revolutionary and banks have to be updated with the latest technologies to provide good services to customers.This would be great if they approve it as cryptocurrencies can also get its support and benefit as they are financial services of nation and governmemt would permit its usage.But on the other hand it is quite technical and banks might fees hesitated to use it or implement properly in their system due to which they follow traditional methods as they are less transparent and they have faith over them.
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
For any company or banks to implement a new technology you need to have a thorough understanding of the system and you cannot implement all the all of a sudden and majority of the technology companies are learning about the opportunities of blockchain for a long time and if the banking sector find it useful for their business then they will implement it.
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
Probably longer than bigger banks. But not because they can't since they're just small. They also have to monitor the demands and population of people demanding for blockchain technology. Since they're small banks, the demand would not be that big compared to bigger banks. But even big banks, still cannot adopt blockchain technology. They're still reluctant about blockchain. They could still function just like the tradition even without adopting the technology.
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
For any company or banks to implement a new technology you need to have a thorough understanding of the system and you cannot implement all the all of a sudden and majority of the technology companies are learning about the opportunities of blockchain for a long time and if the banking sector find it useful for their business then they will implement it.
Of course blockchain will be helpful to banks even growing banks that are not established already. It will help them to secure data and security information that are already stored in their system. Blockchain technology is already being used in certain places and banks shouldn't be an exception.
We can base our point in this article:
https://cryptocrunchapp.com/news/china-launches-blockchain-based-identification-system-for-smart-cities where china based their identification system to blockchain technology. This is implies that the future of banking system in keeping up the records especially the identities of the people safe and secured through blockchain technology. Though, they didn't apply it to banks yet, we can expect that blockchain technology will not just make each transaction secured, but to keep the people safe as well.
Now, the question: why it takes THAT long the smaller banks to go the same way and start using the blockchain?
Maybe because there are still large banks that are not regulating blockchain and that's why some smaller banks didn't regulate the blockchain also. There would be a chance that if all the large bank system start to regulate the blockchain in their system then maybe all of the banks including those smaller banks will regulate and follow it. Another one reason is because the smaller banks are afraid to used blockchain because they still don't know what is the use of this into their banking system and etc.
All of the above users directly quoted the OP or are answering other users who quoted the OP in a thread that I really would consider dead already. The question is who is at fault? The guy who bumped the thread 1st sirminesalot? All of them? Guys who kept bumping? Just want everyone to take a step or 2 in my shoes and give their opinions on what you would do with all these users?
This is the kind of stuff that 1 user can cause. I user posting in this thread caused 31 others to post an opinion.
**EDIT**
As I go through more and more users I'm starting to see this as common practice for some participants. They're quoting the OP and replying adding 0 value to the post or offering an opinion that has been offered 10x already. Hammer will be falling on these types.