Topic: Wall Observer new ownership - page 5. (Read 6933 times)

WTF? That's some twisted bullshit. Very disgusting you think like that. Cats are *perfect genetic machines* that don't need anyone else to take care of them. They can tolerate it and even enjoy human interaction up to some degree though.

hahahaha

Yeah right...

Let's put on a demonstration, just in case Theymos does not know, about how stupid-ass we can become in regards to our off-topicness and our attempts to provoke..

He is actually right... 9 out of 10 women that I know... are exactly like he said! ... Women in their nature... because of the history context, of them being leverage for aliens, they where trade slaves or a commodity for us to bargain our existence on this planet with the invader alliens!
Their mentality is something similar to cats... because someone else needs to take care of them!
Because it is in their genetic matter to be a commodity, a good, a house pet!

WTF did I just read   ?

Do you actually believe this ?

That is some far out fubar shit brother!  Can't help but think you have been exposed to the wrong sorta women - or have been a doormat or been badly burnt by one/several/all of the women in your life?

Altcoin talk is inevitable because bitcoin currently has a reverse Schelling point.  Network effect assumes infinite scalability, so unless bitcoin has orders of magnitude extra scaling to spare, people will utilize other coins in order to avoid usurious transaction fees.  Telling everyone "hey, you're forced to use bitcoin no matter what!" is a pro-usury stance if you're advocating a fixed block size or already know that scaling will always be severely limited.  I don't see LN as a magic bullet to fix it.  It would just take some burden off the chain for inter-bank transactions done by channels because LN will never work in a decentralized manner without putting all transactions in the same centralized common que or turning into Mike Hearn-style hub and spoke bitcoin banks.

The likely endgame will either be:

1)  people constantly migrating from coin to coin seeking lower fees causing the whole ecosystem to die from dilution

2)  everyone going into some uncapped blocksize coin like Monero

3)  everyone going into some much more centralized system like DPOS with higher scaling and lower fees then abandoning it because it's centralized

This is why the whole blocksize scaling issue is kind of a moot point.  The market at large cares more about fees at the end of the day than decentralization (especially people like the Chinese), so it's going to go wherever there is liquidity + decent fees with some type of illusion of decentralization regardless what bitcoin does.  Unless LN was some type of ironclad scaling solution (which I don't believe it is), betting the house on LN will just be the equivalent of pumping Monero or Litecoin or both.

In my view FWIW the ecosystem that Bitcoin exists in is so heavily interlinked with Altcoins - that references to them are  natural and even inevitable, so discussions which stray onto Altcoins are fine in my view- obviously to an extent, I think its just the excessive hardcore shilling, spamming, trolling aimed at promoting altcoins, ICO's POnzi's P&D's etc which are less fine and more likely to get on peoples nerves? or simply be better placed in another thread? That being said this thread has turned into a general hang out, so you know- as long as it doesn't turn into the Shitcoin thread - don't think its toooo much of a problem? as has been mentioned also- it generally goes down like a sack of Ether in a flash crash around here, so it doesn't really get much traction when it is an overt sales pitch.

Does "no altcoin talk" apply to every single mention of altcoins, or is it acceptable to mention altcoins in relation to Bitcoin?

For example, I say "ETH's system encourages maximalism because it attempts to have all altcoins built on its platform and bring all the hype with it.  To insult people for 'Bitcoin maximalism' is plain dumb if the altcoin you're promoting directly tries to trigger it's own maximalism'".

Would that sort of post be okay and discussion about that topic?

Every creature on earth specializes in something through evolution.  Through millions of years, men evolved to specialize in hunting and building things, and since women are phsycially weaker and incapable of surviving on their own, they evolved to specialize in prostitution - to portray themselves like a fishing lure or peacock wearing bright colors attempting to attract attention from a male in order to extract resources and protection from them.

To claim men and women are the same or equal is utterly hilarious when they're not remotely similar.  To know the mind of a woman is to know the mind of a prostitute.  They're generally "takers" by nature, looking solely for an asymmetric relationship that favors themselves.  This is why men get along and women don't.  You can't have two prostitutes standing on the same street corner, it just doesn't work.  Two men can collaborate on building something together even in a zero sum game because they can work out a 50/50 split.  Such a split is considered offensive to a woman.  Utilitarianism is a completely alien concept to them.  

This is why when you look outside your window, every brick was put there by a man.  The people who are actually doing the building have to be in charge.  You can't allow prostitutes to be in charge because they're just looking to outsource the job to someone else and civilization would instantly collapse.  It's not just that women are prostitutes by nature, it's also that men are proactive and women are reactive.  This is due to testosterone making men less scared of risk.  In a matriarchal society, women would probably never go to mars.  In a patriarchal society, men would definitely go, and maybe everyone would die on the way there, but at least it would happen.

This concludes your lesson on why men and women are not equal or even remotely similar no matter how much of an artificial, marxist reality distortion bubble you believe into existence around yourself.

hahahaha...

People pick the cat, or the non-cat that they like.  


Personally, I would not mind having a penquin.... but we cannot always get what we want in this world... so we gots ourselves compromises...






By the way, anyone find it a bit of a strange thing that so far, we have had fewer voters in this particular poll as compared with the what to do with the thread poll...

As I type 90 voted in this poll and 155 voted in the other poll.

Sure we have a few days left, yet I would have thought that with the passage of time, more members would have attempted to log into the WO thread and then gravitated towards these voting threads... and just that more votes would have come through in a shorter period of time

I guess my tentative theory is that WO participants are much more fleeting than I had considered and they seem to be more gravitating towards such WO thread when we have extremes in BTC price movements - which have not been happening in the last couple of weeks.  Prices have been relatively flat in the $2350 to $2700 price range in the last couple weeks, since the locking of the WO thread....

Time for a break out in terms of prices and in terms of recharging the allegedly "fleeting" WO posse?

What you believe is relevant. But don't bother with that crotchety old codswallop. Everybody makes mistakes.

"Mr.", sexist? "Recent"?

What I believe is not relevant. The people pick the person (or being) that they want.

No. Go troll someone else, idiot.

Since this seems to have become the thread where candidates come to campaign, I'd like to ask Mr. Lauda a question regarding his recent alleged foray into the heady world of extortion rackets. Having recently been removed from a position of authority, do you believe you are the best person to moderate what is arguably the forum's most prominent thread?

Also, do you think I could be involved in your next undercover operation?

NB. This is the official alt account of BMB, this account will not be participating in the poll.

I'm not Theymos, but on my screen I see a 'Remove Vote' option that will let you un-vote or re-vote if you want.

Sput! You cray

Well is racism a rule?

Hey.. Can we get a rule about posting scam coins?
Racist commentary is not exactly high on my list of concerns here..
How about moving ICO coins into a new forum section?

But I vote Spoetnik I here good things about that guy.
Not that I have even the faintest clue what so ever what I am voting for though..
I'm just bummed I missed out on some of Roaches controversial posts
You all can't deny their sneaky ways and predatory lending practices are getting out of hand.

A vote for Spoetnik is a vote for FUD!

PS:
The serial quoters are for sure iratating.
Nothing like scrolling past a whole page of a large quotes with one stupid sentence underneath it.

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up. Well, over-quoting is definitely problematic and I don't understand why some users persist in doing it.

Usually the original owner of a self-moderated thread can impose any kind of rule-set. This means that they could just delete all of your posts just because they don't like your username. However, this is a very special case of transferring ownership. I do agree that a time period should be chosen (by theymos), after which it should be re-visited and decided whether the current owner should continue being the owner or whether someone else should be assigned to it.

I think in the Meuh thread some folks were irritated when he created a rule and deleted posts because of the "laziness" of over quoting.  He thought it would be good to prune ; however, it may be better, as Yefi suggest, to have programing that causes nesting rather than people complaining about over nesting.

Regarding an elected moderator to bow out or pass the baton, that seems a bit problematic - but many of the voters here were likely of the impression that anyone running for such WO "owner" position would be committed to carrying out such duties for a reasonable period of time, such as a year or more.. ... and well, I suppose in the end, it is up to Theymos if he believes that passing on ownership would be reasonable or if he would go through some other process, such as an election.. or maybe extending the election based on new information.

I do not think that such a change is likely to occur for the current forum. I don't recall how it works in the beta of the new software, but you should check it out and recommend it there. I am not exactly sure how this is relevant to the OP though.

I was thinking about nested quotes - wouldn't it be better if they were collapsible? The first level would be expanded by default and all higher levels collapsed. If a person needed extra context, they would hit a button or link to expand those higher levels. This could be achieved with simple CSS.

It does not matter whether you wanted someone banned. The moderation goes as follows: Moderator deletes your X posts -> you should not repost them or create posts of the similar type. Basically with r0ach, he just kept going on and on, thus ignoring the warnings (which are post deletions themselves). The next course of action is to request a ban (since most moderators can't issue them), which I did (as deleting was futile). Unfortunately, nobody picked up on that.

That is perfectly fine. I'm not trying to push my way in. As previously said, I like the thread occasionally but it has been ruined by altcoin/r0ach spam most of the time.

Here: