Topic: What are the new rules for posting? (Read 3448 times)

With the recent removal of the "Gold Collapsing. Bitcoin UP" thread [my favourite thread to chat in], I've become unsure what the rules are for posting here at this forum.  In particular:

1.  Are we allowed to talk about non Bitcoin Core implementations of the protocol?

2.  Are we allowed to discuss proposals that, if adopted by >50% of the hash power, would result in a hard fork?

3.  Are we allowed to criticize the moderators?

4.  Can I post /u/raisethelimit's lasted comic?  [lol it involves a CONSENS-A-TRON^TM]

Core 0.11.0 has flattened moar and before. Perhaps because they are implementing customized core + BIP101.

You mislabeled your graph.

"Bitcoin XT adoption" should be labeled "Bitcoin XT + NotXT + Pseudonode adoption."

Good luck observing RealXT's actual adoption with so many FakeXT nodes feeding you misinformation.

Also, the total FakeXT+RealXT adoption curve has flattened over the last week, as the public became better informed about XT's Tor Blacklist, IP reporting, potential catastrophic consensus failure, and Mike's "Final Call."

Altcoin Discussion is the proper place to discuss XT.  Theymos is very generous to make such an allowance on his private server.

If I were him, XT and Gavinistas would be given the Bitcoin-scrypt treatment (IE disappeared like pinkos in Pinochet's Chile).

The logic is simple enough:


No rules have been changed.  Only on /r/ was a temporary 'time-out' for the XT brigade enforced, after a period when they were out of control.

All theymos did was clarify that the *EXISTING* rule against altcoin posts in Bitcon subs applies to XT, because it contains code that attempts, without consensus and despite contention, to create an alternative consensus.  And that, by definition, is an altcoin.

Existing rules are enforced with a light hand.  That is a feature not a bug.  You don't get to complain in the same post about the rules not being enforced and being enforced.   

Your already unseemly self-pity is becoming nauseating.  The sooner you Gavinistas are herded into /v/bitcoinxt to circlejerk yourselves the better.

No. I have not stated my stance towards the discussed there. My conclusion was pulled from reviewing the last few pages of the thread. The last few pages have literally everything in them, from ad hominem to censorship complains.
That is really not related to "Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP." (speculation forum).

So because you disagreed with most of the views there that made it a troll fest.

Are you serious? You don't see how horrible that is.

And no it wasn't a troll fest. It was just people that disagreed with.

Unlock the thread, now.

Just wondering, why was that thread removed?

With the recent removal of the "Gold Collapsing. Bitcoin UP" thread [my favourite thread to chat in], I've become unsure what the rules are for posting here at this forum.  In particular:

1.  Are we allowed to talk about non Bitcoin Core implementations of the protocol?

2.  Are we allowed to discuss proposals that, if adopted by >50% of the hash power, would result in a hard fork?

3.  Are we allowed to criticize the moderators?

4.  Can I post /u/raisethelimit's lasted comic?  [lol it involves a CONSENS-A-TRON^TM]

With the recent locking of the "Gold Collapsing. Bitcoin UP" thread [my favourite thread to chat in], I've become unsure what the rules are for posting here at this forum.  

1.  Are we allowed to talk about my butthurt?

2.  Are we allowed to discuss my poutrage?

3.  Are we allowed to criticize the socioeconomic majority?

4.  Can I post silly cartoons to vent my poutrage and butthurt?

Activating a hardfork based on what miners do is really bad. You could easily have a situation where 75% of miners support XT but none of the big Bitcoin exchanges or businesses do. Then miners would start mining coins that they couldn't spend anywhere useful, and SPV users would find that they can't transact with the businesses they want to deal with. The currency would be split, and in this case XT would be in a far weaker position than Bitcoin.

The possibility of this sort of network/currency split is what makes XT not a "legitimate hardfork", but rather the programmed creation of an altcoin. A consensus hardfork can only go forward once it has been determined that it's nearly impossible for the Bitcoin economy to split in any significant way. Not every Bitcoin user on Earth has to agree, but enough that there won't be a noticeable split.

With the recent removal of the "Gold Collapsing. Bitcoin UP" thread [my favourite thread to chat in], I've become unsure what the rules are for posting here at this forum.  In particular:

1.  Are we allowed to talk about non Bitcoin Core implementations of the protocol?

2.  Are we allowed to discuss proposals that, if adopted by >50% of the hash power, would result in a hard fork?

3.  Are we allowed to criticize the moderators?

4.  Can I post /u/raisethelimit's lasted comic?  [lol it involves a CONSENS-A-TRON^TM]

It was not removed, it was locked. Why is anyone even surprised? The thread became a XT trollfest and everyone went completely off-topic (discussing XT =/= price speculation).

I find these policies very interesting.  It sounds like the Forum permits threads that are entirely off-topic (in the off-topic section); however, threads that are highly-relevant to Bitcoin but broad in scope are not permitted anywhere, regardless of their popularity.  

Based on the link to the forum rules posted by LaudaM, I do not believe this is clear.  I'm not trying to argue for or against a change--I'm just trying to determine what the policies actually are.  

On that topic, these were two of the recently-censored cartoons, which might be particularly relevant to the discussion in this thread:





Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/3h4naf/the_hypocrisy_of_a_thermos_bitcoin_political/ , https://imgur.com/ICFiTVO

If mega threads are not OK, how is it Adam's "wall observer" is still up and running, considering it must be the biggest and most off-topic thread on the entire forum?

You are describing mega threads. BadBear is spot on with his logic on why to ban them unless they are focused on specific topic, e.g. "Economic Totalitarianism" and "Economic Devastation". When grown men can't contain their addictions and it is dragging the diversity and rebirth of the forum down into a blackhole of addiction, then the appropriate action is to force a rebirth. If you guys try again to congregate into the same groupthink morass, then the same needs to be done again. Even CoinCube and I don't post every 5 seconds in the Economic Devastation thread. You were trying to subsume the forum into your own groupthink thread. You even stated that others who have threads with less frequent bumps were to be ignored and were of worthless value (you all actually said that to me!).

You guys want some feeling of exclusivity and power. You want to feel you've joined some tribe that is superior to the other tribes. But it ends up as a circle jerk addiction and bumped every 5 seconds thus sucking more people into the groupthink morass. It is a metastasizing inertia of groupthink addiction "bitcointalk fix". Whereas you see I even destroyed my AnonyMint username. I didn't sell it. I shut down that inertia and started anew. Life requires death. Life requires diversity. Addiction is death.

That is because you are not capable of being an individual.

You are still stuck in your "primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer" evolutionary instinct which shuts down your "rational thought in the pre-frontal cortex".

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Existential_Fear

I know you locked this thread, but I'm going to reply anyway.


The forum itself is about all things bitcoin, there shouldn't be a need to make a single thread for all things bitcoin.

What is it about the format you find compelling? I had some ideas that would help to replicate what you might gain from such a thread and improve the forum, such as a friends list (that requires confirmation, with an activity feed, etc) but thinking about it, it seems like it's mostly a groupthink phenomenon, and not a lacking feature of the forum.

I find these policies very interesting.  It sounds like the Forum permits threads that are entirely off-topic (in the off-topic section); however, threads that are highly-relevant to Bitcoin but broad in scope are not permitted anywhere, regardless of their popularity.  

As mentioned previously, you are free to make multiple threads about multiple topics and have the respective discussions in each of those threads.