*'What keeps a user from attaching a wallet ('getting a gun') and then just... paying in CCs?'*

My understanding and experience is that with my sending and recieiving wallets attached (and showing as attached) any zaps I make are automatically paid from either my attached coinos wallet P2P, or from sats or CCs accumulated in my SNs account.
The only time I can sending CCs is when CCs have been zapped to me...but I am doing and showing I am doing everything I can to keep the SNs economy as sats saturated as I can and minimise the concentration of CC shitcoins.

Not sure how someone could have both sending and receiving wallets attached and showing and not experience the same.


*'Bitcoin will have many hypocrites using it and its "meeting places" now and in the future... we need better systems than just downzapping people.
If we had 2% of the so-called "Bitcoiners" go out and spend 2% of their Bitcoin we would be so much better off.'*

Absolutely agree. The majority of frequent stackers here do have attached wallets showing but a small percentage- I guess ~10% do not. 
Only by raising the issue of their apparent hypocrisy can we hope to have the problem highlighted.

I think we both agree that Bitcoins success is not guaranteed- it is an amazing opportunity given to us to have censorship resistant P2P payments which treat all participants equally without fear or favour. Free of debt or duress. 
But it requires us to take up that opportunity and enable it to grow. 
If we do not, imo, it is unlikely to succeed.

Bitcoin offers considerable individual rights and freedom, but requires considerable and serious commitment from individuals too.

On spending - my spending budget is 5%/year and I am really struggling to achieve 1%...there are so few places to spend. 
I will travel hundreds of kilometres to spend sats. 
More people here on SNs must realise (and I believe most here do already realise this) what a great opportunity we have here on SNs to use the P2P payments protocol as it was intended...or it may well die.

> You are trusting other peoples motives and actions without any means of verifying.
> In fact you are ignoring the one verification indicator we have- whether or not they show attached wallets.

What keeps a user from attaching a wallet ('getting a gun') and then just... paying in CCs?

What even... keeps a bot from "creating an account" on Stacker News, attaching a wallet which costs *nothing* on CoinOS? They would have a gun but would they pay sats? No.

> If they have not attached wallets showing beside their nym there is no way for anyone else to know if they ever use sats.

But even with the gun... they could still be using CCs right?

> I will be more likely to downzap them for being a blatant hypocrit.

LOL i like this, and I mean that sincerely.

> Exactly! If they are a blatant hypocrit you can point it out relentlessly and maybe downzap them to hell.

Bitcoin will have many hypocrites using it and its "meeting places" now and in the future... we need better systems than just downzapping people.

If we had 2% of the so-called "Bitcoiners" go out and spend *2%* of their Bitcoin we would be so much better off.

028559d218

'I respectfully believe... that users are paying in other ways. They are paying via QR or buying a few CCs to use, or just copy pasting the invoices from CoinOS (I do this sometimes).'

You are trusting other peoples motives and actions without any means of verifying.

In fact you are ignoring the one verification indicator we have- whether or not they show attached wallets.

If they have not attached wallets showing beside their nym there is no way for anyone else to know if they ever intentionally send sats.

They are not providing any verification that they are actively supporting LN use here on SNs.

If a consumer of content and thus monetary supporter of SNs, who has attached and shows their LN wallets are attached is buying content here will they choose to zap someone who cannot be bothered reciprocating that effort?

I will be more likely to downzap them for being a blatant hypocrit.

'You can't control what other people do... just how you react to certain situations.'

Exactly! If they are a blatant hypocrit you can point it out and see how they respond and maybe eventually just downzap them to hell.

I'm here to buy and share content, spend sats and support the LN.

Not here to support big talk no walk hypocrits.

bitcoin

The Bigest Threat to Bitcoin is... Empty Blocks

*'I respectfully believe... that users are paying in other ways. They are paying via QR or buying a few CCs to use, or just copy pasting the invoices from CoinOS (I do this sometimes).'*

You are trusting other peoples motives and actions without any means of verifying.
In fact you are ignoring the one verification indicator we have- whether or not they show attached wallets.

Do not trust- Verify.

If they have not attached wallets showing beside their nym there is no way for anyone else to know if they ever intentionally send sats.
They are not providing any verification that they are actively supporting LN use here on SNs. 
They are implying they do not.

If a consumer of content and thus monetary supporter of SNs, who has attached and shows their LN wallets are attached is buying content here will they choose to zap someone who cannot be bothered reciprocating that effort?
I won't certainly won't be inclined to.
I will be more likely to downzap them for being a blatant hypocrit.

Do not trust- Verify.

*'You can't control what other people do... just how you react to certain situations.'*

Exactly! If they are a blatant hypocrit you can point it out and see how they respond and maybe eventually just downzap them to hell.

I'm here to buy and share content, spend sats and support the LN. 
Not here to support big talk no walk hypocrits.