|
If you've come here for the right reason(s), then you don't really care about high ranks[1]. This is the only truth in this context. Everything else is either bullshit or an excuse ("early members unfair advantage", "elitists", "you wouldn't rank up with a new account either" et. al.).
To everyone new joining here: You deserve nothing[1], and you are entitled to nothing[3].
[1] Users do care about passing some initial ranks due to use limitations.
[2] Making XYZ shitposts that you think are "quality contributions" doesn't mean that you deserve anything.
[3] If you think that you are, then you are an delusional idiot and not welcome here.
|
|
|
|
Hello Bounty manager! Please correct my mistake in the reports.
In Twitter companies
Spreadsheets - Week 6:
line 5 - report for Week 5
line 674 - report for Week 6
There is nothing to fix other than slap negative trust on you for attempting to claim two rewards in the same week. |
|
|
|
Trust summary for acoindr
This user recently woke up from a long period of inactivity.
I spy with my cat eye.  |
|
|
|
hello sir please delete the account that uses on my behalf, in the signiture program, in using: bitcointalk username, link my url profile with different wallet,
my original account with the spreadsheet number: 38
username: joycigar
fake account created by a numbered person spreadsheet: 54
please remove from the list numbered 54 because it is not my account, he is on behalf of my account
thank you
It has been handled; good catch. |
|
|
|
It still doesn't make sense. It should be sMerits in your pool. I think. Maybe I'm missing something.
And how are you going to fill the pool?
Pump up one of the main accounts in the ring of farmed accounts by sending it a lot of merit under the pretense of creating a pool. I'm getting good at predicting the future. |
|
|
|
hi manager. i join signature campaign. my rank is member an my spreadsheet number 17. but rate as junior.. can you help me.
Fixed. This should be a reminder for everyone to double check their numbers. Bounty hunter needs to create his profile on the truegame website? Is KYC required? Thank you!
No. |
|
|
|
|
Seems like a good way to covertly deploy merit to your alts[1] under the pretense of "quality-campaign contributions". Thus, I'm going to say 'No' to this suggestion.
[1] Not implying that OP has alts; it's just a thought of one the (bad) things that this would set the precedence for.
|
|
|
|
I am not tagging people for spamming,
I searched your sent trust and found 89 instances of the word "SMAS" in your sent trust, and 437 instances of the word "spam" in your sent trust (some of these may be overlapping). I think it is safe to say your statement that you are not tagging people for spamming is a lie. About 0% of those are tags that were sent as a direct result of someone spamming. You're really desperate. Read before you respond (shitposting et. al.). I am not tagging people for spamming, and I believe that nobody else is doing that right now either.
On a serious note, people may hesitate to give strong opinions against the OP when there are DT members speaking up in favour of him.
Unless I missed someone, it's literally just one. ChiBitCTy was active today so looks like ban has been lifted? Update please if there is a good news  Can't banned people log in, but just not do anything? |
|
|
|
I'm way out of the loop on this, but what is ALU and what is Lauda's connection to this scam?
Literally nothing. I didn't even know this project existed until someone pointed it out in some other thread a few weeks ago. |
|
|
|
Proposed, discussed, and answered before. It is not happening, at least not yet. Let's not start this discussion (again) here.
Please point me to where this was discussed and answered, I honestly want to know, as I do not venture outside of Collectibles often. What are everyone's ideas for improving post quality?
I have mostly ruled out:
- Removing signatures or sig ads globally.
- Requiring payment to wear sig ads.
- Banning account sales.
This is his thread. There were many threads some spanning tens of pages over the course of the past few years. If you are really interested in those discussions, then you should try digging them up yourself (it would take me too much time). Tl;dr of all discussions: Plenty of potential *attacks* on the problem, with all of them having at least some con(s) to it. The last option would be to go nuclear.
I realize that this is off-topic to the subject of the thread, but it is a closing statement to a part of a relevant post (by Lesbian Cow). However, it would be good to keep it in here and not continue the off-topic discussion. I won't comment on this anymore (here) and neither should you @LC. |
|
|
|
And this is the exact issue in unbanning even one person creates. Lone shark shouldn't have been unbanned without adding exceptions to the rules for everyone not just one case. We should look at that decision as a hasty error that wasn't thought through properly and we certainly shouldn't be using that one case as a reason to acquiesce to this one unless defined exceptions are made.
I don't want to look at it with it remaining unanswered. There are a few out somewhat fair options: a) Explanation of that case (then follow up discussion/conclusion). b) Reinstate the ban Loan Shark and keep ban on OP (and make no exceptions moving forth). c) Leave Loan Shark as is, unban OP and *somewhat define* potential exceptions (theymos did address this to some extent, but it is definitely not enough to be used as a reference). Avoiding a) implies that the staff member in question is being protected from criticism, which I understand but not necessarily agree with (in all cases). But then this is just opening it up to abuse and complaints when mods start unbanning people they like or when friends of people kick up a fuss. We can't say copy and pastes = ban, unless a mod decides otherwise based on no defined criteria.
It does, but you also thinking that you are going to come across a numerous cases of people getting banned for this and having notable names (people actively trading inside the Collectibles sections are notable in this context; that's a special area as is) requesting their unban. Additionally, isn't this also the case with permanent bans that aren't related to this rule? Occasionally people complain about theirs in Meta and request unbans.
Update: Typo here and there. |
|
|
|
My stance has always been the same. Plagiarism should result in a permanent ban.
I wonder what the incentive behind that is. Look at the number of people who have been tagged by DT members for so called spamming (whilest the moderators do not think that these accounts deserve even a temporary ban). Yet the very same people are here defending plagiarism, which has resulted in a permanent ban. I find it amusing that you are calling me a hypocrite. I am not tagging people for spamming, and I believe that nobody else is doing that right now either. You've proven yourself to be a biased hypocrite. Since you clearly have nothing useful to say, move along. Either way, the support he's garnered here should mean something. Rules are rules, but the community's voice should be given the appropriate weight as far as what the consequences are to copy/pasting.
Some people appeal to decentralization when it suits them, and not when it doesn't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think Chi might be worth making an exception for? He seems to actually contribute, more than Loan Shark (imo) did anyway, and Lone Shark was unbanned from his copy/pasting ban. |
|
|
|
But copy and pasting is black and white: Copy and paste = ban.
You could have argued that before, but after 1 exception has been made you no longer can. Making exceptions to the rule just screams of favouritism or nepotism and doing so is opening up a huge can of worms that we're going to have to deal with when everybody else starts making their case to be unbanned. What grounds do we give exceptions to plagiarism from now on? If they have a few friends here? They've done a few trades? They have sick relatives? They're a Senior Member and above? They've done a giveaway? They've made a helpful post? To me this is literally just bending or re-writing the rules to serve a friend of somebody and nobody has been asking for exceptions to the rule before this.
I don't think you could set up a "grading check mark kind of list" for something like that. When it comes to making exceptions, it should be a case-by-case basis but that would involve a lot of work (obviously). But how do we now equate them? There have been numerous people who have been banned for one or just a few copy and pastes. It's not fair to all those users who made a silly mistake and never got the chance to establish themselves here. Maybe they would have been different had they received a warning first or had a second chance.
Correct, it is not fair. However, some of them have argued their cases and the community consensus (i.e. only the people that might have taken a look at the user and commented) was almost always(?) in favor of the ban. This screams for the answer to the question: How did Loan Shark get unbanned and why? I would argue that this case would remain unfair without a proper answer to this; i.e. it is not possible to understand why an exception has been made before to properly understand why it shouldn't be made now (since theymos and you seem to be arguing this).
Disclaimer case: I only ever had a few very brief interactions with this user, and I'm not part of any off-site collector groups thus nobody can consider me arguing as part of/in favor of any "clique". Instead of making endless rules to combat spam, have you considered attacking the source and banning paid signature campaigns?
Proposed, discussed, and answered before. It is not happening, at least not yet. Let's not start this discussion (again) here. |
|
|
|
This has got to be one of the worst threads created on the topic of 'scaling'. What you proposed is not only inherently bad to the coin itself, it also has absolutely no relevance to scaling. You don't scale a system by not using it/using it less. Anyone with an IQ higher than a rock should understand this sentence. To me the biggest hindrance to spending Bitcoin in the US is the way it's taxed. I have to track every single transaction AND ITS COST BASIS. This year I had a 26-page Form 8949 in my tax return. I can't imagine a typical Amazon customer willing to bother with that.
That bill where purchases under $600 are not to be taxed would help with that. |
|
|
|
I hope this puts an end to the discussion here. I was beginning to get worried that a small clique of older members could get the rules bent. Thankfully, this is not the case.
Now we do not have to be worried about other spammers using this as a precedent.
Yet Lone Shark[1] has been unbanned, meaning that the rules have already been bent. Your hypocrisy is astounding.
[1] I have nothing against this user. |
|
|
|
hi dev, i registered the signature campaign and why i am not counting week 9.
I am not going to reward you for your spam. You should be banned. Bonus: You haven't reached the minimum required number of valid posts in the period, yet you come here demanding rewards. |
|
|
|
So we should unfairly punish users from certain countries and give older users a free pass to copy and paste? And he also only copied and pasted for the sig money. Why else would he have done it.
As I've argued elsewhere, when deciding on a punishment you can't, and should not look at a case as it were a black and white issue. Look at every law system in any somewhat sane country. Besides, the Loan Shark ban removal has set a precedence for other unbans of more notable people. If someone gives, helps and integrates into this community it is one thing (as in this case) if someone comes in shitposts, copy/pastes and leaches full time (Pajeet) it is another.
A real world example: Sentencing someone who is a pristine member of their community without any criminal background, vs. sentencing someone who is a horrible member + ex convict. They would not receive the same punishment (in some cases the difference between the respective sentences is somewhat extreme). It seems they can when their "friend" gets caught doing something but they've never made these arguments before for the hundreds of other posters who get caught doing the same. This is a bigger issue than just ChiBitCTy. Do we forgive the thousands of others who have been caught doing the same? Or maybe only when they have a few friends here, haven't read the rules or have an unbelievably pitiful sob story? If we're going to unban people under certain circumstances we may as well stop banning people for copy and pastes and just let the community leave them appropriate feedback instead.
You're drawing to a false equivalency. You can't equate a random shitposter that literally does nothing other than shitpost to get money with someone who is actively involved/engaged in the community. Additionally, I'd argue that less than 1% of the people that got banned for this behavior would fall in the 2nd category (which is obviously a number I just randomly threw out based on my memory of the past cases that I've seen). I might argue this more, but this is a bigger issue than this case (as you've mentioned) and would probably go somewhat off-topic.
* Lauda has not read the "sob story" and does not want to. I would have had more respect for you if you just apologised without the sob story.
My reaction would be similar to this, regardless of its validity. |
|
|
|
Hello dear devs.
The people managing the campaign are not developers/part of the project. Can I still write an article about Truegame until the 10th week?
You can submit entries to every part of the campaign until the final forms close (which will happen near the end of this week). |
|
|
|
Hello!
When does the bounty end?
Read the thread. Hi dev
My original spreadsheet of sig bounty is #19
Please look for fake spreadsheet #50 - it's fake or smth mistake . Ty
Someone attempted to steal your stakes. I'm going to run several duplicate checks at the end anyways, but I've already fixed this one. Hey manager!
Please remove application on the line №52 from the signature spreadsheet. I have never applied with this ETH address.
Thanks.
Handled (the same as above). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
