LoyceV made a topic there: A wave of bans: 400 yesterday, 300 the day before. What changed?, from which I took data for my topic.
By now, LoyceV updated data in that topic on daily basis, so I think that my topic will be updated on daily basis too. However, in the future, it will depends on data updates in LoyceV's topic.

I will do two things:
- Observe banned users during the banwave, sorted them by ranks.
- Compare statistics of the before and after period of the banwave (the chosen cutoff day is 11/5/2019)

---

Summary:
- The higher ranks users are, the lower cases of Autobans as well as lower proportional percentages of each ranks per total Autobans.
- The average of Autobans per day of the after period is 1.97-times higher than the figure of before period. Cutoff day between two periods is the 11/5/2019.

Tables:

All ranks
For all ranks, there are 2170 Autobans from 11/5/2019 to 20/5/2019 (10 days). By ranks, Brand New/ Newbie, Jr. Member + Member are the top two groups that accounts for 54.9%, and 30.2% of total Autobans, respectively.
Full Member and Senior Member ranks account for 6.7% and 4.1% of total Autobans. The rest three groups, Hero Member, Copper Member and Legendary accounts for 1.9%, 1.3% and 0.9% of total Autobans.
Among all ranks, Legendary and Hero Member are the two lowest groups (excluding Copper Member), with 20 and 41 Autobans for each rank, respectively.

Brand new and Newbie excluded
For ranks from Junior Members and above, excluding Brand New and Newbie ranks, there are 979 total Autobans. Among those cases, Junior Member + Member, Full Member account for 655 (66.9%), 145 (14.8%), and 89 (9.1%) of total Autobans, respectively.
Hero Member and Legendary have 41 and 20 Autobans, that account for 4.2% and 2% of total autobans for all ranks (excluding Brand New/ Newbie).

Compare the before and after banwave period

• Before: one-week before the banwave: 764 Autobans
• After (from 11/5 to 20/5/2019 ~ 10-day period: 2170 Autobans

The average of daily autobans are 110 and 217 cases per day for before and after the banwave periods, with the cutoff day is 11/5/2019 (the start day of after period). It means that the average of autobans per day of after period is 1.97-times (217/110 ~ 1.97) higher than the figure of before period.

---

Data (from LoyceV)
Previous week before the banwave
764 autobanned users (there is likely a typo made by LoyceV). It should be 764 rather than 747? (If LoyceV see my topic, please confirm this typo). However, there is no data on autobans  over ranks.

---

During the banwave
389 Autobanned users (11/5/2019)

137 Autobanned users (12/5/2019)

213 Autobanned users (13/5/2019)

318 Autobanned users (14/5/2019)

67 Autobanned users (15/5/2019)

685 Autobanned users (16-19/5/2019)

361 Autobanned users (20/5/2019)

It depends upon kind of rule you violate. There are some kinds of violations will get temporary bans with ban notification each time you get temp bans. There are maximum three temporary bans, and the fourth time will be permanent ban.
In addition, users also should notice delete message when their posts deleted by moderators, it is early signal of temporary bans if they keep spamming.
However, there are some sort of rule violation, such as plagiarism will result in permanent bans without any kind of warning. It clearly states from topics to topics, so it does not actually depends on forum users, it depends on forum rules.

There is quote button available for use, and help us more easily to mention as well as point out previous posts/ discussions without fear of plagiarism violations. Human can make mistakes, even with plagiarism, sometimes we unintentionally make it (but such unintentional plagiarism is so rare), but most of times, people plagiarised mainly due to their laziness, and financial motivation behind (such as want to get easy money by copying and pasting to hit post quota). In my opinion, it's hard to explain why users do plagiarism and get sympathy as well as reduced sentence for that. Therefore, by now there are very limited users whom received reduced sentences.
There are some users whom made ban appeals for others, but I don't know such ban appeals on behalf of real banned users will be considered as ban evasion or not. By now, within current terrible banwave, I have not seen admins or global moderators call it as ban evasions. In addition, I guess what you actually meant about changes is things, contributions or net-effects in the forum that users did after his or her plagiarism (when they were not found) and before the permanent-banned days. It is sure that such contributions play important role in investigation procedures of admins, and global moderators.

It does not often occur, but sometime translation topics received more merits than original ones. That is ridiculous, maybe comes from local-board effects. I don't offend anyone and their time to translate topics & make contributions to their local boards (and generally for the forum), but I support your decision.

Such linear line does not make much sense to forecast price movements of bitcoin in my opinion. I believe that there are two scenarios for bitcoin upward movements in the next few months: First, it might hit or break the point around $10000 (the blue line); Second, if it surpass $10000 and still has good supports and demands from bitcoin enthusiats, it might test the strong resistance around $11500 (the red line). Who knows, how bitcoin will move next months, but I think these two price points are very important for bitcoin in medium-term.
It is my first time to see such topic without signature, it looks very clean ^^

There are some facts:
- After receiving reduced sentence: people asked for a little bit more reduced sentence. For example: from one year signature ban reduced to 6-month or less signature ban.
- After having more comfortable ban appeal procedures and more flexible reduced sentences: people asked for more sympathy on plagiarism made after 2016.
I don't offend to any user whom got permanent bans but the fact is the forum has rules & strict punishments on plagiarism that states for long period. They should spend their time to read rules during their first months in the forum. Another thing is even with current approach to solve ban appeals, there are very flexible alternative punishments for each user: from 60-days ban + 1-year signature ban; 60 days ban + 2-years signature ban; or even user whom got reduced sentence with only signature ban or even without signature ban.
The newest case of bill gator, whom got temp ban and signature ban at the beginning (not shown in modlog) is a good example that global mod or admin whom solved that case very carefully at the start. What's happen if bill gator make ban appeal and ask for more reduced sentence?

---

I believe that admins and global moderators consider very carefully before giving reduced sentence for each ban appeal, so I don't think they should ask for more.

bill gatgor is not fitted in the topic, because he was originally banned temporarily with signature ban in the first place. He was not perma-banned, then get temp-ban and signature ban after ban appeal's consideration. It depends on perspective of Alex_Sr to add bill gator to the OP or not, but I don't think this case is fitted with the topic.

I think that theymos has reasons to add such text in signature of permanent-banned users whom got temporary bans and signature bans after deeply review from admins or global moderators. Even theymos has never stated about the purposes of signature banned-text, I guess admin would want to do something:
Firstly, to remind banned-users a very strong Warning that this is a big rewards for them to come back (mostly due to their significant contributions in the past as well as minor, acceptable faults of plagiarism), and those users automatically receive the Warning every time they make each post. That is surely a very strong Warning, that repeatedly pops up and reminds those users for one- or two years-period with their posts.
Secondly, to remind other users in the forum about serious punishments of plagiarism, even users whom luckily enough to get alternative punishments.

---

Therefore, I think it is fine to leave such text in Signature space of unbanned users.

What happen if same requirements on minimum earned merits to display signatures, without demotions? I meant for each rank, users in that reach have to earned a minimum number of merits to be able to display their signatures. Demotions might cause mad situation, so such requirements to have rights of displaying signatures might be a good alternative for demotion. For example:
- Junior Member:  remains 1 as of demotion in September last year.
- Member: 15 earned merits
- Full Member: 25 earned merits
- Senior Members: 50 earned merits.
- Hero Member: 100 earned merits
- Legendary: 200 earned merits.

My dozen of cents:
- When there is no alternative for permanent bans, users ask for alternatives;
- When there is alternative for permanent bans: temporary bans + signature bans (for now); users ask for less period of signature bans;
- What next if period of signature bans reduced to 6 months; users might ask for reduce the period to 3 or 1 month;
- What next if period of signature bans reduced to 1 month; users might ask for temporary bans only (60-day temp bans).
For the group of forum rules, why do we need such group (that likely a perfect place for spam)?
There is Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ. Moreover, the topic is opened for discusions.

Things changed fastly in the forum, and in crypto, so we only have unofficial rules of the forum, instead of official rules. In addition, theymos stated long time ago, maybe in 2019 or late of 2018, that he actually felt campaigns paid in altcoins, tokens are distasteful, and might serious consider restrict all campaigns that not pay in bitcoin. The main reason (likely come from @LoyceV) is that by restricting all campaigns, bounties pay via altcoins and tokens, scammers have to pay some cost (via Bitcoin, the only acceptable payments for bounties) to scam others. It means they have to pay a cost first, and it might potentialy reduce numbers of scam projects that run bounties there to scam crypto enthusiasts.
Such restriction will automatically and dramatically reduce bounty topics and spam in bounty child boards for sure, like what we have witnessed with merit system, months after start of the system, demotions on Junior Members activated, after that spamming reduced considerably.

---

For a official or unofficial guideline for bounty managers, I don't think that sort of guideline will be launched by admins. Main reasons are most of important things are presented here: Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ, and related reference sources.

Some things for you: (1) Your first ban appeal is there: Iust another case of BAN . Help @hilariousandco @theymos (that ban appeal has currently been locked, and the OP shown that it locked by author, but if topic locked by mods, it will be shown as author as well (I could be wrong). If that one locked by yourself, you should unlock it and should bump your ban appeal regularly. (2) The newest one should be locked now. There are some reasons: you don't want to listen to other suggestion, except hilariousandco, so locking it now will prevent unexpected recommendations (even they are not spam); if hilariousandco actually has something to discuss with you, he might do it through PMs. (3) It takes time to investigate all ban appeals as well as check new reports on plagiarism. If your first ban appeal locked by admins or global mods, it likely implies that your case has been under investigation, because @hilariousandco already shed lights that you likely have chance by saying you should contact theymos. Be patient!
Generally, ban evasion always results in negative results for you.
Ban appeal - How to make it right and reduce workload for forum staffs

Agreed.
ChipMixer campaign even has not opened up a single new slot with ban of cellard. If campaigns expand original ranks from Legendary to Senior member ranks (for example) to lower ranks, like Full member or even Member ranks, there might occur another new trend.
Character assasination aims at higher ranks to dig deeply in the past in order to find their mistakes and report them. Everyone can make mistakes when we are newbies, so if they dig deeply, they might find some. To be honest with you all, I don't think it should be a trend at any odds.

---

By the way, I would like to ask this, so please give me answer if you know it.

It raise the ideas that why old users here don't spend their time to check their past posts. I meant I am sure that there are dominant part of forum users did not read forum rules in their trust days there, and of course they did something wrong that they did not even know that they violated forum rules and might get troubles by doing this. So, why not check past posts and delete what you think are shitposts, or not sure why and how you made that post; I believe no one can remember their past posts are palgiarisms or not (that partially why we see ban appeals ask for evidence), so it's better to delete if you think it is poor quality posts.

---

Only one question, which kind of treatments if one user delete their past posts that are palgiarism, before get reported (it means users realized their mistakes themselves, and correct their mistakes)?
1] Will it actually be considered as plagiarism with same treatments, perma-bans?
2] Will they be fine if they delete their past plagiarism before getting reported?
I think the answer is the second one.

What's next if someone (Vod or Ognasty) accepted his faults. Maybe they are both have faults on their sides.
Maybe, I locked the topic can help joiners of the discussion being cooled down a little bit, because they have some inconvenience to quote previous posts. Both Vod and Ognasty are prominent users of the forum, so I understood that they felt hard to accept their faults. No one is a perfect person, and we all can make mistakes, so what's the point to fight each other, to find faults of others, and to deny our own faults?

---

I had same thoughts like yours days ago, when things likely solved, but in fact discussions have kept going, endlessly.

Restricting less than 3 posts per day (with accepted timegaps betweenn posts is 8 hours) to help to slow down lives of bitcointalkers is not a bad thing, especially during those hottest day in both crypto (due to the Spring-return) and in the forum (due to Perma-Bans, Ban Appeals, and thousands of woke-up accounts). It might play important role to slow down the pace of FUDs and scams spreading around by scammers, whom woke up recently or become more actively during recent days.

I actually believed that things solved on that day, but I was wrong when things become worst (it should be better), and we have not had a happy time. I am deeply sorry by starting the thread. So, I locked the topic.
I don't want to dig to the past and figure out who are right, who are wrong; and honestly I don't want to involve with this. If I can say something, I would say that:
- Everyone who joined the fight are all wrong, including me who started the topic at somewhat extent.
- There is no reasonable thing to say that: I did something wrong, but I am not wrong because you did wrong things first. Whoever did wrong thing first does not make sense that the another one involved is innocent, and is right.
- We mostly see wrong things of others and do not see their rest good things. For example: if one person did 100 different things, 5 of them are wrong; we mostly rememeber that 5 bad things, and forget all 95 good things he or she does.
- To end this, each one has to honestly admit his or her faults, then when time passed, things cool down, forgiveness might appear some day.
- If things keep going like this, even 10 or 20 years later or till the day we die, this combat won't be ended, an endless-combat.

You made me surprised. 
Added, and thank you so much for doing this one.

Congratulations, lovesmayfamilis!
I would like to ask you a favor to open the topic for a while till my curious question answered by hilariousandco or admins.

---

By the way, because you are here, please clarify this point for us, hilariousandco:
If my thought is wrong, I am fine to correct it after getting your clarification. If my though is right, I will add a little bit details to my guide.

Best regard,