If an account is banned where can another member see this?

[SebastianJu]

I was of the impression that other users can see this on the trust page, at the same space where the change of the password is announced. Is that not the case or is that only true for those that are logged into that account?

Or is it only shown in seclog or modlog?

[Your Point Is Invalid]

In some instances it is shown in the modlog, i have never heard of it being shown on the trust page

[achow101]

No. Others cannot see whether a user is currently banned. The only indication is if the user was Autobanned by a moderator in which case it would show up in the modlog.

[Quickseller]

If it is banned a specific way then the ban will not even show up in the modlog (I don't know why it would ever show up in the seclog).

IIRC, BadBear said that the way he typically applies bans is a way that causes them to not show up on the modlog (that is available publicly). I am also fairly certain that temp bans will never show up in the modlog

[SebastianJu]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

So I only was able to see if an account is banned because I was able to log into that account for securing it? I'm pretty sure I saw such info somewhere in the profile or trust page. I doubt I'm completely wrong on that. Or am I?

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge. I wonder why password changes are shown, probably to track sales, but bans are not shown to public.

[TECSHARE]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

So I only was able to see if an account is banned because I was able to log into that account for securing it? I'm pretty sure I saw such info somewhere in the profile or trust page. I doubt I'm completely wrong on that. Or am I?

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge. I wonder why password changes are shown, probably to track sales, but bans are not shown to public.

Sure there is a reason. So there are no public calls for them to justify to anyone why they banned them. They tend to make choices that work for them and no one else.

[Quickseller]

So I only was able to see if an account is banned because I was able to log into that account for securing it? I'm pretty sure I saw such info somewhere in the profile or trust page. I doubt I'm completely wrong on that. Or am I?

You need to login to the account that you are accepting as collateral to secure it anyway. I would also say that it is presumed that an account is not currently banned unless the terms explicitly say that it is banned when escrowing a deal, the reason for this is that the buyer would not really be receiving anything of value if they purchased a banned account. IIRC the fact that an account is banned is displayed on every single page when you have accessed the account.

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge. I wonder why password changes are shown, probably to track sales, but bans are not shown to public.

I don't disagree with you, however BadBear seems to disagree, with the rationale that if it is known that someone is banned then you could attempt to impersonate them to try to get them for ban evasion and that he believes it is no one's business that someone is banned.

[SebastianJu]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

So I only was able to see if an account is banned because I was able to log into that account for securing it? I'm pretty sure I saw such info somewhere in the profile or trust page. I doubt I'm completely wrong on that. Or am I?

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge. I wonder why password changes are shown, probably to track sales, but bans are not shown to public.

Sure there is a reason. So there are no public calls for them to justify to anyone why they banned them. They tend to make choices that work for them and no one else.

I doubt that since random users would not check out other users accounts to read if they are banned. And instead banned users most of the time nag moderators with question threads in meta anyway. So I doubt that is the reason.

[SebastianJu]

So I only was able to see if an account is banned because I was able to log into that account for securing it? I'm pretty sure I saw such info somewhere in the profile or trust page. I doubt I'm completely wrong on that. Or am I?

You need to login to the account that you are accepting as collateral to secure it anyway. I would also say that it is presumed that an account is not currently banned unless the terms explicitly say that it is banned when escrowing a deal, the reason for this is that the buyer would not really be receiving anything of value if they purchased a banned account. IIRC the fact that an account is banned is displayed on every single page when you have accessed the account.

Hm, that's unfortunate since the list of tips was meant for users where I don't want to take over the escrow. So that they might be able to help themselves. Not that accounts are mostly known but everyone buying an account without having checked it himself or letting some other person check it would risk a lot.

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge. I wonder why password changes are shown, probably to track sales, but bans are not shown to public.

I don't disagree with you, however BadBear seems to disagree, with the rationale that if it is known that someone is banned then you could attempt to impersonate them to try to get them for ban evasion and that he believes it is no one's business that someone is banned.

Hm, I will read that thread and see what it is about. Thanks for finding it for me.

[botany]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

Enabling account trading is not one of the priorities of this forum.
Account trading is 'frowned upon'. 

[SebastianJu]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

Enabling account trading is not one of the priorities of this forum.
Account trading is 'frowned upon'. 

I know that it is only accepted because forbidding account trades has proven to be not working and instead had disadvantages. Allowing it at least allows mods to follow the messages going around in the forum system.

Though when it is allowed then it's in the best interest of the community to try to hinder scammers on their work. Which means a banned account should be recognizeable. Staff and moderators did already much to help on that front so i think it might be only natural to provide a bit more security there.

[mexxer-2]

Well in most temp bans or a perma one, I've noticed their signature being deleted too. If that applies only to bans for "Paid signature + spam" reasons, I'm not sure

[Quickseller]

Well in most temp bans or a perma one, I've noticed their signature being deleted too. If that applies only to bans for "Paid signature + spam" reasons, I'm not sure

Perma bans will remove all of an account's profile information (eg contact information, btc address, signature, personal text). Temp bans will not

[mexxer-2]

Well in most temp bans or a perma one, I've noticed their signature being deleted too. If that applies only to bans for "Paid signature + spam" reasons, I'm not sure

Perma bans will remove all of an account's profile information (eg contact information, btc address, signature, personal text). Temp bans will not

Not sure if thats the case, I've seen many a perma-bans not clearing out the signatures while, most of the temp ones clearing them. Some for example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1354201.new#new , grue banned users reported in that thread but the users still have their signatures, and considering glob-mods can only perma-ban, I think its fairly safe to assume

Perma bans will remove all of an account's profile information (eg contact information, btc address, signature, personal text). Temp bans will not

Is either not true at all, or applies only in certain situations

[SebastianJu]

Well in most temp bans or a perma one, I've noticed their signature being deleted too. If that applies only to bans for "Paid signature + spam" reasons, I'm not sure

Perma bans will remove all of an account's profile information (eg contact information, btc address, signature, personal text). Temp bans will not

Not sure if thats the case, I've seen many a perma-bans not clearing out the signatures while, most of the temp ones clearing them. Some for example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1354201.new#new , grue banned users reported in that thread but the users still have their signatures, and considering glob-mods can only perma-ban, I think its fairly safe to assume

Perma bans will remove all of an account's profile information (eg contact information, btc address, signature, personal text). Temp bans will not

Is either not true at all, or applies only in certain situations

Maybe signatures are only deleted and the users can put them back in to at least get paid for the open timeframe?

Yeah, speaking about it, it might be interesting for signature campaign owners to know if someone was banned, too.

[botany]

Hm, that's unfortunate for account buyers which makes buying banned accounts a pretty safe thing since most probably bans will not be mentioned by mods and only show up as info when the account holder complains about it.

I was posting a list of checks someone can do to not get scammed by buying accounts or taking accounts as collateral. I simply see that way too many buyers or loaner does not even know what to check at all. Most missed thing is already the valid signature.

Enabling account trading is not one of the priorities of this forum.
Account trading is 'frowned upon'. 

I know that it is only accepted because forbidding account trades has proven to be not working and instead had disadvantages. Allowing it at least allows mods to follow the messages going around in the forum system.

Though when it is allowed then it's in the best interest of the community to try to hinder scammers on their work. Which means a banned account should be recognizeable. Staff and moderators did already much to help on that front so i think it might be only natural to provide a bit more security there.

When even scams are not moderated, why should moderators work to support/help account sales? It only helps give a false sense of security. You trade accounts at your own risk.

[arbitrage]

I think there is no reason to hide the fact that an account is banned. They get banned for a reason and this reason mostly is of concern for the community. It might make sense to make it public knowledge.

Thanks for this very good conclusion, this is very common for a scams.
Maybe if they publicly show banned..Maybe scams will decrease a bit?

Well in most temp bans or a perma one, I've noticed their signature being deleted too. If that applies only to bans for "Paid signature + spam" reasons, I'm not sure

Yes but when selling account he also can claim that wasn't banned from signatures..
So there is no way to know is it scam or not?!

[arbitrage]

When even scams are not moderated, why should moderators work to support/help account sales? It only helps give a false sense of security. You trade accounts at your own risk.

Probably because they don't support trading of accounts anyway,
 probably they assuming this account will be used for scams, so this way they will discourage sells..
  But this is still legal..Why?

[Decoded]

It's only in the modlog when the ban is manual. Most of the time, it's automatic.

Simply just look in the meta thread, and usually the butthurt guy will come crying.

[SebastianJu]

botany

When even scams are not moderated, why should moderators work to support/help account sales? It only helps give a false sense of security. You trade accounts at your own risk.

Sure, trading at your own risk. And using an escrow can avoid that risk even, at least when the escrow is changing the pass, so has to login.

Though for the unescrowed trades or trades where the escrow is not logging in, it would mean supporting scammers. Since showing a ban has no disadvantage for everyone else though has the advantage that others can't be scammd so easily.

Well, when I think over it it might be rather rare cases when someone trades an account without escrow and even would know the account name before buying.


arbitrage

Yes but when selling account he also can claim that wasn't banned from signatures..
So there is no way to know is it scam or not?!

Mostly there are entries from campaign managers in trust ratings. Or one could check out google search with:

Code:

site:bitcointalk.org username banned

When even scams are not moderated, why should moderators work to support/help account sales? It only helps give a false sense of security. You trade accounts at your own risk.

Probably because they don't support trading of accounts anyway,
 probably they assuming this account will be used for scams, so this way they will discourage sells..
  But this is still legal..Why?

They forbid it once but the problem was that it did not change anything. Trades still happened, only hidden. The downside was that they did not see it happen. It's better the trades happen over forum pm.


Decoded

It's only in the modlog when the ban is manual. Most of the time, it's automatic.

Simply just look in the meta thread, and usually the butthurt guy will come crying.

Though an account owner who get permabanned and has a scammy character would not do this. He would try to approach interested users with this irresistable offer.

Though like I wrote above. I think the cases might be very rare to be the reason for a change.