Multi account user spotted

[Cloudpost]

I've helping with bounty program and spotted one user call the article submitted with other account his own article. Both accounts are posting in Turkish section.
Maybe this is wrong section, if so, please move.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=258500
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=944905


Additional evidence: both posted the same ETH address in 2 spreadsheets for different users:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g816oslXesG67GjaB9Nbb69oKB3H6Iz1mK7h_TrnshM/edit?ts=5953a59b#gid=0 marked orange
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1munlrFmfR-f_f5vvZ1NxXzBdfVpgCopT2PxJcXaXIZ0/edit#gid=937198247 marked orange


Also, amoung twitter participants I spotted very stupid multi account owner that tried to abuse the bounty program.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16bHopzdr_hC-dJcsI9ygry6L6IXREEL3yAWmBrWYVaY/edit#gid=1578826459

Lines 560-574, here's the picture. All accs 1 activity and posted Twitter requests one after another:


I hope moderators will be interested in this and suspend or give red trust to these accs.

[dillpicklechips]

Seems like those accounts who participated in the twitter campaign that you reported are removed  in the spreadsheet since they are painted red.


Regarding with ap3311 and saulzaents, they may share the same eth address and might be one and the same person or friends or siblings which decided to use one for their bounty hunting moments (I actually read this somwhere) but no violation to the campaign's rules since he (or they) joined different campaigns which is Blog Campaign and the other one is Signature Campaign so they have no offense. If you are considering multiple accounts as an offense then it is not since it is not stated in the forum's rules that it is not allowed.

Hence, they didn't violate both the campaign's rules and forum's rules. Multi accounts is not an offense but spam is.

[ap3311]

Wish you had asked me first. he is my friend. And I entered the same project with him and he wanted me to write a blog. That's all there is to it.

It's not a big deal for you. he just asked you to accept the blog post, and I wrote a blog and i gave him his nickname.that's it.

[Quickseller]

Multiple accounts are allowed. This person is breaking zero rules

[ap3311]

I tried to explain this to the complaining person but he cant understand


Thanks for the positive comments.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Multiple accounts are allowed. This person is breaking zero rules

Spoken like a scammer who doesn't know the difference between what the rules are and what the right thing to do is.

Don't listen to anything QS has to say about morals, ethics, rules, or anything else.

[Spoetnik]

Multiple accounts are allowed. This person is breaking zero rules

Yup unfortunately.
I seen staff here say they advocate it actually.
When i read that i was sort of disgusted.. it should be disallowed or at least limited.

Oh and i might have it bookmarked but i have a thousand BCT Firefox Bookmarks so i am not sure i can find it.. and i can't recall which staffer said it.
They said if "you have something controversial to say" for example.

[stompix]

Since multiple accounts are allowed,and there is no punishment from the staff if they abuse a campaign, I wonder if this would get the owner in any sort of trouble if reporting it. And not only him but others who do the same.



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=763515;sa=showPosts;start=20
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=836341;sa=showPosts

[Cloudpost]

I was checking twitter spreadsheet and found another HUGE bounty multiacc farmer. Lines 292-308 in this spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16bHopzdr_hC-dJcsI9ygry6L6IXREEL3yAWmBrWYVaY/edit#gid=0

Twitter accs looks absolutely the same, similar followers, identical tweets. I guess BTC talk accs should get red trust because there is obviously just 1 owner for all these accs, who was stupid enough to register at the same time.



I will continue my research!
I guess most of bounty campaigns should change rules and ask manual apporval in slack chat to be accepted to the campaign. I'm managing Aventus bounty campaign and I'll introduce this requirement!

[Lauda]

Since multiple accounts are allowed,and there is no punishment from the staff if they abuse a campaign, I wonder if this would get the owner in any sort of trouble if reporting it. And not only him but others who do the same.

If he/she/it/they is talking to himself using multiple accounts, whilst wearing a paid signature (et. al.), then they would surely get banned.

Twitter accs looks absolutely the same, similar followers, identical tweets. I guess BTC talk accs should get red trust because there is obviously just 1 owner for all these accs, who was stupid enough to register at the same time.

That is circumstantial proof at best. You need something better in order to get me to tag them all. I'd have to look into each account, which would be a huge waste of time and even then it would not be adequate without some sort of stronger connection between them. Personally, I have no trouble believing that this is a positive hit.
I responded as requested.

[Cloudpost]

Since multiple accounts are allowed,and there is no punishment from the staff if they abuse a campaign, I wonder if this would get the owner in any sort of trouble if reporting it. And not only him but others who do the same.

If he/she/it/they is talking to himself using multiple accounts, whilst wearing a paid signature (et. al.), then they would surely get banned.

Twitter accs looks absolutely the same, similar followers, identical tweets. I guess BTC talk accs should get red trust because there is obviously just 1 owner for all these accs, who was stupid enough to register at the same time.

That is circumstantial proof at best. You need something better in order to get me to tag them all. I'd have to look into each account, which would be a huge waste of time and even then it would not be adequate without some sort of stronger connection between them. Personally, I have no trouble believing that this is a positive hit.
I responded as requested.

Lauda, thanks a lot for the reply! Now I realize that there's not enough evidence for BTCtalk accs connected with similar twitter accs. The bounty abuser could just use random forum profile links to fill user link field, because there's no verification requirement for them (if they had to PM manager on forum for example to get approved, this could work). Indeed a big research on these accs needed to proove them as 1 big bounty farm.

Most social media bounty campaigns doesn't verify forum accounts and (if the specific campaign has for example Member+ participation rule) it's easy to bypass the rules by simply using random user profile link...