Account banned, not sure why

[Mrphilios]

Hi my account was banned on Saturday and I'm not 100% sure why. I was hoping that this was just a temporary ban and if not could I ask what the reason for it was? Sorry if I have broken any rules.

The account name is junglebadman

[1713561347]

1713561347

[1713561347]

1713561347

[1713561347]

1713561347

[1713561347]

1713561347

[cissrawk]

Hi my account was banned on Saturday

I believe is not, since your account last post is on 22 july which mean sunday.

Sorry if I have broken any rules.

Even you say sorry, you will not get your account back.

Might this have anything to do with it?

Looks like, since he write 4 posts in a row and in one thread, which is against the rules.

Archive

[hilariousandco]

Probably copy and pasting.

Is this your own work:

There are plenty of crypto non-believers, and they all seem to have very common complaints about the crypto space as a whole. Here are 5 of these complaints and responses to make them think.

1. There is no intrinsic value.

"How can a digital computer code have value?" is a common complaint and it seems logical to people who don't really understand value or money in general. The thing is, Not much in this world really does have any value other than what we as people assign to it. FIAT money is paper backed by a government promise, Gold and other precious metals/stones are just shiny things we pulled out the ground etc. etc. - the only things that really have intrinsic value are food, water and family... everything else is man-made.

This brings me back to my point, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have as much value as any other type of money, if not more because they are backed by an intuitive progressive technology and the energy costs used to create them (for POW currencies).

2. The price of crypto is pure speculation.

While true to a point, this is really a non-point. It's not really any different to the way traditional markets work including the housing market, where landlord buy houses looking to make a profit when the price rises above inflation (hopefully). Moreover, there isn't really such thing as the purchase of something that isn't speculative, buying a meal in a restaurant is essentially a bet that the food will be worth what you paid to eat it.

3. It isn't used as money.

While partly true, it's still wrong. While not at the point of mass adoption, there are places where people can spend crypto and many people do on a daily basis. Some of these payments will be for questionable purposes through the deep web but there are also many legitimate transactions through crypto debit cards. In places like Venezuela people would far rather be paid in crypto than the hyperinflationary bolivar and people forget that it is still early in the development phase. Scaling solutions are in the process of being rolled out while certain altcoins designed as everyday currencies are progressing through development at a rapid pace. it's not much of a stretch of the imagination to imagine a time in the near future when crypto payments are just as convenient as FIAT transactions.

4. Too many Blockchains.

Anyone can fork a blockchain. Anyone can create a coin. But it is the same with most other goods and services in an economy. Anyone can cook a meal, but that doesn’t mean that food is unnecessary. An argument can be made that there is no need for thousands of crypto tokens and I could argue that there is no reason that Nike makes 100 different types of trainers. What actually matters is that as long as the token or coin has a use case then there is a reason for it to exist. It is important to recognize that Blockchain is a technology, and while it has a major use case as a currency, this is not it's only purpose. It can be deployed in an infinite number of ways.

5. Crypto Mining costs

While crypto mining costs are undoubtedly high, and some mining farms use more electricity than some countries, it is important to realise that no monetary system is without costs. Gold has to be mined from the ground and costs a ridiculous amount of money per kg that is extracted; its part of the reason that Gold has such a high price.

Cryptocurrency and blockchain technology are still in their infancy, and it is important to realise that there is still a long way to go in terms of development. Mining costs are necessary to secure the network and when blockchain proves to the world how secure it's network is and the benefits it can bring, I doubt many people will complain about the costs associated with mining then.

[Vod]

Hi my account was banned on Saturday

I believe is not, since your account last post is on 22 july which mean sunday.

He could be in a different time zone than you.  :/

[Mrphilios]

Probably copy and pasting.

Is this your own work:

There are plenty of crypto non-believers, and they all seem to have very common complaints about the crypto space as a whole. Here are 5 of these complaints and responses to make them think.

1. There is no intrinsic value.

"How can a digital computer code have value?" is a common complaint and it seems logical to people who don't really understand value or money in general. The thing is, Not much in this world really does have any value other than what we as people assign to it. FIAT money is paper backed by a government promise, Gold and other precious metals/stones are just shiny things we pulled out the ground etc. etc. - the only things that really have intrinsic value are food, water and family... everything else is man-made.

This brings me back to my point, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have as much value as any other type of money, if not more because they are backed by an intuitive progressive technology and the energy costs used to create them (for POW currencies).

2. The price of crypto is pure speculation.

While true to a point, this is really a non-point. It's not really any different to the way traditional markets work including the housing market, where landlord buy houses looking to make a profit when the price rises above inflation (hopefully). Moreover, there isn't really such thing as the purchase of something that isn't speculative, buying a meal in a restaurant is essentially a bet that the food will be worth what you paid to eat it.

3. It isn't used as money.

While partly true, it's still wrong. While not at the point of mass adoption, there are places where people can spend crypto and many people do on a daily basis. Some of these payments will be for questionable purposes through the deep web but there are also many legitimate transactions through crypto debit cards. In places like Venezuela people would far rather be paid in crypto than the hyperinflationary bolivar and people forget that it is still early in the development phase. Scaling solutions are in the process of being rolled out while certain altcoins designed as everyday currencies are progressing through development at a rapid pace. it's not much of a stretch of the imagination to imagine a time in the near future when crypto payments are just as convenient as FIAT transactions.

4. Too many Blockchains.

Anyone can fork a blockchain. Anyone can create a coin. But it is the same with most other goods and services in an economy. Anyone can cook a meal, but that doesn’t mean that food is unnecessary. An argument can be made that there is no need for thousands of crypto tokens and I could argue that there is no reason that Nike makes 100 different types of trainers. What actually matters is that as long as the token or coin has a use case then there is a reason for it to exist. It is important to recognize that Blockchain is a technology, and while it has a major use case as a currency, this is not it's only purpose. It can be deployed in an infinite number of ways.

5. Crypto Mining costs

While crypto mining costs are undoubtedly high, and some mining farms use more electricity than some countries, it is important to realise that no monetary system is without costs. Gold has to be mined from the ground and costs a ridiculous amount of money per kg that is extracted; its part of the reason that Gold has such a high price.

Cryptocurrency and blockchain technology are still in their infancy, and it is important to realise that there is still a long way to go in terms of development. Mining costs are necessary to secure the network and when blockchain proves to the world how secure it's network is and the benefits it can bring, I doubt many people will complain about the costs associated with mining then.

It was my work inspired by a post I read elsewhere. None of it was copy and pasted though. Apologies if it is too similar to something else but I didn't realise that that was against the rules.

I'm not gonna beg for my account back so all the people having a laugh at me being banned should stop bothering.

About the multiple posts in one thread, the bounty required it and I would have been happy to delete the posts.

[Xal0lex]

Probably copy and pasting.

Plagiarism.

Copy:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1205502.msg32816965#msg32816965

Original: www.time.com/alien-life/

Copy:

1. According to the FBI, 94% of terrorist attacks carried out in the United States from 1980 to 2005 have been by non-Muslims. This means that an American terrorist suspect is over nine times more likely to be a non-Muslim than a Muslim

2. There have been over one thousand terrorist attacks in Europe in the past five years. Take a guess at what percent of those terrorists were Muslim. Wrong, now guess again. It’s less than 2%. -Snip-

Original: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/omar-alnatour/muslims-are-not-terrorist_b_8718000.html

[Mrphilios]

Probably copy and pasting.

Plagiarism.

Copy:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1205502.msg32816965#msg32816965

Original: www.time.com/alien-life/

Copy:

1. According to the FBI, 94% of terrorist attacks carried out in the United States from 1980 to 2005 have been by non-Muslims. This means that an American terrorist suspect is over nine times more likely to be a non-Muslim than a Muslim

2. There have been over one thousand terrorist attacks in Europe in the past five years. Take a guess at what percent of those terrorists were Muslim. Wrong, now guess again. It’s less than 2%. -Snip-

Original: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/omar-alnatour/muslims-are-not-terrorist_b_8718000.html

Wow that's going back in time a bit... Fair point some of that was copied but it was only initially with the intention of backing up my point of view with stats and I obviously got lazy.

At least I have my reason. Thanks

[Mrphilios]

In my defense though, I'm not a shit poster like a lot of the people on this forum posting 5 word posts to just get their bounty signature requirements, I did actually try to contribute.

I feel that a flat out ban without even a warning is a bit harsh. At the time of the two posts you just quoted I didn't realise there was any rule against copying sections of other articles and while ignorance is not an excuse those posts are not indicative of my posting behaviour as a whole.

I realise there is absolutely no reason for me to get my account back but I just thought I would use the opportunity to defend myself while I still have it.

Peace

[DireWolfM14]

Wow that's going back in time a bit... Fair point some of that was copied but it was only initially with the intention of backing up my point of view with stats and I obviously got lazy.

There's nothing wrong with copying other people's work to help support your point, but make sure you supply a reference to the original work, and give the actual writer the credit they deserve. 

[suchmoon]

I didn't realise there was any rule

But the ban is still not a good enough reason to read the rules? You're beyond hope.

[Mrphilios]

I didn't realise there was any rule

But the ban is still not a good enough reason to read the rules? You're beyond hope.

Are you for real? When did I even say that. I can see where I have gone wrong and although I think its pretty harsh I understand that rules are rules.

You on the other hand are just looking for a way to stick the knife in to feed your own ego and it is utterly pathetic.

Try reading the whole sentence next time before you cherry pick parts of it out to try and look like a smart ass

[BTCforJoe]

I didn't realise there was any rule

But the ban is still not a good enough reason to read the rules? You're beyond hope.

Are you for real? When did I even say that. I can see where I have gone wrong and although I think its pretty harsh I understand that rules are rules.

You on the other hand are just looking for a way to stick the knife in to feed your own ego and it is utterly pathetic.

Uh, he quoted you exactly to the post where you said that...

In my defense though, I'm not a shit poster like a lot of the people on this forum posting 5 word posts to just get their bounty signature requirements, I did actually try to contribute.

I feel that a flat out ban without even a warning is a bit harsh. At the time of the two posts you just quoted I didn't realise there was any rule against copying sections of other articles and while ignorance is not an excuse those posts are not indicative of my posting behaviour as a whole.

I realise there is absolutely no reason for me to get my account back but I just thought I would use the opportunity to defend myself while I still have it.

Peace

Plagiarism is plagiarism, but you have stated that this work that got you in trouble was your own that was inspired by an article, and that you had not copied and pasted it from anywhere:

It was my work inspired by a post I read elsewhere. None of it was copy and pasted though.

When you got called out, you changed your tune to say that at least you're not a shitposter, but in my opinion, plagiarizing is more offensive than shitposting.

There's no need to get defensive when others call you out based on your own actions. I can assure you that from a third person perspective, @suchmoon wasn't trying to feed their own ego with what they stated. You just took offense to it because of the nature of the way you tried to prove your innocence.

If you think that your plagiarism is justified because "at least you're not a shitposter", then maybe you don't belong on these forums afterall.

[suchmoon]

I didn't realise there was any rule

But the ban is still not a good enough reason to read the rules? You're beyond hope.

Are you for real? When did I even say that. I can see where I have gone wrong and although I think its pretty harsh I understand that rules are rules.

You on the other hand are just looking for a way to stick the knife in to feed your own ego and it is utterly pathetic.

Try reading the whole sentence next time before you cherry pick parts of it out to try and look like a smart ass

In addition to what Joe said: the post that I quoted is violating another forum rule (#32: no multi-posting), thus making it obvious that you have not read the rules even after your ban.

[Mrphilios]

Plagiarism is plagiarism, but you have stated that this work that got you in trouble was your own that was inspired by an article, and that you had not copied and pasted it from anywhere:

When you got called out, you changed your tune to say that at least you're not a shitposter, but in my opinion, plagiarizing is more offensive than shitposting.

There's no need to get defensive when others call you out based on your own actions. I can assure you that from a third person perspective, @suchmoon wasn't trying to feed their own ego with what they stated. You just took offense to it because of the nature of the way you tried to prove your innocence.

If you think that your plagiarism is justified because "at least you're not a shitposter", then maybe you don't belong on these forums afterall.

Seems like you have trouble reading things in full as well. The post I got banned for was not plagiarism, it was the two posts further down the article that I was admitting to. So I didn't change my tune at all.

I legitimately just wanted to know why I was banned, not trying to protest my innocence or anything like that but the lot of you just want to be arsehole and rub it in because I may have made a mistake 4 months ago.

The part of his post that I took offense too was where he said I was beyond hope which was clearly un needed

This forum is full of either idiots who are just here to exploit it or people like you who just want to boost their own ego.

I'll say it again. I understand where I have gone wrong ad I now understand the rules. Have fun on your toxic little forum

[BTCforJoe]

Lol, I can assure you that my ego has nothing to do with my response. I'm not the one that broke any rules. Regardless of which post you got banned for, you did ultimately break rules.

- Forum Idiot

P.S. Good riddance.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

This forum is full of either idiots who are just here to exploit it or people like you who just want to boost their own ego.

Better them than a bunch of plagiarists.

Have fun on your toxic little forum

K bye.

[suchmoon]

I just want to state one the record that my ego is so huge there is no way to boost it any further.

I hope this question is now settled and we can go back to the "why ban I didn't know there's rules wah waaaaah" topic.