Alternatives to Permabans for plagarism

[S_Therapist]

As LoyceV said, merit can be received through abuse and it can't be a solution (Although I have voted for that option too before reading the discussion). I think the current rule should be continued since copy/paste is really a bad practice.

[suchmoon]

Oh, I said that because a large %age of the highly ranked member that gets banned were for post made as further back as 3-4 years,

I don't think it's a large percentage. Do you have data to support that?

And even if true that doesn't mean they haven't copy-pasted for the 3-4 years since and it's nearly impossible to prove.

As LoyceV said, merit can be received through abuse and it can't be a solution

I wouldn't worry about that too much. How many of the 5000 users who get banned every month would be able to claw their way back via merit abuse? Would they even do that on an account that already has one strike? Seems far more plausible to create or buy a new one. But this could work for genuine "mistaken" users.

[Quickseller]

I think there are several levels of severity in plagiarism and not all are equal and in some cases a permanent ban forever can be a little harsh (especially if it was just one silly mistake)

How do we determine it's a single case of a copy and paste? Let's say user X has 5000 posts and he is caught and reported for just 1.

I actually already posted a potential solution to this

Separately, there is an argument that bans for plagiarism should be delayed by a week, or 20 posts from the time a moderator discovers the infraction. The purpose of this would be too see if they will continue plagiarizing many times, or if they did something stupid on one or two posts. Someone who copies 5-10 of their next 20 posts is clearly not someone we want around, while someone who copies 1-2 ever might deserve some leniency, especially if they make generally insightful posts. This would help decide if someone will have *really* "learned their lesson" and wont make the mistake of copying content a second time.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I think there's a big difference in someone quoting something from Wikipedia to answer someone's question, and those that purposefully copy someone else's post here or 'text-spin' it just to earn from signatures

If the member isn't citing Wikipedia as the source, then I don't see any difference at all between those two cases.  I've seen a lot of cases where people are copying stuff from all over the internet in order to answer questions and passing it off as their own original answer.  That's plagiarism.  The text spinning stuff is more devious, but we're talking about the difference between a criminal who leaves his fingerprints all over the doorknob vs. one that tries to clean up the crime scene--the offense is the same.

I don't think there's a problem with the way things are now, except that not all plagiarizers are created equal and there are two that I know of that I wish had gotten some leniency--but I also understand how important it is to be consistent with rule enforcement.

Hilariousandco, you know that when people get permabanned, they go right back to doing it with a new account.  Hell, you've even suggested it a few times and I've begged you not to give that kind of example to people.  So I don't think a signature restriction would work at all--they'll just abandon the account.  The merit solution has problems, too, unless it's a very high amount.  We know merit gets traded and sold. 

Part of me wants to see leniency for established members who may have fucked up early on.  Maybe there could be an amnesty date set somewhere in 2016 or something, i.e., if you plagiarized after x/x/16 but have a good post history/positive trust/[insert whatever else here], you'll be banned like everyone else.  It's definitely a tough call, because if you show mercy to some based on subjective standards, there's going to be an outcry from those who didn't get any mercy (and probably other members, too). 

I voted for keeping things as they are.

[suchmoon]

I actually already posted a potential solution to this

Separately, there is an argument that bans for plagiarism should be delayed by a week, or 20 posts from the time a moderator discovers the infraction. The purpose of this would be too see if they will continue plagiarizing many times, or if they did something stupid on one or two posts. Someone who copies 5-10 of their next 20 posts is clearly not someone we want around, while someone who copies 1-2 ever might deserve some leniency, especially if they make generally insightful posts. This would help decide if someone will have *really* "learned their lesson" and wont make the mistake of copying content a second time.

That's not a solution. 1 of 20 is still horrible and who's gonna track the ~1000 users every week?

So I don't think a signature restriction would work at all--they'll just abandon the account.

Then it's equivalent to permaban for those users - great. But it gives the option for the few that might be genuinely remorseful.

The merit solution has problems, too, unless it's a very high amount.  We know merit gets traded and sold.

It should be a high enough amount to force most shitposters into a voluntary permaban. 50-100 should do it. If one or two buy/hack/etc enough merits to get back to spamming we'll get them next time. Now that I think about it - if someone wants to waste merits (legit or not) on this - more power to them.

I voted for keeping things as they are.

I voted for the merit option AND to keep as is. Not my fault that voting options are bipolar

[hilariousetc]

I think there are several levels of severity in plagiarism and not all are equal and in some cases a permanent ban forever can be a little harsh (especially if it was just one silly mistake)

How do we determine it's a single case of a copy and paste? Let's say user X has 5000 posts and he is caught and reported for just 1. How do we know that there are no other plagiarized posts? Who will audit these many messages and prove that it's "just one silly mistake"? Note that different plag. checkers give different results. What you get with plagium and seotools may differ from a quick custom google search. Then there are the spinning tools which are very hard to catch, let alone many other ways to fool detection.

It's probably not possible to determine how many they have in fact copied, but you can usually tell between the serial plagiarisers and the ones who have done it once or twice. Either way, they can still all be treated the same: One copy and paste = one signature ban. Either earn the merit or pay the fee or whatever.

I can't believe that there are five people who voted "Pay some sort of fine". That is some bullshit!

It's not that bad. For anyone who has fallen foul of being banned for a silly one-time mistake I'm sure they'd happily pay the price. It's a small price to pay instead of being banished for life.

But who will determine whether a person deserves a permanent ban or not? Staff? DT member?

Probably staff, just like they do with current bans.

As LoyceV said, merit can be received through abuse and it can't be a solution (Although I have voted for that option too before reading the discussion). I think the current rule should be continued since copy/paste is really a bad practice.

It's going to be very hard to abuse 100+ merit without being spotted. If there's any shenanigans going on they can either be just banned or left negative feedback (which is as good as a sig ban in most cases).

I think there's a big difference in someone quoting something from Wikipedia to answer someone's question, and those that purposefully copy someone else's post here or 'text-spin' it just to earn from signatures

If the member isn't citing Wikipedia as the source, then I don't see any difference at all between those two cases.  I've seen a lot of cases where people are copying stuff from all over the internet in order to answer questions and passing it off as their own original answer.  That's plagiarism. 

It's still technically plagiarism but it's hardly a capital offence that deserves a death sentence. Sometimes it's just down to naivety more than being malicious. Imagine if you've made years worth of contributions without a single copy and paste, and then someone asks a question and you help them out by getting the answer from Wikipedia or somewhere else but don't properly attributive it. This is a web forum not a test for a degree in English Language and people don't expect to be banned for such a thing. This probably wouldn't get you a ban on any other forum but this board is  obviously unique in that there's a real issue with plagiarism due to signature campaigns and hence why it's treated so harshly, but not all copy and pasters are the same. We really need more awareness of the rules and that's why they should be told about them upon sign up or have reminders. Hoping that new users just randomly stumble upon the long and complicated list of rules in Meta really isn't enough.

The text spinning stuff is more devious, but we're talking about the difference between a criminal who leaves his fingerprints all over the doorknob vs. one that tries to clean up the crime scene--the offense is the same.

I'd say it's more like giving the death sentence to both a murderer and someone who goes 1 mile over the speed limit. Both are crimes but don't deserve the same punishment. However, I have no sympathy for the people who text spin and maybe they shouldn't be given another chance, but then again I wouldn't be against them be able to get their account back if they prove they're here to contribute and earning a ridiculous amount of merit might be a good enough penance for that.

I don't think there's a problem with the way things are now, except that not all plagiarizers are created equal and there are two that I know of that I wish had gotten some leniency--but I also understand how important it is to be consistent with rule enforcement.

Well that's the problem right there. There really is quite a big difference between a one-time offence and someone who's only here to copy and paste but at the moment everyone is treated the same, but I also want there to be some consistency because we can't be giving special favours to certain people whilst others are banished for life.

Hilariousandco, you know that when people get permabanned, they go right back to doing it with a new account.

Then what does it matter if they're still going to be here? Doesn't make a difference either way.

Hell, you've even suggested it a few times and I've begged you not to give that kind of example to people.  So I don't think a signature restriction would work at all--they'll just abandon the account.  The merit solution has problems, too, unless it's a very high amount.  We know merit gets traded and sold. 

Newbies might abandon their account but what about Senior or Heroes? It's incredibly difficult to achieve those ranks now so most aren't just going to do a drake and start from the bottom, but if they are then again, it doesn't matter because they're still here just under a different name. 

[The Cryptovator]

I haven't submit vote. Because I don't think parmaban should be cancel and I am not fan of fine. But by considering merit system ban duration would be appropriate. In my opinion temp ban just keep same as now. Instated of parmaban extend it for six month. It could be call strike I don't mean that parmaban will cancel, but if someone got 3 strike then he should got parmaban. Since merit earn is very hard thats why consider strike system.

So my vote for implement strike system.

[SaltySpitoon]

I like the initiative, I support either permanent signature bans, or permanent bans. You know as well as I do, that there are never cases where someone gets punished just for mis-citing an article or something like that. Its always blatant spam that people are trying to disguise to get their post count up. In that case, a permanent signature ban is just as effective as a permanent ban. If you can't spam for profit anymore, your account is useless, and its the same as if it had been banned.

I hold extreme prejudice against copy and paste spammers. I personally find it to be the worst offense on Bitcointalk that one can commit. Of the handful of rules here, the purpose is to keep the boards clean and usable. There are always extenuating circumstances for offenses that go against the rules, that make it a little more understandable, but copy and paste spamming is the one thing where there should be no tolerance. Its spitting in the face of every member here, and the staff. To make a mistake and go off topic and spam a thread is a human mistake. I see copy and paste spamming as malicious. If you can't spend 2 minutes to even formulate your own ideas to post, you do not belong here. If your intention is to come here to make money from paid signature advertising, thats absolutely fine. If you post in topics that don't interest you because you must keep your post count up, fine. Who cares if you are feigning interest in a topic? As long as you aren't detracting away from other users who are there because they are genuinely interested, no one cares about your intentions. When you join a discussion with no intention of even trying to add to it, its time that you leave.

On a side note, I'm not a fan of the fine idea. Sure it'd dissuade people from getting caught, but there is still the opportunity that its profitable enough for them to continue spamming if they are only caught with a certain frequency.

[r1s2g3]

Separately, there is an argument that bans for plagiarism should be delayed by a week, or 20 posts from the time a moderator discovers the infraction. The purpose of this would be too see if they will continue plagiarizing many times, or if they did something stupid on one or two posts. Someone who copies 5-10 of their next 20 posts is clearly not someone we want around, while someone who copies 1-2 ever might deserve some leniency, especially if they make generally insightful posts. This would help decide if someone will have *really* "learned their lesson" and wont make the mistake of copying content a second time.

This looks to me similar to approach like if cop sees some rash driving, then instead of giving ticket immediately ,he should watch/follow to observe driving for next 10-15 minutes ?

There should be no leniency if someone copying the post of others or from articles from other website.

Only leniency can be given to those who copied official announcement types post without declaring the site.They can be given temp sig ban.

I am not in favor of any financial penalty.

[makila]

I vote to remove bans and disable signature space

[cryptohunter]

I think there's a big difference in someone quoting something from Wikipedia to answer someone's question, and those that purposefully copy someone else's post here or 'text-spin' it just to earn from signatures

If the member isn't citing Wikipedia as the source, then I don't see any difference at all between those two cases.  I've seen a lot of cases where people are copying stuff from all over the internet in order to answer questions and passing it off as their own original answer.  That's plagiarism.  The text spinning stuff is more devious, but we're talking about the difference between a criminal who leaves his fingerprints all over the doorknob vs. one that tries to clean up the crime scene--the offense is the same.

This is exactly why we need to thrash things out to get some completely different opinions and then try to find the optimal course of action. There are quite a few factors to consider

There are some differences here. Based on Hilariousandco's statement

 Motive -  

1. wiki guy -  Doing it to help someone.  There is not essentially any financial reward for his time and effort. We don't know for sure he is trying to claim this work for his own either he could just see nothing wrong with posting some official stats from wiki on populations or gdp figures. He may assume that people realise he did not just take a huge head count of the entire populace of the world or construct a 2000 character table of figures himself in the 2mins since someone requested it or it became relevant to post in the thread or he just may have got a bit lazy.

So he put effort, tried to help , got nothing back financially , may even consider it is quite obvious that this is not his own work.



2. text spinner - doing it to help himself, knowingly doing something wrong, trying to claim it as his own work,


I mean the act is the same but the motives and type of person to do commit both infringements are likely to be very different. 1 type i think will work well as part of a community and become net positive after a slap on the wrist. The other type has already demonstrated a clearly devious and self centered trait that will need to have a much more serious punishment to help him see things in a different light. I mean text spinners to me should not have another chance.

that is just my opinion - nothing is black and white


PM's sent to everyone that there is now zero tolerance after this date. I am sure that would choke most of them off doing it.

Basing anything on merit right now is not going to be feasible. I mean I see some excellent posters that have not even earned more than 30-50ish after all of this time. I mean top tier posters - they post on the discussion boars more than places like meta.  

-

[bitart]

...
Another possibility to earn their signature back would to be make x good reports - this would need to have an additional requirement of >x% accuracy to prevent spamming the report button. Say 5000 reports with >95%?
...

That makes no sense setting up an x good report limit, this has been discussed before.
Imagine your life depends on x good report (escaping permaban). Would it be hard to register 10 or 100 or 500 fake accounts and post that x copypaste post with them, and your original account would report those and voilá, you just managed to get to the required x good reports, and you're free...
And the forum has managed to get another x unnecessary spam posts...

[Hhampuz]

As previously mentioned I believe that it has to be decided on a case-to-case basis. If someone has been blatantly plagiarizing for a long period of time just to get paid from a signature campaign they should not be able to have the ban lifted. If someone has done it once or twice over the span of thousands of posts while they are actually contributing members to any community at this forum it should be reviewed. A temporary ban and then a disabled Signature until x amount of merit received would be the best solution IMO.

I know of one case where the user got perma banned although a lighter punishment would have been more deserved.

Needless to say, I believe in second chances (Unless people are scamming). So that's what I voted for.

[Lafu]

Normaly i would say " Nothing should change and permabans remain "


For higher ranked Users , alternatives to permabans for plagarism should be to set there Merit count back to " Zero " if they have some and includes a 2 or 4 Week ban.
If they get detected again for plagarism  they should get perma banned !

Thats just an idea.

But personaly i say there should be no second chance for Copy and Paste banned Users , because they have know it from the Rules !

80 % of all that Users that doing plagarism dont care about the Rules !

[Chosen Username]

their should be a statute of limitations agreed upon for plagiarism
2 or 3 years especially if it is not related to signature spam or shitposting
if you are motivated enough to go through the many years and thousands of posts on my legendary account you can probably find some example of text copied from someplace on the net without a link or something as an excuse to ban me
it was not a major concern back then but now it is a ticking time bomb and major anxiety
all it will take is to cross the wrong person enough for them to put in the time to search it all - they will probably find something - and all of years of effort i put into this forum will be gone and i would not even be able to start again with a new account because it would be ban evasion
this is true for many good users old accounts full of years of banter
a permanent account ban is harsh enough but a complete ban from even being able to start over is ludicrous
what should i do ? spend weeks searching all my old posts in google and delete anything that matches ? what if the post has been quoted ? what about archives or waybacks ?

[Quickseller]

Separately, there is an argument that bans for plagiarism should be delayed by a week, or 20 posts from the time a moderator discovers the infraction. The purpose of this would be too see if they will continue plagiarizing many times, or if they did something stupid on one or two posts. Someone who copies 5-10 of their next 20 posts is clearly not someone we want around, while someone who copies 1-2 ever might deserve some leniency, especially if they make generally insightful posts. This would help decide if someone will have *really* "learned their lesson" and wont make the mistake of copying content a second time.

This looks to me similar to approach like if cop sees some rash driving, then instead of giving ticket immediately ,he should watch/follow to observe driving for next 10-15 minutes ?

A mod could institute a ban that would automatically go into effect in the future and the review could be done if/when they appeal the ban.

[suchmoon]

if you are motivated enough to go through the many years and thousands of posts on my legendary account

Not sure how to break this to you gently but you're not really a Legendary.

[bitart]

if you are motivated enough to go through the many years and thousands of posts on my legendary account

Not sure how to break this to you gently but you're not really a Legendary.

It's just an opinion from someone who has a legendary account but just registered a new one to express this opinion (just in case if someone would start to review his/her older posts for copypaste, after...)

[suchmoon]

It's just an opinion from someone who has a legendary account but just registered a new one to express this opinion (just in case if someone would start to review his/her older posts for copypaste, after...)

I get that, I'm just saying (in my clunky sarcastic way) that this is exactly the kind of topic where the words of a 1-post sockpuppet are completely meaningless. If this is a real Legendary user they're doing a disservice to the discussion by turning it into a puppet show but for all we know this could be someone who e.g. bought some accounts of unknown origin and is looking for a way out of the plagiarism crackdown.

[yogg]

I voted in favor to disable signatures of users that have been busted doing plagiarism.
Doing this alone will prevent to monetize their posts any further, or they need to start from the beginning.
In some occurrences, a non scrupulous, legitimate, user may copy/paste something occasionally from the internet, without having the reflex to source it nor the intent to abuse, but help.

Removing signatures will have the same effect as a permaban on a certain category of users.
Those creating accounts by the 100's just to squeeze a few more satoshis. As long as they cannot display their sig, they won't earn a dime.

This differs from the other ranges of users that have been banned, and whose contributions goes beyond simply this.

They shouldn't be confused for one another, and disabling signatures is sufficient to do the trick.