Not fair account ban

[opium3]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.
2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?

What do you think about this ??
I understand that you all do not care about users like me. But still...

[1714907223]

1714907223

[1714907223]

1714907223

[1714907223]

1714907223

[1714907223]

1714907223

[DdmrDdmr]

<...> Also, for the last thing, there has never been a ban appeal here that ever wins. Not a single one (during my stay for 1 year - I don't know before that)

There is this one case I recall (June 2018), where a person was framed and reported for plagiarism (see vulnerability of the forum. slander in plagiarism ). @Theymos and some other mods reviewed the case and the account was unbanned. It is nevertheless an extremely well argument case and an exception to what we usually see here where the starting point is that of having no clue to what happened to their account.

[TheBeardedBaby]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.
2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?

What do you think about this ??
I understand that you all do not care about users like me. But still...

I know it doesn't sounds fair to be banned for something that happens so long ago but I can assure you that the plagiarism has always been in the rules no matter the last edits+ those were done mostly to correct errors or update according to the last changes in the forum.

On the other hand. We have multiple hard evidence against your word. How can we trust you? We just can't. I'm so sorry but you have to leave the forum, until you pull the same hard evidence to show that we are wrong.

[Halab]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.
2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?

In October 2017, there were already topics in the same kind as yours: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2296660.0.
And the answers were the same as today.

[Veleor]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.

Plagiarism from the last year.

Copy:

This month has been about discovering new limitations in the Ethereum network and the associated problems Bancor users face when congestion increases. We’ve made changes to address a sequencing issue when multiple transactions are pending, a gas fee increase adaption and better alerts throughout the site and product to help users understand how instabilities may affect them.

Original:

This month has been about discovering new limitations in the Ethereum network and the associated problems Bancor users face when congestion increases. We’ve made changes to address a sequencing issue when multiple transactions are pending, a gas fee increase adaption and better alerts throughout the site and product to help users understand how instabilities may affect them.

Also, for the last thing, there has never been a ban appeal here that ever wins.

Successful appeals were actually, but one of the acquitted users ruined all things. Read on this page.

[coinlocket$]

1- your account(s) is(are) not tagged from any DT for abusing bounties, the post was made to report suspected transactions between account. Did anyone tagged you? No.

2- you are not be banned for cheating bounties, none will be banned for this. Sadly.

3- you are permabanned for plagiarism, even if you keep saying you did nothing wrong.

So for your information, the problem is not the suspicious abusing but your plagiarism.

question to you, you provided a screen with a transfer of 0.01 ETH to my wallet.
But this transaction (even this block) is not in my wallet. How can you comment on this?

Was done a long time ago I don't remember how but

1- can be a mistake

2- from a quick search

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uahgZpR0drOtEgb94EOBK-9D6dRyOVs09FuROpDY7ks/edit#gid=1268809405


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ygK9IHfoNCsr5KBSoZh3Nk_mQkNjsD4R-t5nueveE4g/edit#gid=1922047923


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ygK9IHfoNCsr5KBSoZh3Nk_mQkNjsD4R-t5nueveE4g/edit

Facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/vivvipop/posts/773286613,054461

Anyway I repeat, nobody tagged you and this is not the reason for yot ban.

[DdmrDdmr]

<…>2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?<…>

Two year should be sufficient history in my opinion. Going further back seems a bit far stretched, and people are entitled to change. But it's not how it currently stands.

Nevertheless,  rule number 33 related to plagiarism was around on the 21/11/2016 (see https://web.archive.org/web/20161121133329/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0), but not on the 06/05/2016 (see https://web.archive.org/web/20160506061123/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0). The former date means that the rule was in state at the time you broke it…

[suchmoon]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.
2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?

What do you think about this ??
I understand that you all do not care about users like me. But still...

I think that you're wasting our time. The "I didn't do it but even if I did it's not a big deal" defense is not going to work. The rule has been there for more than two years: https://archive.fo/MRmXq#selection-746.175-746.177

What's next? "I was hacked"? "I was drunk"?

The only thing that can still happen here if you keep pushing your luck is that more proof of your sockpuppeting will come up and you'll lose those alts too.

[Veleor]

<...> Nevertheless,  rule number 33 related to plagiarism was around on the 21/11/2016 (see https://web.archive.org/web/20161121133329/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0), but not on the 06/05/2016 (see https://web.archive.org/web/20160506061123/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0).

Does this mean that users with plagiarism before 21/11/2016 should not get banned?

[opium3]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.
2 years ago.
The rules were edited last time on December 27, 2018.
Maybe at the time when plagiarism was published this was not in the rules?

What do you think about this ??
I understand that you all do not care about users like me. But still...

I think that you're wasting our time. The "I didn't do it but even if I did it's not a big deal" defense is not going to work. The rule has been there for more than two years: https://archive.fo/MRmXq#selection-746.175-746.177

What's next? "I was hacked"? "I was drunk"?

The only thing that can still happen here if you keep pushing your luck is that more proof of your sockpuppeting will come up and you'll lose those alts too.

Not. Nothing like this will happen, you can be calm.
But I would like to ask you: what do you mean by the expression "you will lose your violas too"?

[DdmrDdmr]

<…> Does this mean that users with plagiarism before 21/11/2016 should not get banned? <…>

Well it raises a fair question.
The rule was added somewhere between the 06/05/2016 and the 21/11/2016 (I haven’t seen any other historical snapshots in between to narrow it down any further). It’s over two years, but the rules are the official unofficial rules, and not a set of common law articles which normally are not retroactive. By that, I guess that cases are really down to admin/mod best judgment, and they may or may not consider the date as a factor when presented with a case of plagiarism that occurred before mid-2016.

[opium3]

Good. Let's suppose that theoretically yes, there was plagiarism (although I still did not do this). But he was 2 years old.

Plagiarism from the last year.

Copy:

This month has been about discovering new limitations in the Ethereum network and the associated problems Bancor users face when congestion increases. We’ve made changes to address a sequencing issue when multiple transactions are pending, a gas fee increase adaption and better alerts throughout the site and product to help users understand how instabilities may affect them.

Original:

This month has been about discovering new limitations in the Ethereum network and the associated problems Bancor users face when congestion increases. We’ve made changes to address a sequencing issue when multiple transactions are pending, a gas fee increase adaption and better alerts throughout the site and product to help users understand how instabilities may affect them.

Also, for the last thing, there has never been a ban appeal here that ever wins.

Successful appeals were actually, but one of the acquitted users ruined all things. Read on this page.

Are there any other posts that were plagiarized? In addition to these 4 that you have already published in this thread.

[suchmoon]

Not. Nothing like this will happen, you can be calm.
But I would like to ask you: what do you mean by the expression "you will lose your violas too"?

violas?

Again with the "I didn't do it but in case I did" nonsense... your alts will be banned too. You can't use another account once you've been banned, except for the appeal thread. You really should read the rules.

Are there any other posts that were plagiarized? In addition to these 4 that you have already published in this thread.

Yes. Doesn't change anything though.

[morvillz7z]

Are there any other posts that were plagiarized? In addition to these 4 that you have already published in this thread.

A single plagiarized post is sufficient to get yourself banned. But since you are so curious, here's another example:

Another Website Integrates the Bancor Widget

You can now use the Bancor conversion widget on the MyWish website, one of the newest tokens to activate in the Bancor Network. Another step in achieving truly decentralized liquidity is allowing users to convert their tokens from anywhere, directly from their Web3 wallets.

https://blog.bancor.network/bancor-progress-update-466766be1dc6

[opium3]

Okay guys. Got it. I apologize for your time spent.
You can delete / close the topic.
All the best.