[Updated August 2023] How many banned users have you merited?

[DdmrDdmr]

Well my data seems pretty reasonable: 11 merited banned users (3,20% out of the 343 people I’ve merited), representing 23 sMerits (1,77%  out of 1.302 sMerits sent as of last Friday). Breaking it down by last rank of the banned user, I have merited: 1 Hero, 1 Sr. Member, 2 Full Members, 3 Members, 2 Jr. Members, 1 Newbie, and 1 Brand New.

Two banned names did surprise me, although I had already seen it at some point: @zentdex and @vphasitha01.

[mole0815]

Whatever ideas you come up with
Thank you so much for the list... i have analyzed my details briefly.
at 3-4 of the 7 users it concerns i didn't know that they are no longer in the forum. again and again exciting such lists that you can find here in the meta area (from you)

[OgNasty]

This is a bit of an eye opener for me. I had no idea that so many accounts I’d merited have been banned here. Is it correct to assume that a majority of them were banned for plagiarism?

[LoyceMobile]

Is it correct to assume that a majority of them were banned for plagiarism?

Plagiarism would be my guess too.

[LTU_btc]

So, it looks that I have merited 2 users who got banned later. Well, not that bad, but still, sad for wasted merits... I see that one of these users got quite many Merits...
11.26% of users who ever got Merit is permanently banned now. It's huge number I think...

[Coin-1]

Thanks for mentioning my chart which shows how many newbies received at least 1 merit since September 17, 2018.

In total, 26864 users received at least 1 Merit until last Friday's merit data dump, and 3024 of those (11.26%) have been banned. It's probably a bit higher, my list of banned users is incomplete.

Your list of banned users is helpful.

I also decided to extend the time interval of my previous chart up to January 24, 2018, and I got the following:



As I can see, 1934 newbies are already banned since the day the merit system was implemented on the forum.

The data (click for the full version)
    1. 45 (43.26%) banned users merited by foserfox Banned! (details)
    2. 41 (11.38%) banned users merited by EFS (details)

foserfox is probably a hacked profile who sent merits to farmed accounts mostly in the russian local board, but I'm sure that the merit source EFS who is the moderator of the turkish local board didn't know that the users merited by him would be banned. I think this is absolutely normal.

@Loyce. I went to your full list and noticed that when an 8 appears, you get  (. Maybe use brackets instead.

Thanks, fixed!
(Additional Options... > Don't use smileys.)

I always select this checkbox when I publish my TOP-200 ratings, so as not to show the "cool" smile.

[tranthidung]

Great initiative to dig deeper finding what happened due to the demotion of Junior Members in September 2018.
In the chart above, there is a break point in mid of September. I think that it makes lot of sense.
After the demotion implemented, there were massive merit abusements in the forum, lots of Junior Members demoted got promoted again due to merit abusements.
Personally, there is a hypothesis that massive newbies got their first merits due to merit abusements after Sep. 2018, or due to their successfully pseudo-quality posts.
Eventually, most of them got banned.
The chart probably presents wrong x-axis scale, you stated there are 1934 newbies got banned, but the chart shows nearly 10k newbies got banned.
You should clarify it a little bit if the chart is right, or should correct it if it is wrong.

[LoyceV]

you stated there are 1934 newbies got banned, but the chart shows nearly 10k newbies got banned.

Only the lighter color represents banned Newbies, so the small top of the graph.
It would indeed be better to draw them at the bottom of the graph.

[tranthidung]

I known.
I don't know how the graph creator made it, but the graph should have two x-axis scales, right?
The current one is likely for un-banned newbies, I guess.
There are two graphs overlap each other, but it should have two x-axis scales.

Only the lighter color represents banned Newbies, so the small top of the graph.
It would indeed be better to draw them at the bottom of the graph.

Or if only one x-axis scale used, the graph (lighter color) for banned newbies should be in the bottom, below the darker one, as you said.

[Coin-1]

I known.
I don't know how the graph creator made it, but the graph should have two x-axis scales, right?
The current one is likely for un-banned newbies, I guess.
There are two graphs overlap each other, but it should have two x-axis scales.

Only the lighter color represents banned Newbies, so the small top of the graph.
It would indeed be better to draw them at the bottom of the graph.

Or if only one x-axis scale used, the graph (lighter color) for banned newbies should be in the bottom, below the darker one, as you said.

Yes, I used the same X-axis scale in the chart above. As a result, I aggregated the number of banned and non-banned users.

I can create a new chart that shows only the lines with a transparent background. In this case, I will not aggregate the values, so the line showing banned users will be drawn below the line showing non-banned users.

[LoyceV]

I have new Merit data, but it takes many posts (in Archival) to create an update. If anyone's interested in an update (now or 6 months from now), just ask.

[Theb]

I guessed that its inevitable to see merit sources part of the list here, you may never know and control what members will do after they receive the merit/s you have sent to them. It is like most of them are likely to plagiarize more after they become more desperate on receiving more merits. To my surprise as well Foxpup even though is a top 5 merit sender in the forum didn't show up in the top 200 of the list he was in fact ranked 5041st with 3 banned users (one of which is zentdex), the only thing I can think of why he has a few banned user under his name is he does a thorough background check before he sends some merit to the user.

[LoyceV]

the only thing I can think of why he has a few banned user under his name is he does a thorough background check before he sends some merit to the user.

Foxpup has "only" merited 265 unique users, but indeed, his 1.13% puts him almost at the bottom of the list.

And as I said before: there's no shame in this list as long as you're a good user

[Foxpup]

To my surprise as well Foxpup even though is a top 5 merit sender in the forum didn't show up in the top 200 of the list he was in fact ranked 5041st with 3 banned users (one of which is zentdex), the only thing I can think of why he has a few banned user under his name is he does a thorough background check before he sends some merit to the user.

Correct. Every time I find a post by a newbie worth meriting, I first check if it's plagiarised. More often than not it is, with the result that the user gets banned instead of merited. I'll also check the rest of their post history for consistency, on the assumption (which is almost always correct) that a lone good post amongst a large number of shitposts is plagiarised even if I can't prove it.

Foxpup has "only" merited 265 unique users, but indeed, his 1.13% puts him almost at the bottom of the list.

I'm actually disappointed that so few users survive my checks, but being at the bottom isn't always a bad thing.

[Theb]

To my surprise as well Foxpup even though is a top 5 merit sender in the forum didn't show up in the top 200 of the list he was in fact ranked 5041st with 3 banned users (one of which is zentdex), the only thing I can think of why he has a few banned user under his name is he does a thorough background check before he sends some merit to the user.

Correct. Every time I find a post by a newbie worth meriting, I first check if it's plagiarised. More often than not it is, with the result that the user gets banned instead of merited. I'll also check the rest of their post history for consistency, on the assumption (which is almost always correct) that a lone good post amongst a large number of shitposts is plagiarised even if I can't prove it.

Just by confirming what I thought you made me imagine how much time and effort you give before you even send merits away to members. With that kind of low percentage it only means that you never let your guard down when it comes to newbies, the 3 banned users you have given merits to (zentdex, rickadone, and LuanX3) are all  high ranking members which I myself don't even expect plagiarising content. I wouldn't even consider this a mistake as you don't expect them to do this kind of things.

[philipma1957]

To my surprise as well Foxpup even though is a top 5 merit sender in the forum didn't show up in the top 200 of the list he was in fact ranked 5041st with 3 banned users (one of which is zentdex), the only thing I can think of why he has a few banned user under his name is he does a thorough background check before he sends some merit to the user.

Correct. Every time I find a post by a newbie worth meriting, I first check if it's plagiarised. More often than not it is, with the result that the user gets banned instead of merited. I'll also check the rest of their post history for consistency, on the assumption (which is almost always correct) that a lone good post amongst a large number of shitposts is plagiarised even if I can't prove it.

Foxpup has "only" merited 265 unique users, but indeed, his 1.13% puts him almost at the bottom of the list.

I'm actually disappointed that so few users survive my checks, but being at the bottom isn't always a bad thing.

I was at 5% which is better then the 11% average. I also  have not had one in a while.

I used to go through long lists of newbies in an effort to help them when they lost rank.

I think four of my bad ones were from the lists I checked.

The list had 5000 names and I went through thousands of names. Found very few to merit and it looks like they turned bad anyway.

[tranthidung]

I guessed that its inevitable to see merit sources part of the list here, you may never know and control what members will do after they receive the merit/s you have sent to them. It is like most of them are likely to plagiarize more after they become more desperate on receiving more merits.

This is what I called their merited posts like pseudo-qualitied ones.
The orginial purpose of merit system is giving constructive, high qualited posts merits as rewards for their contributions to the forum.
Therefore, it is reasonable and acceptable if merit sources simply and immediately send their sMerits to high qualitied, constructive posts.
Due to massive abusements and autobanned merit-receivers, I think it should be better if merit sources spend a couple of seconds to scan post histories of posters if merit sources saw their likely constructive posts.
It's not required by theymos, of course, and as I pointed out above, it's not main tasks of merit sources.
Anyway, if merit sources have spare time, they should scan post histories before sending their sMerits away.

[r1s2g3]

  158. 5 (3.96%) banned users merited by mdayonliner (details)

Help me to understand. All these members are permanently banned?

I see BTCeminjas, iqrasalsabila, vphasitha01 had quite good activities in the forum and not only received merit from me but also from other users. They were doing very well in the forum.

I know vphasitha01  was permanently banned for plagiarism charges but later unbanned after finding that Medium article was plagiarized and source put by   vphasitha01  was correct one. Unfortunately bpip and maybe LoyceV system do not track these "unbanned"  changes.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4805466.msg43350300#msg43350300

[morvillz7z]

@r1s2g3, Likely somebody had reported him a second time for plagiarism.

I'm pretty positive he is currently banned and him not posting for almost five months now would explain that.

One is sent to vphasitha01, I remember his 'ranking up' thread, didn't know he was banned...

I obviously missed his first ban/unban story too.

[LoyceV]

Unfortunately bpip and maybe LoyceV system do not track these "unbanned"  changes.

Unbans aren't published in modlog. If a Mod can confirm vphasitha01 is still not banned, I'll remove him from [ LIST] Banned users. Since he last posted in November, he might have been banned again.