At what point does feedback spam warrant a ban / nuking?

[DaveF]

Let me start with I *know* I should let this go and not feed the trolls. I know it, I can feel it in my bones just ignore him.
But for some reason with this one I can't.

So with the above being said.
game-protect has now left over 100 negative feedbacks to anyone who dares to
1) Support the flags against him
2) Participate in a signature campaign that he does not like.
3) Make any negative comment against him.

Take a look here.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=874254

Yes, I got 3 from him.
Since he has massive negative trust and is 99.999% never going to make it onto any trust list it really does not matter.

However,

Posting this to 50+ members profiles:

Children reading the extremely mentally ill brain wash nonsense shit of this bitcointalk account are at a high risk of getting mentally abused!

Or this one to subSTRATA profile:

You abused all children who had contact with you!]You abused all children who had contact with you!

Is there a limit to what will be tolerated?

I think there is and he went way past it.

If @theymos or any staff says no he didn't then I will listen to them, let it go, and ignore gp.

BUT, I do think there should be some kind of discussion about what is permitted and what is not.

Thanks for reading my ramblings.
-Dave

[pugman]

I don't think anyone has ever been banned for spamming feedback on trust walls. I do recall theymos deleting some feedback by some dumbass who spammed thousands of lines on multiple user's trust walls, but other than that I don't recall anything happening in regards to control or act against spam/retaliatory/troll-based/garbage feedback. And the reason for little to no action is because the trust feedbacks are supposed to left unmoderated to avoid collusion related crap.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Let me start with I *know* I should let this go and not feed the trolls. I know it, I can feel it in my bones just ignore him.
<snip>
BUT, I do think there should be some kind of discussion about what is permitted and what is not.

You aren't rambling, my man, and it's gotten past the point where people should just ignore him--and you can't exactly put your own feedback on ignore anyway.  Usually negs from non-DT members can be safely ignored, but game-protect is going above and beyond what's acceptable, especially since some folks see him to be one of the good guys (don't know why that is).

I did give him a negative and I excluded him from my trust list.  I don't know about supporting that flag, because I haven't read the entire scam accusation against him and I'm not completely sure he's a scammer.  But he's certainly a trust spammer and he's doing some damage to people's reputation which isn't justified.  I think Theymos ought to consider banning him and perhaps removing his spam feedbacks.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Here's the catch though, the more we discuss about his recent behavior the more he becomes popular and what ever he's promoting gets popular. So far his feedback hasn't had any effect so they are just one of those worthless troll feedbacks (atleast that's what I consider those he left on my account to be). A retaliation either won't help matters.

I would suggest a suspension on his account, disabled his ability to leave feedback on accounts and possibly delete every other feedbacks he have left especially the most recent which don't have any reasonable backings.

[Lafu]

There was 2 that got banned about that , but dont know the names , remember that theymos deletes all his feedbacks and he got a ban !
The other one i guess has done nearly the same and got an Temp ban for that !  Damn cant find the User for now .

[DdmrDdmr]

Well, there’s this to go by:

Trust spam isn't allowed. If I see anyone posting dozens of fake trust ratings (from one account or many alt accounts), I will delete all of their ratings <…>
I agree that it is a little annoying to see a wall of negative ratings, but this is in the "untrusted" section. The way things are set up currently, untrusted ratings can be easily spammed in a number of ways. That's why those ratings are hidden by default.

The quote is from 2014, so it’s a long standing complaint that crops up every now and then due to childish retaliation feedback, or spamming otherwise on the Trust feedback.

[AB de Royse777]

I don't think anyone has ever been banned for spamming feedback on trust walls. I do recall theymos deleting some feedback by some dumbass who spammed thousands of lines on multiple user's trust walls, but other than that I don't recall anything happening in regards to control or act against spam/retaliatory/troll-based/garbage feedback. And the reason for little to no action is because the trust feedbacks are supposed to left unmoderated to avoid collusion related crap.

May be theymos needs to do this exception for GP too. Lately he (GP) turned to be a celebrity of the forum. :-P

I did give him a negative and I excluded him from my trust list.   

His trust rating,


I do not think anymore neg is going to do anything for him. He seems do not care about all at all.

I think Theymos ought to consider banning him and perhaps removing his spam feedbacks.

I know theymos banned someone named John K or something long ago (can not remember it much). He can do the same for GP too or at least restrict him to leave feedback for others and remove the existing feedback he left for others.

Something seriously needs to be done against him.

@DaveF, sorry bud. I totally forgot about it earlier. Good work.

[DaveF]

Well, there’s this to go by:

Trust spam isn't allowed. If I see anyone posting dozens of fake trust ratings (from one account or many alt accounts), I will delete all of their ratings <…>
I agree that it is a little annoying to see a wall of negative ratings, but this is in the "untrusted" section. The way things are set up currently, untrusted ratings can be easily spammed in a number of ways. That's why those ratings are hidden by default.

The quote is from 2014, so it’s a long standing complaint that crops up every now and then due to childish retaliation feedback, or spamming otherwise on the Trust feedback.

Exactly. Had I gotten one about the wolfbet sig, something about it it might not be legit because of "X" reason. I most likely would have ignored it. Even if he tagged everyone in the campaign. But calling it illegal, the retaliatory trust spam, the walls of text have gotten to be an issue.

Makes you wonder if a straight timer would work:
You can leave 1 feedback per hour, counted from your last feedback.
For every current DT 1 member that leaves you negative feedback that adds an hour to that count.
theymos (and people he trusts) can set your feedback timer to whatever they want that with no restrictions.
And done.
You want to leave 100+ feedbacks after getting dinged by just 2 DT 1 members that's 300+ hours assuming you never miss the window to post.

You want to leave a wall of spam, great it's going to take you weeks. By then some mod or someone else can take a look before it gets to this point. Would be a quicker fix.

None of this would help the current situation but could make the mods life easier in the future.

-Dave

[DaveF]

Bumping this because in the 11 days since he has left another 15 negative feedback's for people who supported the flag against him, or spoke out against him.
Yes, I know stop feeding the troll.

But I really think it's time to get some mods on board with a nice ban for him.


-Dave

[suchmoon]

Sorry for the kinda tangential post, but this made me laugh - game-protect got spammed by another trust spammer:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2658920

[hd49728]

Sorry for the kinda tangential post, but this made me laugh - game-protect got spammed by another trust spammer:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2658920

If I am correct, that guy is not the first one who advertise through trust page.

[Coyster]

But I really think it's time to get some mods on board with a nice ban for him.

I do not think he'll get banned for all his inconsequential feedbacks as they really do not hold any ground, so no need paying any attention to him and his feedbacks.
Though they(his feedbacks)could be considered as worthless spamming, which could get his account nuked for 7 days as a warning to him, if this continues then maybe a 15 and 30 days ban respectively, which if no change, then a perma ban for the account just as the rules posits.
The mods will have to decide on that based on the severity of his offence(s).

[hd49728]

Here's the catch though, the more we discuss about his recent behavior the more he becomes popular and what ever he's promoting gets popular.

He is already so famous, without his recent trust spam.

There was 2 that got banned about that , but dont know the names , remember that theymos deletes all his feedbacks and he got a ban !
The other one i guess has done nearly the same and got an Temp ban for that !  Damn cant find the User for now .

If what people talked is true, game-protect was temparory banned weeks ago. It is just assumption and what we talked about, because it is a bit abnormal to see that account was inactive for several days.

[rhomelmabini]

I will say no more if that will surely ban him for good, it seems he has a huge time to spare to give those childish feedbacks.

If what people talked is true, game-protect was temparory banned weeks ago. It is just assumption and what we talked about, because it is a bit abnormal to see that account was inactive for several days.

Deserves him right, because if there's no basis with the accusation against him then why so serious on all those things? I am guessing he got 60 or more days of ban.

[eternalgloom]

I don't know about supporting that flag, because I haven't read the entire scam accusation against him and I'm not completely sure he's a scammer.

TL;DR

The scam accusations against him are based on the fact that he's offering a service to "protect" you from casino's scamming you.
Some sort of crypto casino insurance scheme, if I remember correctly. Though he has no actual power to actually do anything, while he's still charging you.

Not sure if he's still actually charging people, but I remember that's how he started out and that was the main reason why he got negative feedback in the beginning.

[DaveF]

Another 6 today. (3 users @ 2 each)
And lets take a look at this insanity:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5179453.0

-Dave

[DaveF]

And they left another 65+ spam feedbacks today.
100% useless but at some point in time I would like to think some mod someplace would boot do something about it.

Even if it's just a really long ban instead of being nuked. I mean, lets get real G-P is just a troll at this point.

-Dave

[DaveF]

Kind of feel like I am talking to myself here but
Hatch Support https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2477143 is not far behind GP in terms of feedback spam and they also are opening up dozens of bogus flags.

Yes I know the flags are not important because they will probably never get support. But going around opening the "violated a written contract, resulting in damages" flags on dozens people has got to be worth a ban.

Just venting, but it's really getting bad again out there with some users.

-Dave

[GazetaBitcoin]

Maybe there should be implemented a limit of feedbacks / trust / flags in a given time (if it doesn't exist already)? Similar to the bump limit (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5183553.0).
Practically, this would mean that an user isn't allowed to give multiple feedbacks in the same day, for example. Or, another suggestion, in case that several reputable members here (maybe those from trusted list) vote against someone's flag (example: 50 vote to oppose against what a spammer sustains about someone via feedback / flag etc), this user should have a given amount of time until he is able to post again feedbacks / flags.

Besides, maybe it could be implemented a system where if a big number of reputable members (DT list, for example) vote for banning / deleting someone's account, this action to be performed automatically, without having to involve mods / administrators / theymos.

Does it make sense what I'm saying here?

[DaveF]

And another 4 left over the last 3 days.
Since the powers that be don't want to issue a ban for the feedback spam, every time I remember to check I will post here bumping this thread to the top of Meta.
Sooner or later this clown is going to have to be dealt with.

It's not even about the scamming anymore. It's the abuse of the trust feature.

Fine don't want to permaban or nuke. At least a nice long vacation.

-Dave