50 Merit for Authentication Post

[Railai]

I got over this post and I have myself a few questions:

1. I still don't get why it is a problem because users changed merit between themselves? If the merit is open to everyone's will? Why it is a problem? At a moment their merit will dissapear and won't be a problem. As everyone has the power and the willing to send btc to anyone, to any address, why merit should be so centralised in such low ammounts.
As example the OP made a topic where he raised a question, why he got so much merit on it? I also have dumb posts where I got merit and I still don't know why. When I am trying to do a high quality post it never gets merited, I start to believe that you need to hunt those topics where old users are reacting. That's the only way of actually getting a status in the forum.
Why it is a crime to send merit to someone else?
2. Besides the fact that he sent merit to someone and there is a sad story about him playing whatever game, and being banned and so on, why it was obviously just ignored by everyone and just stayed with their first feedback?
I am not the king of melodramatic person, but still he got a point there and as I said to one, it ain't his right to do whatever he wants with what is his? He obtained those merit himself, not paid for it or trade for it.
3. Why the feedback is red? This ain't scamming and it can't be considered scamming at all, from none of the view points that express logic. It's just a rule that everyone accepted it that a red trust can be done by not scamming someone. I also saw a lot of feedbacks about opinions with red/negative...

Not noice...some stuffs are not noice

[1714689986]

1714689986

[1714689986]

1714689986

[1714689986]

1714689986

[1714689986]

1714689986

[1714689986]

1714689986

[nutildah]

@sunce33 I hate to break it to you, but this doesn't look good. What were you thinking - that nobody will notice?
We tried to warn you a few months back, didn't we? When you posted the same translation under Serbian and Croatian subforums (and on some other forums). Isn't that cheating? And your defense is that you are not a fraud?!

Does this thread say what I think it says?

..

Jovane, brate, prijatelju... Cemu ovaj post? Jel to tvoj prevod i imas li dozvolu korisnika @sunce33 da to copy/paste ovde?

Koliko li oni placaju ovakve profile ovde... Kako im nije dosadilo vise da ih masa reportuje...

Nemam pojma, ali ovo se smatra kao plagiarizam i za to se banuje nalog na prvu. Al eto, potencijalnih 20 dolara je ipak bitnije.

Basically jovan85 is being accused of plagiarizing the work of sunce33 by posting the same translation from the Croatian board... That's probably why he deleted the post which is a word-for-word copy/paste of the Croatian translation. He registered in that bounty with both accounts.

And the fact that jovan85 accidentally used the sunce33 twitter handle makes it a sealed deal. They are definitely the same person. jovan85 should have been banned for plagiarism but he deleted the post before it was reported, thus there is no longer anything to ban (though he may have done this in past bounties).

[YOSHIE]

I never had a problem in any bounty campaign and I was never disqualified.

50 Merit, sent to the application post ......?

I'm a little curious as to why @sunce33 does it all, obviously it's a suicide delivery.

In addition to the Alt account found by:@nutildah.

If at a glance I see Facebook and Twitter that are used by: sunce33, connected to the account below.

1. vtechpro.vn

I have a feeling that @ sunce33 is committing suicide.

Facebook:

Week: 5 (24/02/2020)-(28/02/2020)
BitcoinTalk Name: sunce33
Your Facebook Account Name: Lora Anderson
Your Facebook Profile Link: https://www.facebook.com/ALora22

Twitter:

Week: 5 (24/02/2020)-(28/02/2020)
BitcoinTalk Name: sunce33
Your Twitter Account Name: @sunce33
Your Twitter Profile Link: https://twitter.com/sunce33

http://archive.is/wip/4UXO8

Link: http://archive.is/hQyc5

Proof of Authentication
Bitcointalk Username : jovan85
Facebook Profile Link: https://www.facebook.com/ALora22
Twitter Profile Link: https://twitter.com/sunce33
Telegram : @borianm

WEEK 13   18.11-24.11

#Twitter Campaign
Link to your Twitter account: https://twitter.com/sunce33

#Facebook Campaign
Link to your Facebook profile: https://www.facebook.com/ALora22

http://archive.is/wip/BpIrm

Bitcointalk Username: vtechpro.vn
Wallet address (eth): 0x4a27744a1f1018D287e191f8E14d777E34Cdcad2

http://archive.is/wip/M8bG9

Miscellaneous:

In other words dozens of Alt @ sunce33 accounts have been killed here, this is purely a factor (disappointment).

Post by: @Bttzed03 :Topic: Multi-Accounts Joining Same Campaigns - TAGGED

Another wallet linked to those accounts: 0x4a27744a1f1018D287e191f8E14d777E34Cdcad2

That's why he did it to send 50 merits to @ jovan85.
All at once, the @ sunce33 account is sunk in this forum, (really very frustrating), infidelity in a campaign with an Alt account.

[LoyceV]

Both of you might want to read this before you further embarrass yourself:

Do's and Don'ts

• It's okay to include your alt-account on your own Trust list. This means you trust the feedback you left from that account. Example:
  

  hilariousandco Trusts these users' judgement:
  7. hilariousetc (Trust: +3 / =1 / -0) (1725 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

• Don't include your main account from your alt account(s). This could influence DT1-voting, and although that's not part of this guide, it's bad.

I'm glad you agree on this now, I remember you disapproved of this a while ago.

Interesting. I don't feel embarrassed, I feel like trusting your alt account that you yourself identify as insecure is embarrassing in itself.

I've posted my view on this here.
I get where you're coming from though, but I don't understand why you only exclude mobile alts from your mobile, and not from your main account.
Now, if you'd include your own mobile account, that would make sense again as putting your alt on Depth 0 would exclude your alt's exclusions on your Depth 1. It's ironic, isn't it

[dkbit98]

I got over this post and I have myself a few questions:

1. I still don't get why it is a problem because users changed merit between themselves? If the merit is open to everyone's will? Why it is a problem? At a moment their merit will dissapear and won't be a problem. As everyone has the power and the willing to send btc to anyone, to any address, why merit should be so centralised in such low ammounts.
As example the OP made a topic where he raised a question, why he got so much merit on it? I also have dumb posts where I got merit and I still don't know why. When I am trying to do a high quality post it never gets merited, I start to believe that you need to hunt those topics where old users are reacting. That's the only way of actually getting a status in the forum.
Why it is a crime to send merit to someone else?
2. Besides the fact that he sent merit to someone and there is a sad story about him playing whatever game, and being banned and so on, why it was obviously just ignored by everyone and just stayed with their first feedback?
I am not the king of melodramatic person, but still he got a point there and as I said to one, it ain't his right to do whatever he wants with what is his? He obtained those merit himself, not paid for it or trade for it.
3. Why the feedback is red? This ain't scamming and it can't be considered scamming at all, from none of the view points that express logic. It's just a rule that everyone accepted it that a red trust can be done by not scamming someone. I also saw a lot of feedbacks about opinions with red/negative...

Not noice...some stuffs are not noice

You are in no position to judge situation here, as you are spamming other people with PM to sell them stuff!
Expect to see red trust feedback and more soon
https://i.imgur.com/4QeZAIi.jpg
archived: http://archive.vn/0OU5W

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@YOSHIE
great research yet again

[Railai]

I got over this post and I have myself a few questions:

1. I still don't get why it is a problem because users changed merit between themselves? If the merit is open to everyone's will? Why it is a problem? At a moment their merit will dissapear and won't be a problem. As everyone has the power and the willing to send btc to anyone, to any address, why merit should be so centralised in such low ammounts.
As example the OP made a topic where he raised a question, why he got so much merit on it? I also have dumb posts where I got merit and I still don't know why. When I am trying to do a high quality post it never gets merited, I start to believe that you need to hunt those topics where old users are reacting. That's the only way of actually getting a status in the forum.
Why it is a crime to send merit to someone else?
2. Besides the fact that he sent merit to someone and there is a sad story about him playing whatever game, and being banned and so on, why it was obviously just ignored by everyone and just stayed with their first feedback?
I am not the king of melodramatic person, but still he got a point there and as I said to one, it ain't his right to do whatever he wants with what is his? He obtained those merit himself, not paid for it or trade for it.
3. Why the feedback is red? This ain't scamming and it can't be considered scamming at all, from none of the view points that express logic. It's just a rule that everyone accepted it that a red trust can be done by not scamming someone. I also saw a lot of feedbacks about opinions with red/negative...

Not noice...some stuffs are not noice

You are in no position to judge situation here, as you are spamming other people with PM to sell them stuff!
Expect to see red trust feedback and more soon
https://i.imgur.com/4QeZAIi.jpg

And why it was a spam? You posted in the thread that he wants and I sent a PM with my price. Where is the mistake about it? I should do giveaways to random people with the risk of losing it?

And as I said in my reply, no one cares about the context, they just judge right away as you just did right now.

[dragonvsandroid]

Both of you might want to read this before you further embarrass yourself:

Do's and Don'ts

• It's okay to include your alt-account on your own Trust list. This means you trust the feedback you left from that account. Example:
  

  hilariousandco Trusts these users' judgement:
  7. hilariousetc (Trust: +3 / =1 / -0) (1725 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

• Don't include your main account from your alt account(s). This could influence DT1-voting, and although that's not part of this guide, it's bad.

I'm glad you agree on this now, I remember you disapproved of this a while ago.

Interesting. I don't feel embarrassed, I feel like trusting your alt account that you yourself identify as insecure is embarrassing in itself.

I've posted my view on this here.
I get where you're coming from though, but I don't understand why you only exclude mobile alts from your mobile, and not from your main account.
Now, if you'd include your own mobile account, that would make sense again as putting your alt on Depth 0 would exclude your alt's exclusions on your Depth 1. It's ironic, isn't it

Probably as I'm not as thick-skinned as others   The reason for this was to make the point referenced above in a clear manner, to generate this discussion. I'm glad you found the irony in my actions, it was intended just for you

Mission accomplished  

[The Cryptovator]

1. I still don't get why it is a problem because users changed merit between themselves?

Small correction it will not themselves, it will be "himself". If still you have questions then feel free to reply.

Why it is a crime to send merit to someone else?

WTF, don't spam before read all the story on sensitive object. Where you had found he send merit to someone else? He sent merit to himself, means sent merit to his alt accounts which is merit abuse.

3. Why the feedback is red? This ain't scamming and it can't be considered scamming at all, from none of the view points that express logic.

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag. Besides that, do you need scam proof? If so then he have done. Because he have scammed project owners by joining bounty with alt account where projects do not allow it. He have more alt accounts read full thread to understand the story behind it.

[LoyceV]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

[The Cryptovator]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

Why not true? If your point of view about admin opinion as you mentioned below then not true (for you). But it doesn't mean users are allow to trading merits between alt. Probably you missed a point wrote by moderator although it's not official rules. But it's TRUE.

Can I give merit to my alt accounts?

No, this is frowned upon and will almost certainly lead to you receiving negative feedback if discovered.
 

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

Probably admin told it on my thread and I have remembered it which purpose he said. But you know eventually he had removed that merit source we talked about. I believe they abuse merit system and its equal to cheat forum system. So who want to cheat forum system trading with them is extremely high risk.

I always try to avoid tag merit abuser, this user is accused for multiple reason. So no more second chance for him and I believe I wrote correct thing on feedback;

Alt account; jovan85, sunce33 cheating bounty campaign and abuse merit system (trading merit between alts)

[blue Snow]

1. I still don't get why it is a problem because users changed merit between themselves?

The problem, 50 Merit for Authentication Post made me confusing. because I read high-quality posts only got >30 merits.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5228677.msg53918571#msg53918571
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5227654.msg53889326#msg53889326
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5229389.msg53938069#msg53938069
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5228744.msg53921072#msg53921072

is this normal?

[Timelord2067]

...that you yourself identify as insecure is embarrassing in itself...

Did I?

Did I say that???  Wrong again.


You should pay closer attention to who you send PM's to.  Very interesting one you sent me instead of OGnasty ... 

[YOSHIE]

I never had a problem in any bounty campaign and I was never disqualified.

I am still curious about what was said by both of them @ sunce33 and @ jovan85, as mentioned in the quote above.

1. sunce33
2. jovan85

It is really ironic what happened to the Alt Account. The two of them had an affair in the same campaign. Even worse, not just one campaign, almost all of the campaigns that they participated in were side by side.

Proof:

Topic: [ANN][NEW BOUNTY][IPBO] - CRYPTO-PUPPIES-LAND ROUND2

http://archive.is/wip/8Nf5e

spreadsheets






In other campaigns also found cheating.

Proof:

@jovan85 page 287.

Topic: 🚀🌟[ICO][Bounty]🌟🚀 StopTheFakes.io $ 1.000.000 $ to share

@sunce33 page 117.

Topic: 🚀🌟[ICO][Bounty]🌟🚀 StopTheFakes.io $ 1.000.000 $ to share

If you open the spreadsheet, you will get @ sunce33, number (637) and number @ jovan85 (798).

sreadsheet


In other campaigns also found cheating.

Proof:

@sunce33 page 436.

Topic: 💠 DIWtoken.com 💠 [BOUNTY CLOSED] 💠 [ICO]💠 Decentralized Security

@jovan85 page 984.

Topic: 💠 DIWtoken.com 💠 [BOUNTY CLOSED] 💠 [ICO]💠 Decentralized Security



spreadsheets

I think this proof solves this problem in taking Alts's decision to cheat in a campaign.

[nutildah]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

Okay, well this is a good discussion to have. Does trading merit constitute selling merit? Technically they are buying merit with merit, so I would say yes. In this case, its not at a 1:1 exchange rate, and the two parties are most likely one in the same, but I think sending heaps of merit to oneself does constitute untrustworthy behavior as they are artificially building an inflated reputation for themselves. Should users be able to send merits to their alt accounts?

I don't think its a good idea to tag people specifically for meriting low quality posts, but in this case, two instances of accounts meriting each other's proof of authentication posts does lend credibility to the idea that merit is being exchanged/traded, regardless of whether or not they are owned by the same person.

[Lauda]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

This is high-risk and actually flag worthy,  short version is that any service is getting scammed by this user. Defending of such scams needs to stop around this place, sadly this is not the current standard any more.

[Timelord2067]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

This is high-risk and actually flag worthy,  short version is that any service is getting scammed by this user. Defending of such scams needs to stop around this place, sadly this is not the current standard any more.

Put down the red crayon Lauda...  You've pissed on enough walls for one lifetime - most of your sprays aren't hitting the mark and are dribbling down your leg instead.

[dragonvslinux]

I feel like trusting your alt account that you yourself identify as insecure is embarrassing in itself.

Did I?

Did I say that???  Wrong again.

(quote expanded)

My bad, this wasn't the implication I was trying to convey - I thought this was clear given the example, I understand where it was open to this interpretation. Apoogies.

I didn't mean "you" (Timelord) I mean plural you, arguably the reference you bought up, but otherwise plural "you", whoever that may apply to. If "you" tag your own mobile as using insecure connections, then I don't believe it's embarrassing to put it in "your" trust list. Obviously people's trust lists are their own business etc etc, that's just my opinion.

You should pay closer attention to who you send PM's to.  Very interesting one you sent me instead of OGnasty ...  

It was meant for you Timelord, I was playing the guessing game of where I "still can't read" (implication: again?). I'll give up guessing now

[nutildah]

I think this proof solves this problem in taking Alts's decision to cheat in a campaign.

Wow, this is very extensive work and I feel comfortable saying the case is closed on this issue.

It was meant for you Timelord, I was playing the guessing game of where I "still can't read" (implication: again?). I'll give up guessing now

It was a copy/paste feedback he also left for me. Its the 3rd neutral he's left me -- he thinks trust comments are his personal diary

[Timelord2067]

I was playing the guessing game of where I still can't read" (implication: again?). I'll give up guessing now

Rest assured you won't be able to "inadvertently" send me PM's that you were clearly meant to send to OGnasty ever again...

Code:

~dragonvslinux

[hacker1001101001]

Trading merit between alt accounts is enough for red tag.

Not true:

If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.

Context: theymos said this to a Merit source, but I'm pretty sure it applies to all. Use negative feedback when you think that trading with the person is a high risk.

I agree with this, the system was purely created to indicate newbies about a users trading history on the forum and using it to indicate merit trading doesn't seem to be an intended use of the system, by the creator.