Full Member Merit Abuser and Bounty Cheater

[blue Snow]

Account connected:

1. dark1234
2. Ojengonggu

BTC address(No BCH): 13mkUfmrbnwWT6UCbTQ4KoUuXpLwyrg95Z

BTC Address for Payments: 13mkUfmrbnwWT6UCbTQ4KoUuXpLwyrg95Z

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2792957.msg29095102#msg29095102



Another Full Member connected from Ojengonggu - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5053073.msg47031418#msg47031418

4 Accounts Connected:

Ojengonggu, ninis45, hotimbineh, fara_buduk.

Proof connected between dark1234 and hotimbineh https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2792957.msg32027903#msg32027903



I will appreciate it who eligible (DT1 or DT2)  to tag them.

[1713586742]

1713586742

[1713586742]

1713586742

[1713586742]

1713586742

[1713586742]

1713586742

[1713586742]

1713586742

[The Cryptovator]

The solid proof I found about Ojengonggu & dark1234. No doubt both accounts have been controlled by the same person. And it's clear these accounts abuse the merit system by sending merit to alt accounts. Forum moderators discourage sending merits to alt account.

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.
  

So definitely both accounts deserve negative feedback IMO ans tagged these two accounts. I am not getting solid evidence about the rest account.

[lovesmayfamilis]

The solid proof I found about Ojengonggu & dark1234. No doubt both accounts have been controlled by the same person. And it's clear these accounts abuse the merit system by sending merit to alt accounts. Forum moderators discourage sending merits to alt account.

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.
  

So definitely both accounts deserve negative feedback IMO ans tagged these two accounts. I am not getting solid evidence about the rest account.

I don't think you have tagged these accounts correctly. Since the merit was transferred at the time, the merit system was introduced. I have met a lot of accounts that transferred 50 merits at a time, precisely during the period of January 2018. But these accounts were not negatively tagged. Many simply tried this system, and only later began to adhere to the rule that you should not transfer credit to your viola.
If there are other violations of these two accounts besides the transfer of merit, then this could be called a violation.
But also one account has been inactive since 2020, and this can also serve as proof that the dark1234 account does not pursue cheating plans.

[The Cryptovator]

The solid proof I found about Ojengonggu & dark1234. No doubt both accounts have been controlled by the same person. And it's clear these accounts abuse the merit system by sending merit to alt accounts. Forum moderators discourage sending merits to alt account.

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.
  

So definitely both accounts deserve negative feedback IMO ans tagged these two accounts. I am not getting solid evidence about the rest account.

I don't think you have tagged these accounts correctly. Since the merit was transferred at the time, the merit system was introduced. I have met a lot of accounts that transferred 50 merits at a time, precisely during the period of January 2018. But these accounts were not negatively tagged. Many simply tried this system, and only later began to adhere to the rule that you should not transfer credit to your viola.
If there are other violations of these two accounts besides the transfer of merit, then this could be called a violation.
But also one account has been inactive since 2020, and this can also serve as proof that the dark1234 account does not pursue cheating plans.

Thanks for pointing it out. I think I should agree with you. I didn't investigate the sending date. Let them take advantage of the beginning stage of the merit system. I removed the red tag. Hope during that time he learned about the merit system. Though I am not tagging possible merit abuser, but can't ignore trading merits between alt account.

However, OP please add more details during creating a new accusation. A deep investigation would help trust abuse and arguments as well.

[JeromeTash]

OP could you please bring us to light on how the accounts were involved in bounty cheating and what bounties they cheated in. Maybe the culprit and all his connected account could be tagged on the basis of bounty abuse rather than merit abuse. I personally never tagged a user for exchanging merit between the alts though the practice is highly discouraged in the forum.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

So definitely both accounts deserve negative feedback IMO ans tagged these two accounts. I am not getting solid evidence about the rest account.

That quote you pulled was from 2018 when the merit system was brand new.  Since then--and I'm sure you're aware of this--merit abusers have rarely been tagged by DT members (though that's a judgement call for anyone on DT).  I used to give merit abusers negative feedback but stopped quite a while ago, as did a number of other DT members. 

There's just way too much proof that's required to say someone is abusing the merit system, since people can send merits for any number of reasons, and a lot of times alt accounts can't be linked with enough certainty to make it worth tagging someone.

[BITCOIN4X]

Merit abuse may be frowned upon as this will only render the merit system ineffective. Based on the available evidence, I know one of the abusers sent merit to his alt account right in a post that I think is inappropriate. So maybe deserves to be punished.

I've seen some users at the time the merit system was introduced also doing the same before on local board, they've been tagged by DT for trying to send merit to their alt account to boost rank. There's no reasonable reason for them to send 50 merit to their own alt even if they just want to try out how this merit system works.

[blue Snow]

He merited self and meriting bounty proof like another member did. I can't guess what are they did even as a testing system.

OP could you please bring us to light on how the accounts were involved in bounty cheating and what bounties they cheated in.

In basic thread @coinlocket$ where he catches 4 others, I connected them as bounty cheated

and cheated KRYLL Bounty Campaign in 2018 ago.

1. dark1234
2. Ojengonggu
3. ninis45
4. hotimbineh
5. fara_buduk

[YOSHIE]

OP could you please bring us to light on how the accounts were involved in bounty cheating and what bounties they cheated in.

Just to straighten out the two discovery accounts by @blue Snow, based on the data above (Merit).

Second question asked by: @JeromeTash, for @blue Snow, maybe you can find it below.
Proof:

BOUNTY: Topic: [BOUNTY] Newbium Retweet & Facebook Share Bounty

https://archive.vn/wip/BAlOn

However, there is another bit of suspicion towards the two accounts, they don't just blame Merit, cheat on the bounty, but there is another case for them, namely violation of the rules (25).
Which states the following:

25. Ban evasion (using or creating accounts while one of your accounts is banned) is not allowed.[e]

This can be found and proven based on Twitter and Telegram used by: @dark1234.

Example: Twitter used by: @dark1234 is also used by: @winbk14.

Accounts Connected:

1. winbk14 (Archived)

Proof:

twitter username: @rufendi99  
twitter profile link: https://twitter.com/rufendi99

Twitter Username: @rufendi99
Twitter Link: https://twitter.com/rufendi99

[ Archive ]


While below Telegram which is used by: @dark1234 is also used by: @hotimbineh.

Accounts Connected:

1. hotimbineh

Proof:

Twitter campaign
Twitter profile : https://twitter.com/hotimbineh
Facebook campaign:
Facebook profile : https://web.facebook.com/bunpereng
Telegram Campaign: @Bekoh1234

[ Archive ]

twiter url: https://twitter.com/rufendi99
telegram username: @Bekoh1234

[ Archive ]

Related Addresses:

Code:

https://twitter.com/rufendi99
Telegram: Bekoh1234

Means: @dark1234 has another high ranking Alt account still active and a banned Alt account.

[LoyceV]

I will appreciate it who eligible (DT1 or DT2)  to tag them.

Why don't you tag them by yourself? The more users use the Trust system, the more decentralized it becomes. You may not be on DT now, but you might get there eventually if someone on DT1 believes you use the Trust system correctly.
That being said: being alts isn't a reason for (negative) feedback! Alt accounts are totally allowed and shouldn't be a problem as long as none of those accounts do bad stuff.

merit abusers have rarely been tagged by DT members (though that's a judgement call for anyone on DT).

This is what upper management says (about a Merit source):

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.

Merit abuse may be frowned upon as this will only render the merit system ineffective.

Those 5 Merits are meaningless to the Merit system. The way they're going, they'll never reach the next forum Rank.

[lovesmayfamilis]

OP could you please bring us to light on how the accounts were involved in bounty cheating and what bounties they cheated in.

Just to straighten out the two discovery accounts by @blue Snow, based on the data above (Merit).

Second question asked by: @JeromeTash, for @blue Snow, maybe you can find it below.
Proof:

BOUNTY: Topic: [BOUNTY] Newbium

YOSHIE, I do not want to argue with you, but still, it can be supplemented. You cite 2017 as proof. In the terms of that company, there is no direct indication that alternative accounts cannot participate.
I have not looked at all these accounts thoroughly, and do not join their side in any way. Likewise, I just want to be consistent. In this case, let's go back to the old themes from five years ago, and tag all uncolored accounts.
The question is, blue Snow did not find these accounts on its own. They were discovered long ago by coinlocket $. Why didn't he mark them?
If you take today's bounties, which are conducted by managers without notifying them that the participation of alternative accounts is prohibited, does DT mark such violations? If the managers themselves allow it. For example, I do not see Hhampuz bans in his bounty campaigns. How many times I looked, but did not see a direct prohibition.  


As for the account  winbk14 . Did you follow all of his actions? He stole reports from all the other bounty hunters. Check again, so you can associate it with dozens more accounts.




Also, a question for everyone present in this thread.
How to call such a transfer of merits? All three participate in the same bounty campaign.
In your opinion, is this not abuse? But I don't see any other matches, so all tags will be invalid in my opinion.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=2999106
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=2900229
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=2178170

[YOSHIE]

YOSHIE, I do not want to argue with you, but still, it can be supplemented. You cite 2017 as proof. In the terms of that company, there is no direct indication that alternative accounts cannot participate.

Yes, that's for sure I also don't care about that, indeed that was a past scenario, only I was just straightening out @JeromeTash's post, it's just that I forgot to mention that it was in the past, of course it's different from now.

As others have said and forum rules don't prohibit a member from having an Alt account, as long as they don't violate any existing rules.
If we talk about Alt giving sMerit to other Alt, I can say it's an open secret and many do it, it's just that sometimes I often ignore it, let it be their business, as long as they are not involved in cheating or violating existing rules.

That's all from me.
Regards.

[BITCOIN4X]

Those 5 Merits are meaningless to the Merit system. The way they're going, they'll never reach the next forum Rank.

LoyceV, you're right. The relatively lower number probably won't affect the merit system much, but still most of the members here don't like it and I agree with that. Some users I mean are those who abuse the merit system with a total of more than 90 merit (they have been tagged) even though the recipient has been ranked up to a full member of the member rank after gaining an additional 90 merit from alt.

[rozak]

Those 5 Merits are meaningless to the Merit system. The way they're going, they'll never reach the next forum Rank.

That's right, abusing the merit system by sending 5-10 merits won't get them to the next rank.

but I think such abuse is only aimed at following the campaign with BTC payments. most of which provide rules related to getting 5-10 merits in 120 days.
example:

Rules & Requirements
You need to have received a minimum of 5 merit in the last 120 days to take part in this campaign.

this may just be another consideration of the case of abuse of merit. indeed no one will be harmed in a case like this. because the amount of merit that is distributed too small will not make it reach the next rank.

sorry OP, maybe this will be off-topic.

[blue Snow]

That being said: being alts isn't a reason for (negative) feedback! Alt accounts are totally allowed and shouldn't be a problem as long as none of those accounts do bad stuff.

maybe I'm a little bit wrong to mean the word of No multiple Signatures and No Spam, Abuse or Insults on KRYLL Bounty bounty rules.?. I believe he did and received a 4x reward.
And in fact, he broke Twitter campaign rules

Only one twitter account per person is allowed.