They deserve a neutral tag for not earning 100 merits or for not ranking up? I'm scared of your judgement though.
If you were theymos, you could shut down the forum for not receiving a merit score for one month.
Why not? Well, let's figure it out. You and the purchased account are applying for a place in the company's signature. But the rank of the purchased account is higher than yours. And they accept him simply by skimming through his latest posts. But you are not accepted, because there are no more places. Then you go to ask why it happened. And you discover for yourself that the account is not so good; there are many inconsistencies in the languages, presence on the forum, change of mail, password, and language, and in general, it is clear that the account has changed its owner.
Are you swallowing injustice and waiting for the next chance?
Tbh, I will feel bad but I will not consider my efforts of building my accounts from zero to my present status as a waste. This is because everything isn't about campaign. There is reputation an account that grew from newbie is holding, which a bought account cannot. For instance, if you have $1 million to share randomly in the forum, I am sure I will have a share, which those accounts will not.
That is not my emphasis though, my concern is whether it is acceptable to tag someone for not ranking up or not earning a certain amount of merits within a given time. Has it happened before?
And the scammer, who just bought an account, walks around and boldly declares to everyone that he was ill, that his dad and grandfather died, that he learned five languages and other lies.
When I look at such lies, I don't need any soothsayer to tell me that they are lies. During my childhood days, my uncle will not punish you for lying, but he will punish you for not lying smartly or reasonably.
Coming up with the grandfather's lie, not even direct Father, kept me amazed at why such format of lies?
Is everyone ready to ignore it? I doubt. If someone does not mark such cases with a negative tag, there will be those who still do everything right.
A neutral tag is OK for accounts that changed hands, then if the new owner is showing tendencies to scam or spams the forum, it should be tagged.
I am in 100% agreement with what The Cryptovator said.
Be careful when you want to create an account change hand allegation against anyone. Good accounts shouldn't be tagged anyway though bad accounts do not get the tag. Or a neutral tag would be fine if there are doubts. As long as the changed account does not attempt to scam someone and there is no clear evidence, I won't tag them.
