Topic: Abuse due to revenge? (Read 643 times)
it's true, one could argue that many of those "accusations/links" are true, but they are pretty much far from accurate, therefore i think you did well on "revising" your feedback on such cases, specially if there was no harm/scam involved.
On the other hand, I do think often accounts can be linked by these sorts of transactions, but it's very difficult to tell the difference. We all know damn well that bounty abuse happens and that a lot of bounty hunters think no one is paying attention and that they won't get caught trying to cheat.
I totally agree with you. I think that there are even such farms in which it is impossible to track the links between the accounts, as they adapt very quickly and know well how they are being tracked.
On the other hand, I do think often accounts can be linked by these sorts of transactions, but it's very difficult to tell the difference. We all know damn well that bounty abuse happens and that a lot of bounty hunters think no one is paying attention and that they won't get caught trying to cheat.
~Why does it sound like it has happened with you, I'm not pointing fingers at you but I have a doubt.~
If this happened to me, I would point it out and provide additional information that is needed. Just on the forum a lot of disgruntled users who are trying to prove that they left a negative feedback without evidence. And it became interesting to me, because such a situation can occur.
@OP Sorry for hijacking 
You stupid moron,i am mad because of my unrightful red tag,so you just need to fake it till you make it (this whole leaving drama) ?so these accounts now are connected to me? you cant connect it with the addresses,date of registration and now you are using last logged,very intelligent indeed you are one true abuser feel free to ban/paint those accounts if it pleases you.,send me regards to those who got banned
Are there cases on the forum when an honest user is framed by scammers.
Sure, some time ago another Dutch translator and I were framed by a competitor translator who happened to be friends with Lauda.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hy2nECAXGCIaYN8H3746yU6fkSNGdQn-b11oDSZmBr8/
Some people value money more than honesty. Sad but true.
Mikewith's first contribution in the known alts thread was some five hours ago so it's interesting he's speaking with such an air of authority.
Just because I don't post in that thread , it does not mean I don't see what is going on there, this is one of reasons why i don't give much weight to what is posted there, lack of solid evidence.
you simply came to conclude that since i have not posted there then it's surprising/interesting that i am speaking "with such an air of authority."
Quote
it's just answering your question with facts.
I have not asked any questions , neither i see any facts in your post ( except for the one about my first post )
please don't get me wrong, i have nothing personal against you, never interacted with you before my first post in your topic , and you have never accused me for having an alt " yet
" , adding to this , that your efforts against potential "scammers" are highly appreciated, my only concern is that most evidence used to prove the connection between those accounts are poor to say the least, and giving the fact that the damage of false accusation can be huge, i chose not to like your way of connecting accounts , but what do i know ?
It can happen but usually mostly it is "my brother's/sister's/friend's/cousin's account" excuse. There are some huge farming rings where people hire spammers and pay them in their local currency for tokens they receive(trust me on this one, I have received few PM's about this business, together with pictures of the "team of spammers")
Wait, this is even better, ACEugenio:
This address 3QRy91zsHAb4QzpihYsTbC9kwakNj254uE connects last 2 banned accounts with other 2 banned accounts ...and...and following these accounts and merit trail https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=loof99 from one of banned accounts, I have found, among other things, this:
cryptosomething...this crypto...:
?
That would explain why someone is ranting around whole day long
@OP Sorry for hijacking
But the hierarchy loves these type of connections,merit,eth addresses, date of registration patter? wouldnt you get negged if you disagree with their beliefs?i like what marlboroza is doing ,tagging alts with the use of those said connections,merits,and date of registration basically he isnt following what theymos have said,a total abuser here and the drama of leaving the DT position doesnt make sense because he is still tagging people while he has campaign of leaving his position . 
Do you mean something like this, 2eugenio: basically he isnt following what theymos have said,a total abuser here and the drama of leaving the DT position doesnt make sense because he is still tagging people while he has campaign of leaving his position . Wait, this is even better, ACEugenio:
This address 3QRy91zsHAb4QzpihYsTbC9kwakNj254uE connects last 2 banned accounts with other 2 banned accounts ...and...and following these accounts and merit trail https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=loof99 from one of banned accounts, I have found, among other things, this:
Quote
jbautistangina 1 1
cryptopussies 1 1
cryptopan 1 1
mangkanor 1 1
jackolinyoko 1 1
mariangpalad 1 1
pedropendukot 1 1
cryptocrocs 1 1
cryptopussies 1 1
cryptopan 1 1
mangkanor 1 1
jackolinyoko 1 1
mariangpalad 1 1
pedropendukot 1 1
cryptocrocs 1 1
cryptosomething...this crypto...:
?
That would explain why someone is ranting around whole day long
@OP Sorry for hijacking
This is one of the reasons I don't investigate the (usually very big) threads that link accounts together through Eth-addresses in campaign spreadsheets.
But the hierarchy loves these type of connections,merit,eth addresses, date of registration patter? wouldnt you get negged if you disagree with their beliefs?i like what marlboroza is doing ,tagging alts with the use of those said connections,merits,and date of registration basically he isnt following what theymos have said,a total abuser here and the drama of leaving the DT position doesnt make sense because he is still tagging people while he has campaign of leaving his position . 
what the OP is wondering about is certainly something that happens , by looking at the reputation section or the known-alts topic, you can see that many people get accused for using alt account with some poor evidence.
Mikewith's first contribution in the known alts thread was some five hours ago so it's interesting he's speaking with such an air of authority.
As OP of the thread he's so graciously referenced, I can't recall reading that happening often - rarely would be a better description. You'll find abuse in forms you won't even know has happened to you such as person's who have given you trust are peer pressured into removing their trust. Might sound like Butt Hurt, it's not, it's just answering your question with facts.
Good luck.
Why does it sound like it has happened with you, I'm not pointing fingers at you but I have a doubt. Anyways I personally know someone(suppose A) who has fallen prey to this thing you mentioned of in 4-5 lines but the guy(suppose B) who accused A of cheating campaigns with alt accounts didn't know each other at all so I don't know whether was it for revenge or eliminating competition because B was later found to have multiple alt accounts and was also cheating campaigns.
If someone wants to check this case I can link the thread.
If someone wants to check this case I can link the thread.
I understand your idea but this will relatively happen in the slightest chance. But, if this scenario really happening then it is not a ground that the bounty hunter that was being framed up by just sending tokens from his wallet should not consider that user having a multiple account. Giving negative trust should be done if it is clearly detected that someone has a multiple account and in your scenario DT should not tagged that user beung framed up. Evidences were really poor and should not be the basis for tagging negative trust. Besides, multiple account is not a violation unless you joined it in the same bounty program.
I wouldn't deny that this could happen, given the extremes some butthurt people will go to achieve personal vendetta. Very recent examples: fake personal messages via manipulated html code, or placing an email address in a banned account in order to connect and frame someone.
Account A & B send 10$ to address C. "A&B same wallet"
I've sent Bitcoin to an address of a payment processor, and to my surprise the same address had been used by someone else several months earlier. I don't know why they reuse addresses, but the fact is they do.A&B are only the same wallet if they send funds in one transaction.
a week later we both get 10 coins, he sends the coins to my address , and then start a scam accusation topic, saying I used an alt and broke rules, i get tagged for something i never did.
As far as I know, this is not enough evidence.Let's say:
Account A post: A address.
Account B post: B address.
Account A sends 10$ to address B. "It is not proof"
Account A & B send 10$ to address C. "A&B same wallet"
Also, writing style, activity times, and synonyms are considered evidence to strengthen the doubt.
sr. member
Activity: 375
Merit: 1021
Just in case no one loves you, I love you 3000.
This is one reason why scams, accusations, and wrong information are not moderated, aside from time consuming there are going to be different opinions or decisions that may result to biased outcomes – depending on which side of view, of course.
I may have different opinion about this kind of topic, but, it doesn’t matter since I don’t have the data that will proved the guiltiness of one person. People can just say I was framed by this scammer or have some revenge, although we have one case that was proven false accusation/framed, it was the first time.
We cannot protect them on such abuses, since it is beyond our control, they are giving information just to earn free tokens, they should know the possible risks of their own actions. That is why I do not immediately tag such bounty abuse or other stuff related to account connections (unless I want to bestow my time on it), it is susceptible to abuses.
I may have different opinion about this kind of topic, but, it doesn’t matter since I don’t have the data that will proved the guiltiness of one person. People can just say I was framed by this scammer or have some revenge, although we have one case that was proven false accusation/framed, it was the first time.
We cannot protect them on such abuses, since it is beyond our control, they are giving information just to earn free tokens, they should know the possible risks of their own actions. That is why I do not immediately tag such bounty abuse or other stuff related to account connections (unless I want to bestow my time on it), it is susceptible to abuses.
Are there cases on the forum when an honest user is framed by scammers. For example, the user participates in the bounty without breaking the rules and not abusing the system of merit and the system of trust. The scammer finds the public key of the victim in the Google table the bounty of the past or in the history of messages an honest user and sends a token with the account, which is also involved in the same bounty. Then he files a complaint against the user from another account and the honest user gets negative trust.
Just like with Merit, the receiving party should always be assumed to be innocent.Even if there are token/altcoin/Bitcoin-transfers, it could be part of a Currency Exchange, but there are also other ways to link addresses while being different users.
This is one of the reasons I don't investigate the (usually very big) threads that link accounts together through Eth-addresses in campaign spreadsheets.
Do you mean a scammer sending token to an honest user accounts. Firstly how did the scammer get the token. OK let assume the token has already been distributed then you are at your right to send your token to where ever you choose and the receiver can never get any tag for that
You probably do not understand what I mean. Account scammer and honest user participate in the same bounty. If I send tokens to another wallet immediately after receiving the tokens, this will not solve the problem. Read this post, which is a good example of such a scam: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49874935
I apologize for my English.
Recently on the forum there are constant disputes and wars. I have one question. Are there cases on the forum when an honest user is framed by scammers. For example, the user participates in the bounty without breaking the rules and not abusing the system of merit and the system of trust. The scammer finds the public key of the victim in the Google table the bounty of the past or in the history of messages an honest user and sends a token with the account, which is also involved in the same bounty. Then he files a complaint against the user from another account and the honest user gets negative trust.
I am interested your opinions and ways to protect against such abuses.
Do you mean a scammer sending token to an honest user accounts. Firstly how did the scammer get the token. OK let assume the token has already been distributed then you are at your right to send your token to where ever you choose and the receiver can never get any tag for thatRecently on the forum there are constant disputes and wars. I have one question. Are there cases on the forum when an honest user is framed by scammers. For example, the user participates in the bounty without breaking the rules and not abusing the system of merit and the system of trust. The scammer finds the public key of the victim in the Google table the bounty of the past or in the history of messages an honest user and sends a token with the account, which is also involved in the same bounty. Then he files a complaint against the user from another account and the honest user gets negative trust.
I am interested your opinions and ways to protect against such abuses.
I understood clearing that's why I said if he wasn't asking exclusively based on his example i.e asking a general question if framed cases have been solved before that's why I provided that topic of a scammer framing an innocent users, to let him understand that framed cases can be resolved. then later went on to give my opinion to the topic based on the example he gave. Read my OP you'll understand my reply.
I also think that you provided us with a quote about plagiarism, for which the user will receive a permanent ban, and not a negative feedback. And this already refers to violations of forum rules, and not abuses.
I have one question. Are there cases on the forum when an honest user is framed by scammers.
If you aren't asking specifically for your example then here is a situation when framing happened and it got resolved but it doesn't happen more often.
I just stumbled upon a proven case of framing someone for plagiarism:
The scammer can take the original text from the forum, post on his website changing the date and write a complaint, and also delete it by editing it. We need to study this problem.
Jump to: