Topic: Account banned - Limx Dev - [closed] (Read 1902 times)

I have to say a big thank you to everyone who helped unlock the account.

Best Regards

Chris

Thumbs up for this decision. I am really happy about this positive development and decision. On behalf of the Bitcore and Bitsend community i would like to say thank you! 

As far as I know, there's no standard notification for unbans, so BPIP can't know about it.

Unlikely.

Is this April fool or what.

Still that account show autobanned on Bpip.org. https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Limx%20Dev

And even on Bitcointalk their signatures are not available,so I guess its a late prank.

I unbanned it.

Please mods, reconsider the ban of user Limx Dev, he is a long standing member of the crypto community with good reputation,  and if he broke some forum rules i am sure it was not malicious but an honest mistake.

Please let him post again!

I support the solution to give Limx Dev a second chance to come back.
However, the topic is not a place for you to spam.

What is this?
You should know that Limx Dev is not be able to unlock his account himself. He need supports and decisions from admin, so it is why we have seen the topic opened.
Nope, when rules violated, punishments dropped on violators.
After that, they need to show huge contributions to the forum in the past, and that their violations were not motivated by money, they might have second chances. Additionally, the forum don't need money, admin stated about that long time ago, and it has not changed by now.
Unfortunately, the odds to have second chance is extremely low.

Please unlock your account LimxDev! What is necessary to remove the lock? Can pay a fine or something?

I can only join. His altcoin projects are no scam and have certainly brought many people here in forum. It would really be a loss to banish him completely. Maybe it would be good to adapt the rules and in such a case, where the breach of the rules was not extreme and happened a very long time ago, to impose only a temporary ban. Hopefully Theymos will reconsider and lift the ban. 

Theymos has said the forum doesn't need money, and he's not trying to profit from it either. Although a payment has been suggested before, I don't think it will convince Admin. It's also sets a bad precedent that can lead to banning users to earn money for the forum.

I don't think that it is the case to make deal. If the suggested donation deal accepted, then if someone violate rules more seriously, they simply donate 0.5, 1, 5, or 10 BTC to come back. I don't think it make sense and fair for all users. Donation has its own purposes, and should not be compromised to lift bans.
Such a deal might make the situation worse, in my opinion.
The matter is it only makes sense if Limx Dev can come back first.

---

To be honest, I joined the crypto too late, some day around April or May of 2017, months later I created my account in the forum, then the first bounty I known is Bitsend, that run by Limx Dev.
The airdrop lasted for years, but only open and joinable for Legendary, so I could not join it.
However, I kept following Bitsend, and others projects that have participations of Limx Dev.
My personal thought is he have done lot of good things for crypto, for the forum community via airdrops, and more than airdrops. He and his team kept their promises for yearrs, and weekly made very transparent reports for their communities.
He violated rules, but those rule-violated posts made years ago. Human all can make mistakes from small to serious, because we are human, not Chris or Bud.

For the case of Limx Dev, I suggest to take into consideration at least three factors before making final decision to give him chance to come back or keep the permanent ban.

1. Purposes of plagiarised posts
Plagiarised posts are plagiarised posts, no one can deny it, and we all have proof for that.
Let's look deeper a litle bit, why he made plagiarised posts?
There are some reasons, that maybe the real reasons behind the scene:
- To hit quota post of bounties.
- To scam others.
- To steal ideas of others.
Personally, I don't think Limx Dev had any of these three.

2. The long history of Limx Dev on projects that he participated in
In this aspect, he done his works well. Price rises and falls for all, not only Bitsend, BitCore, BitCloud, and so forth. So, it is not fault of Limx Dev and his team on the falls over last more than one year.
There is no one complained that Bitsend, BitCloud, BitCore are scam projects. Of course, there are complaints from spammers, but their voices should be ignored all.

3. The history of Limx Dev's promises and contributions for communities
In the last aspect, he and his team done well.
All their promises kept. No one can deny about that fact.

For all reasons and three factors above, I believe that Limx Dev should be given a second chance.
Scammers who plagiarised definitely deserve permanent bans, but Limx Dev is not the case. He is not a scammer, instead he is a well-known contributor in the forum.
So, the second chance (if given) will be not only for Limx Dev, himself, but also for all projects he particiapted with, and for the forum community as well.


Cheers,

It would be a waste to ban LimxDev. He was keeping the forum more alive with his airdrops and altcoin experiments.

The reason for a ban isn't strong enough neither in my opinion. Maybe ban him for 3 months just for being careless but a perma ban? That's too much I think.



Exactly this. The ban is technically right but it is also weird at the same time.

It means nothing. why do you think that people can't contact themselves without using bitcointalk?


I follow both projects a long time, I do not have the feeling that both users dishwara and Limx dev that they were doing anything that would lead people to the wrong conclusion. It would be good if Limx dev stay here on the forum, we need a person like them.

Below statement does not point that they are same user but look like dishwara never explicitly written that they are 2 different users.

Everyone has it case by case as theymos said so I just think this case is a different one and an exception should be made.

And if others complian and have legitimate reasons for there ban upliftment there ban too would be handled in similar way I think. But we don't see much legitimate cases of unintentional paralzism attempts here mostly.

This could be the best example of legimate upliftment of ban which was successful recently:

[PERMABAN APPEAL] ChiBitCTy

---

As i said there are very less examples and the above stated could be one.

I think only if the ban reason is not financially motivated or not causing spam.

I remembered that you found post of Limx Dev years ago, that copied and pasted, without source.
I like what Limx Dev did with his project, and really hope he can come back.
But, if it is the case that lead to return of Limx Dev, with ban-unlift, so I guess others might complaint.
Why someone get ban-unlift with case-by-case handle, whilst others don't get it.
So, how to explain about it?
I just curious (still support the come-back of Limx Dev).

---

By the way, in which cases users will get signature ban for 1 year, 2 years, rather than perma bans?
Which kind of rule violations will cause punishments with year-long signature bans?

Thank you.

Well I would probably agree, especially if they're on the same team. The potential merit abuse can be looked at separately.

I think this shouldn't be treated as plagiarism. It looks like a message from the Team, posted by 2 different team members.
The original was posted by dishware, who also created this topic. I think it's obvious he doesn't think Limx Dev plagiarized his work. It looks like a double post from different accounts, I don't think that justifies a ban.

I don't think so, otherwise there's some Merit abuse involved.

Yes, they could be as the user dishwara is the one posting this ban appeal thread.

I don't see him explaining his connection with Limx Dev anywhere.

---

I agree with this.

This should not be treated as a intentional paralyzing attempt and if everything is handled case by case in paralyzing as stated by Theymos this should have been overseen as not an financially motivated paralzism.

I would support for an upliftment of the ban.

There are two reports in the queue for plagiarism. One has been deleted so I can't see it but the other is this one:



Are these the same users?