Franky1 has been on the forum for a very long time, and from the early days I came across the profile, they were a pretty decent poster who gave mostly accurate information, although I believe they had a tag then for spreading wrong information on the forum.
I am not quite sure when their postings went downhill as I do not engage in any posts that they have posted in. However, judging from the links in the OP I would not still support a ban for the user. There may be some disagreements wand misinformation, but I would not call them net negative to the forum deserving of a ban.
As have been said, challenge the misinformation or leave a neutral feedback on their account, or put it on your ignore list.
Topic: Ban request for user: franky1 - page 8. (Read 3166 times)
I agree mostly with others. It doesn't mean you aren't concern with the community regarding a single user peculiar attitude towards posting. If he did violate some rules here likely no need to request for ban since he will get banned eventually. If he isn't then there is some sort of hope or light on what he speaks or discuss here in forum. I believe moderators are taking that also in consideration. Not familiar with the guy, but let the ban hammer done naturally.
Yes, but the moderators should not be the truth gatekeepers either. Would you really want that? To me that sounds very authoritarian
If you ask me I prefer having some people who constantly throw into confusion outa here than leaving this place in its chaotic mercy. You aren't either absolutely totalitarian or disgustingly libertarian. History has shown exaggerations fail. As I said, everything in moderation. We're a forum after all.I'd like to see him get some support for whatever mental disorder he's got going on
Yeah... About that 
Again, die in a fire plz. Absolute waste of oxygen.
As for this, I'm fully agreed:
Eventually, once you've debunked all the lies, he just resorts to semantics and wordplay. And by that point no one is going to be convinced by what he's saying anyway.
However, as I've underlined above, I'm more discouraged than encouraged to pay this man attention by starting all those wrangles. To reach the point where he starts resorting to semantics and wordplay, a page of wall-sized posts is required. By knowing there's a high chance for the discussion to be removed after all this mess, I don't even take the time.Ah, OK I've just realized that there is no authomatic system, it is just that if he publishes there his posts will be moved or deleted.
From what I've noticed, he's banned in theory, but in practice he can disrupt a lot. The existence of the post you've linked proves he's not completely banned from that board, but instead confusing the users with the same shit.however, I don't think he is posting in bad faith.
How do you interpret bad faith? I can characterize him an immature, inhibited scum the least. 
After a number of years of reading franky1's posts, I have come to the conclusion that he believes what he writes. I have posted previously that I do not agree with very much of what Franky says, and I probably would not agree with most of his interpretation of facts, however, I don't think he is posting in bad faith.
If you disagree with what franky1 is saying, I would encourage you to engage in a fact-based discussion with him to try to change his mind. In doing so, you should also be open to having your mind be changed, if a sufficient fact pattern were to emerge.
As a result of the above, I would strongly oppose banning franky1.
If you disagree with what franky1 is saying, I would encourage you to engage in a fact-based discussion with him to try to change his mind. In doing so, you should also be open to having your mind be changed, if a sufficient fact pattern were to emerge.
As a result of the above, I would strongly oppose banning franky1.
Lol. I was very surprised to see this thread. I already said at some point that franky1 is a peculiar guy and I would like to see the face he has out of curiosity. I had him on ignore for a while and took him out just for the laughs. He does weird things like for example: he knows that Jet Cash has him on ignore and yet he doesn't stop replying to his posts. Sometimes two and three posts in a row in the same thread.
I don't support the ban request either. If he is already banned from the technical section I don't think there is a need to ban him from the whole forum.
As for trust feedback, I see the only one that is strictly about some money is the one left by Carlton Banks, although if gmaxwell and achow101 left him negative feedback as well for non money issues I imagine he pissed them off quite a bit.
By the way here is his last post on mining in Kazahstan: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58913234
Edit:
How has he been able to publish this post there a few moments ago, then? Ah, OK I've just realized that there is no authomatic system, it is just that if he publishes there his posts will be moved or deleted. Good luck with that, then. Seeing what he does with Jet Cash, I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote a lot of posts there.
I don't support the ban request either. If he is already banned from the technical section I don't think there is a need to ban him from the whole forum.
As for trust feedback, I see the only one that is strictly about some money is the one left by Carlton Banks, although if gmaxwell and achow101 left him negative feedback as well for non money issues I imagine he pissed them off quite a bit.
By the way here is his last post on mining in Kazahstan: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58913234
Edit:
In case you were unaware, franky1 is banned from Development and Technical Discussion: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/note-franky1-is-banned-from-the-this-subforum-5192937.
How has he been able to publish this post there a few moments ago, then? Ah, OK I've just realized that there is no authomatic system, it is just that if he publishes there his posts will be moved or deleted. Good luck with that, then. Seeing what he does with Jet Cash, I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote a lot of posts there.
Honestly not sure what the answer is at this stage. I'd like to see him get some support for whatever mental disorder he's got going on, but I doubt that's going to happen. The problem is, he knows where the limit is and he won't cross that line. But he'll be as much of a disruptive nuisance as he can up to that point. If you dare utter one of his trigger words, he's straight in with the same misleading nonsense stuck on repeat forever.
All we can do is challenge the dishonest stuff, even if it means doing the same infuriating dance for the rest of our time here. It gets tedious, but at least it keeps him somewhat in check. Eventually, once you've debunked all the lies, he just resorts to semantics and wordplay. And by that point no one is going to be convinced by what he's saying anyway.
Keep up the good fight (and keep him out of Development and Technical Discussion).
All we can do is challenge the dishonest stuff, even if it means doing the same infuriating dance for the rest of our time here. It gets tedious, but at least it keeps him somewhat in check. Eventually, once you've debunked all the lies, he just resorts to semantics and wordplay. And by that point no one is going to be convinced by what he's saying anyway.
Keep up the good fight (and keep him out of Development and Technical Discussion).
Despite I often disagree with @franky1 I believe he's a good poster, especially compared to the mass here
We shouldn't ban people for their opinion or lies. It's called the freedom of speech and democracy. We all have different opinions on several things. It's up to us to debate/argue and everyone has the right to talk. Not a majority deciding to ban people who disagree and give them negative feedback.
How could we listen to the 2 parties to then decide if you censor a party?
So everyone can say; hey I'm convinced you're lying so here is negative feedback. Following this logic is dumb. Everyone could neg rate everyone.
If the person has been brainwashed, no matter, but it doesn't deserve a ban or a negative feedback
We shouldn't ban people for their opinion or lies. It's called the freedom of speech and democracy. We all have different opinions on several things. It's up to us to debate/argue and everyone has the right to talk. Not a majority deciding to ban people who disagree and give them negative feedback.
How could we listen to the 2 parties to then decide if you censor a party?
So everyone can say; hey I'm convinced you're lying so here is negative feedback. Following this logic is dumb. Everyone could neg rate everyone.
If the person has been brainwashed, no matter, but it doesn't deserve a ban or a negative feedback
He doesn't syllogize his counter-proposals, I must provide valid arguments to make a point. Now add to these that he's mocking you on every single post and repeats the same things.
I gave you 4 merits for using the word syllogize, not necessarily because I'm agreeing with you--I just want that noted. I appreciate the higher-level vocabulary, as I see so little of it used around here. Now as far as providing valid arguments to rebut franky1's posts, you've probably done all you can, and again I say this: Let the community use their brains to decide for themselves which argument makes the most sense. At this point if you continue to argue with franky1, all you're going to get are more posts that frustrate you. I'd suggest perhaps you take a deep breath, walk away from the keyboard for a while (or at least any thread having to do with the LN in which franky1 is posting), and regroup your thoughts.
Does it worth even having a conversation with him? No. Does his opinion affect some people? Can't say for sure, but having him banned from the Dev & Tech board shows me he's disapproved by some mod(s).
Yes, but the moderators should not be the truth gatekeepers either. Would you really want that? To me that sounds very authoritarian, sort of like Jen Psaki talking about the government's "suggestions" to Facebook as to what info about COVID reaches FB users' eyes. 
I support intervention that prevents franky1 derailing Lightning Network threads with discussions that are either not relevant, or appear to have no basis in fact much-less reality.
However, when a newbie makes a question and this beast comes spitting nonsensical FUDs that bring confusion and upheaval then the thing takes another dimension. Shall you leave this unchallenged?
Last time I saw it, the I added a heads up:
False.
False.
In case you didn't know yet: franky1 doesn't like LN and has been spreading lies about it for a long time. It has earned him negative feedback from 3 highly knowledgeable users, and an "informal ban" from the tech boards (meaning his posts will be deleted on sight).False.
TL;DR: you're wasting your time trying to explain things to him.
Then challenge it instead of ignoring him.
People have tried. The problem with trolls is that they feed on attention. If he posts the same "opinion" in many different topics, it's useless to challenge the same thing over and over again. I have franky1 on ignore, and there's always someone who's unaware of him being an anti-LN-troll who tries it again. And if enough people add him to their ignore list, eventually his posts will remain unchallenged and someone may believe it.I think red tag here is uncalled for. Expressing an opinion (no matter how wrong or "FUD" it may seem to someone else) shouldn't make a user "high risk".
Agreed, I think neutral would fit better. But clearly some people who know much more about Bitcoin than me think otherwise. Then challenge it instead of ignoring him.
I do, but it's a lost game after all. He doesn't care about his writings, I do. He can't comprehend where he's wrong, I'm forced to highlight it. He doesn't syllogize his counter-proposals, I must provide valid arguments to make a point. Now add to these that he's mocking you on every single post and repeats the same things.Does it worth even having a conversation with him? No. Does his opinion affect some people? Can't say for sure, but having him banned from the Dev & Tech board shows me he's disapproved by some mod(s). Is this some sort of limitation of the forum's free speech that I'm unaware? Why not getting him rid of for good? Once and for all.
Usually this is what happens to a user who's constantly reported for trolling. (And actually gets his posts deleted)
Let people think for themselves, even if they're newbies being exposed to franky1's posts. You (or the forum) don't need to be the gatekeeper of the truth.
This works oppositely too: Should you leave a malicious user cunningly propagandize against you? Isn't reporting also considered gatekeeping of the truth? All I'm saying is that he gets his posts deleted very often which discourages you to argue with him even if you know he's lying.create a solid rebuttal thread with all the LN stuff etc and respond with a link to that thread when he derails a discussion, thus negating his potential negative impact on newbies etc.
That's maybe a smarter, less violent solution. 
I think red tag here is uncalled for. Expressing an opinion (no matter how wrong or "FUD" it may seem to someone else) shouldn't make a user "high risk".
Frankly (some minor pun intended) I would even hesitate to call franky1 a troll, he doesn't appear to be winding people up on purpose or at least that's not his primary purpose, it just happens as a result of his very headstrong opinions.
Having said that, if he breaks the rules - report him by all means, but that's unlikely to result in a ban. He's not plagiarising or evading a ban or moving a thread somewhere. The real solution here would be to put him on ignore, or if you care enough - create a solid rebuttal thread with all the LN stuff etc and respond with a link to that thread when he derails a discussion, thus negating his potential negative impact on newbies etc.
Frankly (some minor pun intended) I would even hesitate to call franky1 a troll, he doesn't appear to be winding people up on purpose or at least that's not his primary purpose, it just happens as a result of his very headstrong opinions.
Having said that, if he breaks the rules - report him by all means, but that's unlikely to result in a ban. He's not plagiarising or evading a ban or moving a thread somewhere. The real solution here would be to put him on ignore, or if you care enough - create a solid rebuttal thread with all the LN stuff etc and respond with a link to that thread when he derails a discussion, thus negating his potential negative impact on newbies etc.
Shall you leave this unchallenged?
And what happens when there are people who will abuse it? Who will manipulate the newcomers' opinions with their dogma? Propagandizing invades my speech. Let alone to be discouraged to clear up the confusion. Freedom of speech, yeah, but moderately.
Then challenge it instead of ignoring him. I'm strongly against banning people's speech just because it is in fact, or is considered to be, misinformation. The same drama is happening in the mainstream media, Youtube, and on social media platforms regarding COVID and I hate to say it: The type of speech that needs to be protected the most strongly is the type the majority of people disagree with. And what happens when there are people who will abuse it? Who will manipulate the newcomers' opinions with their dogma? Propagandizing invades my speech. Let alone to be discouraged to clear up the confusion. Freedom of speech, yeah, but moderately.
Let people think for themselves, even if they're newbies being exposed to franky1's posts. You (or the forum) don't need to be the gatekeeper of the truth.
I don't know why franky1's posts have been deleted or what that says about this situation. It'd be nice if a moderator chimed in here. Some of franky's posts I've seen in the past were well-written and informative (though not on the subject of the lightning network).
In case you were unaware, franky1 is banned from Development and Technical Discussion
I'm aware, it's just that Lightning discussions can happen outside this sub-forum and he will still take the chance to dictate with his opinion. Someone may just mention it in the Bitcoin Discussion and he'll start bringing terror. I don't want to imagine what he's been writing to the Politics & Society board.Note that there are far worse trolls than franky1 who are yet to be banned
But none so pathetic comes to my mind. Wanna share with me who's worse?This is really a case that needs to be looked at more than whether you agree or disagree about free speech.
Again, it's not that I disagree with free speech. Pretty much the opposite: I'm trying to protect it here. 
I didn't know about user franky1 who was actually considered a troll before you created this thread. There are 3 negative tags [trusted] it receives before you start painting it down to 4 negative tags, but I really don't see if it's the effort it takes to remove any of the old users on this forum.
We always get advice from forum contributors that if you don't agree with someone's post then you can cite it for justification so as not to be misleading. If indeed the user continues to spread lies [trolling] which could cause serious problems in the forum, then the post and profile should be reported for review. So far there are 2 options I can think of regarding the user you are referring to, ignore the profile and posts or report more posts that you find misleading.
I just checked how many posts the mod has removed for its profile, but 71 posts is too few if people actually report the post assomething wrong. Whatever it is, I'm just standing somewhere [neither confirming nor blaming]. This is really a case that needs to be looked at more than whether you agree or disagree about free speech.
We always get advice from forum contributors that if you don't agree with someone's post then you can cite it for justification so as not to be misleading. If indeed the user continues to spread lies [trolling] which could cause serious problems in the forum, then the post and profile should be reported for review. So far there are 2 options I can think of regarding the user you are referring to, ignore the profile and posts or report more posts that you find misleading.
I just checked how many posts the mod has removed for its profile, but 71 posts is too few if people actually report the post assomething wrong. Whatever it is, I'm just standing somewhere [neither confirming nor blaming]. This is really a case that needs to be looked at more than whether you agree or disagree about free speech.
In case you were unaware, franky1 is banned from Development and Technical Discussion: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/note-franky1-is-banned-from-the-this-subforum-5192937. Also see this post by achow101 explaining the rationale behind this decision: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52782685. If you wish to actually discuss Lightning without being insulted, correcting the same lies dozens of times, and being taken wildly off topic, then do so there.
Note that there are far worse trolls than franky1 who are yet to be banned, so I doubt very much any action will be taken here. While I disagree completely with silencing someone because of their opinion, even if that opinion is completely and provably wrong, him derailing every thread he posts in to be about his personal vendetta against Lightning is getting tiring to say the least.
Note that there are far worse trolls than franky1 who are yet to be banned, so I doubt very much any action will be taken here. While I disagree completely with silencing someone because of their opinion, even if that opinion is completely and provably wrong, him derailing every thread he posts in to be about his personal vendetta against Lightning is getting tiring to say the least.
The best way to do that is to use the ignore button.
This is the best way for you to avoid his shitposting. However, when a newbie makes a question and this beast comes spitting nonsensical FUDs that bring confusion and upheaval then the thing takes another dimension. Shall you leave this unchallenged?That way we can preserve freedom of speech
And what happens when there are people who will abuse it? Who will manipulate the newcomers' opinions with their dogma? Propagandizing invades my speech. Let alone to be discouraged to clear up the confusion. Freedom of speech, yeah, but moderately. Besides, isn't he already getting his posts deleted constantly for trolling? What else do you need to ban someone by that accusation?
I don't know a whole lot about lightning nodes (though I did try to understand them a while back until my eyes glazed over), but that doesn't matter. Franky1 could be arguing about bitcoin itself, my mom, or COVID--I don't support this forum banning anyone based on their opinions of things unless they're absolutely trolling, which I don't think franky1 is. He might be wrong, his opinions might be loud and in-your-face, but the only thing I'd support is people shunning him if they don't like what he has to say.
The best way to do that is to use the ignore button. That way we can preserve freedom of speech and at the same time you don't have to see posts you know you're not going to want to see.
The best way to do that is to use the ignore button. That way we can preserve freedom of speech and at the same time you don't have to see posts you know you're not going to want to see.
Franky appears to create a lot of noise when it comes to threads regarding the Lightning Network[1][2][3]. The way this person talks is ill-intentioned and does not contribute anything to the discussion. Instead, he starts yelling and spreading lies and FUD[4][5] whenever we're talking about something that is not in his interest (such as the LN) and demands from the users to do as he says[6]. Anyone who's against his ideas is being cursed.
Countless of times his posts are getting deleted after been reported. Still, he has an account here and is allowed to act same like without any penalties. However, those who do want to constructively prove him wrong are being punished by having their posts deleted and thus discouraged to stop his future FUD.
I address to the moderating team and request a ban, whether that's temporary or permanent. I also address to those who have been part in discussions with him and are annoyed by this uncontrolled abuse of the forum's free speech as he's infringing the rules:
It's down to you to support my statement that what he does is trolling.
[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58708356
[2] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58877861
[3] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58804168
[4] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58894664
[5] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58827879
[6] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58878182
Countless of times his posts are getting deleted after been reported. Still, he has an account here and is allowed to act same like without any penalties. However, those who do want to constructively prove him wrong are being punished by having their posts deleted and thus discouraged to stop his future FUD.
I address to the moderating team and request a ban, whether that's temporary or permanent. I also address to those who have been part in discussions with him and are annoyed by this uncontrolled abuse of the forum's free speech as he's infringing the rules:
Q: Do you moderate/delete (possible) FUD, accusations and untrue information?
A: No. We don't have enough time to check every single piece of information and verify the validity of the sources. Also, just like scams - too much room for bias and abuse.
However, trolling isn't allowed. If a user is habitually posting obviously false nonsense ("obviously false nonsense" to an outsider, NOT to someone who follows or is involved in the discussion) just to stir up trouble, then it's considered trolling, which is prohibited. Such cases should be thoroughly documented in the report though (There are tons of reports that just say "trolling", but moderators don't have time to look through each user's post).
A: No. We don't have enough time to check every single piece of information and verify the validity of the sources. Also, just like scams - too much room for bias and abuse.
However, trolling isn't allowed. If a user is habitually posting obviously false nonsense ("obviously false nonsense" to an outsider, NOT to someone who follows or is involved in the discussion) just to stir up trouble, then it's considered trolling, which is prohibited. Such cases should be thoroughly documented in the report though (There are tons of reports that just say "trolling", but moderators don't have time to look through each user's post).
It's down to you to support my statement that what he does is trolling.
[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58708356
[2] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58877861
[3] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58804168
[4] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58894664
[5] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58827879
[6] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58878182
Jump to: