Topic: Improving the current ban situation (Read 1128 times)

The most problem is that when users join to the Forum and i guess 40% or more join to make some money or BTC here only ,and that they just start posting and dont care about the Rules ,
because of the " $ " are in there eyes blending them to read the pinned Topics and threads for the Rules and information in every Board !

It's actually a very small piece of code to insert globally, won't bring the whole server down.


The registration page doesn't show any T&C so many would not even be aware such rule exists unless they're observant enough to read the stickies (I don't )

About the red text thingy, that's good enough as long as the users somewhat have to view it (like the Welcome page).

Generally, it is unnecessary, because we need space for more essential things.

---

I don't think such Warning is needed to show off when users type their posts because users have to read forum rules, that contain the rule on plagiarism. Wherever they join, they should read rules and accept rules before they join or use it; so it is not a responsibility of the forum to announce or warn them about that.
Nevertheless, if there will be a Warning on Plagiarism, it should be popped up as concurrently with the Welcome message after a new user register and log in account the first time. Your suggested Warning is somehow inappropriate, I suggest another:
"Plagiarism cause permanent ban when found, read forum rules and be careful!"

I agree that the plagiarism ban is too harsh, especially for those unaware and have contributed for years before it hit them.

Perhaps a warning or a placeholder in the text (reply) field should suffice so there's really no excuse to feign ignorance next time.

This is likely one of the way to improve the current banwave situation by reduce ban evasion, and create appropriate ban appeals.
Ban appeal - How to make it right and reduce workload for forum staffs

Sounds fair to introduce a one-time warning and if the user is caught doing that again he will receive his ban. And honestly, I wouldn't have a problem if someone gets banned like that because he was warned and totally aware that a repeated offense would result in a ban. The positive effect will be that plagiarizing for sigspam would be useless because they seem to do that regularly and normal users doing that by mistake will get a reminder to quote or like other sources.
Requirement to receive a warning should be at least Jr. Member rank that mods can still nuke spambots.

For the voting I can imagine that the user can add a poll to their ban appeal and the result of that poll will have an unofficial character, especially if the global moderators don't know much about the user because he was active in local boards.
Such polls can help to figure out if the user is useful for the community or not.

This is a weighty allegation and should be looked in so as to avoid stifling the budding local boards across the forum. Based on this, I support the OP's suggestion listed on 4 as quoted below...

The local community will at best know posters who are I dispensable to them and as such should make their votes count in unbanning them if certain other members who post in English are getting that unban privilege based on recognition.

I found a thread that somehow got split from another thread talking about signature campaigns from 2014, and someone suggested a table that implies some deals might have spots for a "newbie" rank.

Even if there is no financial incentive to plagiarize a post, an adult should know better. I stand by my point that a person is still an adult if they had recently registered on an internet forum.

Fair point. I would still expect him to be acting like an adult. He also said that he was sleep deprived, which I think is a strange excuse.

@1miau: I support some of the proposals, others not. The rules you propose are a bit "mild" in my opinion, as the problem is important.

The "warning points" would not be a bad idea, but I think all obvious copy-and-paste intents from 2017 onwards should get an outright ban. Why after 2017? Because it was this year when the spam problem, as a side-effect from the Bitcoin bubble and the ICO boom, went rampant. Those that have participated to lower the quality of the forum in these last years should not get special treatment.

However, the "warning point" idea could be used for earlier abuses. As some already wrote, in 2014 the forum was a different place - as far as I remember (I registered in early 2013) only the altcoin subforum was already getting spammed hard. I think it's very likely that some users that offended in this early era, were in their teens or even earlier at that time.

I would, however, favour a one-warning system, not 10 points - those that plagiarized after they got the single warning, should only get less than a ban in very special occasions (e.g. if they really developed into a very valuable member, e.g. people posting good Bitcoin tutorials and participate in development). In this particular case I think a community vote could be part of the "recovery" process. But I would require at least 500 self-earned Merit points (so I would still not qualify, for example) for that, because it's a pretty labour-intensive task for moderators to evaluate these cases.

To your other proposals: I don't think trust should be used (sig-ban is a better "milder" punishment). And to the ban evading issue I've no opinion 'cause I never stumbled upon it here ... so I don't know if it's important.

---

In this particular case, the user - after the ban - wrote in his ban appeal that he was young indeed when that happened. In his case I think even the "milder" two-month ban and one-year-sig ban is a little bit harsh, albeit I think it's still in the OK range.

I think the current waves of ban is alright. This is just to imply a new start for the betterment of the forum. I can't just bare to imagine a forum full of copy and paste posts because there can no good discussions with them. This is all fine just think of how btc falls down to 3K USD and now back to 8K USD. The forum could also be like that knowing that there could still a lot of users that will going to join in this wonderful forum and will going to learn and the same time will going to earn.

I guess you might stay up-to-date here

I also don't know who is cellard or Bluestackz - I've never talked with them or know them personally or know anything about them. I just used their cases as an example.


A newbie most probably won't plagiarize for sig earning in 2014. I was not here at that time but I doubt there were sig campaigns for the newbies, tho I haven't searched about it.

Maybe he did it to increase his post count, maybe he did it unintentionally or maybe intentionally... there could be a reason and the reason already punished them.

Anyway, there is nothing to discuss more after Theymos's post - They know better than us and have the data and have already decided the best.

---

Btw, what's the current number of total bans?

if anything, the fact that one could cherrypick one of their posts at random and just do a simple search on a single sentence, and usually get a direct match, shows the majority of their posts are probably plagiarized.

its only recently (2 years or so? my timeline is off, too much time off the forum) that plagiarism has gotten a lot of attention, and personally i think the second chance should be enough; the older users who are just now getting found out are incredibly unlikely to be repeat offenders, and the temp ban + sig ban is more than fair for these cases. C+p shitbots though, should definitely not be given a second chance; their sole purpose is to just spam seemingly good posts to farm activity and merit. take a look at this post that was actually plagiarized, yet was given a merit point: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50977961
if this is the end goal, these users shouldnt be shown any leniency. 

It's almost never "2 or 1 mistakes" and it's almost never "mistakes". Appeals and sig bans can handle such rare cases but 99.9%+ of it is clear-cut copy-pasta BS. The fact that you see 1 or 2 messages presented as examples when the perp asks "show me what I copied" doesn't mean that's all there is.

Of course it is not. Anyway hanging a big red trust onto an account, will be a strong punishment already (since he/she won´t be able to attend in serious Signature-campaign any longer.

Still I agree, that being flagged with neg. trust, won´t stop "intentional c&p".  

But here comes the point, when is it "intentional c&p"? And in my humble opinion (intentional c&p) is what needs to be judged/banned.
How is it of any use for the forum if a member with 2000+ posts and 50+ merits over the course of 2 years or more will be punished for 2 or 1 mistakes (even if the forum-rules have to be respected) done anytime in the past?

Is any comparativeness given with 0.05% posts are to judge according to the rules?

---

Fully agree, tyz has been an important factor to increase my knowledge over the course of the past years with all the help & additional value he provided in local. I can´t believe he misstepped that badly that he deserved any judgement harder than an official warning. I might be wrong here, of course, just would like to see the evidence.

---

... is another good example how it might be given fairness to not merge any body with every spam-bot when it comes to the sentence.

---

Thanks for that since it makes it easier to feel that 100% justice is involved in all decisions and there is always a chance for the banned user to get the information what he is banned for as well as the chance to explain him-/herself to rule out misunderstandings! In the aforementioned cases it seems crystal-clear.  

The following tables illustrate what you meant by pointing out around 87% of total banned cases from 11/5-15/5/2019 come from Member ranks and below, includes Copper Member (just 14 cases).

There is not much to add after what theymos said, but I just want to point out that while our attention is often captured by those high-profile cases - Legendary, DT members, etc - the vast majority of banned users are newbies and other low ranks, and that has always been the case.

Or to put another way - the fact that those older users managed to get away with it years ago should be viewed as an accident, not a free pass, and the sig ban option is already a huge privilege for them.

I don't know who cellard is, or anything about him. I am not commenting about him specifically.

I think the assumption that just because someone is a "newbie" that they are young, new to bitcoin, or don't know what they are talking about is just naive.

All being a "newbie" means is they have recently registered. Some people register here after being involved, or interested in Bitcoin for a long time. Some even have worked for crypto related companies for years before registering here.

Being a new user does not mean they are young. My presumption is everyone here is an adult, or a "young adult" in their mid-teens, and everyone should be treated that way, including holding them responsible for what they do. In both high school and college, students are forced to submit their writing assignments/papers into one or more anti-plagiarism platforms, and the expectation is anyone caught plagiarizing will automatically receive a zero on the assignment. College students are taught that plagiarism is grounds for possible expulsion, even if they have spent tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition.

1 - I would consider a temporary ban plus a years long signature ban a warning. The temporary ban may be redundant if the plagiarism is from a long time ago, but I do understand the idea this. A 1-2 year signature ban will still allow a person to continue discussing bitcoin and crypto and anything else discussed here.

2 - I would not personally trust anyone who is caught plagiarizing. I would consider this a form of dishonesty. See my response to 1

3 - In some cases I believe in lieu of a temporary ban, a user should be allowed to start "fresh" with a new account, but I believe the person should be required to receive permission to do this. This might be appropriate if someone has a decent history here, but there was a more severe problem with what they did to earn a ban. A person is banned because they were breaking rules that were causing problems.

4 - I don't think winning a popularity contest is an effective way to decide who gets a pass. 

It's amazing disclose, because I know that case and have been curious what happened after his ban uplifted (without text of signature ban - I thought like you forgot to add such text, something like this). Now, I got the reasons behind. Once again, you have shown that you are very flexible admin, in the way you control forum issues and handle cases of forum users, in reasonable and fair approaches.

Merely forgetting to quote things is not plagiarism, and if we read it that way, you probably won't be banned at all. For it to plagiarism, you have to have the intention of passing the text off as an original work by you. In all of these recent cases (unless we make a mistake, which is rare), it's extremely obvious in context that the person is copy/pasting to make money. Usually they're copy/pasting someone else's post and not adding anything else, in fact, which makes it very clear. Here's the most recent one:

All of the recent cases are ~exactly like this, since this is what the bot looks for. (Thank you to the bot designer!)

If at any point you had a mindset where you'd treat the forum like a dumping ground by worthlessly copy/pasting other people's posts in order to make a tiny amount of money, then my default reaction is GTFO, and you have quite an uphill battle to earn even a 2-year sigban instead. No warnings, no statute of limitations.

I know of one case where someone was banned for plagiarism in the recent massacre, but a very careful reading of the context showed that the person actually did just forget to quote, and by "quoting" the post they were expressing an actual point even if it constituted their entire post. This person was unbanned without any sigban, since this isn't plagiarism.