Topic: Is having an alt account a crime ? Why red trust for having one ? (Read 680 times)

To guess, you have nikjain422 and preditor422, which means you have 2 accounts?
how can this happen with the same number.

Ok, I updated my post with some info about this, as OP's concern was :

This is resolved.

So, this is my opinion: OP didn't cheat, but his intention was to cheat new campaign(merit part - but not with alt account).

4$ is 4$  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickrolling

What's with everybody linking the same Rick Astley's song? I know I am missing out on something, not sure what it is.

Fair enough, its up to TP and yahoo if they want to leave negative or not. 0.0005BTC wasn't a lot at that time, but still it maybe a reason for merit abuse.

They were accepted to campaign on January 26., while they've sent merit on February 9.
Well, I can't argue on this one, they used that merit to receive higher payment - somehow I missed it.
I really wonder how that happened, with all these information from reference links (2 PM's with different signatures, wrong connection in known alts )

Actually, reference to OP's feedback was pointing to this post https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.36254804 and he was tagged for this. TP changed feedback to merit abuse after pointed that connection is not good.

And after all this you pointed they sent merit because there was merit requirement for that campaign, I believe everyone in this topic missed that part.

---

I have to edit this:

This was merit rule:


They applied first time on January 26 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28977175 without any merit so this rule doesn't affect them.

Signature campaign was closed following yahoo's message "No response from owners so Im gonna close this campaign. You may remove sig"  and also this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.29594754 "Campaign is closed for now yes, but they will reopen in a week or less. They have a bug in their tracker and want to fix it before continuing. They are apologizing for the delay in response and hope noone thinks badly. "on February 04 and reopened later - on February 24. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3002004.0;all while OP sent merit on February 9.  http://loycevsbasement.privatedns.org/Merit/history/1277719.html

Now, yahoo's feedback says: "alt of preditor422 cheated eroiy campaign "

Did they cheat campaign?

I hadn't even considered the certain campaigns that require at least 1 merit, and look at that, Eroiy is one of them... You've convinced me, even if you weren't intending to, that OP had the intentions to abuse. Sending 1-merit to your alt and then enrolling that alt in a campaign that requires at least 1-merit, and you had not received any merit previously.. This screams abuse and I agree that is significant, even though it was only a single merit. I just wouldn't be willing to say that sending 1-merit to an alt is always abuse or should be treated as such. The evidence for this particular case though, definitely isn't in OPs favor. Seems malicious, and with the specific intent of wiggling into a campaign.


I wouldn't say exactly the same, since they sent 1 merit each to 1 account and not 1 merit each to 200 accounts. The extra 199 accounts would just solidify that it was done abusively. I can imagine sending some merit between alts during the early days of merit implementation for testing purposes or prior to reading the guidelines/rules. I remember sending some poor random user -500 merit as a test and it worked, that poor fellow required a manual fix from Theymos. Obviously that's different, but sending 1 merit to 1 account could reasonably be used for testing purposes. Though, once you add the Jr. Member requirement to 1 merit, the fact that the user has never received merit besides that and then they send themselves a single merit just before applying for the aforementioned campaign.. It adds up to likely abuse.


I thought this was all a ploy for you and The Pharmacist to keep the shitposting cash for yourselves. Carry on.

Nice try LOL

I've been pranked enough times to remember this URL.

I don't think it's "ok" to do so, I just don't think someone should get red trust for sending 1 Merit to his alt 2 weeks after Merit was introduced.

All true, but shitposting isn't the main reason he got red trust. The forum is better off if he can't spam signature campaigns anymore.

suchmoon1, suchmoon2, suchmoon3

Ok, 5 million might be a borderline abuse case but 1 merit each to 200 accounts seems exactly the same as what OP did. What makes it more significant? Is having 200 alts instead of 1 alt the problem? What if I'm a benevolent farmer and don't spam with those alts?

Here is how I see it - and I'm not trying to convince anybody here, just stating my opinion. The OP has no purpose for the alt account(s) other than to spam the forum. The post quality is somewhere between useless and horrible, as evidenced by the inability of those two accounts to earn even a single merit from any other user. The OP was trying to keep the alts secret but got accidentally exposed. I can also see intent to not give up "only merit point" as well as a registration in a sig campaign that pays more to Jr. Members with at least 1 merit. Occam tells me that the OP sent the single merit to their own alt in order to make more money via shitposting and I consider that quite significant.

Now if you excuse me I'm gonna go register 200 accounts. Please don't rat me out to The Pharmacist.

That's where we're going to disagree; as I said earlier "significant" is highly-debatable and subjective. I would deem sending merit to 200 alt accounts as significant enough to call it abuse, personally. I would also deem sending 50 merits to 4 alt accounts as significant enough to warrant abuse. 5,000,000 Merits would put you at the top of the most merited list for many years to come, which is also significant. Each scenario you describe, I would disagree that they are insignificant. I also see the rank of the accounts to be mostly insignificant when determining how abusive the situation is; although, maybe I am wrong for this criteria.

It is fine to agree with The Pharmacist and stand on a principal. I have no issue with this, and ultimately it is your choice what to do with your trust feedback anyways.

OP is being misleading about their situation though, because suggesting that you were tagged for simply having an alt account is incorrect. You were tagged for abusing the merit system, per the judgement of a DT member that has made their principals on the matter clear. Additionally you were tagged for cheating a signature campaign by the campaign manager, who also happens to be a DT member. You would be better served by contacting Yahoo directly to resolve and discuss the situation regarding the duplicate PMs. As for The Pharmacist, again you would have your best chance at redemption by simply carrying on towards a better path. Everything is negotiable, and I personally believe that The Pharmacist would reconsider their trust down the line once you are a stand-up citizen of the forum.

What if I send 1 merit each to 200 newbie alts?

What if I send 50 merits each to 4 Hero alts?

What if I send 5 million merits to a Legendary alt?

Quite insignificant in each individual case.

I'm inclined to agree with The Pharmacist on this. I think it's never ok to merit alts.

In terms of merit, that's a very tough call, which is why it is understandable for certain users to take a stand on principal rather than an amount. I guess this puts me in a similar camp to Loyce, in that, it depends on the circumstance and action(s). I suppose, for me, the threshold for abuse is something along to the lines of "Has there been significant damage done, progress made or advantage acquired through the proclaimed abuse?" Obviously "significant" can be debated and I haven't figured out a solid way to determine "significant damage". We can consider things like progress towards next rank or monetary gain.

Can I go for the classic: "it depends"?

Allow me to prove you wrong: LoyceBot and LoyceMobile don't spam and don't have a paid signature.

As you can see having multiple accounts are not prohibited. As long as you're not abusing it.
Even the the mod "hilarious" has his alt, even I do have an alt.



You maybe right, but some people may need it anyways.

Go and look at the forum rules once again. There is no need for any individual to have alt account instead to spam signature campaigns. This is not a place to make a earning but indeed is a place to share and experience huge volume of technical and therotical knowledge.

Alt accounts are not actually needed in this forum because one account is enough to get immense knowledge and to stay updated to the forum always.

Having multiple accounts can lead for scamming and spamming and also it does break the rules for most of the campaigns here on the forum itself. Having alt account is not actually a crime but it does break rules so it can be related to a crime here on this forum.

This forum is the best place to acquire knowledge and to also get a good promotion done as most of the potential projects do promote their projects here to get some good amount if investors. You can always enjoy the benefits of the forum from your ONE account and try to avoid multiple accounts because some or the other day you will be tagged for it.

What's the threshold for abuse?

If this single merit is all they had from the airdrop I don't think that's a mitigating circumstance. If I sent 200 merits to my alts I bet I'd be tarred and feathered in a jiffy.

In the screenshot preditor422 is wearing the signature for yahoo's signature, but nikjain422 is not. It would be understandable to have sent this on the wrong account, but I don't understand why/how you managed to send it on both accounts; that seems a bit odd to me. I would suggest you tread more carefully in the future and redemption will surely be possible in due time.

In nikjain422's post history I can't find anything about that campaign, and I don't see either of these accounts on the spreadsheets from the Eroiy campaign. I haven't gotten a chance to see if they both applied for the campaign, though. If it is true that both accounts were not enrolled nor applied, then that would seem excessive. Also, a single merit sent between alts is not something I would personally constitute as abuse; I can understand standing on principal, rather than on the quantity though, if that is the argument.

I will just add everybody should add a neutral trust between all alt accounts claiming that they are alt accounts of the main account. I think when things are transparent from beginning  they need not be investigated.

I think nobody will abuse anything. (whether it is DT power or bounty).

TP,you shouldn't take half of Timelord's connections. They hardly make any sense. No offense to timelord2067, but still doesn't change the reality. He even accused me of being TheUltraElite's alt just because we used the edit button a lot, and used to report the same type of accounts and we used to use the word "This". Strong connection,don't you think?

The OP really doesn't deserve a negative for that, sending a Pm from an alt account could be an honest mistake, and a red tag for it is beyond too much.

We know that  
Did they?

---

---

It's not my opinion - connection is not good.

Look at this logic(don't ask me how I figured this):

Account TheUltraElite ID: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/theultraelite-878630
Account marlboroza ID: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/marlboroza-787736

User ID's are very close.

TheUltraElite was last time active September 01, 2018, 06:46:58 PM...


...while my last post was posted only 5 minutes before that on: September 01, 2018, 06:41:06 PM



Both of us were in FortuneJack's signature campaign(Theultraelite still is).

They use ["hr"] the same as I do, also " "[1], they make this grammar mistakes "Dont", "Its", "Thats" which I used to do 2 years ago etc. Also, if you look at https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/theultraelite-878630;sa=showPosts;start=3380 you will see that they started this "journey" [1] in microearning section, the same as I did.

I can probably connect dozens accounts like this with my account, the same way I can connect dozens accounts with your account or anyone else's account, such connections are very dangerous - I am not sure why timelord sometimes connects accounts this way and it is  first reason why I countered this - second reason is I can't find where both accounts enrolled in yahoo's campaign - I see only 2 PM's which in my opinion isn't reason to tag someone.

Well, about that, I can only repeat what LoyceV said