Topic: Legendary Member's ban appeal (Read 1172 times)

I like this idea. Plagiarizers a paying a fine to get their accounts back sounds good to me. Even make it increase steadily after each ban to discourage repeated plagiarism. It will certainly help people like OP whose offense was made several years before the permaban.

Bump. We're nearing the two year mark on this. I feel like my case at least deserves a look, but I still haven't gotten a word from staff.

No, that’s not true. I bought the account many years ago, when it was something like a Member or something as trivial as that. All the feedback pertains to me, and I’d argue that its image was cultivated directly by me.

Even if your account is once unblocked, I suspect that all positive feedback will be deleted since you are not the one to whom it was addressed, not to mention getting multiple new neutral or negative tags. It's up to the moderators anyway, although I think you just want to get your money back by unblocking and selling this account ...

Alright, let's open this bad boy one more time.

There is a quick edit in the original post of this thread that provides useful context to this bump that I'd really appreciate anyone skim over before replying. It includes my actual ban appeal.

I didn't intend to add this part onto this bump, as I'm drafting this up, but... I've grown quite fond of this forum back when I was a regular here. Here's to hoping that I'm allowed back in at some point!

Cheers, if you made it this far.

yeah I have visited the article just to check if it was really being copied and yes OP does copy the article. A legendary account now is useless after the ban. Besides I not see if theymos or the MODS has consider the account as ban for signature only because it was not being specified but for sure it was permban. Good Luck OP on finding your next crypto forum to continue your cryptocurrency endeavors.

Considering that a large part of the first hundred comments of bitcoin revo were borrowed from other members, the probability of random coincidences is extremely low in this case, I suppose.

In addition, OP has admitted that he bought the account from plagiarist, and now the administration is probably thinking to satisfy his appeal or not.

After reading this I can see some posts are certainly copied.  But I bonded multiple posts that would be gray.

Sometimes things do get repeated. Word for word.

“There was a thunderstorm today so I turned my gear off”

This may be often repeated.

The op did more then enough  copies to look bad. But some of the ones I bolded may not be copied.

Or maybe they were.  The ones I left alone really look like copies.

Set minimum requirements for appeals, so people will know their odds from the beginning and will bother you less.

Luckily for you, I'm not making those decisions... I don't envy hilariousandco and other globals&admins though

I gave negative feedback to accounts that I felt were at high risk of being used for taking advantage of their status or reputation to scam by their new owners, and I will remain by those feedbacks even now. Yes, I played judge and jury and executioner with my subjective view, but your oversimplified statement overlooks the fact that this account was either a Jr. Member or a Member (can't remember) when I acquired possession of it and it had no trust feedback whatsoever - nothing like the accounts I chose to tag.


You might be referring to the basis of trust that The Pharmacist has for me, but it sounds like you're trying to derail my "trustworthiness" to 98 dollars and 28 cents so I'll ask you to scan through the rest of my trades as well. It may not compare to full-time traders here, but it still exceeds the amount that you posted - if that's any scale to how trustworthy one may be, which isn't. There are other factors such as timeliness, reliability, etc etc which I hope I exemplified to The Pharmacist during my interactions with him here, of whom will likely be taking those other factors into consideration.

---

As biased as I am on this case, I get it. I do. Seeing a shit ton of people using this excuse and knowing that some of them may just be using it as a deceptive second chance at spamming for a few extra coins is infuriating, and there needs to be more thought put into this so that this isn't used as precedent for one of those fake cases to succeed in the future as well. However, I do ask that context is considered and I'm not grouped together in with yobit spammers or trust abusers that take advantage of account prestige.

First feedback:
Risked BTC amount - 0.01567000
Date - 2017-04-08
Bitcoin price on this date - 1172 $
So, risked usd amount - 18 dollars and 28 cent.

Second feedback:
Risked BTC amount - 0.02
Date - 2019-03-25
Bitcoin price on this date - 3972 $
It's approximately 80 dollars.

18.28 + 80 = 98.28 $

Average cost of legendary account is about (as i know) 1000-2000 dollars for now.

Yep, trustworthy, without a doubt.  

[Thanks for explaining your thought process. I wasn’t referring to you in my comment though.

I would generally agree with your logic in this case.

See, I trust bitcoin revo based on our interactions, which is why I left him positive trust--and I still trust him, despite the fact that he bought the account.  There's no official statute of limitations as far as tagging people for account dealing, but what he did is far in the past IMO.  

The fact is that after taking control of the bitcoin revo account, the present owner hasn't been a shitposter, a scammer, or even a plagiarizer as far as I know.  Plus he's been honest in his transactions with me.  This is why I'm comfortable leaving the positives I've left for him intact.  Not disclosing the fact that he bought the account isn't a transgression in and of itself, and I certainly understand why he wouldn't advertise that fact.

I'm open to dissent, but I'm pretty sure I'm doing no harm by doing nothing in this case.

My opinion is that account sales ought to be banned on the forum, but Theymos obviously doesn't want to go that route.  Nor does he want to ban scammers for that matter.  That's why DT members have been tagging both--to make up for this glaring shortfall of rules.

maybe i dont know too much of the site laws ,but should selling account's not be an ilegal stuff? many people proposed that but i find it quite unfair and non ethical,for the reputation of the site such things should be aborded.

As I said before, a lot of people are going to use this excuse and it's going to be something that is hard to verify (and most won't be able or willing to provide proof that they bought the account either). There's also the issue of who we unban and don't. I keep getting messages asking for unbans because people have started to notice we're doing them now, but it's meant to be for people who are a "net positive" to the forum (which is obviously a very subjective thing anyway), but a lot of people who are messaging me either have no earned merit or only one or two or handful at best. These people usually don't really fall under the 'net positive' term, but is it still fair that a Hero/legendary account gets banned for one/two/a handful of copy and pastes whilst others get off?  Maybe we should consider some sort of fee/fine to get their account (or signature) back for the others who don't qualify. As recently discussed the money could go to charity. I would see it like paying a speeding fine. Whilst copy and pasting is still a serious offence here it can sometimes still be quite harsh to get a death sentence for it, especially if it's only a few copy and pastes and there's a lot of people who aren't going to meet the net positive terms and it's a hassle for staff to keep having to decide who does and doesn't get lenience and the ones who don't are going to whine and pester us about it. Maybe paying a fine to charity will just make things easier. Yes, people shouldn't have copied and pasted in the first place but we could see this as paying their debt back to society so at least some good comes of it.

I'm starting to really hate this can of worms that theymos decided to open for bill gator. So now every asshole will be able to weasel out of a ban with some whining and helpful hints from an account farmer/trader? And why should this one get a temp ban? Just unban him altogether and give him back his signature, he's got a perfect alibi

Speaking of bill, I don't recall him bringing the real plagiarizer (the person who sold him the account) to justice. Should be the minimum requirement for getting any kind of lenience on the grounds of an account purchase. Just shows how those account buyers don't really care much beyond their signature spam.

The positives he got are justifiable for keeping his end of the deals he made,  the negatives he got and going to get are also justifiable.

However the funny part is that when someone buys an account they want to enjoy every single benefit of the previous owner's achievements ( possitive feedback, merit, activity , repuation) but nobody wants to take any responsiblity for the mistakes.

Having said that and given his contribution - i think a temp-ban is a good enough punishment.

It's really funny to see someone who bought an account and then sending negative feedback to possibly bought accounts. It even took a ban for you to finally admit. 

Do you remember the account you bought your account from? Do you have the wallet file you used to pay for it? If so, can you post the TXID?

My personal opinion is that you should not be punished for buying your account 4 years ago via your trust score. I am willing to debate anyone who disagrees with this, and anyone who is unwilling to defend the trust ratings they leave has no business anywhere near DT.

I believe you should be unbanned if you really bought your account, and there was no plagiarism after you bought it. Unfortunately, the prior owner plagiarized a lot, and this person probably should have all their accounts permabanned. Also, unfortunately, it takes a lot of effort on the part of the administration to verify the claim your account was sold, and I don't know for sure either of the admins will be able to take the time to verify your account was actually sold.