Topic: New? - page 2. (Read 1495 times)

Here's the other plagiarism:



Let me guess... only did it twice? No?


gotta love the "grin" ^^^


So... thrice?

Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension

I read it too. Nowhere does it say that there was only one plagiarism, nor is it a tenable claim to begin with.

But don't let facts get in the way. Carry on.

I read his ban appeal thread:

Just show us what you got suchmoon.

He's got his sig removed for 2 years so unless he a real enthusiast that account will die. If Theymos has looked into it personally and said he can keep his account then he must think this person will continue to contribute even without a paid sig.

This shadowy threat you try to wield to get good members banned for a couple of sloppy errors well meaning errors is going to get taken away from you now. ScumBuster.

Only real plagiarists should be banned that are spamming this board for financial gain. Not people that have good intentions that got lazy or sloppy or were not even aware you HAVE to reference every single thing. A sig ban is  enough for them. That could even be variable in time but since I personally think the board would be way better with no sigs i'm not too bothered about the time length.

Removing quality posters and helpful persons for a sloppy error or 2 is a net negative action as I have said for a long time. You want all the REAL enthusiasts you can get here working together.

How do you know that redsn0w did it only once?

IIRC, ChiBitCTy had plagiarized much more than once (as Redsn0w did), and they were part of a large burst of low effort posts he made while participating in a signature campaign.

If anything, IMO, he would be one of the later people to have their ban removed for plagiarism.

Edits within 10 minutes never showed as edited.

You're not wrong, the unedited post had this:

Also noticed the edited feature()is no longer the same duration.
Noted this when I came back, I was checking patrol and reported someone, but, got bad on my report, I am positive that it was a correct one.

@theymos, correct me if I’m wrong, you did change from:
to
But, the edited feature didn’t change.
I am not saying it is bad update, but, wouldn’t that be frustrating on reporter side? Reporters wouldn’t report a specific topic if it is not worth reporting at all (I don’t mind accuracy).

---

EDIT:
Thanks, LoyceV. IIRC, it was 5 to 7 minutes.

I agree. Some "lazy" people being helpful and copying some mining guide or some other helpful project announcement from twitter.... or anything just trying to be helpful and answering a question should not be a ban. Just take away their sig for a year or 2. The good posters will still post. I mean a sig should be for promoting projects that you are specifically interested in because you believe they are really going to make a difference here or that you support the person running them. Those will be few and far between and are not gambling, and other shit people spam everywhere just to make money.

If your sig is taken away no big deal you can still post and contribute.

Appeals to keep your account are understandable. That account is your id here and has sentimental/historical value within this movement. A sig is nothing if you cry about losing that then it is obvious you were just here to make a quick buck.

No appeals for copy and paste where the sig is taken away. OR you can appeal but if found guilty still then you are actually banned for good. That will likely put an end to these appeals.

Even that guy the other day banned.

1. was just some obvious project announcement he was relating

2. "walks talks looks like" a duck or whatever else he said is a common saying and I would not even count that as copy and paste anymore than using a film quote or something in a funny way.

I agree though the persons intentions are the most important... and if they are net negative overall.

Yes those bots and spammers ripping off any nonsense to spam over and over for money. Then ban them. Grey areas or possible net positive people sig bans. No point getting rid of anyone that is a real enthusiast for this movement.

I recall a couple of recent discussions and one poll where most folks voted for a bit more leniency in the policy.  It's understandable why some would think this is a new policy.

I believe this is the first case I've witnessed where a plagiarist has not been permanently banned.  

Sorry about misunderstanding the policy in place and how it is applied, I appreciate the clarification. I took your advice and created a topic regarding the user in question it can be seen here.

..i'm not sure if this plagisrism case was new in this forum or it have been long implemented..what do comes in my mine right now is that this case was good enough for the members of this forum in order to minimize spamming..newbies should carefully read the rules and regulations before posting..we the member of this forum should become smart in posting in different threads so that we will not be get banned on bitcointalk..

I'm still curious to see which post got him banned. If it's really something from years ago, long before plagiarism was a problem, it's totally different than the account farmers that caused massive spam.

I don't know a single other forum that's this strict on plagiarism, especially if someone just copies some text to answer a question and solve a problem.

There's been no policy change. redsn0w wasn't permanently banned due to several factors which made me think that permabanning him would be a net negative for the forum. Nobody is banned strictly because of "the rules"; it's always handled case-by-case, but almost always, plagiarists deserve to be permabanned.

If you think that a ban should be ended, make your case in a new topic from a "good for the forum as a whole" perspective.

This is excellent news and a sensible solution.

REAL members should not be here to spam their sigs and treat this board like a cash cow.

If they are plagiarising for financial reward then cut their sigs off and they will vanish anyway.

REAL members who got a bit sloppy for citing a reference every time will not care much about no sigs but can still bring their valuable contributions anyway (without a sig)

Sensible solution.

If you are a real enthusiast of building or helping to promote the start of and end to end decentralised trustless arena then you will not feel it ESSENTIAL to spam sigs everywhere.

I feel meta is a board that should be full of REAL enthusiasts ONLY. I would make it a non sig zone. Let's see who really wants to see this movement go somewhere and who just wants to manipulate things for their own self interest and benefit at the cost of silencing those that may not agree with everything they want/say.

Good catch Sir millionaire.

I think this is a welcome change to most, I recall theymos discussing wanting to be less rigid and treat it this way. With the Sig ban for 2 years we'll definitely find out why people were here in the first place.
Now some can actually salvage their account, and stick around long enough to learn from their mistakes and hopefully contribute to the forum as a whole.

I wonder if there will be a place for people to recommend a member be reinstated. I can think of 1 account in Mining that I believe was banned under the old way of things.

Yes. .I vouch for ChiBitCTy. A good friend and excellent forum contributor. Please bring him back.

To err is human..to forgive divine

Im texting him now, pretty sure his account is still banned because he would be using it to post

It's absurb he is still banned. Dudes got no account, and still active in the bitcointalk community.

That was meant ironically lol!
He knows how and what and makes helpful contributions here!
Looks like you are not here so often!