Topic: Request Support (or Opposition) for Flags here! - page 13. (Read 50299 times)

Requesting support for flag started against the user BitGame777 for the scam accusation out laid here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitgameonline-removed-winnings-after-winning-more-than-expected-5218218

Flag link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1251

Please support flag against @BTClover999, OP of Affiliater, scammy project  with plagiarized whitepaper that has ICO going on at the moment.

Flag type 1   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1250

Heads up, a new round of flags created by korner alts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1231
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1232
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1233
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1234
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1235
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1236
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1237

They are all being supported by his other alts. 

That's where the team of investigators of the Known Alts thread(s) work to expose such shill/sock puppets to identify and tag the alts.

I don't think there is a forum policy for this. My personal policy is they're not important enough to care.
As long as invalid Flags are inactive, the system works just fine

If this happens on larger scale later in the future, I don't think it would be notified or handled always. Even opposing that number of abusive flags is not always handy. Only theymos could handle this at light speed and he should now.

_{Btw, the thread title changing trick make it more confusing, please stop.}

When you (In this case it seems that the person is me) are drinking on a lazy day in the local pub and if you already have drunk a lot then slip of tongue (better to say fingers on the keys) like this (restricting to create flags) is acceptable. What I mean by this is that you have a valid point here and I have edited my last post after seeing your response :-)


True but as usual someone will spot it and will bring it to our attention.

For voting - maybe. For creating a flag - no. Scammed newbies need to be able to create flags. It would be nice to have a limit on how many flags they can create but on the other hand Bitcoin SV and other "advanced" sockpuppets are able to farm merits fairly easily so that wouldn't be much of an impediment for them anyway.

Noted. It's a great idea to edit the response title that suits the needs.

I too was wondering how it's not known by a user like you (seems to have good grasp than most of the members in the forum). Good thing is that I was not wrong.

Absolutely and this is not the only user in the system. We have game-protect and many other users who do constant abuse of trust feedback system. And you already realized that I too is not fine with it.

Fact.

Yes and it seems the flags created by the user The-Devil are very wrong after all and according to your language, "I am not fine with it" in other words, I oppose the flags created against the users PrimeNumber7 and Lauda.

I too have not much strong opinion but if I someone asks me while I am drinking in the pub on a nice evening with an intend to start a conversation with me then I would say, yeah put some restrictions (possibly allow a minimum rank) for users before they are able to create flags and also to vote. This will eliminate the brand new fake accounts to abuse with false support or oppose in a flag.

I would like to have a one-click "advanced" option to oppose obviously frivolous flags, like the ones create by korner sockpuppets. It doesn't have to be all flags by a certain user but at least an option to select multiple ones easily and and then oppose all selected. The troll flags are basically DOSing the trust system since the effort to create them is so much lower than the combined effort of multiple users trying to oppose them.

Note the word “attempted” in the subject.  I know full well that it carries no weight, but it’s obscenely abusive.  I am not “fine with it”.  It is a Sibyl attack, and it is spam of the trust system.  The theoretical futility of the act does not alter this.

Moreover, it did apparently scare the newbie who apparently does not know he’s in no danger.  Please see above.  If you dig way back on my trust page, you will see negative sent feedback explaining that I had previously intended to send it, but I was afraid to when I was a newbie—for exactly this reason.  Against a newbie, false flags or tags are an intimidation tactic (though the retaliatory flags against PrimeNumber7 and now Lauda (!) are just plain stupid).

I think it really boils down to the question of whether the forum’s administration wants to let such useless Sibyls lie dormant indefinitely, or clean them up as the trash they are.  As a practical matter, I don’t have a strong opinion on which way they should handle this; but the question is worth broaching.


Good idea:  You’re not “fine with it”.

Supporting or opposing a flag from a non-DT account does not carry much weight. So we all should be fine with it. Talking about this flag from the user The-Devil seems very uninformed step. And it's not unexpected as per my opinion since that use is fairly new to the forum affairs.

I will be opposing this flag too.

See here; the non-“Brand New” supporters are known alts.  Now, I see three new accounts.  I have archived their user pages to show that they are/were “Brand New” with 0 posts as of the time when I found them through their support of Flag 1213:

• #2744274 “Tomsss” (Brand New)
• #2744275 “Vundoo” (Brand New)
• #2744278 “Rafusss” (Brand New)

I will tag them, with reference to this post.  Should I flag them?  Should they be reported to moderators?  What is the forum’s policy on accounts created for the purpose of supporting/opposing flags?

Someone has created several new accounts just to Support the Flag. I've Opposed it, the Reference thread only shows you've hit a nerve.

I think this is the right topic discussion I am in.

There is a flag created against me for writing the topic Does this tread really deserve the attention it has got?

Flag--> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1213

I would request for justice. I do not find any mistake in the topic I started.

Added a flag for "TrustUSD", which is a blatant ripoff of the "TrueUSD" stablecoin, except their token is neither stable nor backed by assets. They have a plagiarized white paper and their logo is almost an exact copy of the TrueUSD logo.

Flag here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1214

ANN:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-trusd-an-elestic-yet-stable-digital-asset-5205460

Scam accusation thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/trustusd-plagiarism-misleading-and-full-of-fake-comments-5213446

You can semi-automate it, then it's much faster than the time it takes them to make them which is important. Were it the reverse, we'd have quite a problem on ours hands.

I wouldn't try to vote on all possible Flags. There's far too many of them, and ideally many different users should all check a few Flags once in a while to make voting more distributed.

In my Trust Flag viewer, I highlight the easy ones to Oppose: duplicate Flags and Flags without valid Reference link

Thanks, Loyce!  Useful.


This raises two important points:

In my case, I only got through a fraction of the flags thus far.  If BSV raised an abusive flag against you, and I didn’t yet oppose it, it means nothing except that I could only do so much repetitive clicking in one bout.  Thanks to nutildah, psycodad, and SockyMcSockFace for having had the stamina to slog through the whole list!  I will continue opposing these a few at a time; and yes, I would in this rare case apply a script.

While I was opposing BSV flags, I saw many other inactive flags which are probably wrong, which occurred in my absence.  I say “probably wrong” because they are against people I’d be more or less inclined to trust, and/or were opposed by people I trust.  It was a distraction that I ultimately just ignored, because I would need to do at least a cursory investigation in each case to reach my independent conclusion.  I observe this to underscore what psycodad said, “I take my responsibility and right of supporting or opposing flags quite serious”.  If I just ignore an inactive flag against you, it means nothing about you.

---

Sshh.  Don’t give him the hint.  Far from wanting to ban him, I wish there were a way to force him to stay here if he tries to run away.

Here, we have a home advantage insofar as, other than noisy, stupid BSV shills, everybody here knows that he’s a liar.  I think the best strategy is containment and examination.  Yes, it seems like a waste of time to deal with that mess; but unfortunately, we will need to spend much more time counteracting BSV anyway, on and off this forum.  It’s best to start here.  Also, restating another way what gmaxwell recently pointed out in another thread, it is also a benefit when BSV supporters speak up.

The principle of freedom of speech is often explained in terms of shining a light in dark places.  I want to shine a light on BSV, in the manner of a police interrogation lamp.  He is losing his cool and lashing out wildly.  I want to encourage him to stay here for as long as BSV is a problem in places other than this forum, i.e. as long as the BSV scam exists.  This is a much bigger issue than some forum drama.

(I also note, we seem to have perpetual drama anyway; it’s better to have drama about an important issue, so we can coalesce and redirect that energy into a bigger effort.)

As for any publicity being good publicity, this was recently discussed implicitly in another thread.  I thought so, which was why I ignored BSV (the whole scam, not just the user account).  I realized that I was wrong, so I stopped ignoring it.  The community needs to organize, pay attention to BSV, and go on the offensive.  You are questioning whether or not his antics here are helping him in the bigger picture.  I am suggesting that we make sure his antics everywhere backfire, starting here.


PR protip:  “Any publicity is good publicity” reaches its limits when you just made everybody see you as crazy.

Abuse of the flag system is rampant and has been going on far too long unfortunately, I hope some action is taken to put an end to stop those that misuse the system.

Look at that Bitcoin SV user, he is showing signs of someone suffering from a variety of mental issues. Seriously.

It is unbelievable the amount of flags he created and attached fake reasons for validity. Why is he so concerned about what users in this forum think about Bitcoin SV anyway?