Topic: Second chances - page 3. (Read 3254 times)

Maybe not, without worrying about reaching the campaign goals they will probably interact a little less than normal, or they might still be on vacation at the end of the year (I really wanted a 30 day vacation at least lol)

Only one of them created one post since the unban. If they only become active once their signature ban expires, does that mean the "second chances" failed?

It is generous there is no fixed period in the second chance offer, maybe it should remain open rather be just a seasonal offer. The negative side to the offer could be that some members operating accounts with nefarious intentions will be emboldened in the knowledge there is a small window of opportunity (or hope) to get the account unbanned in the event it gets banned.

How many have actually taken advantage of the opportunity since your previous post of ~17 requests by email and three unbanned accounts?

I agree, that's why I once in a while read some of his posts, even though I have him on ignore. He could be a good forum member, but he seems to prefer trolling.

Account farmers would love it if only one of their accounts gets banned after breaking the rules.

We can just abolish any so-called "ban evading" rule because it's useless in any case.

A spammer or scammer will not care for it but members trying to improve after getting banned, honest from a new account will be targeted.
Plagiarism should simply result in a ban - no discussion. Plagiarism is serious violation.
Accounts engaging in plagiarism need to be trashed.

But after plagiarizer accounts are trashed, a new chance should be given by starting a new account.

We do not nee any strange so-called "ban evading" rule.

If the standard that I use to gauge posts were to become "the entire thing has to make sense, otherwise it's worthless", then I might not merit a long post ever again.

I tend to leave merit for one (or more) of the following reasons: sometimes it's to reward effort/work, sometimes it's because I agree with a point well-made, sometimes it's because I disagree with what I still consider to be a valuable perspective, sometimes it's to "wink" at someone based on a previous exchange or PM, sometimes it's because something they said made me laugh or smile or learn something new, and sometimes it's just to offer encouragement...

When I first joined Bitcointalk, I was kind of on-board with the whole "the forum never forgets" attitude that a lot of members here seem to enjoy. But, the more time I invest in Bitcointalk, the more I think that we could probably do a lot better as a community if we were kinder to each other and not such hard-asses about certain things.

Honestly, I'd probably feel pretty safe doing a small to medium-sized trade with digaran, so his received-feedback seems a bit over-the-top to me, like he's had a microscope put on him and had all his mistakes blown out of proportion and then hung around his neck for all to see. He does post a lot of things that I don't agree with or that leave me scratching my head, but there is good stuff sometimes buried in digaran's posts, and some part of me wonders how much better his posts might skew if he felt less attacked/ostracized.

I think I started to think this way when naim027 got unbanned and then almost immediately got tagged into oblivion. I mean, I did tag him too, so I get why he was painted red, but I also have to wonder how it might have gone if the community had offered him a clean slate and a road to redemption, instead of just collectively hissing at him for lying.

I don't know, I'm just sharing some thoughts I've had. (Maybe I'll look back on them one day and consider them naive.)

And this is why nobody will ever take anything you post seriously. There's no point even responding to your Godwin.

Is there any admin, staff around here to clear something up please? Is it Ok for DT members to interfere with moderation rules/duties? Such as tagging people for something like AI generated post, bad post quality etc?

What I'm trying to convey, hear me out please, it doesn't matter what our differences are, what degrees and education we have, we are all human beings deserving to live in peace and harmony, we all have our short comings, our flaws but we are always trying to improve and advance, some might be slow, some might be fast, but without care, patience and tolerance from matures, adults in our societies, none of us would be here, if we want to see progress in a community we should care and respect everyone. Only with kindness and leniency we can teach, violence has never worked.

Some people might have difficulty in adapting, but when they see there is a need for it, they will try to be better, so it's not cool to have a few individuals dictating how others should behave or post by using neg or neutral tags.

So is it against "forum" rules to do that or not? This is not about trust system being decentralized etc, you either accept such policy applied by some DT members or you don't.

If it's accepted, then we should all apply it to our behaviour as well, if not, then nobody should be exception.

---

A reminder from recent history, Hitler used to kill/burn disabled children, children with mental issues. So in a way calling people shitposter and treat them like garbage by using tags and verbal insults, is the same thing, to bash people on the head all the time saying they are garbage, it won't give them any chance to grow and learn.


I'd say if Stephen Hawking lived during WW2, nazis would have killed him as well.

---

Here is a joke written in sig space of a joker
"Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”

Very funny, he just appeared on my radar today. 😉

Yes it is logical, I was just trying to ascertain the mood of those participating in the thread to see if something wonderful theory was going to be put out there

But what sort of message will the forum admins be sending if members that are using an alt-account will now get at least one of their accounts unbanned because that will then give them access to at least two accounts.

At the end of the process, if only three accounts from 17 applicants have been given a reprieve then that is a very good (low) number as I would not like to see dubious account operators make a return.

Perhaps they do not have alt accounts but read the forum as guests? 

But to be serious, it is logical that they do not want to expose their current account, given that they are most likely ban evading all this time.

I don’t think admin plans on making this a onetime thing. I believe this is going to be an annual event, so far only 3 out of 17 accounts have been unbanned which tells me the applications are critically reviewed and evaluated before approval. To be honest, I expected more applications because there were a lot of plagiarist caught last year, I think most of the accounts were not up to full member rank, that’s probably why they are not bothered about getting the account back.

You only fixed one post, there are two posts to fix.

This post was fixed but OP was not fixed.

Lol,,, you really got me laughing my heart out with this.
Well, probably yeah they wouldn’t get the chance except for a few. Bought accounts are those I’m referring to in this regard as previous owners might be grounded enough to have laid some good foundation that has been parasitized on by current users that endured the ban. A time frame for valid, constructive post would help.
Still, I wish the means to application is one that requires you to get really creative. This will be some means to sieve them shaft from the straw as, they would have a hard time making sense of anything.

Meanwhile, it’s still a sensible thing to do for some cut backs to give users a means to redemption and pride in their attached users. Hope this doesn’t become some annual event though else, there would be schemers along the way.

I have to say 17 is more like the number I would have expected but there are three banned members asking for a reprieve in the thread. I wonder why the applicants decided to make contact with admin asking for a second chance via email. Could it be because they did not want their current accounts to be associated with the banned account or is there something else behind it?

Username: gregofdoom


Post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28008592

Post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.24918808

Post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.20381998


I've already apologized many times for my mistake and now I'm doing it again, I'm sorry.

Fixed, thank you LoyceV!

Correct link: kokoska

There is no end period set as of yet.

So far we've received ~17 requests by email. I've been waiting a bit to get a baseline - to avoid the risk of being too strict/lenient. Whatever the case may be, it's almost impossible to please everyone at the same time and would like to remind everyone that it's easier to ban than to unban.

I could be wrong but to my knowledge there are a total of now just three requests for bans to be removed. If the account has little to no rank, maybe the account farmers are now simply focusing on other things otherwise the requests would have been much higher. What is the deadline for this thread to be closed or to stop accepting second chance requests?

Quite alright but at the same time some may not even see it as an opportunity for their send account to come back to life, while some might see it as another chance of getting a second account to flex the Forum even more.
On the other hand what you said is true true, their offense should be seen as a scar not to only other members but to the owners too (let me say in a case of taking loan and not paying) so that if should incase they think of trying what got the account to be banned they'll have a rethink, you know we have people who find it difficult to change.
The account can be saying something different while the users might be thinking of something different too, while I said that is because some account might be banned by mistake and the user couldn't think of a way to undo what he has done but to say, "it's a mistake they'll understand" but it doesn't work that way.