Topic: User got voted into DT1 by sockpuppets (Read 2792 times)

Thank you for mentioning this potential abuse, but I previously already excluded those users from the DT calculation; they are not the cause of The0ldl_lser being included. (You could not have known that I excluded them, since I don't generally announce it.) At the time of the last DT reconstitution, The0ldl_lser was included in this way:

Big requirement:

• Gangster-Hamster
• MoxnatyShmel

Small requirement:

• Gangster-Hamster
• MoxnatyShmel
• stoos
• Vadi2323
• Smartprofit
• F1ak
• Excimer
• DabLjat
• peloso
• airfinex

(Other "voters" may have been possible; these were the ones the system semi-randomly chose to satisfy the criteria.)

In this case I already excluded these users, but it is helpful if people point out potential abuse in the DT reconstitution process, since I don't spend all that much time on it, and I could easily miss things.

I know about the criteria, the problem is that until week 158 he was not eligible to participate in the elections ^{[the moment when 5 alt accounts intervened]}.

I have nothing against this guy, I'm just for the fact that the 4 mentioned accounts would be blacklisted.

By the way, Google translator should translate normally (I checked).

I don't mind

The above statement doesn't seem correct: Even without those 4 accounts voting for him, The0ldl_lser has enough inclusions to join the DT1-election.

Your evidence is in Russian, so I can't easily review it. But even if those 4 accounts aren't the reason The0ldl_lser reach DT1, if they're alts they shouldn't give any user more than one vote.

LoyceV, I hope you don't mind if I refrain from creating a new thread  


Request to exclude 4 related accounts from the DT selection process.

• Irrefutable evidence linking these accounts

Merited by witcher_sense (4), madnessteat (4), A-Bolt (1), imhoneer (1), tvplus006 (1), lovesmayfamilis (1), zasad@ (1)

• Confession

• Manipulation of the trust system ^{[thanks to these voices, The0ldl_lser became DT1 for the first time this month]}

Soon after the exposure, all the mentioned accounts began to distance themselves from each other (example 157/158 week).

My trust list today looks like this:


xolxol is probably part of this coven of merit farmers given their UID is a few ahead of this user u=2061631 (by twelve minutes) that is on the theymos list:

---

I would wager zin-zang is probably part of this group also as they last posted three weeks before the others, all are created in January 2018 and last post in February 2019:

---

ito-marketing and gwsukabokepjepang are probably part of this cluster too given they were created 24 hours (almost to the minute) apart:

If he was forced out of DT1, he would presumably be unable to vote via his trust list as well. Removing his trust list would only remove the possibility of someone not showing up on DT1 when they should have if his trust list votes were to count, and would reduce the chances of anyone asking any questions with substance.

It also looks like he does not like being questioned very much. What he posted is also not proof of anything, it does not show context, especially if there was communications before his alleged message he sent asking to be blacklisted from DT1.

So? Relevance to the topic at hand? Are you gonna bring up every one of the ~4000 users who are voting or have voted for DT1?


Holy shit, this is stupid even by your standards. You know that theymos is unlikely to comment on the reason for blacklisting this so you're just making shit up.

Its just funny to me that gunhell16 achieved exactly enough merit to rank up to Sr Member and hasn't earned 1 more since.

I suppose this isn't exactly "bounty cheating" because there's no way to prove for sure that they are all the same person, yet it is highly suspicious that all the bounty tokens appear to be funneling to the same ETH address.

In any case, good work, and in the future we'll be on the lookout for lude Filipino profile names, lol.

I like it
Starting now, I'm scraping https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview every hour. If/when I get a VPS I'll publish everything, until then, send me a PM if you have a specific request.

And then he stopped voting and removed himself from DT1 at the same time. If he had removed himself from DT1 and continued to vote for others, you may have a point, but he didn't so you don't.

Unless anyone is constantly scraping the DT1 list (doubtful), there is no way to prove that without theymos.

I also wonder why you would be so keen to invent this nonsense drama to derail the thread away from the issue of sockpuppets voting for DT1 members.

He has been blacklisted from DT1, see below:
You can see he was immidiately removed from DT1:
I posted why I believe marlboroza is pretending to want to be removed in the post you quoted.

It is possible he does not want to participate in DT drama. He opened a thread asking to be removed from DT2 on Feb 11, and within 10 days, by my count, he had left an additional 50 ratings, and in the ~month since he opened his thread, he has left more than 120 ratings.

The above happened when he was very well aware that he is still in DT2.

Based on the above facts, I don't find it to be a reasonable conclusion that he was trying to get removed due to the DT drama.

This is a fact? Maybe I missed something, but could you provide your source?


What's far more likely is he was just sick of the petty drama of DT politics and wants to take a breather from it.

I don't think you are this blind and are playing dumb.

As of immidiately prior to him being blacklisted from DT1, he was voting for others in his trust list to be on DT1.

The thing is that he does not appear to actually want to be off DT. He has gained a more solid footing into DT2 than he was before he opened his thread. He appears to have put in a "show" effort into "trying" to get removed from DT2, and is not serious about getting removed.

I don't think marlboroza, what I believe amounts to pretending to want to get off DT2 is suspicious on its own, but he was in fact blacklisted from being on DT1, and was removed from DT1 immidiately.

Based on the below two facts, I believe marlboroza was forced off DT1, and was forced into making a public attempt of getting removed from DT2:

• Was actually blacklisted from DT1
• Appears to be pretending to want to get off DT2

It is not normal behavior for someone to not honor this type of request if they believe it is legitimate. It appears those who still have marlboroza do not believe he is making a serious request, and marlboroza has not done anything to correct this, assuming he actually wants off everyone's trust lists (as discussed above, I do not believe this). A good first step to trying to get someone to remove you from their trust list would include sending a personal message asking to be removed from their trust list, and to follow up if they do not comply.

So starting with ignoring low rank and banned accounts

Merit received by gunhell16 from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)

Tue Apr 10 17:53:06 2018: 3 from hackzang12 Banned! (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Tue Apr 10 17:50:43 2018: 4 from Viscera (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Tue Apr 10 17:04:16 2018: 4 from Dwey Banned! (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Tue Apr 10 17:02:31 2018: 6 from Dwey Banned! (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Mon Apr  2 17:19:20 2018: 2 from tokeweed (Trust list) (history) for Re: A Poll on Blockchain.info on What You Use it For. The Next20 Earn 2 Merits Each!
Mon Apr  2 10:56:11 2018: 5 from martina14 (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Mon Apr  2 10:19:43 2018: 5 from Cassy14 (history) for Re: Philippines to accept eth trading @coins.ph
Wed Feb 28 13:07:43 2018: 4 from coinstalker23 Banned! (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Wed Feb 28 12:51:52 2018: 5 from Risktaker31 (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Sun Feb 25 16:59:23 2018: 5 from lance04 Banned! (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Sun Feb 25 16:55:51 2018: 5 from ace4549 Banned! (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Sun Feb 25 16:03:05 2018: 10 from santino11 Banned! (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Sun Feb 25 16:01:05 2018: 5 from kram31 (history) for Re: why hackers can get into Myetherwallet
Sun Feb 25 15:43:02 2018: 10 from cherryganda (history) for Re: Why People Can Not Believe Bitcoin
Fri Feb 23 13:19:06 2018: 1 from Gibreil (history) for Re: Cryptocurrency Exchanges!
Fri Feb 23 13:11:54 2018: 2 from Wallflower28 (history) for Re: How does a Bitcoin have any value?
Thu Feb 22 12:46:51 2018: 15 from anjho.ace (history) for Re: 🌟🌟🚀[BOUNTY][ICO]ATLANT REAL ESTATE PLATFORM[OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN]🚀🌟🌟
Thu Feb 22 12:42:13 2018: 4 from yrrehc16 Banned! (history) for Re: 🌟🌟🚀[BOUNTY][ICO]ATLANT REAL ESTATE PLATFORM[OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN]🚀🌟🌟
Thu Feb 22 12:41:34 2018: 16 from wdnj (history) for Re: 🌟🌟🚀[BOUNTY][ICO]ATLANT REAL ESTATE PLATFORM[OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN]🚀🌟🌟
Thu Feb 22 12:28:26 2018: 10 from santiPOGI (history) for Re: why hackers can get into Myetherwallet
Tue Feb 20 17:36:49 2018: 10 from n691309 Banned! (history) for Re: why hackers can get into Myetherwallet
Tue Feb 20 17:35:43 2018: 10 from santino11 Banned! (history) for Re: why hackers can get into Myetherwallet
Thu Feb 15 18:03:57 2018: 4 from cherryganda (history) for Re: do you think i should sell my coins to cut my losses?
Thu Jan 25 14:18:44 2018: 5 from ivanst776 Banned! (history) for LENDING? Why dont we turn it 180 degrees!

5 Accounts connected
 
   cherryganda    
   santiPOGI    
   wdnj    
   anjho.ace    
   martina14    


Proof:

We have a good transaction here
https://etherscan.io/address/0x8950ea1d18b383bb86b24e72c5d97a8e59c43cdc#tokentxns



And here to link the final account

https://etherscan.io/token/0xfa2632a88bd0c11535a38f98a98db8251ccbaa9e?a=0x99c24521433b2316b973009f1bbcf281f96003db



Related Addresses:

Miscellaneous:

_________________________________________	_____________________	________________________________________________	___________________
BTC	ACCOUNTlink	BTC on forum	ARCHIVE
0xc6C16064C5d5be91d06aD9a5F29dE0b898b52484	cherryganda	https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/cherryganda-1108107	http://archive.fo/vzMOM
0xCC95096A0F4BAFF51723058Abfb67E50Ecb45B37	santiPOGI	https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/santipogi-1107098	http://archive.fo/FgsZn
0xAbdC34a85485619A1E686C816C179bB6440d29d0	wdnj	https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/wdnj-412953	http://archive.fo/4WrZE
0x99c24521433b2316B973009f1BbCF281f96003dB	anjho.ace	https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/anjhoace-1197849	http://archive.fo/IHa5O
0x19657b9f9F3614D0289a1cdF52867019a8dE029C	martina14	https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/martina14-1169245	http://archive.fo/PfSek

What does it mean? They probably know each other and more likely those are full members alt for gunhell. Others account are probably alts too.
Will look more tomorrow, bed time.

So what would you have him do instead? Constantly harass everyone with him on their trust list until they remove him?

Perhaps he was fed up of artificial drama being manufactured by some users for personal gain. I can't say I blame him.

I thought it might have something to do with the realization that he was providing support to those who were promoting scams he claimed to be fighting and him not wanting to be a complete and total hypocrite while maintaining his personal relationships.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49666702

Maybe he doesn't want the hassle that comes along with having his red tags (or green ones) carry so much weight.  It certainly can be a pain in the ass when your PM inbox blows up every day with pleas for mercy, excuses, and everything else that goes along with being a DT member.  Ultimately, we don't know why he made the request to be removed, but I don't find anything suspicious about it. 

Given how warped QS's view of things is, it doesn't surprise me he thinks there's something sinister about marlboroza not wanting to be on DT.  And no, marlboroza doesn't have to justify anything to anybody when he hasn't done anything wrong.

Yep.

Yeah but we can be sure that you're trying to make this molehill into a mountain because marlboroza posted not-so-nice things about you recently. You're giving thin-skinned narcissists a bad name. How is this even relevant to the topic of sockpuppets voting for DT1? He doesn't vote nor can be voted for.

I didn’t compare the date of the trust list to the date of his thread. There is a post not long after the thread was opened that shows he has an empty trust list.

I would presume he cleared his trust list prior to opening the thread or very shortly thereafter.

I was trying to point out that he previously had a trust list before he was blacklisted.

The suspicious part is that his actions don’t match what he is saying.

He is very much aware that his ratings show up by default but he continues to leave ratings despite saying that he doesn’t want them showing up by default.

When I first saw the thread, I didn’t think his request was genuine, but I wasn’t sure why he was making the request.

Not to mention that people who are not in DT are also allowed, encouraged even, to have trust lists.

This is quite questionable. When was this change made? Should not all DT1 users be manually reviewed and not automatically placed into the category?

Except his trust list was wiped at most 3 hours after starting the thread asking to be excluded: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49699653. It was probably wiped before that though, since Loyce's data would have been 3 days old by that point.

How is asking to be removed from DT suspicious? If he was asking to be added to DT, you may have a point.

Because he could be sending ratings for his own benefit, or he is perfectly happy for his ratings to appear as untrusted to everyone else, you know, just the same as the thousands of forum members who leave ratings but aren't on DT or anyone else's trust list.

I think you misinterpreted the date:
Feb 12, I made some improvements to my Trust list viewer, and updated week 4. However, the data dump I used was from Saturday morning before that (Feb 9).

Marlboroza created his topic on Feb 12:
I have no reason to believe marlboroza had not emptied his trust list yet, when he created that topic.

This conflicts with the insulation that he does not want to be on DT1, nor DT2 anymore.

There is no question that he was blacklisted. The question surrounds the circumstances surrounding him getting blacklisted.
I agree, no questions regarding suspicious activity should be allowed to be asked of him. /s
Right  So you are telling me you think it is completely normal behavior for someone to *ask* to be removed from everyone's trust list, and continue sending trust ratings? These two activities conflict with eachother; there is no argument against this. 

So?

He was blacklisted. He disappeared from DT1 on the same day he made the original thread, and not when DT1 was next recalculated 3 weeks later. Therefore, theymos must have manually removed him. He is also not required, in any way shape or form, to explain his decision to anyone.

Not wanting to be part of DT has nothing to do with leaving trust ratings, otherwise no one except DT members would ever leave trust ratings.

Lauda has marlboroza on his trust list. Also, as of Feb 12, marlboroza had many people on his trust list.

I would point out that marlboroza says he asked to be blacklisted from DT1, he has not given any details regarding the circumstances as to why he asked to be blacklisted, he asked to be removed from DT publicly, however he has put very little effort into getting this done (very near to zero effort), and he still leaves trust sometimes.

Quicksy's twisting everything into a shit pretzel as usual. marlboroza is doing fine as a DT2 member, doesn't seem too frazzled by the evil DT1 members not heeding his request.

marlboroza requested theymos put him on the blacklist. Also, marlborozo doesn't have a custom trust list. Quite frankly I don't know what you think you caught a whiff of.  

There is one person on lauda trust list that theymos blacklisted from DT1. I am not sure if his DT votes were also blacklisted and it would be difficult to test, it is possible his trust list is setup so that it won’t matter.

The person claims to have requested to be blacklisted and opened a thread requesting to be removed from everyone’s trust list but there was seemingly close to zero effort put into this actually getting done.

edit: He asked for everyone to not ask any questions, but he was asked a few, but he did not answer anything meaningful.

YES
anyone that would trust lauda is very suspicious

at the very least they must be unintelligent   have poor judgement   or have a corrupt motive

no legitimate reason for trusting lauda exists

Investigations usually begin with some sort of evidence or at least a list of suspects. Do you have any?

I think lauda has sufficient trust inclusions for him to be in DT1 under current rules. There might be one or two alts on lauda's trust list (inconclusive), and there are perhaps some more inappropriate trust list relationships between lauda and others.

There are some people who also have inappropriate trust list relationships due to conflicts of interest via close business relationships, and close personal relationships, and some people seem to have popped into notoriety and into DT1 seemingly out of nowhere (and suspiciously).

I don't think that's necessary. Sooner or later these farmers will run out of merits, as opposed to being able to continue this shit indefinitely like it was prior to the merit system.

Yeah, please do. I'm about 75% certain ace4549 is ac2eugenio, who also sent merit to ace. Some of ace's merits are organic, but most are not...

I'm pretty sure anjho.ace is also ac2eugenio... He got exactly enough merits to rank up between 1/25 and 1/30/18, and hasn't received a single one since! 90 merits in 5 days, a pretty good take.

anjho.ace sent a bunch of merits to gunhell16, who also sent merits to ace4549. And guess what? gunhell16 also got exactly enough merits (150) to rank up to Sr Member, all from 1/25 to 4/18/18, and hasn't earned another one since. What are the odds??

There's a lot of cross-linkages here, which I suspect is merit shuffling through minor alts:



ac2eugenio's ring of alts just went up from 55 to about 80 (note: not all accounts shown above are alts). Its possible that its a team of people coordinating this; i would like to believe that as it seems more sane. otherwise, its just insanity.

If we're moving to ban people for merit abuse, I think all of these aforementioned accounts should be banned. It would definitely discourage this kind of behavior.

This is the ring created by

Nevis



This is the ring created by ace4549



Zoom on the relative part



BUT THE IMPORTANT QUESTION: who give the merit to ace4549 to start the ring? Let's see



Zoom on relevant part


Big transactions



I can check those accounts if anyone is interested, pretty sure will find more coincidences.

that's nothing. crypto offers more than that.



those names. its not a violation but i find it disturbing to see one creating such usernames for his accounts. these usernames were already noticed back then, i have read a local thread about these pinoy alts, some of them were already tagged. but he lives and still in the business lol right on! lol if you want him out, you should tag all of it. i'm certain these are all alts.

I assume that it may just be one or two even three entities doing it. I believe it is some sort of graffiti to them. And they do it out of sheer arrogance that no one will discover or rat them out.

You cannot search for those slangs. It is very colloquial and partly textspeak. You have to know the culture behind the words.

Seriously?
When I first saw the first mention of what could those mean I thought it was a joke but they actually used such names?
What was the point of doing so other than immediately rising suspicion (from the Filipino users) as it seems the rest of the board had no clue about it.

Would it be possible to search for those slangs?
As always when a ring like this is uncovered it's usually only the tip of the iceberg...

i have gained enough,im done with bitcointalk   ~ 78k in one year is a good shit ~ bountyhunter hahaha..its not me but i know him

The forum should have a Filipino DT member to easily spot these alts.

For those curious, the following are the meaning of those vulgar usernames:

chickinini - Love bite, hickey
Pablojob - "Can you blowjob me?"
PiningGarcia - Fingerfucked
PingGermoco - "Please finger me"
poypototoy - Poy's dick
LillyBogan - Horny
MallyVogue - Horny
kantotinio - Fuckboy Tinio
poetmo - Your ass
TinaMoran - Bukkake, facial
NilaMutac - Ravaged
BethLogins - Testicles
GinaCole - Masturbated
MaeUtong - Has Nipples
abduljakul - Abdul Masturbator
reypinyoko - "Rape me"
reypinioco - "Rape me"
Salsalyn - "Masturbate it"
pepenghindot - Pepeng Fuck
jackolinyoko - "Masturbate me"
junjunsalsalani - Junjun Masturbator
totnaksquad - Fuck squad
pooque - vagina
maereglapo - "Have menstruation period"
matsusomoto - "Can you suck this?"
MaylaWet - Ladyboy (Have a dick)
nakauten - succesfully fucked someone

 

I might suggest that theymos audit a percentage of DT1 users and those that voted them into DT1 each month and check for multiple alts voting for the same person and giving merit to yourself in order to be able to vote.

Even if only a small percentage of users are audited each month, there would be a huge disincentive to engage in these shenanigans. Also, over time everyone should eventually get audited. If someone is going to be audited and have been in DT1 for some time, they would be audited as of multiple times in the past, including when they were first put into DT1.

I am actually somewhat surprised to see this happened (that this was not caught prior to Rmc... being added into DT1).

Yeah, good point. Considering that, then as you say, suchmoon's suggestion of requiring merit to have been earned recently is probably the best solution. The other option would be to implement some of the criteria for becoming DT1 to also be required to be eligible to vote - online within last 3 days, posted within last 30 days, at least Member rank.

It's awesome how much you all utilize the available information.  Glad to see theymos take action.

The problem with a continuous increase is that it makes it harder for new users. Counting Merit earned in for instance the past year levels the playing field.

If you don't want to increase the merit required to have a vote, then you could also consider increasing the number of votes required to reach DT1. This doesn't disenfranchise the average user so much because they still get their votes, but it still achieves the outcome of making it more difficult to game the system.

With the amount of total earned merit always increasing, we will reach a point where the current requirements are trivial and need to be increased. It may take several years, but we will reach it. To me it seems like a neater solution to have gradually increasing requirements rather than just have an arbitrarily chosen sudden jump in requirements.

I think it has something to do with ac2eugenio, who, wouldn't you know, was also part of the great H8bussesNbicycles scheme to overthrow Lauda. Interestingly, he was never red tagged by Lauda, but it leads me to believe that an alt of his was.

My girlfriend, who is a Filipina, burst out laughing when she read some of the names, and for others she just said "Oh my God, why would they do that??"

She also taught me what "pooque" means, which is thought to be an alt of ac2eugenio, as are some of the names listed in page 1 of this thread.

I'm willing to bet all these accounts belong to him. He is (was) a bounty manager, and even if he stopped posting under that account in late February, I'm sure he lives on in other accounts.

This is quite alarming. Those usernames are commonly used by Filipinos to insinuate something vulgar out of those common names. While these users might be ban for the DT1 selection/voting process, perhaps a permanent ban is necessary. I can pretty much name/point out users that may have been connected to each other by just looking at them, as they all hint a shade of vulgarity in Filipino terms.


This idea would be nice, knowing how abusers and account farmers give their alts 3-5 merits in one go just to satisfy the 10 earned merit requirement. Also, this would be pretty hard to game and abuse since the element of time is already involved.

The requirements should follow the forum ecosystem development.
A year ago 1 merit was very difficult to achieve, there were just a few sources and initial smeirt was given away for a few months, now many more courses were added, much more merit is generated per month and the tendency is the merit pool to grow bigger with the time.

Here are two options.

-Instead of fixed 10 earned merit make it a % of the total generated source merit so if new merit sources are added the requirement will change accordingly.

    Example now there are 20855 sMerit per 30 days requirement can be 0.1% of the total amount =

- If it is fixed amount then add a requirement for additional earned merit for a given time like 3 merit per 120 days of activity.

   That will be easy to spot the abusers, at least the lazy ones that give 3 in one shot.

ace4549 is connected with the several profiles which sent merit to each other. All of them have changed passwords within 12 minutes.

6/13/2018 9:27:02 PM | password changed | [BPIP] s31joemhar (banned)
6/13/2018 9:29:03 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Jombrangs (banned)
6/13/2018 9:30:56 PM | password changed | [BPIP] loof99 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:31:37 PM | password changed | [BPIP] ace4549 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:34:25 PM | password changed | [BPIP] harbin55
6/13/2018 9:34:41 PM | password changed | [BPIP] mabell943 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:34:56 PM | password changed | [BPIP] lance04 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:35:18 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Lannie25
6/13/2018 9:37:12 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Genosx
6/13/2018 9:37:28 PM | password changed | [BPIP] BlasterS (banned)
6/13/2018 9:37:54 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Glydel1999 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:38:09 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Joemzz31 (banned)
6/13/2018 9:38:21 PM | password changed | [BPIP] RakknRoll (banned)
6/13/2018 9:38:36 PM | password changed | [BPIP] Sean25pogi

This is interesting, are they alts or merit sellers?


Nevis
ace4549

TLDR, read the end after the EDIT

Most of those accounts got merit from those 2

Accounts involved

Merit received by chickinini from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)

Thu Jul 19 01:40:12 2018: 7 from Nevis (history)for Re: can eth reach over 700
Sat Apr 14 09:49:08 2018: 2 from cryptocipher (history)for Re: HOW MANY HOURS per day do you spend in topics related to Crypto?
Sun Feb  4 18:59:06 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Is doing bounty worth it?

---

Merit received by TinaMoran from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)

Fri Jul 20 07:26:04 2018: 6 from Nevis (history)for Re: HOW MANY HOURS per day do you spend in topics related to Crypto?
Mon Apr 16 17:02:48 2018: 2 from LillyBogan (history)for Re: Do you still believe in the bright future of Crypto?
Tue Feb  6 12:04:33 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Would you buy Bitcoin in the present market conditions?

---

Merit received by Pablojob from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Fri Jul 20 13:50:02 2018: 6 from Nevis (history)for Re: In South Korea, the Crypto Currency Boom Hits Economy system.
Mon Apr 16 17:13:16 2018: 2 from PingGermoco (history)for Re: DOES SPENDING MORE TIME IN BOUNTY CAMPAIGN GAIN YOU MORE TOKENS?
Tue Feb  6 13:43:56 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Rate my portfolio! (result from my analysis so you can benefit from this)

---

Merit received by PiningGarcia from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Fri Jul 20 23:34:24 2018: 6 from Nevis (history)for Re: DOES SPENDING MORE TIME IN BOUNTY CAMPAIGN GAIN YOU MORE TOKENS?
Tue Apr 10 10:30:13 2018: 1 from jbautistangina (history)for Re: YOU CAN DO IT
Tue Feb  6 17:04:05 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Receive tokens to MyEtherWallet
Fri Feb  2 08:42:21 2018: 1 from xianbits (history)for Re: Receive tokens to MyEtherWallet

---

Merit received by PingGermoco from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Sun Jul 22 08:12:09 2018: 6 from Nevis (history)for Re: How can I get earn on the Bitcointalk
Sat Apr 14 09:56:38 2018: 2 from MaylaWet (history)for Re: Do you trust your intuition when invest in ico?
Tue Feb  6 17:44:38 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: The statements of ripple

---

Merit received by NilaMutac from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Thu Jul 19 09:15:31 2018: 6 from Nevis (history)for Re: How can i earn bitcoin here in bitcointalk?
Sat Apr 14 09:54:56 2018: 2 from reypinyoko (history)for Re: My MEW Got Hacked
Mon Feb  5 18:17:32 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Why bitcoin is going down this few weeks?

---

Merit received by cryptopov from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Mon Apr 16 17:05:22 2018: 2 from NilaMutac (history)for Re: The longer the bounty, the fewer the earnings?
Sat Feb 10 07:06:25 2018: 2 from ace4549 (history)for Re: Litecoin: To hold or to buy more?

The 2 accounts

Merit sent by ace4549 from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Thu Apr 19 19:37:37 2018: 10 to Joemzz31 (history) for Re: BTC hold or sell this moment
Sun Feb 25 20:28:44 2018: 7 to Joemzz31 (history) for deleted post
Sun Feb 25 16:55:51 2018: 5 to gunhell16 (history) for Re: [ANN][ICO] EARTH TOKEN - Participate in the $120 trillion natural asset market
Mon Feb 19 05:12:47 2018: 2 to lance04 (history) for Re: [ANN] Lina.Review | Community-Driven Review Platform | TGE Event 15th Jan
Tue Feb 13 16:01:40 2018: 10 to MetalBall (history) for Re: Do Banks fear cryptocurrency
Tue Feb 13 16:00:24 2018: 2 to BethLogins (history) for Re: How can you improve yourself in trading?
Tue Feb 13 06:54:01 2018: 2 to Ms.cumshot (history) for Re: Do you truly believe in cryptocurrency
Mon Feb 12 17:16:27 2018: 2 to Ma.KattyClitoris (history) for Re: Why bitcoin is going down this few weeks?
Mon Feb 12 14:12:56 2018: 2 to Asiong (history) for Re: Making Money
Sat Feb 10 18:00:07 2018: 2 to Sexton (history) for Re: ".`Altcoins Continue to Bleed?
Sat Feb 10 14:16:57 2018: 2 to GinaCole (history) for Re: Token or coin?
Sat Feb 10 07:06:25 2018: 2 to cryptopov (history) for Re: Litecoin: To hold or to buy more?
Fri Feb  9 17:41:08 2018: 2 to MaeUtong (history) for Re: how can i search good airdrops??
Fri Feb  9 15:02:24 2018: 2 to MetaMod (history) for Re: HELP ME TO DECIDE PLEASE!
Thu Feb  8 20:19:32 2018: 2 to Kaplogs (history) for Re: Participation in airdrops and Ledger Nano - safe?
Thu Feb  8 19:44:11 2018: 5 to HappyDumper (history) for Re: when you try to explain people about cryptocurrency do they understand?
Thu Feb  8 19:43:29 2018: 2 to MallyVogue (history) for Re: Have you invested to certain altcoins and lost all your money? Read everything!
Thu Feb  8 18:13:03 2018: 2 to jashley (history) for Re: Don't panic!
Thu Feb  8 18:08:01 2018: 5 to CryptoBalds (history) for deleted post
Thu Feb  8 18:07:27 2018: 2 to poetmo (history) for Re: Do you trust your intuition when invest in ico?
Wed Feb  7 08:17:27 2018: 7 to CoachCarter (history) for Re: Bitcoin in the classroom, yes or no and why?
Wed Feb  7 08:00:16 2018: 2 to abduljakul (history) for Re: Why Neo growths so fast?
Wed Feb  7 06:31:35 2018: 2 to reypinyoko (history) for Re: 2018 bitcoin plummeted
Tue Feb  6 18:17:20 2018: 2 to Salsalyn (history) for Re: Airdrop or Fork asking Private keys
Tue Feb  6 17:44:38 2018: 2 to PingGermoco (history) for Re: The statements of ripple
Tue Feb  6 17:04:05 2018: 2 to PiningGarcia (history) for Re: Receive tokens to MyEtherWallet
Tue Feb  6 13:43:56 2018: 2 to Pablojob (history) for Re: Rate my portfolio! (result from my analysis so you can benefit from this)
Tue Feb  6 12:04:33 2018: 2 to TinaMoran (history) for Re: Would you buy Bitcoin in the present market conditions?
Mon Feb  5 18:17:32 2018: 2 to NilaMutac (history) for Re: Why bitcoin is going down this few weeks?
Mon Feb  5 16:42:31 2018: 2 to cryptorgasm (history) for Re: Possibility that Twitter will follow the advertising ban of Facebook?
Sun Feb  4 18:59:06 2018: 2 to chickinini (history) for Re: Is doing bounty worth it?
Sun Feb  4 17:29:14 2018: 2 to cryptocipher (history) for Re: What CRASH? There's a huge sale!
Sun Feb  4 15:21:39 2018: 2 to pepenghindot (history) for deleted post
Sun Feb  4 12:54:19 2018: 2 to mr.creampie (history) for Re: Would you buy Bitcoin in the present market conditions?
Sat Feb  3 12:53:32 2018: 1 to Betternet (history) for Re: [ANN] Lina.Review | Community-Driven Review Platform | TGE Event 15th Jan
Sat Feb  3 12:17:44 2018: 2 to xbl1008 (history) for deleted post
Sat Feb  3 12:09:50 2018: 1 to cafucafucafu (history) for Re: Do Banks fear cryptocurrency
Sat Feb  3 12:09:42 2018: 1 to aso118 (history) for Re: Do Banks fear cryptocurrency
Sat Feb  3 12:09:33 2018: 1 to Drnice (history) for Re: Do Banks fear cryptocurrency
Sat Feb  3 12:09:27 2018: 1 to CARrency (history) for Re: Do Banks fear cryptocurrency
Sat Feb  3 12:09:20 2018: 1 to flag39 (history) for Do Banks fear cryptocurrency



Merit received by ace4549 from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Sun Apr 15 22:09:26 2018: 3 from Joemzz31 (history)for Re: BITCOIN IS STILL FAMOUS
Sat Apr 14 08:25:20 2018: 2 from Sk_Ezaz (history)for Re: Saving Bitcoins for your Children.
Thu Mar 29 08:43:16 2018: 1 from cryptoindustries (history)for Re: Should I invest In Bitcoin?
Thu Mar 29 08:06:27 2018: 1 from redcucumber (history)for Re: Bitcoin is changing the world.
Wed Mar  7 16:38:58 2018: 1 from baduday1991 (history)for Re: What is Virtual Money?
Thu Mar  1 01:24:52 2018: 2 from jashley (history)for Re: Will the price be stable?
Wed Feb 28 20:29:13 2018: 5 from Emdppablo (history)for Re: Bitcoin is NOT DEAD
Mon Feb 26 11:52:12 2018: 1 from titteringtacos (history)for Re: How can I do Hodl or Quit
Sun Feb 25 21:28:00 2018: 2 from mylifeisfullofalts (history)for Re: Do Altcoins really have a future?
Sun Feb 25 21:27:01 2018: 1 from mylifeisfullofalts (history)for Re: Which Coins are a great LONG-TERM investment ?
Sun Feb 25 21:24:28 2018: 1 from mylifeisfullofalts (history)for Re: How do you Panic?
Sun Feb 25 20:11:33 2018: 2 from mabell943 (history)for Re: Start with Bitcoin or Ethereum
Sun Feb 25 20:11:22 2018: 2 from harbin55 (history)for Re: Start with Bitcoin or Ethereum
Sun Feb 25 20:11:10 2018: 2 from loof99 (history)for Re: Start with Bitcoin or Ethereum
Sun Feb 25 20:10:18 2018: 1 from lance04 (history)for deleted post
Sun Feb 25 20:09:53 2018: 4 from Jombrangs (history)for deleted post
Sun Feb 25 20:09:29 2018: 2 from s31joemhar (history)for deleted post
Sun Feb 25 16:52:11 2018: 10 from gunhell16 (history)for Re: Is bitcoin is the new era of currency?
Mon Feb 12 21:00:25 2018: 1 from cryptodevs (history)for Re: What encourages you to invest in any altcoin?
Sun Feb 11 08:41:22 2018: 1 from habaratbu (history)for deleted post
Sat Feb 10 07:03:44 2018: 1 from bulbolitobayagyag (history)for Re: Is Bitcoin money?
Fri Feb  9 17:48:40 2018: 4 from HappyDumper (history)for Re: BITCOIN vs ETH ? Your thoughts?
Fri Feb  9 17:48:08 2018: 4 from CryptoBalds (history)for Re: Is Bitcoin money?
Fri Feb  9 17:33:02 2018: 1 from sycaburatan (history)for Re: Should Bitcoin even have a future?
Thu Feb  8 23:56:46 2018: 1 from nakauten (history)for Re: Why do we really need Bitcoin?
Tue Feb  6 11:24:53 2018: 1 from cryptoux (history)for Re: why so many currencies?
Mon Feb  5 06:42:06 2018: 1 from cryptopuma (history)for Re: Is It advisable to quit my present job for bitcoin?
Sat Feb  3 13:17:59 2018: 1 from ac2eugenio (history)for Re: I'll never stop buying Bitcoin
Sat Feb  3 12:41:09 2018: 1 from redcucumber (history)for deleted post
Sat Feb  3 12:20:00 2018: 1 from xbl1008 (history)for Re: I'll never stop buying Bitcoin
Wed Jan 31 12:28:58 2018: 5 from Lannie25 (history)for Re: What is BTC for you?
Wed Jan 31 12:28:39 2018: 5 from BlasterS (history)for Re: If Bitcoin dies does altcoin die?
Wed Jan 31 12:28:12 2018: 5 from Genosx (history)for Re: is it risky to turn all my money to bitcoins?
Wed Jan 31 12:27:30 2018: 1 from Sean25pogi (history)for Re: Is It advisable to quit my present job for bitcoin?
Sat Jan 27 16:16:10 2018: 16 from loof99 (history)for Re: interest in bitcoin is increasing
Sat Jan 27 16:15:39 2018: 16 from harbin55 (history)for Re: Bitcoin = $1 Million by 2020
Sat Jan 27 16:13:55 2018: 16 from mabell943 (history)for Re: What do you think are the biggest disadvantages of Bitcoin?
Fri Jan 26 09:14:43 2018: 5 from ivanst776 (history)for Re: Does any bank accept Bitcoin?
Thu Jan 25 18:21:38 2018: 1 from Glydel1999 (history)for deleted post
Thu Jan 25 18:21:10 2018: 1 from Danglen1010 (history)for Re: interest in bitcoin is increasing
Thu Jan 25 18:20:45 2018: 1 from RakknRoll (history)for Re: How to explain bitcoin to teenagers or children
Thu Jan 25 18:20:14 2018: 1 from LastRolling (history)for Re: How much risk in bitcoin investement ?
Thu Jan 25 18:19:47 2018: 1 from Joemzz31 (history)for Re: How much risk in bitcoin investement ?
Thu Jan 25 18:14:44 2018: 2 from lance04 (history)for Re: Paypal VS Bitcoin
Thu Jan 25 18:02:16 2018: 5 from Glorious04 (history)for deleted post
Thu Jan 25 17:02:02 2018: 17 from Jombrangs (history)for Re: Is It advisable to quit my present job for bitcoin?
Thu Jan 25 17:00:49 2018: 28 from s31joemhar (history)for Re: How can you improve yourself in trading?
Thu Jan 25 12:03:29 2018: 1 from Gibreil (history)for Re: Does any bank accept Bitcoin?

---

Merit sent by Nevis from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


Thu Sep 20 04:00:29 2018: 1 to Mandoy (history) for bitcoin is a rat poison?
Wed Jul 25 10:46:21 2018: 6 to LillyBogan (history) for Re: For how long you will hold your altcoins?
Tue Jul 24 11:32:28 2018: 6 to kantotinio (history) for Re: How often do you join airdrop?
Mon Jul 23 14:41:12 2018: 6 to poetmo (history) for Re: True BTC believers
Sun Jul 22 15:36:50 2018: 6 to poypototoy (history) for Re: youtube and blogger have started blocking ICO ads
Sun Jul 22 08:12:09 2018: 6 to PingGermoco (history) for Re: How can I get earn on the Bitcointalk
Fri Jul 20 23:34:24 2018: 6 to PiningGarcia (history) for Re: DOES SPENDING MORE TIME IN BOUNTY CAMPAIGN GAIN YOU MORE TOKENS?
Fri Jul 20 13:50:02 2018: 6 to Pablojob (history) for Re: In South Korea, the Crypto Currency Boom Hits Economy system.
Fri Jul 20 07:26:04 2018: 6 to TinaMoran (history) for Re: HOW MANY HOURS per day do you spend in topics related to Crypto?
Thu Jul 19 09:15:31 2018: 6 to NilaMutac (history) for Re: How can i earn bitcoin here in bitcointalk?
Thu Jul 19 01:40:12 2018: 7 to chickinini (history) for Re: can eth reach over 700



Merit received by Nevis from January 24, 2018 until April 05, 2019 (source)


EDIT if you notice the merit received from ACE4549, you will see a lot of merit in a shor amount of time, this leads to more probable alts from him
like

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/blasters-1126441
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/loof99-359855
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/s31joemhar-959116

and more groups of users / accounts with the same signature/avatar


and accoutns with a very similar nickname

Fri Feb  9 17:48:08 2018: 4 from CryptoBalds (history)for Re: Is Bitcoin money?
Tue Feb  6 11:24:53 2018: 1 from cryptoux (history)for Re: why so many currencies?
Mon Feb  5 06:42:06 2018: 1 from cryptopuma (history)for Re: Is It advisable to quit my present job for bitcoin?

Thu Jan 25 18:20:45 2018: 1 from RakknRoll (history)for Re: How to explain bitcoin to teenagers or children
Thu Jan 25 18:20:14 2018: 1 from LastRolling (history)for Re: How much risk in bitcoin investement ?

Thu Jan 25 18:14:44 2018: 2 from lance04 (history)for Re: Paypal VS Bitcoin
Thu Jan 25 18:02:16 2018: 5 from Glorious04 (history)for deleted post

@Theymos maybe you want to undo the merit sent from
Nevis
ace4549

I will look more on the ring for ace4549.

That is exactly what I expected.

I don't think they have much left: the ones with "0 Merit earned" in my list above sent their only sMerit already.

Way too low; it's just a matter of time again.

You were here first.

Correction: 57 accounts. You listed PiningGarcia (u=1586551) twice.

All now red-trusted, too.

Perhaps some kind of additional RANK or ACTIVITY requirement could help? It would increase the cost of failure considerably.  I mean who knows who they can trust after being here 5 mins? having a broad knowledge of a lot of peoples pasts and their relationships with others here is going to put you in a far better position to start vouching for how trustworthy they are isn't it?

Trust (real trust) is something very important to the board. Not just for trading but also for even more important reasons that I won't go off topic with now.

These accounts if you decide require nuking..  are not substantial loss since they are mostly new and can be replaced in a short amount of time. You can easily buy merits for around 4 bucks ( so I have heard) even if you do not have the required alts to gradually power them up. Or friends whom are merit sources.

I would have thought a DT1 would need to have years of history to look over and analyse to install any real trust in those people and of course the cost of losing something that takes a minimum of 4- 5years to replace is quite a risk to play around with. Perhaps also some trading experience? I mean it may be slightly more manual but it is better that DT1 actually represents trust. With perhaps review every 3 months and any untrustworthy actions mean immediate removal. Gradual careful additions may be added.

There seemed to be far LESS trouble and the board seemed to provide a far more optimal environment in many ways when you just picked the DT1 that you were familiar with and trusted yourself.

On top of this you may not have considered the psychological impact of allowing those KNOWN to have committed openly very untrustworthy actions to actually punish others for lesser evils is going to fuel persons to really rebel against the system that allows that to take place. Causing a lot of friction and motivate people to game the systems and not use them in the way that you have stated they should be used.

In some instances (like an anonymous forum) I think broadly centralised control works better than experimenting with decentralised control. Especially as generally it will allow for more consistent and fairer treatment of all members. This will lead to less friction, easier/less appeals since there will be more accountability.

So in short I think some mix of activity and trading history (manual analysis) with some merit requirement mixed in could make it harder to game and make the cost of failure far higher. But even then I think DT1 should really be a solid and observably trustworthy bunch that really denotes TRUST. Any observable dirt REAL DIRT in financial terms of a DT1 invalidates them to most of the board. This will always come up and make the entire system look corrupt and misleading when they dish scam tags on anyone else.

These are my honest tips for improving the system. I would like to see the same thing as you. Free of scammers and ico pumpers, sig spammers without leaving free speech vulnerable . A real meritocracy.

I could be as simple though as leaving it how it is and offering kudos to anyone that finds any financially motivated untrustworthy deeds committed by anyone on dt1 and instantly blacklisting them. Keeping then a fresh batch of observably spotless DT1.

If those people went to all that trouble to install someone (many others do trust)  who observably didn't trust 2 persons that are not spotless ? does this not tell you something theymos?

anyway those are my ideas to help get trust back into the trust system. If this is off topic here then do not delete it since theymos asked for ways to improve it, simply let me know and I will delete it and copy it to another thread.

Excellent idea!

Or, have merit decay as it ages, but that might require decimals.

KYC

Seriously though, if you could add what you just did (I assume some query based on IPs and whatnot) to your monthly DT1 process maybe that would help expose these shenanigans?

I don't know what else we can do without tightening the requirements. Maybe some minor tweaks could be done without disenfranchising legitimate users. E.g. require at least one of the 10 merits to be earned in the last N days (30? 90?) so that this potential exploit would have an ongoing cost.

[Nevis has sent merit to the following people:
chickinini
TinaMoran
NilaMutac
poetmo
kantotinio
LillyBogan

At least three of the above were part of those "colluding with Russia" on ]this thread, although their trust lists appear to have since been changed. Except for one of them, they all have exactly 10 merit.

ace4549 also has sent merit to 4 of the 6 alts, although he has sent a lot of merit:
Perhaps you could remove their sMerit for those who are not already banned. In theory, they can use the ~580 merit they received, and send it to 29 additional accounts to have 29 other accounts have 10 merit.

edit2:
I would also point out that I received 200 sMerit when the merit system was introduced (IIRC), and someone abusing that merit could turn that into ~400 merit, so it would not take a lot for someone to be able to get 580 merit to various alts.

I know. Check this thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ac2eugenio-maybe-alts-5114184
Bunch of banned senior/hero members ranked up farm and I don't think 58 accounts is correct number.

I see no particular evidence of Bazinga442 being an alt, but the other six five (edit: zin-zang may not be part of this circle) are all the same person. They will be blacklisted from the DT selection system in the future. Haven't decided whether this abuse warrants a forum ban.

How did they get 10 merit? (I don't have time to look into this right now.)

10 merit is difficult enough IMO. I don't want it to be too difficult. Any other suggestions? We could just keep an eye on it and respond reactively to cases like this.

---

Edit:

After some investigation, this is a circle of 58 accounts, most of which have 10+ merit. IDs:
2061631
1658865
1609508
1586656
1586585
1586551
1586457
1586404
1575750
1575704
1325707
1325699
1325681
1325665
1325651
1325633
1325624
1325612
1312864
1312835
1312750
1312730
1312682
1312669
1312215
1311924
1311852
1311798
1311776
1311740
1311716
1311700
1311664
1311649
1311624
1311608
1290714
1290532
1289915
1260476
1260451
1247231
1247213
1247203
1247193
1240919
1240872
1240853
1240832
1240198
1237158
1237123
1236944
1236879
1236860
1231268
1231252
1586551

They're all now excluded from the DT selection process, so if the goal was to manipulate DT, someone blew ~580 sMerit in order to ultimately fail doing so.

The votes are limited, so except for  Bazinga442, who has two, the rest only have one vote. These people as a whole, only have the ability to get one person on DT1, and they will need help.

This falls outside of the criteria that theymos previously said will cause him to blacklist people -- I believe he said he will blacklist in cases in which you are putting your own alts on DT1, but that is likely not the case here. All of these people did receive merit (although under suspicious circumstances), which does entitle them to vote, although not multiple times for a single person as appears to be the case here.

I think it is a very bad idea to mix the merit system with the trust system. This person for example should have 4 "250" votes, and 100 "10" votes, based on this:
as I believe that person deserves to be legendary, even though I don't know him, or have any reason to trust or not trust him one way or another.

I cannot believe I am writing this, but I agree with QuickSeller.

Perhaps 10 merits is too low. Even if theymos could fix this one issue by blacklisting those sockpuppets from voting it's still way too easy for someone else to attempt it.

Increasing the merit requirement (or the required number of votes) would also postpone bumping up against the 100-member limit, which seems inevitable in a couple of months. It would be quite ridiculous if due to the limit some sort of random selection would end up removing some legitimate members from DT1 while keeping some elected by sockpuppets.

Sorry, I misread your previous comment. Time to sleep

You're right, that's the reason of the shared trust list created by H8bussesNbicycles, and I'm not after users who used that list, I'm only after users who I suspect to be alts.

Those sockpuppets (you and I presume) included anyone who excluded Lauda from their trust list, and excluded anyone who included lauda on their trust lists.

The reason why he is included on their trust lists is because he excluded lauda and TMAN

---

That quote was referring to different research I was planning on doing.

No, why would I care about that?
I noticed this case on http://loyce.club/trust/ranking/:
Rmcdermott927 was ranked too low to get on DT1. This turned out to be my misinterpretation of the requirements, but it got my attention anyway when I saw the votes from red-trusted Newbies.

I don't really follow the Collectibles-thread, but looking back a few months he did have more exclusions. Either way, the reason for this topic is clearly stated, no need for speculation

I am guessing this is because:


Rmcdermott927 Distrusts:
1. ~TMAN (Trust: 243: -0 / +25) (DT1! (18) 879 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. ~Lauda (Trust: 300: -0 / +31) (DT1! (23) 868 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

I was actually planning on doing some research starting at Rmcdermott927, not because of him being included into DT1, but rather because of what I was here, as it seems there might be some evidence some people are being excluded specifically because of who they have on their trust list, specifically, I was going to look into a group of people potentially excluding anyone who trusts (via their trust list) who is critical of said group. Although it seems the Rmcdermott927 exclusion was somewhat resolved as of the last trust list dump.

I think Rmcdermott927 is the first user who's been voted into DT1 with the help of red-trusted Newbies that are likely alt-accounts.

---

---

Let me emphasize that I have nothing against Rmcdermott927, who's #36 Most Trusted on BPIP.
This topic is about the system, the user is just a coincidence. I have no reason to believe Rmcdermott927 is responsible for creating the sockpuppets.

---

---

DT1 requirements (incomplete but relevant items of the list):

Rmcdermott927 was added to DT1 3 days ago. As of this morning, Rmcdermott927 is trusted by these users:
Although I don't think there's much harm done here by voting Rmcdermott927 into DT1, it's a proof of concept of DT1-voting using alts and would set a bad precedent to let it happen, so I'm asking theymos to look into this.