Quote from: aleix on November 02, 2015, 05:46:37 PM

1.- As I said, 229 posts attacking the same thread and the same topic. Not a single post outside it. Repeating the same over and over.

We both well know that not all -- as in 100% -- of his 229 posts are not out of line. I posted specific posts that are clearly not out of line. For example, expressing an opinion on predicted price action. If that is out of line then the lead developer of the coin doing the same thing is also out of line (in fact neither is).

It is important if you have a valid point to support that point with specific evidence.

Quote

3.- You posted several quotes talking about a supposedly "scam"

I quoted specific examples of the account in question having expressed substantive opinions the coin rather than merely nonsense, inflammatory personal attacks, or other actual trolling. That is relevant to your claim that his posts are trolling. The truth or accuracy of his opinions is irrelevant.

That directly refutes your suggestion that all 229 of his posts are trolling. The posts I cited were on different subtopics as well, including price action and the coin having been instamined, so they don't appear to be the exact same content being repeatedly post on a thread in a disruptive thread bombing manner. Though if you have examples of the latter you could post them.

I also quoted some posts which may well constitute trolling and could be reported as such. They're not his entire 229 post history though.

Quote

This is about the accuracy and good or bad name of a project. A lot of work from a lot of people. This is the meta section and some people will read this debate.

Opinions on a coin whether positive or negative, along with the accuracy thereof, are all explicitly not moderated. It doesn't matter whether a lot of people have worked on it or not, nor whether the project has a good or bad name. The moderators don't get involved in that at all.

Quote from: mprep on July 21, 2014, 05:27:51 PM

Q: Why haven't you banned who is an obvious scammer?
A: Possible (or real, not for me to decide) scams are not moderated to prevent moderator abuse. If we start picking out which ones we call "scammers" and ban, we would make a lot of decisions based on biased opinions.

Q: Do you moderate/delete (possible) FUD, accusations and untrue information?
A: No. We don't have enough time to check every single piece of information and verify the validity of the sources. Also, just like scams - too much room for bias and abuse.

However, trolling isn't allowed. If a user is habitually posting obviously false nonsense just to stir up trouble, then it's considered trolling, which is prohibited. Such cases should be thoroughly documented in the report though (There are tons of reports that just say "trolling", but moderators don't have time to look through each user's post).

Q: Someone insulted me. Why aren't you deleting his post/thread?
A: Possible (since we don't have the time or resources to check) insults are also allowed as long as they contain any kind of constructive opinion, info or something else substantial and aren't off-topic. For example, posting something like "you are dumb" will be deleted as it contains no meaningful content. However, if the post is somehwere along the lines of "You are dumb. This is wrong because this website/thread/etc. has explained it's not right", it's in most cases accepted.

If you want to claim that the account in question is posting obviously false nonsense (note the emphasis which is mprep's not mine) and that is not constructive opinion, info, or something else substantial that isn't off topic, then you are going to have to quote it specifically and document it as such.