I just recently rarely deeply conduct investigations, there is no time for that. Therefore, when you raised this question for the first time, I did not see a reason to lower the trust. Why do I need to dig deep? Do you think I have little suspicion accumulated all the time? A lot, but I do not have time to check everyone deeply.
But you took a lot of time to protect the scamer.
Example: huge post on
June 10, 2019, and huge post on
June 13, 2019 You defended Smart Man although the evidence was obvious.
MaoChao pointed this out to you:
~It is clear from the evidence that the Smart man recruited people to provide bumping/shilling services for projects. And there seems to be no doubt that bumping services harm forum users, the reasons have been repeatedly mentioned in this thread.. ~
~ What, for example, does selling fake activity differ from selling trust or merit?
Among other things harm, similar services and their employees litter the forum with useless messages. And in the ad, as was correctly noted, it is directly stated that they are dialing alt owners with 5 or more accounts.~
But you ignored these arguments and continued to defend the proven scamer.
One more example: I show in detail how
one of the Smart Man farms works.
Your answer:
I did not see the evidence, just suspicion. I will study the merit flow pattern. The rest is speculation.
~
and try to attack personally me.
MaoChao saw the evidence and start to
tag farm accounts (and reporting for ban) and he pointed out that there is a merit connection of the farm with Smart Man.
You always acted in this way and constantly lied. I made a
selection of these cases, all information is open and anyone can check it.
~ Evidence appeared only on June 30th. ~
Another lie. Facts suggest otherwise.
~
I did not confess to the unreasonable report, I do not think moderators are fools. In the Russian section, these issues are discussed very actively, KTChampions said that he had not seen individual consideration of issues before. I gave him an example that all questions are individually considered. I made a lot of reports on it, according to the paragraphs of the rules No. 32, No. 1 and 1 report No. 33. There was no reference to the source. The report received the status of "good" and the message was deleted. There was no blocking, it is a clear example of an individual approach, which, as KTChampions argued, is missing. I'm wondering what prevents people from putting the link? The list of blocked in the Russian section
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4588431.0~
Lie. My words about the lack of an individual approach were about offering bumping service:
~
1.) At the moment, all users offering a bumping service have been tagged. No individual approach - the conveyor.
~
Trying to confuse the situation, you confessed to another attack against me and it was extremely immoral.
Deliberately false report on my post trying to ban me.Your tales about how useful the shitposting was for you personally, I do not even see the point of commenting. You distribute not personal merits, but merits that belong to the forum. And I have nothing to add to this:
I'm hoping that this system will increase post quality by:
- Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
- Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.
While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.
And I still don't see your tag on
Smart man for any of these points.
1.) Mass account trading.
2.) Merit abuse.
3.) Bumping /shilling.
4.) Offering bumping service.
5.) Plagiarism (many accounts from his farms are banned for plagiarism).
6.) Participation in the obvious scam projects.
7.) Account farming.