Re: Appeal of Ban Appeal: “hacker1001101001” spammer-sockpuppet menagerie
One can't become more naive, workless and mentally effected due to effects of Lockdown and Quarantine more than the OP. Seek doctor's help.
Flies into a rage at being called out for his own wrongdoing. Remorselessly turns around and accuses his accusers, sneering at them with disgusting self-righteousness and self-satisfaction at his own feigned ethical superiority to those who caught him with his hand in the cookie jar. Projects his own demons onto others.
Whether his reaction is more consistent with psychopathy (here dropping his mask), or an extreme reaction to narcissistic injury, I will leave for someone with a medical degree who has examined “hacker” in a professional setting. I am not interested in fixing his mental health; that is his problem. I am interested in protecting the forum from sockpuppeting spammer plagiarists who lie, lie, lie, change their stories, and then lie some more.
It is beyond my knowledge how this plagiarist, fraudulent bump account and spam service got the second chance.
Together with quotation of the 2019 complaints that lenience to “hacker” was unfair to other users who were banned to plagiarism, that should be /thread.
Or in rather less eloquent terms, my whole OP could have been reduced to this:
Quote from: nullius (the short version)
LOLWUT. Leniency was misguided. Ban him.
Instead, I wrote an OP which anticipated every even minimally substantial objection thus far raised in this thread. For unfortunately, attempts to express oneself succinctly seem to be against this forum’s moderation policy:
https://bitcointalk.org/modlog.php
Quote from: modlog.php
- Delete reply: Re: Appeal of Ban Appeal: “hacker1001101001” spammer-sockpuppet menagerie in topic #5240612 by member #252510
http://loyce.club/archive/posts/5422/54228988.html
With size=5pt changed to size=larger:
This coordinated effort to go after hacker1001101001 only began once he started being openly critical of Lauda. Since then it has been a nonstop procession of all the same clowns that come after anyone who ever says anything that is not glowing praise for Lauda, working overtime to find or manufacture any justification whatsoever to exercise their retribution against this user. None of this is new, nor is it a threat to the user base even if it was. This is just more of the same abuse of any system they can get their hands on to punish people who openly disagree with them.
That's ridiculous.
(I am just getting started in an experiment to work on shortening my posts)In the overall context, that is really the appropriate response. I would try honing my own Laconic wit, but it seems “μολὼν λαβέ” may also be deleted.
Funny, moderator deletes more on topic posts from genuine people and leaves the ones from trolls from this very thread too. I wonder how effective the report on plagiarism would be. Seems there is on going moderation bias by somebody.
Are there new infractions?
OP could you list the end date of hacker's 60 ban.
Op could you list new sins after hacker's 60 day ban.
[...]
OR ALL THE SINS YOU HAVE PREDATE THE BAN HAMMER
OP could you list the end date of hacker's 60 ban.
Op could you list new sins after hacker's 60 day ban.
[...]
OR ALL THE SINS YOU HAVE PREDATE THE BAN HAMMER
iRRELEVANT; READ op. (And please fix your caps lock.)
double jeopardy
Read the subject line, at least, before making fallacious quasi-legalistic arguments (surprising, or perhaps altogether unsurprising since you also fail to recognize the formality of a quasi-legal demand). The word “appeal” suggests in concept that I am seeking review of the old case, not opening a new one; and the subject line, at least, should not constitute grounds for your characteristically childish, vindictive personal snipes based on rote repetition of arrant nonsense.
wall of text
wall of text
Unappealing, that is. Anyway, this is not a court of law. It is an Internet forum, which cannot tolerate the presence of plagiarists who run massive sockpuppet spamming operations and then repeatedly lie about it.
I strongly suggest that the administration and staff reconsider a precedent that surely can be cited with “but you unbanned this guy!!!” arguments by garden-variety copy-paste sigspammers who didn’t run organized multi-account paid ICO-spam operations.
[— nullius is evil waaaah—insult, insult, insult —]
Off-topic trolling > /dev/null
However, I do agree with this if I cherry-pick it wildly out of context:
Only context and a full and complete review of a persons entire history can provide you with a sensible objective consistent and fair course of action.
Absolutely! Lenience for a plagiarism committed by a multi-account sockpuppeting spammer is inconsistent and manifestly unfair to everybody who has been permabanned for a single copy-paste. Be fair: Ban the professional spammer.
I hereby advocate only that “hacker1001101001” inclusive of all his many alts must be held to the same standard as numerous others who have been properly permabanned for plagiarism. Or for spam. Or both.[/list]