@lovesmayfamilis Seems like your effort in this case (Salamstar) has been in vain, as this user ban has been lifted and changed to signature ban until December 31st 2020. While I agree that signature ban should be enforced more often for specific cases, I just don't see how ban evasion part could be ignored.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5279396.0I honestly don't know what's going on in the Arabic locale.
This is not the first case of plagiarism identified in the past week. I get the impression that they don't read the rules at all.
Besides plagiarism, this account has been banned twice already.Looks like tried to hide his trail by editing incriminating post one week later. This is how it looked originally
https://loyce.club/archive/posts/5234/52344304.htmlAnd how it looks now, his last edit of that post was on September 10th 2019. It looks quite different, only thing left is FB account.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5180282.msg52344304#msg52344304
My question is, if all this evidence is not enough to prove ban evasion, then what is? Here we have use of the same address, social media accounts, telegram usernames etc, and still that wasn't enough. I mean, majority of the evidence on this thread comes from use of same address, and we could see in this case that wasn't enough. I am aware of the fact that there is always a chance that someone might try frame someone else by using the address, but in this case Salamster used ETH address long after those two previously banned accounts. As a matter of fact, he even registered two weeks after those accounts got banned (they were banned on April 29th 2019 while Salamster was created on May 15th 2019. So no questions who used ETH address first.
Thoughts?