Quote from: stompix on April 19, 2022, 12:45:07 PM

Much knowledge gained! Such progress!

It's clearly hacked or bought account. Or both.
I have a feeling that this is the history behind most accounts in that campaign.

Quote from: stompix on Today at 01:38:21 PM

But, the whole thing is fishy, is there any campaign that has such an amount of accounts that have clearly changed hands and accepted them and paid them despite negative feedback? Look at the behavior of the accounts, they all defend their sponsor going beyond what's normal, you won't see that with any other normal users, and in no way you're going to see the accusations they hurl at others, it's simply a completely different behavior. Plus, a lot of them were getting tagged yet they've never been to meta or reputation to ask why or plea for removal, why would somebody risk an account for a few weeks of signature money that might be over tomorrow?

As for the addresses, this needs to be looked on by somebody with much more experience than me with blockchain analysis but last year when I've been browsing through their addresses I've seen a lot of really weird things, too many of those go through tumblers, and I don't see users who can barely write down a phrase longer than 6 words being able to mix their coins this way.

It would not be unexpected that some of the team members actually own most/all of those accounts, so an analysis whether the money is just circled around could be interesting.

I know that scams are not moderated, but this campaign is more than scam, it's also about spamming the forum, farming multiple accounts, accessing hacked accounts and so on. But... can this be proven? Because without that there may be a dangerous precedent no matter how good the intentions are.