Quote from: Ratimov on April 24, 2023, 10:24:08 PM

Why does the forum need users who cannot grow on their own, but resort to such methods? A forum's account is history, it is status, it is reputation, it is knowledge, and all this should be assigned to only one user and should not be transferred somehow.

The forum does not need them but it is them that need the forum therefore they purchase and trade accounts in the hunt for bounty and signature campaigns.

Quote from: Poker Player on April 25, 2023, 03:52:05 AM

Quote from: yahoo62278 on April 24, 2023, 10:12:41 PM

Should all accounts be tagged that are guilty of or presumed bought? Is a neutral tag appropriate for accounts that are bought that have no reputation, or should accounts be ruined period?

I told you in the other thread. Who commits a crime does not change the typology of the crime. Giving different penalties depending on who commits the misconduct goes against the fundamental principles of law.

All this is stirred up by someone who not only bought an account, but is a ban evader and willingly participated in advertising a known scam site.

Being from a poor country and getting away with buying an account is a comparative aggravation against your compatriots from poor countries who do not take the fast track and with their effort little by little rank up the account.

What would happen if say for example the forum had an open policy of accepting with open arms those that buy and sell accounts. Surely the quality of posting would drop further from what it already has and not only that, it would most probably increase the number of posts (most of which would be nonsensical incoherent ramblings) being made in order to meet the minimum character criteria to earn the weekly fee.

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on April 25, 2023, 04:29:24 AM

But the recent change of ownership and a blatant lie—look how Martyns writes about his brother— The fact that he died was not announced immediately. He corrected this, realizing that we would ask the brother. And also ignoring and subsequently lying about another blocked account—doesn't that deserve a negative tag? Does anyone here like to look like an idiot for believing this?

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on April 25, 2023, 04:29:24 AM

In addition, if someone buys someone else's account, he must understand that one day a ray of suspicion will be directed at him. If someone was Indonesian from the very beginning, why go to another locale?

If at that point of suspicion other members decide that the suspect has contributed enormously towards the forum then he might get away from being tagged at all however that does not send the best signal to others as they can try to use that same defence when trying to protect their traded accounts from being tagged.

After all, when a particular member (now a campaign manager) was accused of having purchased his account several years ago and a thread was opened to discuss him, he ended up being defended by several members. There is no consistency in the way DT and DT members approach this matter. If the forum policy is simple as purchased/traded account = negative tag then it is settled and there is nothing else to discuss but when it comes to being subjective and opinionated about whether exceptions should be made or whether mitigation should be considered on a case by case basis, we end up having disagreements.

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on April 25, 2023, 04:29:24 AM

As a result, I think that each case and each bought and caught account deserves separate consideration. When a person thinks people are idiots, the red tag fits well with his reputation.

Fair enough but that would again make it subjective. One member may feel a negative tag is warranted/justified but another member may feel a neutral or none is appropriate and then we all go back to same point debating the subject all over again.