I've got about
350 trust feedback remaining (some of which that have account sellers mentioned). I'll have a look through my notes and see if there are others.
More to come.
Thank you for your efforts. The numbers involved are colossus therefore let us wait to see what you bring on your next post, who knows you even bring up some surprises.
While I do agree, it really can become a full time job to deal with.
Case in point the entire Dank14 issue. I saw the topic this AM, replied to it @ 6:45 AM give or take and had the idea of looking through the other accounts and adding them to my ~ list and tagging them.
The time it can take is not insignificant
For these scammers / spammers it is their job, so that is what we are fighting against. People like me have to take the time to do it when we could be doing other things.
Yeah, it makes me look lazy but I'm being honest here. If it's a choice between tagging someone and creating a post about how to pull your coins from a non-standard collectable private key or helping someone setup their node when it's giving them trouble. Those will win every time over tagging someone.
Dave it does not make you lazy and it cannot be denied what you are saying is true because taking a look at (and then tagging) accounts is a time consuming exercise. You have to prioritise where you want to spend your time and only you can decide where it is better spent. As you suggested, if there was a template for copying to the feedback it would help those that wanted to utilise it.
JollyGood, I agree with you about not discriminating but I've also given second chances to members to whom I've given negative trust years ago if, and only if, they've shown evidence of 1) not engaging in the buying/selling of accounts, and 2) not getting any more negative trust OR receiving legit positive trust since I gave them the negative.
You have first hand experience in this matter which will be helpful. Keeping in mind the two conditions you wrote above, in your opinion what is the furthest back (in years) is an appropriate number to go before the account is deemed to be not appropriate to tag?
I still think these new idiots buying or selling accounts ought to be negged all to hell, and if they come to my attention I'll do so. Anyone who's been here for a while should know that trading accounts is dangerous if the account(s) in question carry a positive reputation, as they can be used to scam, and they can also become a nuisance if they're used by sig spammers or bounty hunters who just want to write crapola nonstop.
But none of that is new info to most of us. Hopefully others will read what I just wrote and understand why account sales are severely frowned upon--even if they technically don't break forum rules.
That is one of the dangers of the forum being flooded with spam and low quality posts when accounts are traded. It would not be a surprise if the buyer wants to get to work posting immediately. If the new/recent account sellers and accounts buyers manage to face problems some may decide to give and even if it is a small number it would mean our persistence is tagging accounts would have had some impact.