All the cases that he brought forward are of users that are just shitposting useless generic content for money,

Every system that theymos has introduced here has been completely corrupted by incentives and the status quo. Everything is about the money, hence why this place has devolved to one of the shittest platforms relating to Bitcoin. Remember where it started, and who was present here in the early days -- look at it now. 99% of the posters don't give a single fuck about Bitcoin, they are just 3rd world parasites treating this as a "work" platform.

Absolutely, it is better to do nothing at all so that your alt accounts can avoid getting banned. 

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you suggesting I perform a review every time somebody disagrees with a sigban?

We have a process in place which involves opening an appeal thread in Meta. Anyone can voice their support for the affected party in said thread and it will be taken into consideration before making a decision. In these threads I will also provide an explanation behind why the user was sigbanned.

You understood me correctly when I wrote about large mining companies. These companies also have their own pools.

You have an interesting idea about mining companies' profits, but I disagree. A mining company needs to find an investor to buy new shares, and if I owned shares in such a company and didn't like its policies, I would sell my shares and buy shares in a more stable company.

I think at the time I said something along the lines of it being the ban I thought was least justified or the one that had surprised me the most.

In any case, the ban was for a short period. But given the uproar that all this issue has ensued, the fact that quite a few users have already been banned, and that alt farms linked to them have been uncovered, I think it would be best to ease up on the sigbans, at least for a while.

For that to happen there needs to be a strong willingness to listen to the community and use that feedback. The only user im aware that was unbanned came after the first request for review was deny followed by several pages of reply where reputable members here were accused of bias and their opinion counting less cause they are involved with a casino campaign and it only ended when a preferred (albeit impartial) mediator helped to review and recommended the ban was removed. Does that sound like a good process which values community contributions? How many members will be willing to stick their head out the next time for another user even if they feel a mistake was made? If they do, they would only do this when a decent poster in their opinion is affected, okay posters who are not high quality but still do not spam negatively will just be let to serve their ban.

This initiative should be aimed to take out the worst of spammers but some of the affected users are okay posters in my opinion. This is why I think I'm wrong on what the aim of the whole thing is.

Nope imo. Plus, when he was sigbanned there was some drama about it, you can check in sigban thread. Iirc, FMC also spoke in his defense.

I think we need to be careful that we don’t end up like most other forums, in fact most other areas of life at the moment. When I say that, I mean regulated to fuck, this forum is about free speech and individualism. Sure, some people shit post but maybe that’s because there are different levels of education available in different parts of the world. There has to be some leeway, not everybody is high IQ.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, I don't like to see people getting sig bans for moderate quality posts. I reviewed the list of people sig banned so far and sure the people banned aren’t the highest quality posters but they’re not all total shit posters.

Since you mentioned skeptical folks, I thought you were referring to me hence I felt the need to reply.

Now, as for reply itself:

I agree with the initiative as well as in Nutildah I trust, actually I trusted him to sigban me but I am not (yet). So, he hasn't lived up to my trust.

(I feel I am being too self-deprecating at times, but it's not deprecating if it's factual, is it? — this is called nested self-deprecation).



It already did since most sigbanned users have stopped posting so less spam.

The idea is excellent, and i believe it will help the forum in the future and that the quality will be at a higher level than it is now. Everyone has the right to make a mistake, nobody is perfect, but i certainly think that he can ask for help from other respected forum members to help him with the final decision and that's it.

yeah minings Time is ending

maybe 12 years and it is done for a guy like me