RE: Jeff Booth - The Price of Tomorrow

avatar

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

"You have been wasting your curation upvoting this account."

Care to elaborate? As it is, we have been provided no information with which we can make a well-informed decision.

Out of respect for your time, if you have written this down elsewhere, in a previous comment on this account, please provide a link. That would be very helpful!

deutsch
0
0
0.000
19 comments
avatar
(Edited)

Hi @roleerob @sandymeyer

Just as on his account and many alter accounts that he has used for years, Zuerich was spamming with copypasta content exploiting the reward pool and kept refusing to stop. Hive's rewards pool is not "free money" faucet to exploit with spam/copypasta.

Some example of posts:

https://hive.blog/deutsch/@zuerich/jason-lowery-softwar-part-i
https://hive.blog/deutsch/@zuerich/jason-lowery-softwar-part-ii
https://hive.blog/deutsch/@zuerich/jason-lowery-softwar-part-iii
https://hive.blog/religion/@zuerich/the-real-battle-of-vienna-1683 (This one is from 2018)

The posts were a huge copypasta of content from different books (over 4000 words of copypasta per post) with only a few original sentences (less than 60 words each).
Original writing could be compiled into less than 3 sentences:

The multi-language translation of the sentence does not count as original content.
It is not a 50/50 ratio of original to quoted text. It's 99% copypasta.

These posts (there were hundreds not just these 3) had only 1 very short, original sentence:

Post 1:
Capture (1).png

Post 2:
image.png

etc.

Regarding his multiple accounts, here is more information. His other accounts were not only mass spamming copypasta but all mass spamming plagiarised articles.

https://hive.blog/deutsch/@zuerich/jason-lowery-softwar-part-iii#@hivewatcher/s6fcdk

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Thank you for investing your (? who is this exactly?) time into answering my question.

I would like time both to reflect on it (after looking into it further), as well as (very important!), hear from Zuerich, as there are always two sides to any matter. Generally true and undoubtedly particularly true, in this case.

Thanks again!

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Dear @roleerob, thank you for your comment.
I just made a post on these allegations.

And yes, there are some posts that copy parts of books, but for this I read the books, carefully select the best sections, and format them for posting them here.
I'd guess I made overall about 100 of this kind of "excerpt posts" and 300 "free write" posts, and I do not expect upvotes for them - as I write them mostly for myself.

One could make a quick comparison: 100 post with each "earning" 5 dollars making 500 dollars. I have delegated tens of thousands of Hive Power over years - voluntarily forgoing profits in interest and curation rewards. I don't have exact numbers on that, but I am sure this makes a lot more than 500 dollars, and I'd guess that these delegations add value to Hive - and that is what should be a big part of our efforts here.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

🌄 Good morning (here)!☕ The "morning after" ...

As anticipated, @zuerich has replied here - choosing to respond in a post.

________________________

My appeal to you:

  1. Whether here (okay ...) or on his post (my preference ...), respond "out in the light." Where it is "immutably enshrined" on our Hive blockchain. Not hidden away in some server on Discord ...

  2. As evidence of your willingness to / support for conducting this ... "constructive dialog" ... here on our Hive blockchain, where it is "out in the light," identify yourself. That is, what is the personal account, from which you write your own content, in your own efforts to add value to / increase the value of this blockchain.

  3. Respond as civilly and respectfully as you can manage, objectively addressing the points made in his defense.

  4. Do so with this clearly in mind (as your focus?) - I came "in here" originally, as an investor. You have no idea who I am, but I will tell you now that I am capable of a far greater investment in Hive than what I have made thus far.

    Write from the perspective of having an "audience" to all unfolding here and how it might be perceived, from the point of view of this (or any other) investor.

________________________


If you will respond, great. I will look forward to it. For ... "extra credit?" Let me know it is coming, as you may need time to reflect on what you are going to say.

If you will not, as a demonstration of professional courtesy and respect, let me know you will not. For ... "extra credit?" Let me know why you will not.

Thank you, in advance, for your consideration of my appeal.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

☝️ @hivewatcher, @hivewatchers, @hivewatch, @hivewatcher2 ... ☝️

A day later and you have not replied to my appeal here. Perhaps you are planning to, perhaps not. Obviously, I have no way of knowing.

I will restate this:

"If you will not, as a demonstration of professional courtesy and respect, let me know you will not. For ... "extra credit?" Let me know why you will not."

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Hi.
We have provided the details of the investigation of multiple-acccout fraud by this user and the reasons for the blacklist.
Thank you

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

🌄Good morning☕

Thank you for at least something of a reply. Which barely begins to address my appeal ...

Tell me, please ...

... how you define "Appeals." We appear to have very different definitions.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
(Edited)

Hi.

Right now, an appeal consists of being given a certain amount of posts that the user needs to post in a certain amount of days to show that is capable of creating original content.

That's if the user is blacklisted. If the user is not blacklisted, there is nothing to appeal.
Unless the user would like to inquire about some of our comments.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Okay, that helps. Thank you. It confirms what I suspected. We have a different definition of the word appeal.

What I am referring to is more or less in line with what is defined here:

"... where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction ..."

What you have written "right now" is what I would characterize as ... "terms" ... Of their "sentence" ... If the "accused" chooses to ... "appeal" (?) ... them, you (whoever "you" is ...) then subsequently determine the degree to which the "accused" has complied with them. And on from there ...

To "talk straight," your original charge will stand, as it cannot be challenged. "You" are judge, jury, and executioner. Therefore, it is not up for discussion / debate.

Agreed?

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar
  1. No new users get blacklisted.
  2. There is evidence of abuse in the sources provided in our comments, like sources of possible plagiarism.
    When appealing, the user cannot provide evidence to show that is the author behind the articles in the sources, then it is obviously considered fraud and the account may be blacklisted. If blacklisted the user is asked to go through the next step of the appeal process of showing the ability to create original content. It is called an appeal because no user is forced to go through that process. They can always refuse and continue whatever activity they want on their blog. Blacklists are decentralised and so is our blacklist. Many users that got blacklisted by us simply ignore it.
0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Back "in here" now, from an appointment, nice to find at least some attempt at a response. From "my side," however, you are dodging (or ?) key aspects of what I have written to "you."

Nonetheless ... I would like to address what you have said. And I will ...

________________________

First, I am going to "slow down," and get clear answers, one at a time. One way or the other ... To questions which I cannot imagine you have missed. You have simply chosen not to answer them, right?

Starting with this:

  1. Who are you, i.e. under what account name are you adding value to our Hive blockchain? I cannot imagine you would claim it is this one.

  2. Or (as you have done so far) ... If you refuse to provide that information, please explain in unmistakably clear terms why you refuse.

#1?  Or #2?  Not too tough, right?  I have faith in you.  I know you can do it!  So, I will look forward to receiving your answer.

Thank you!

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Obviously, we cannot say who we are for safety reasons.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

"... who we are …"

I have asked who you are, since I assume you started this and are finishing it …

"... safety reasons."

Wow. Safety of what? I hope you are not seriously implying you are fearful of some physical harm, right?  You don’t have a pseudo-anonymous account name, with maybe the vaguest reference to where you can be found in this big, wide world of our?  Instead, you decided to provide your full name, address, and phone number?

Can’t imagine it … No, that cannot be it ...

You are far more likely concerned about the ... "safety" ... of your own investment in our Hive blockchain.  God forbid you experience anything like the reciprocal of what you yourself said to me at the beginning, threatening mine:

"You have been wasting your curation upvoting this account..."

I will now do my best to set that aside and finish what I started. At least as much as that is possible, given your failure, thus far, to address the points of my original appeal.

Appeal.  Key word.  My definition.  Which I will now make some attempt at serving as a ... "defense attorney" ... although we can both laugh at that.  I am an engineer ... 🤷‍♂️

________________________

As the "prosecuting attorney," please address the following responses to your ... "allegations:"

  • Your #1 above - I have no idea what you are intending to convey with "No new users get blacklisted." What does that mean?

  • Your #2 above - "Possible plagiarism ..."

    1. Every book review of his that I have read clearly state the title of the book and the author.  Typically with the book cover serving as the lead image!? 🤷‍♂️

      Including the post examples you cited in making your original "case" ...

    2. Knowing this, as I can't imagine that is confusing, how do justify this charge?  Further knowing your challenge is compounded by your electing to use inflammatory words like "fraud?"

    3. Presumption of innocence. "Innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt ..." Does this standard of justice apply wherever you are in the world?

      Make your case.  Provide ONE example of where he did not cite his source.  As it is, your cited examples fail this essential test ...

  • From your original "case" - "These posts (there were hundreds not just these 3) had only 1 very short, original sentence:"

    1. While you provided an image, one of which clearly shows 2 sentences, you have provided no links, so that anyone might independent of you verify your claims.

    2. That said, this is the only part of your overall case, with which some might be sympathetic.  Not enough of his own content, while referencing the clearly sourced content of others ...

    3. What you fail to grasp, or at least acknowledge, is:

      • The enormous amount of time which is required to read the book, in the first place. And then extract those points which he deems of greatest interest for his followers to read and reflect upon.

      • To this point, he has clearly stated the time to create a ... "standard" ... post, would require far, far less of his time and effort.

        In contrast, what is your view of others of our fellow Hivians openly boasting of their "s...post" efforts where they are clearly stating it took them almost nothing to produce?

        Being consistent, I am sure you are bringing the hammer down on them as well, right?

      • He has clearly stated (although we can agree not consistently) that if the author ever finds his post, he will gladly give the paid out rewards to them.

        Given what I know of the man's integrity, I have no question this would take place.

  • I and (as anyone can plainly see) others find very good value in this man's posts. And reward the time and effort he puts into presenting them to us accordingly.

    Please acknowledge:

    1. There are other ways to measure time, effort, and "quality content" than a simple word count.

    2. His well-earned rewards are nowhere near the top of the Trending list.

    3. His work in support of others is exemplary.  Our Hive blockchain would benefit from many more like him, rather than drive him and his readers away.

  • Bottom line: While he, myself, and others are actively working to add value to our Hive blockchain, you are actively working to destroy it.

    • You have legitimate targets,
    for your legitimate efforts.

    This account is
    not
    one of them!

    ________________________

    Please respond as though a "jury of his peers" is making the final decision, as to the merits of your "case." Not you.

    And that these peers are:

    1. Investors. Upon whom the future of our Hive blockchain depends.

    2. Actively involved in adding value to their investment.

    3. Inclined to view your efforts as destructive of the very value they are faithfully laboring away every day to create.

    The above is not hypothetical. You are "talking" to one.

    Thank you, in advance, for your careful consideration of how you now choose to respond.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Wow. Safety of what?

Your trivalisation of the threat is a clear example that you lack understanding of what abuse fighting work amounts to and complete ignorance regarding the number of threats, insults and attempts on doxxing we have received throughout the years.

Your #1 above - I have no idea what you are intending to convey with "No new users get blacklisted." What does that mean?

It means that no new accounts get blacklisted.

Your #2 above - "Possible plagiarism ...

Could you please provide evidence of where in our comments posted on Zuerich posts we mentioned plagiarism?

What you fail to grasp, or at least acknowledge, is

Completely irrelevant and logically fallacious argument. The time that someone spend entertaining themselves watching movies, playing games, reading books, cooking, drinking beer, or basically any activity is not a valid reason to spam with copypasta and refusal to add relevant amount of original content

I will conclude my responses here as we have no time respond to newly created essays in each of your replies. Particularly because they include a lot of logical fallacies, and from my experience responding to someone who creates logically fallacious responses only winds them up to create more responses with more logical fallacies. It ends up going on circles.

Thank you for your time.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Your trivalisation of the threat is a clear example that you lack understanding of what abuse fighting work amounts to and complete ignorance regarding the number of threats, insults and attempts on doxxing we have received throughout the years.

It is trivial because everyone else who deals with abuse hasn't had that issue.

Get over yourself, @logic.

logically fallacious argument

Classic deflection.

You won't respond because you have nothing to say in return. You going around in circles is not a show of intellect. It's quite the opposite.

Nobody likes you because you are an asshole.

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

Thank you for your witness vote!
Have a !BEER on me!
To Opt-Out of my witness beer program just comment STOP below

0
0
0.000
Reply
avatar

"I will conclude my responses here as we have no time ..."

"Thank you for your time."

Understood. "You" are welcome. It was, I believe, the right thing to do. Specifically, give “you” the benefit of the doubt. Hoping for the best, while preparing for the worst …

I will also now "conclude," starting with "credit where credit is due" ...

  • Albeit (my perception) reluctantly, "you" did respond in a civil and respectful manner, as requested. I appreciate that. More than "you" likely realize ... From my vantage point, the … “gap” … has no hope of being reduced / closed, otherwise …

  • "Completely irrelevant and logically fallacious argument" ... - In a few words (ignoring my advice), "you" all but eliminated the “good will” resulting from the “credit” just cited …

    Instead, "you" have reinforced that my time and effort have been wasted. "You" have no idea who I am, but "you" could have hardly made a poorer error in judgment.

  • Judgment. Key word. "You" have elevated yours. At the expense of that of everyone else. Foolish, at best ... Oblivious to why I wrote the above and the central point of my request at the end?

    No!

    You ignored it. Full stop. Period. Reinforcing what I have just said to "you" - "you" could have hardly made a poorer error in judgment.

________________________

One of my favorite sayings:

"When all is said and done, a lot more is said than done."

Those who know me well would tell you I am the opposite. As I will happily return to living out, as soon as I click on "Reply."

👋

0
0
0.000
Reply