First of all, I've learned that without a plagiarism check it can't, it can't, because without it the big hiver could just copy good posts from newbies and monetize their work for themselves thanks to their reach. And that would definitely be the end.
Partly true, but then some of the obscure cases have been found without plagiarism checks. A simple copy paste of snippets from the post sentences and some links can pop up easy on searches. The fact is, the ones that have been chronically circumventing the sanctions by making new accounts also use plagiarism checker tools.
When caught, one could also plead innocence and if someone new to hive were to see the conversation on discord, you'd think the brash rebuttals of HW would have been too heavy handed. I don't expect newcomers to backread old conversations or do investigative work so misunderstanding the context and tagging HW mean by default is an understandable scenario.
This new user has written an excellent post, from his point of view and the point of view of the 70! Commenters. The post was celebrated, he was invited to various communities, all were full of praise for this excellent post.
I was in discussion in the discord server about how the story went down, the short version is they had their post checked and was advised not to push it and cite sources prior, yet against the advice they went ahead and got caught. During their first post, they only got a warning simultaneously receiving positive feedback from other users. The second post, they repeated the same stunt even after HW gave a warning. No downvotes were made while all this went down. In fact, it was the effort of other community members that downvoted the post for the dishonesty and HW chimed in right after. Now none of this is publicly available, some backtracking on the chain level needs to be done to confirm how events unfolded but the black parts include how discussions outside HW server and among curation groups.
But if one were to look at the case upfront, they'll definitely see the robotic text and the downvotes. For some who want to extend their investigation, they'll figure out some parts of the story don't add up, like how even other community members outside HW piled downvotes on the user if HW was the only oppressor there? the answer is independent groups disagreed with the rewards. I disagreed with the rewards for dishonesty and I was the first one to cast the downvote there and other curators that saw the evidence. The user in question expressed not wanting to own up to the mistake so that convinced me even further that they the rewards for dishonesty was just in excess. And this happened over discord, not on chain chats where other people can readily follow the story.
Probably the poster was still busy answering all the praising comments when the downvote avalanche hit them.
They were advised to edit but didn't see the need to do it timely for salvage whatever reputation they had. They let hours slip by and even moved to make another post instead of answering up to the accusation. I got this directly from the user's immediate peers and was there to see how events unfolded during that time. But you don't have to take my word for it.
If one sees the post, it's just going to look like an HW being mean and that's enough justification for some that won't bother to hear what other truths behind the case transpired. It's unlikely that rants about HW has will stop, my unpopular opinion is community members on Hive just take it upon themselves to moderate other members to reduce the need for the HW service. Nobody has the time to sit online reading blogs trying to spot fakes because they have jobs and other priorities, most anyway.
RE: from friendly bot @cheetah to hive gestapo in 6 years