|
Nelek wrote: how many of them will be legitime
That's an extremely good question!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at the reputation graph, I see a rather steep climb in the Organiser reputation. Most of it was gained over the course of about one month, and the steep climb stopped directly after achieving Platinum status, which gives the user the privilege to approve/disapprove a pending article (gold already gives that privilege, so that may not have been the goal).
So I agree with you: it is very suspicious. Also, regardless of suspicion level, I am uneasy with a user who has contributed next to nothing to the site having article approval privileges.
I want to report for abuse, but I think I'll wait and see what others have to say, in case I missed something.
What is this talk of release? I do not release software. My software escapes leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in its wake.
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately there is no way for us to know for sure, right?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
this[^]. The author however seems valid so perhaps a warning is sufficient at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
You beat me for some seconds
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mika Wendelius wrote: The author however seems valid
Really? One comment that doesn't mention the tool, but alludes to it; one QA answer that doesn't mention the tool; one QA answer (now deleted) that links to the tool; one message that links to the tool.
Smells pink and ham-like to me.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I had a look at the posts from the author and you're right. Even this is an 'old' account, the messages are pure spam...
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gone
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTW, i have seen you mention two different links to the member profile whenever you report here. Is there any specific reason?
Just to know.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
Just in case. There are at least two ways to reference a profile page. I'm not sure both are permanent; and one of them is associated with username.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
10th kick applied, but the user still lives.
You should probably remove the URL from the text of the question link.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|