#28 Wiki SG Proposal: Restrictive procedure for unscrupulous contributors [PASSED]

General description

In order to prevent fraudulent activities, fraudulently receiving a reward, and to keep the Wiki community clean, we propose this procedure to restrict unscrupulous or malicious contributors within the Wiki SG.

Criterias for unscrupulous contributors

If the contributor has done one or more of the following:

  1. Receiving (or attempting) unreasonable reward through submission when the work was not really done and/or more work is claimed than actually done.

  2. Bypassing preliminary review of contributor’ work by review editors.

  3. The use of multi-accounts (fake profiles) in the Wiki SG chats, on the Free TON forum or on the Free TON Wiki website in order to impersonate another person or to circumvent established restrictions.

  4. Submission of work through third parties in order to circumvent the established restrictions.

  5. Other actions that could be classified as fraudulent or self-serving deception.

Restrictive procedure

Sequence of setting and implementing restrictive measures:

  1. Wiki members will review the contributor’s actions and take into account factors such as intent, repetitiveness, refusal to correct, insensitivity to comments from the Wiki team.

  2. Wiki members will select the appropriate contributor restriction measures and the term for applying this. Such measures will include limiting the use of contributor accounts in Wiki SG chats and on the Free TON Wiki website, including their partial or complete blocking for a specified period or indefinitely.

  3. Wiki members’ decisions will be made by simple off-chain voting (poll) with a majority vote.

  4. The final decision of the Wiki members should be published on the Free TON forum (in the Free TON Wiki section) and in the Wiki SG chats. After that, any Wiki SG administrator has the right to apply appropriate restrictions to the contributor.

Procedural remarks

Changes are effective immediately.


nice move to make subgovernance more effective and transparent :+1:

In order to implement #28 Wiki SG Proposal: Restrictive procedure for unscrupulous contributors and keep the Wiki clean from unscrupulous contributors, we vote to restrict the user IndiaChain (Telegram, Forum profile) to Wiki SG indefinitely.

He will receive blocking of accounts in Wiki chats (mute, read only), blocking of the right to add and change content on the Free TON Wiki site (read only). He will no longer be eligible to participate in the Wiki SG and to submit submissions to any Wiki contests from now on, including the current #26 WRC. Any of his submissions, if he sends it, will be rejected by the judges.

Exception: He has the right to resubmit work once only for May 2021 for the current #26 WRC, as permitted by the #25 Wiki SG Proposal: Partial revision of the # 23 WRC voting.

Member poll result:

where is this poll?
This poll should be transparent and community access.
Just a screenshot of voting with few initial members (group) isn’t a voice of Free TON community. Members involved in this injustice will be punished hardly.

Where is link to the voting?
Just a screenshot of self controlled group!
Everyone is watching here and ready to expose Free TON Centralisation in upcoming events :+1:

Then why you inbound me for next upcoming wrc submission?
are you have any boss?
any pressure?
Why not you are going for a open voting.
I had already won in decentralised voting but now your are implemented centralised voting for me.
All proofs are available and ready for a sting operation on Free TON ecosystem.

Wiki members have the right to make decisions and represent the interests of the community within the Wiki SG. We made the decision to kick you out of the Wiki based on the proposal above (see startpost) for attempting to cheat and bypassing the rules for checking content by review editors. According to the proposal above, a whole community vote is not required and the decision is made only by the Wiki members.

But now I have resubmitted my submission as according to the last proposal. Why you have asked for a resubmission.

Why you aren’t believing on jury voting on the submission? If my submission isn’t valuable, it can be rejected by the wiki jury members. This time submission is reviewed and already added to the user report.