Abuse Series: Deceit

         Welcome back to the Abuse Series! The series has been on pause for a few months, and I am glad to restart my contributions. This will be the start of Volume 2.

         Finding plagiarism can be a complicated matter for any anti-abuse initiative. Sometimes, it is as simple as a @cheetah tipoff or a well-constructed content with poor format. Other times, plagiarizers seek to cover their trails by more devious methods.

         One example of covering their trail is through article spinning. Spinning is a strategy developed by content creators to improve their visibility. It involved the process called search engine optimization. I will not be covering the historical usage and developments in this post.

         In the context of plagiarism, this often involves content with different wording. Comparing spun articles to the source usually reveals similar sentence structures and orders. Of course, that only applies to simple case of spinning.

         On the blockchain, it is not uncommon to encounter a spun article consists of several sources. One of my experiences with an intensive spinning attempt received the following response:

         Why did I suspect this person of spinning? I have seen the author commit several instances of photo plagiarism a few posts back. The need for surveillance came as a result of them editing their posts to appear innocent in the public.

         Investigating spun articles requires copious amount of time and energy. In my experience, they can take anywhere from 30 minutes to over two hours to prove the perpetrator to be guilty. I am unaware of any efficient automation for detecting such fraud in existence.

         Furthermore, such practice is also accompanied by rampant use of promotional services. Some may even work in conjunction with voting rings. If it was not for the fact that the abuser would have slid by with ill-gotten gains, I would not have bothered.

         I am all for reforming and educating plagiarizers for their transgressions. But, that is not always possible as it takes a certain level of malice to construct a façade to conceal such deeds. The truth, then, is that some people have chosen their paths as bad actors from the beginning.

         Here is a more recent example that involved this type of coverup. To summarize, the Steemian chose to repost articles he found online as their own. The @steemcleaners took action, which prompted the content thief to dispute in Discord.

         It would appear many do not understand the implications of a blockchain. Nothing is ever erased from the records even if edited. There are tools that allow even average Steemians to view these revision histories. My personal favorite has been @drakos' tool at scribe.steemians.info.

         This Steemian's action brought the following response from the @steemcleaners:

         Needless to say, this person deserved the flags they received. Despite the edits made to the posts, they still did not remedy the situation. In fact, it worsened due to their attempt to cover up their actions.

         The consequences for the individuals when convicted of plagiarism vary. Each entity has its own processes for dealing abuses on the platform. It is up to the individuals to approach these entities and come up with a solution to the problem. This usually involves a change in behavior on the blockchain.

         Those involved in anti-abuse projects are also expected to keep the goal in mind. The goal is to encourage preferred behavior while mitigating the undesired ones. Flags are part of the tool kit to raise community awareness. They are not the ultimate solution to the ever-present issues such as plagiarism.

Do not plagiarize. Enjoy your time on the platform by being you.

         Read previous entries of the Abuse Series here!

Next post: Call to Action