INTRODUCTION

It got to my attention that user @omo-ope and @henry-9ja have been accused of spinning/rephrasing someone elses publications. It's important to note, that both of those users have been part of our project hope community and I shared my trust towards them. Trust which has been kind of ... abused.

DIFFICULT DECISION

I spoke to a few guys from PH and have discussed this issue with them. I feel that it is my responsibility to ensure that situations like these cannot take place in our community. I'm not a police officer, who is going to monitor all of you closely. My job is to support your efforts and help you all grow bigger on this platform. Weather you're more active on steem, or new to hive - I'm here to support you. And I trust you all - until this trust is abused and forever lost.

For all those reasons, both those users had their access to our community telegram channel removed and all their future publications posted within the Project Hope community will be ignored by me. I will not downvote/flag any of it, but I will not support it either. I strongly believe it's a fair decision.

FINAL WORD

I cannot afford to teach people ethics and how not to behave. I also cannot be playing the role of a police officer here either. I don't want to do that. And I hope this unfortunate event will not repeat itself again. Let's respect ourselfs and the work of others.

It's time for our paths to separate and I would expect everyones understanding. At the end of the day I'm the face of this project, and doing something which looks like a "fraud" affects my reputation. Learning from user with 1mln SP, that I'm supporting plagiarism is not the way I would like to start the day.

Some of you may disagree with my decision and may believe that everyone deserve a second chance, and maybe perhaps some people do. However, I'm not planning to punish those users - I'm simply not going to support them any more. I wish them all the best, our short "adventure" is now over.

---

Yours, @crypto.Piotr

Example of "spinning" from their posts:

Original version:	"Spinned version"
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms such as Deep Learning have become integral parts of our daily lives: they enable digital speech assistants or translation services, improve medical diagnostics and are an indispensable part of future technologies such as autonomous driving. Based on an ever increasing amount of data and powerful novel computer architectures, learning algorithms appear to reach human capabilities, sometimes even excelling beyond. The issue: so far it often remains unknown to users, how exactly AI systems reach their conclusions. Therefore it may often remain unclear, whether the AI's decision making behavior is truly 'intelligent' or whether the procedures are just averagely successful.	Artificial Intelligence (AI) and computer studying algorithms comparable to Deep studying have grow to be vital ingredients of our day-to-day lives: they enable digital speech assistants or translation offerings, reinforce clinical diagnostics and are an fundamental a part of future technologies such as autonomous using. Established on an ever increasing amount of information and robust novel laptop architectures, finding out algorithms show up to arrive human capabilities, mostly even excelling past. The limitation: to this point it normally stays unknown to customers, how exactly AI systems reach their conclusions. Consequently it may mainly remain uncertain, whether or not the AI's determination making habits is truly 'smart' or whether or not the techniques are just averagely victorious.
Original version:	"Spinned version"
A useful quantum computer with many communicating qubits most require some distance extra dots and changes that human could manage. Quantum computer theorists assume what they could do with hundreds of thousands or thousands of qubits, but the elephant in the room is that we can actually make handiest a handful of them work at a time.	A practical quantum computer with many interacting qubits would require far more dots -- and adjustments -- than a human could manage Quantum computer theorists imagine what they could do with hundreds or thousands of qubits, but the elephant in the room is that we can actually make only a handful of them work at a time,