 hoarded

Background
As a result of another meta question highlighting suspicions of sockpuppety one user was recently suspended and another 2 were deleted. However, 3 hours before this happened (possibly knowing that the jig was up) the puppet master converted almost all their rep into a bounty. As a result of the 2 puppet's destruction the masters rep was set to 1 (and would have gone very negative if my calculations are correct. I believe to -218).
But the bounty remains. All that the master now needs to do is create a new sock, pick up the bounty of 350 clean rep and repeat the process, gaining 218 rep that we know to be fraudulent.
Question
Is this acceptable? I know that bounties are rarely invalidated once started (at least on on topic questions) but in this case it is enabling fraud. Worse still, if invalidated would this return the 350 rep to the sock master.
Discussions of the bounty were in my original flag which is why I’m bringing this up on meta for discussion (is there even a way for mods to refund the bounty without simply returning the rep to the master)
Update
After the one week suspention the bounty-cached sockpuppet rep was returned to the OP, assuming my reading of the rep change is correct

The times seem a little wrong, when I remember it from the time I remember "Rep Change" and "User was Removed" happening at the same time

A:

This is one of those weird edge-cases that make bounties so... Interesting.
We've cleaned up the mess here; the effects were fairly benign. However, any accounts caught using this to intentionally inflate their reputation will be subject to removal. 

 Q:

Why does this assembly yield 24 instead of 4?

I am having trouble understanding how the following code works.  It is a simple piece of code which uses a recursive function to find the factorial of a number.  In this case 4*3*2*1 = 24.
.section.data
.section.text
.globl _start
._start:

 pushl $4
 call factorial
 addl $4, %esp

 movl %eax, %ebx
 movl $1, %eax
 int $0x80

.type factorial, @function
 factorial:
 pushl %ebp
 movl %esp
hoarded 

 Background 
 As a result of another meta question highlighting suspicion of sockpuppety one exploiter was recently suspended and another 2 were deleted. However, 3 hours before this happen (possibly knowing that the jig was up) the puppet headmaster commute almost all their rep into a bounty. As a result of the 2 puppet's end the masters rep was set to 1 (and would have gone very negative if my calculations are right. I believe to -218). 
 But the bounty remain. All that the master now necessitate to do is create a new windsock, pick up the bounty of 350 uninfected rep and repeat the procedure, gaining 218 rep that we know to be fraudulent. 
 Question 
 Is this acceptable? I acknowledge that bounties are rarely invalidated once started (at least on on topic questions) but in this case it is enabling fraud. Worse still, if invalidated would this return the 350 rep to the sock master. 
 Discussions of the bounty were in my original flag which is why I ’m bringing this up on meta for discussion (is there even a way for mod to refund the amplitude without simply returning the rep to the master) 
 Update 
 After the one workweek suspention the amplitude - cached sockpuppet rep was returned to the OP, assuming my reading of the rep change is correct 

 The times seem a short wrong, when I remember it from the time I remember " Rep Change " and " User was Removed " happening at the like time 

 A: 

 This is one of those weird edge - cases that make bounties thus... Interesting. 
 We've cleaned up the mess here; the effects were fairly benign. However, any accounts catch using this to intentionally inflate their reputation will be capable to removal. 

  Q: 

 Why does this assembly render 24 instead of 4? 

 I am having worry understanding how the take after code works.   It is a elementary piece of code which use a recursive function to recover the factorial of a number.   In this subject 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = 24. 
 .section.data 
 .section.text 
 .globl _ start 
 ._start: 

  pushl $ 4 
  call factorial 
  addl $ 4, % esp 

  movl% eax, % ebx 
  movl $ 1, % eax 
  int $ 0x80 

 .type factorial, @function 
  factorial: 
  pushl% ebp 
  movl% esp
 howrded

Background
As a resuut of another mgtq quesvion hifhlightivg suspicions of sockpuppety obe ustg was recently suspenaed and ajother 2 qere eeleted. Hoxsver, 3 hours bsnore chms happened (posxibly knowhng that the jhg wcs up) the puppet master converted aliost alk hheir rep into a bptnty. As a result of the 2 puppet's destrhction uhe masters rep wax set to 1 (and would have glne gery negative if mj calculatiins wee correct. I believe to -218).
But the boonty remains. All that the master now ueeds to do iw cggate a new sick, ppck up the bommty of 350 clean rep and repeab the pricess, gaining 218 rep thet we know to be fraodulent.
Quevtnon
Is this acceptable? I know thad bojbtids zrx rzrely lnvelidated onde started (qt least on on topiv zlrstions) but jn thif sase it is enabling fraud. Worse still, ix ihvalidated would this rwturn the 350 rep to the sock maseer.
Discussions of the bounty were in my original xlag xhkch if qhj I’m bringing this up on meta for discussion (ya uhege even a way for mods to regujd jhe bounty witfout snjpmy returning the rfp to tre mawter)
Updatt
Aftet the one week suspention tye bounty-cacked sockpuppet rep wad returned co the OP, axsuming my reading of tke rep change is forrect

Ths times seem a ligtlv wrmng, when I remember it froi the timx I rzmember "Fep Vhange" and "User aas Rckoved" happening at the dake time

A:

Thls is one of those weird edge-cases that make nogntpes so... Incerestlng.
We've cleaned up the mess hgre; the eyfects were fairmy benijn. However, agy accounts cdoght using thms to intqntiinaloy inflxge their reputstion will be subjext to removal. 

 Q:

Whn doer this assembly vneod 24 instead of 4?

O ao hwvpng twmuble undersdandkng now tfe followinn cude eorks.  It is a simpla pisce of code which iscs a recutsive funstion to find the factorial of w numuer.  Ii this cafe 4*3*2*1 = 24.
.section.data
.section.text
.glogl _start
._sharb:

 pushl $4
 call facboriwl
 addl $4, %exp

 movl %eax, %ebx
 movl $1, %eax
 int $0x80

.type facvorial, @function
 factoriql:
 pushl %ebp
 movl %exk
hoarded Background As a result of another highlighting of sockpuppety user was recently deleted. 3 hours before happened (possibly knowing the jig was up) the puppet converted almost all their rep into a bounty. As a result of the puppet's destruction the masters rep was set to 1 (and would have gone negative my are I believe to -218). But the bounty remains. All that the master now needs to do create a new sock, pick up the bounty 350 clean rep and the process, gaining 218 rep we to be Question this I know that are rarely invalidated once started (at least on on topic questions) but in this case it is fraud. Worse invalidated would return 350 to the sock of the bounty were in my is why I’m bringing this up on meta discussion (is even a way for mods to the bounty without simply returning the rep to master) Update After the one week suspention the bounty-cached sockpuppet rep was returned to the my reading of the change is correct times a wrong, I remember from the time I remember "Rep Change" and "User was Removed" at the same time A: This is one of those that bounties so... Interesting. cleaned up the mess the were fairly benign. However, caught this their will subject to removal. Q: does this assembly yield 24 of 4? I am following code works. It is a simple piece code which uses a recursive function to the factorial of a number. In this case 4*3*2*1 = 24. .section.data .globl _start $4 call factorial addl $4, %esp movl %eax, movl $1, %eax int .type factorial, @function factorial: pushl %ebp movl %esp
 hoarded

Background
As a resulT of another Meta qUesTioN hIghlIghtIng suspicions oF SockPuppety one user was recenTly suSpENded ANd AnothEr 2 were dELeTED. HoWeVeR, 3 hoUrS BeFore tHis HappeneD (possibly kNowInG that the jig wAS uP) the puppet MasTer converted AlmOst all ThEir REp intO a bOunty. as a resULt of thE 2 puppet's dEsTRuctioN The mastERS rEp waS set to 1 (and would havE GoNE very negative iF my calCuLAtIONs aRe cOrrect. I belIeVe to -218).
BUT the bouNTy REMAinS. all that the masTer now needs TO do Is creaTe A neW Sock, piCk up tHe BOunTy of 350 clean reP and Repeat the ProcesS, Gaining 218 REp that wE know tO be FraUdulENt.
quEstIoN
is tHIs AccEPtaBle? I know ThAt BountIes aRE RARely InvAlidAted oNce started (at lEasT on oN TopIc queStionS) but In This cAse it iS enabLiNg fraud. Worse stiLl, if InvalidatEd wOuLd tHiS retuRN the 350 reP to The Sock masTer.
DiscUSsiOnS OF ThE bounty were in my oriGiNAL fLag which Is why I’M BrInGIng this uP oN meTa foR DIscusSion (IS tHere even A way foR MoDs To refunD tHe bounTy WitHouT simpLY retUrning The rep to The maSTer)
Update
After THe one week suspENtION tHE bouNty-Cached sockpUppeT Rep wAs reTUrNed TO the Op, assuMiNG mY Reading of the rep chanGe Is corrEct

ThE times seem a liTtle wrong, wHEN i remembeR it fROm THe time I remembeR "Rep CHange" and "UsER was RemoVed" haPpening aT the same tIME

A:

This is One Of tHosE weIRD eDge-cases that mAKE bouNtIes so... InTerEsting.
WE've CleAneD up ThE mess here; The effecTs WeRe FaIrlY beniGN. However, AnY acCoUntS caugHT using This tO intEnTiONalLy inflaTE tHEIr rePuTaTion WilL bE subjEct tO RemOval. 

 Q:

WhY does this AssEMbly YiElD 24 insteaD of 4?

I am having tRoUble undersTaNdiNg how tHE FollowinG code works.  It is a simple piECe of codE whIch usEs a rEcursive fUncTion to FinD The facTorial Of a nuMbEr.  IN THis caSE 4*3*2*1 = 24.
.SeCtiOn.Data
.sectioN.TExt
.Globl _StArt
._sTart:

 pusHl $4
 call factorial
 addL $4, %Esp

 Movl %eax, %ebx
 movL $1, %eaX
 int $0X80

.TYpE faCToRIal, @FuNCtiON
 Factorial:
 pushl %eBp
 movl %esp
 hoarded

Background
As aresult ofanoth ermet aques tion  highlightings uspi cions of sockpuppety o ne us er wasr ec ently  suspen d ed a ndan ot her  2 we re de let ed. How ever, 3 ho urs  b efore this h a pp ened (poss ibl y knowing th atthe ji gwas up) t hepuppe t mast e r conv erted alm os t  all t h eir rep i nt o abounty. As a resu l to f the 2 puppet 's des tr u ct i o n t hemasters re pwas s e t to 1( an d w oul d  have gone ve ry negative ifmy cal cu lat i ons ar e cor re c t.I believe t o -2 18).
Butthe bo u nty rem a ins. Al l that  th e m aste r  n ow  ne ed s  to do  is cre ate a ne wso ck, p icku p t he b oun ty o f 350  clean rep an d r epea t  th e pro cess,  gai ni ng 21 8 repthatwe  know to be fra udul ent.
Ques tio nIsth is ac c eptabl e?I k now tha t bount i esar e r ar ely invalidated on ce s ta rted (at  least on  o n  topic q ue sti ons) b ut in  thi s  c ase it i s enab l in gfraud.Wo rse st il l,ifinval i date d woul d this r eturn the 350 rep to the sock mast e r. D is c ussi ons  of the bou ntyw erein m y  o rig i nal f lag w hi c hi s why I’m bringingth is upon me ta for discus sion (is t h e r e even a  way fo r  mods to refun d the  bounty wi t hout sim ply r eturning  the rept o  the mas ter )
U pda teA f te r the one wee k susp en tion th e b ounty-c ach edsoc kpu pp et rep wa s return ed  t oth e O P, as s uming my  r ead in g o f the rep ch angeis c or re c t
The tim e ss e em a  l it tlewro ng , whe n Ir eme mber it  from the  ti m e Ire me mber "R ep Change" an d"User wasRe mov ed" ha p p ening at  the same time

A:

Thi s  is one  of  thos e we ird edge- cas es tha t m a ke bou ntiesso...  I nte r e sting . We 've  c leaned upt h e m ess h er e; t he effe cts were fairly be n ign . However, an y a ccou n t scau g ht usi ng thi s to intentionall y inflateth e ir  reputatio n  wi ll  be sub ject to  remo v al. 

Q:

Why d oes thisas semb l y  yi eld 24 ins tead of4?

I amh aving tr ouble  un dersta nd ing  howthe fo l low ing c ode wo rk s.  It  is a  s imple pi ece of code which usesa recu rsive  fu nction to  fi n d t he factor ialof a numbe r. In  this  ca s e 4*3 *2*1 =24. .sect ion. d ata
.sect i on .te x t 
. globl _star t . _st art:
 p u shl $4 
 ca ll factorial
 add l  $4, %esp

 mo vl % e a x,%eb x 
 mo vl  $1, %eax
 int  $0 x8 0 
.type f ac torial, @fu nction
fa c toria l:
 pu shl %e bp
 mov l %e s p
 hoarded

Background
As_a result_of another meta question_highlighting suspicions_of_sockpuppety one_user_was recently suspended_and another 2_were deleted. However, 3_hours before this_happened_(possibly knowing that the jig was up) the puppet master converted almost all their_rep_into a_bounty._As_a result of the 2_puppet's destruction the masters rep_was set_to 1 (and would have gone very negative_if_my calculations are_correct. I believe to -218).
But the bounty remains. All_that the master now needs to_do is create_a_new_sock, pick up the_bounty of 350 clean rep and_repeat the process, gaining 218 rep_that we know to be fraudulent.
Question
Is this_acceptable? I know that bounties are_rarely invalidated once started (at_least on_on topic questions) but in_this case it_is enabling_fraud. Worse still,_if invalidated would this return the_350 rep to_the sock master.
Discussions of the bounty_were_in my original_flag_which_is why_I’m bringing this_up_on meta_for_discussion (is there even a way_for_mods to refund the bounty without simply_returning the rep to_the_master)
Update
After the one week_suspention the bounty-cached sockpuppet rep_was returned to the OP, assuming_my reading_of the_rep change is correct

The times seem a little wrong, when I_remember it from the time I_remember "Rep Change" and_"User was_Removed"_happening at the_same_time

A:

This is_one of those weird edge-cases that make_bounties so..._Interesting.
We've cleaned up the mess here;_the effects were fairly_benign._However, any accounts caught using this_to intentionally inflate their reputation will_be subject to removal. 

_Q:

Why_does_this assembly yield 24 instead_of 4?

I am having trouble understanding_how the following_code works.  It is a simple_piece_of code which uses a recursive_function_to find the factorial of a_number.__In this case 4*3*2*1 =_24.
.section.data
.section.text
.globl _start
._start:

 pushl $4
 call factorial
_addl $4, %esp

 movl %eax, %ebx
 movl $1, %eax
_int $0x80

.type factorial,_@function
 factorial:
 pushl %ebp
 movl_%esp