Bitcoin Forum

Recent activity of SteveStake (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2458002) look like encourage spam on the forum (IMO). I had noticed it (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5092506.msg49557823#msg49557823) two weeks ago. However, never mind what is the pay rate, it's depend on them and I don't want to talk about it. I just want to mention how they are encouraging spam. FYI, I had not bothered to apply or I have no problem with them. My intention isn't to tag them or stop them.

I have bothered open this thread because to they have opened another campaign although there is a running campaign and look like they are inviting spammer. Below is their 2 thread;
1. Stake.com - A signature campaign for everyone! Earn up to 0.1 BTC weekly (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.0;all)   (Archived (http://archive.is/BkOJv))
2. Stake.com Signature Campaign - Up to 0.035 BTC a week (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5092506.0;all)   (Archived (http://archive.is/6jVZX))

I will quote below those point is encouraging spammer. (Both signature campaign is running)
Old thread:
I think this is the one reason of encourage spam. There should be limit of maximum post like 50 or 100. Is it very easy to make 200 post ? Can we expect quality good post if someone made 200 post ?


So why need encourage spam?

On new thread:
and What constructive post he is expecting within 20 words ?

Look at the bold part, accumulate high post count, he don't need accumulate quality post count.



Answer given by Darkstar, so I don't want to repeat.


They had not uploaded participant list/spreadsheet yet, so we can't check their posting quality.

Most likely SteveStake forgot about merit system where most of managers are requiring even 5 earned merit (especially for btc signature).

Do you think he is doing right? What is your opinion ? Do you think they should reconsider their requirement?

I was actually considering posting something similar.

Big up for doing it.

I guess it is still a bit soon, and we will need to see what the BM considers a constructive post or not.

You are relating the 20 chars & constructive posts as if 20 chars was the max and not he min. You should change your reasoning. It is perfectly possible to be beneficial to a debate or a question by giving a short answer, even if it is unlikely.

My personal opinion is that this will go south very fast.

Edit: They don't have to change their opinion, they just have to thoroughly check the posts. I am not saying that I trust them to do it tho.
They should just increase the payment/post and limit the max post being paid and only accept member that generally post a lot, or just offer a fixed amount/week, with a min posting while chosing big posters.

Some examples of the high quality posting brought to you by the Stake campaign:

Funny i just checked today myself for the first time signatur campaigns and realised that no accounts with negative trust are being accepted anymore.
So you can say DT members who are abusing their power or giving false rating on purpose are instantly destroying the possibility to earn some BTC using these signatures.
Seeing also the biggest DT supporters their hunting for these signatures made me laugh.

You destroy legit accounts which created a lot of good content in the past and are getting flooded now with newbie accounts.
Soon there will be no more high ranked accounts without red taggs.

Also the rule if somebody receives a red tagg from a DT member won't get paid is the biggest joke.
Is a DT member playing BOSS deciding who will get paid and who not ?
I think these campaign managers are a little bit to much brain damaged by these DT abusers how else could you explain enforcing such nonsense.

I sent out of interrest some PM's asking if false negative trust is an issue.Will love to see their replies.


Its really funny the people who are yelling the loudest about signature being the biggest shit on this forum are all wearing these nice signatures which is mainly promoting hazard.... which btw is in most countries ilegal (even promoting it).

And since its ilegal am asking myself where are here our honorable DT members protecting our community from scams which are by law ilegal ?

Bitcoin is illegal most of country, so we need to stop promoting Bitcoin ? Should we leave this Bitcoin related forum? Did you?


No one tagged him yet. My intention isn't tag him, my intention is discourage spam.

I don't think so.


Are DT members deciding who will accept or reject ?

Is Bitcoin created for only western country ? Has Satoshi Nakamoto told you that Bitcoin created only for western country?  Don't ask stupid questions.

Never mind, red always against DT members.

So we should start tagging people because they didn't have the chance to be taught english early on, or simply because they have poor knowledge/are stupid?

Seems a bit extreme.

isn't this what most campaigns do? they all have the word "quality" there and most of them don't seem to follow through. a single test would be counting merit for those people wearing signatures, i am pretty sure the majority of them don't even have a rate of 1 to 10 merit to post ratio, they all seem to post the same shit everyday and since they still get paid, why should they bother?

 I don't think anyone has been punished around here for not knowing English. Users from non English speaking backgrounds are punished for joining signature campaigns and posting outside of their means. If they cannot make a post(constructive) that makes sense and is on topic in the English boards, then they need to stay in their local boards until they learn the language better. I'm just giving reasons as to why users may get a red tag if English is not a language they know well, not anything about you.


I was wondering if a thread about this Campaign would be made. As long as this manager keeps an eye on the participants and is strict about the posts, things should be fine. Obviously by seeing the post by Darkstar we can see that users are posting some trash, but we do not know if they are being paid for that trash yet.

We will be able to tell a lot more when we see who is paid and what rate they earn as to whether this Steve guy is doing a good job.

Now more to the point of your questions. Do I think he is doing right? No, I think users will post like crazy to make the campaign worth their time. I think he is tempting users to get banned for spam. I think it's a very bad move on the part of Stake, but that's just my opinion. We, the community has 0 say in what they offer participants as far as payrate goes. That's between the manager and the site they are advertising.(Even if it's an owner of the site on a new account)

You gotta remember a site's main objective is to attract players. They want as many people in the bitcoin world as possible seeing their Advertisement. They could care less who get's banned or whatnot. They want the most bang for their buck. Can you blame them? I understand their stance as well, they just need to come up with a payment option that can best achieve what they want while not making the community go nuts.

We the community do have a choice as to whether or not apply for the campaign. So, if some campaign like this pops up, users should just not join or not fall for temptation. You either can deal with the low rate offered and move on, or join and take your chances at getting banned by spamming. Why risk it? Seems to me the choice should be do not join, and show the company you would rather support the community then make a few dollars and risk being tossed from the community.

I have no issues with Stake or any other site, Just my opinions

Seems they are going to change few rules as we discussed here and their thread. Just now noticed from their campaign thread. I will take it positively at least they understand that their few rules should be reconsider, that was the reason why I have opened this thread. My intention isn't harass someone, we just need reduce spam from forum. Let's wait what changes they are going to do.



However I will keep open this thread for further discussion.

I've sent Stunna (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=81292) a PM, asking to check this thread.

What about promoting harzard to underaged people ?Why don't you need to reduce that too ?


Oh just saw your signatur.Now i know why you don't feel that need

I forwarded this to Steve and the rest of the Stake team. Obviously there are some valid points highlighted here, there is no doubt that this is creating a huge amount of spam. Hopefully they can make some changes that the community finds agreeable.

Actually the first campaign have  spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=0) so we can see how some users behave when they have the opportunity to post up to 200 posts per week. Most is still below the limit of 50 post per week, but few users post more then 100 post, and one is commend by campaign manager for reaching post cap of 200 posts.

I think they are not doing right this campaign, some basic rules are ignored and many participants have no minimum predisposition to participate in any signature campaign.

You should stop promoting cryptocurrency. It's related to illicit activity and you are promoting such a terrible, terrible thing to underage children. How immoral of you :(

---

Brilliant. Actual campaign managers that care about rooting out spam will make the forum a better place.

Honestly i think its not possible to have enough traffic in website by just increasing particapators or post only. Quality post and creative poster make a great impression on visitors mind. That's why its better to highlght quality post rather than shitpost. As an example you can see the original scenario of ChipMixer Signature Campaign (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1935179.0) and web traffic (https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/chipmixer.com)


You can see here on the pic that 58.3% traffic drived from bitcointalk but stake.com haven't got the visibility of bitcointalk traffic yet. Now you can compare it with ChipMixer partipants and IMO obviously they are high quality poster. For that reason they got the high amount of traffic from bitcointalk.

It is to notify that every participator of ChipMixer is high merit earner. So i think its clear to everyone that you will not get traffic if you accept spammer on signature campaign.

So you should stay away from this forum and just trash all your crypto funds if you have any,be a good citizen bro. ;D

Definitely bitcointalk will miss you.

Kind of disappointing that they seem to be relying on the community to do their job for them. From Telegram:


(source) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1904684.msg49804288#msg49804288)

---

@Stake - You should figure out that not all posts are the same. Those that get viewed are infinitely times more valuable than the 200th+ post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089214.msg49793301#msg49793301) answering (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5041743.msg49786522#msg49786522) a (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4845224.msg49781707#msg49781707) simple  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3349017.msg49799044#msg49799044)question  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5034230.msg49779980#msg49779980)which  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1786423.msg49770762#msg49770762)are  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5048060.msg49783692#msg49783692)only  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1919869.msg49782647#msg49782647)read  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5107025.msg49777282#msg49777282)by  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5106312.msg49757332#msg49757332)spammers  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2967940.msg49666036#msg49666036)looking  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3076961.msg49665836#msg49665836)to  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2047546.msg49797269#msg49797269)paraphrase  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4819273.msg49780348#msg49780348)for  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5101219.msg49732257#msg49732257)their  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4789872.msg49806089#msg49806089)own  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4479318.msg49803919#msg49803919)post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3349017.msg49799044#msg49799044) spam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5099849.msg49805946#msg49805946).

(each word links to an exceptional high quality post by a Stake campaign member that will surely be read many times)

I wouldn't say that asking for reports is mutually exclusive to handling of campaign spam by the manager. Given that the campaign is set to take in a large number of users (from what I assume, since there are yet to be actual numbers on the member list), any kind of help should be welcomed.

What I don't like is the "earn up to 0.1 BTC weekly" part of this campaign (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.0). That's a minimum of 990 posts that they'll accept (weekly) and a maximum of 4950 posts.

There is no way a normal person can create that many constructive posts.

Assuming 9 hours of sleep and 15 hours of posting (every single day, without break) that corresponds to one post every 6.4 minutes at the Legendary rank. Or, one post every 1.3 minutes (76 seconds) at Jr. Member rank.

Its a numbers game.Quantity will always beat at some stage quality.
If somebody replaces 1 quality posts with 50 shitty posts the quality post will definetly lose that battle.
Legendary/Hero get higher click through rates no question asked but not that they will be able to compete against 10+ shitty posts from regular accounts.

You say this, but do you know where those shitty posts end up in? Sections that nobody reads. Well, nobody except for other fellow shitposters. And they're too busy shitposting to pay attention to the ads. Oops.

Consider: what is the likelihood of a signature ad reaching users that will actually click in the Altcoin section, or one of the Economics megathreads?

Main target are noobs so they will reach them anyway no matter which section.Wouldn't they target noobs they wouldn't use legendaries reputation to increase their own credibility.

Even new users to Bitcoin won't scour through the scores of shitty posts that permeate throughout the many Bitcoin Discussion and Economics threads. And I assume most new users would enter those nice-sounding board names... to subsequently exit after they see the nonsense that's spouted by "high-ranking" forum members.

Maybe Maggiordomo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2340148) can join :D

I believed this can be consider as stake.com sig spammer. Deadline is near they have to add some efforts to increase their post counts.

http://archive.is/tpwPi 

Issue: Post time interval

This is what happens when you skip hiring real managers such as Hhampuz or Yahoo, but what do I know. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Here's 27 posts from a Stake signature spammer in the short span of 35 minutes

https://archive.is/qQbPg

probably the fastest 2$ he has ever earned.

---

 seven2smoke1  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=926641;sa=showPosts;start=0)  suddenly became very intersted in gambling with 10 posts a day ( previous posts show that he is not active there) but thanks to the .001 BTC bonus. ;D

This is true, but if you hire experienced managers then signature campaign must have rules that have been introduced in all sig campaigns. Rules are simple, but stake.com is for some reason allow posting in all boards (who and how check posts in local boards?), without a clear determination what is spam or not, and to all users (DT red tag excluded), but completely ignoring the merit system.

I am sure you, Hhampuz or Yahoo would never agree to run a campaign under these rules.

1st week recently ended and this guy won 1st prize of 100$ in contest that was added to the campaign. I have asked Steve to check the posts again.

There are some who posted more than 100 posts and one even posted 180 posts during the 1st week.

Hello everyone, I respect the opinion of all, they are really people who have a lot of experience, I am in the process of applying the stake signature, I have noticed that most of the people that live in the stake have a high IQ, they administer information in all areas and, in fact, they are very kind people and some of the content that they publish in the forum are of high quality, it has helped me because there are many investors, I see their points of view on how they think and how they act. And the importance of everything is that we are many people who want to continue growing in this prestigious forum and Mr. Steve is providing opportunities to very valuable people. This is my humble opinion.

I don't understand why you needed to write so much to convey so little. Regardless of your English ability, it should be easy to cut down on irrelevancy and redundancy.

---

(and I see nothing about confronting spam at all, only "stake is a campaign that allows members to earn bitcoin")

LUCKMCFLY went from 40 posts in 15 days to 40 posts in 3 days since he joined that campaign. That says it all.

I'm sorry, but by stating that there are high quality publications made by most users, I am very emphatic to show that there is no spam, except that in any ecosystem there are people of all types, and those who do spam,
will are at risk of be expelled from the campaign, as it is written in the OP. Also, every day, I work to improve my English, it is not necessary to try to humiliate my lack of capacity.

It is evident that you are using a thesaurus. If you had learned the meaning of those words, you would not use them in such a way. Please do not attempt to use language of which you have little understanding.

Thank you very much, but the truth is that I have not been selected yet, and I have the signature and the Avatar because I am an aspiring participant, and well I like the avatar, but check my publications, I think I have been contributing what little I know.

so 40 posts in 3 days is warming up?

Their new requirements are twice as strict  :o

Only if that changed a thing. Cunts here will start writing posts with two keyboards to fill that criterion. This is really easy you see, the reward is great but just needs an additional rule to weed out the shit-posters - Minimum of 100 merits achieved to join the campaign.

What I had noticed is  Stake.com - A signature campaign for everyone! Earn up to 0.1 BTC weekly (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.0;all) don't even have a public spreadhseet of accepted participants and I think they were maintaining that in their telegram or discord channel so is it okay to deal with outside of the forum about the accepted participants?

If yes then we may going to hear more stories like below when they are started spamming ::)

It should be fine to do that but I wonder how do the participants get to know if they have been accepted or how much posts have been counted and stuff? I public sheet is much better than a telegram channel.
I personally find it very shady if someone wants to hide information as insensitive as this behind a telegram channel.

They have this sheet from the other campaign (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=0). It is possible to see that  Caladonian (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=704041) made 109 posts and received 0.0184BTC.

Stake has also some topics on Local Boards. Stake.com Muita Diversão e Lucros em Um Só Lugar! (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2707090.200)
 Primedice - Nº 1 Site de Apostas com BTC! 21 bilhões de Bets, 112+ BTC Jackpot! (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2660803.0)

@Adriano, who is the moderator of the Portuguese section, have alerted them that this kind of marketing was not so effective. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2707090.msg28814009#msg28814009)It is just one person posting alone, there isn't any conversation or anything.

it's getting unreal if you usually visit the gambling section , I made a post in sportsbet thread about getting limited and waiting for their support to answer me I got 5 replies with stake signatures and all of them just making guesses about the problem

it looks like they are racing to make posts in the gambling section , even stake thread is full of spam now with their participants talking about V2 without even giving any valid info about what's coming with V2
I usually check the thread just to see if Stake is announcing the launch of the sportsbook but all I find is spam

Primedice's (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208986.30160) thread has turned into wall observer thread.
Wherever I click I see Stake. This reminds me of "good old" yobit signature days and 20 posts/day  ::)

---

Can someone tell me what does this mean:

I'll give 2 merits to first member (without Stake's signature  :)) who deciphers this.

The choice between Waves and Ethereum Classic boils down to this:

Ethereum is different to Ethereum Classic.
Therefore, Waves is the superior choice.

We have

He exactly want to mean that if someone want to choose between waves and ETC then he should choose waves. ETC is not Ethereum means, ETC is a fork of Ethereum. And I am agree with his statement as well. I am not sure if you know that ETC developers was stopped work (https://kryptomoney.com/bad-news-for-ethereum-classic-etcdevs-shut-downs-operations-due-to-price-cash/) on last December due to financial problems. So we can say dev team isn't strong of ETC, although ETC team changed developers (https://mobile.twitter.com/eth_classic/status/1073903748223647746). But this kind of announcement would break investors trust. So over all we can say waves is better then ETC. And for clear confusion, ETC is not ETH. Both platform is different.

If a campaign don't have any spreadsheet at public,when the participants found spamming they can easily defend that they kicked out that person or even didn't accept them.

I think we need to force the campaign manager to provide a public spreadsheet.

Maybe this is what he meant.
https://i.imgur.com/jsq2anO.jpg

3 reasons for which we're observing spam like this.
1. 0.001 BTC bonus for posting in Gambling.
2. 2x merit points in Gambling section.
3. The big one- Competition on first page replies. There is a big competition based on first page reply for which users are replying instantly after a thread being posted.

It means Campaign Manager isn't professional  :D

here another thread with 9 comments so far , literally all of them with stake signatures
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111649.0

it's funny how they are discussing one of the most popular gambling sites in the market (Betonline) and most of them don't even know that site but yet they are giving their opinions (and guesses )  about it

it explains a lot how most of stake participants are discussing gambling stuffs without even having experience just because there is a bonus for the gambling section

14/16 replies now Stake.com owned

Today's challenge;

Find 10 consecutive posts with no stake signature in the gambling section

Ohh God,Thats mission impossible. :D

https://media.giphy.com/media/1UNFtwPcLcsoFpCwZy/giphy.gif

Just find my posts  :P

Still not possible to find 10 consecutive posts in any thread without stake signature,not only in gambling section they invaded all the sections of Bitcointalk. :o

Even the boards that don't display signatures are not safe due to that ultra-annoying avatar.  I'm glad theymos is going to end the insanity. Actually, I don't mind most of the animated avatars, but something about stake.com really hurts my eyes. >:(

We had a very long lull there without many bitcoin-paying signature campaigns, and now this one pops up with apparently no quality control, and BAM....we're back to the days of Yobit and Secondstrade.  Crazy how one campaign can lead to so much forum pollution, but there you have it.

We talked about having some sort of minimum standards for campaign managers, but I think we got lulled into thinking we actually started to improve without any restrictions on campaigns--sadly I don't think that's the case.  Imagine if there were multiple campaigns like this running simultaneously.  You know damn well every spammer in the world would have their whole families engaged in writing shitposts.  Just like the bad old days (which weren't even that long ago).

Somehow we did manage to get a thread here in reputation without much stake posts :)

They (stake.com) are doing what they are allowed to do, and except this thread and few post in their signature threads I do not see that even one DT member marked manager account with red tag for as title say encouraging spam.

YoBit and BitMixer signature campaign are both running with bot, because of that it was not possible to control spam. But then Lauda is took over BitMixer and hilariousandco YoBit (if memory serves me good), and both problems were quickly and efficiently solved.

There is always a way to fix the bad things, but there is not always enough willingness to do that.

DT shouldn't tag accounts accounts for things that should be handled by Mods. That's not only spam but also plagiarism, merit abuse and ban evasion, and from what I've seen, most DT members don't tag this anymore.

Does 'Gambling discussion' count towards their bonus?

If so, I found a topic that has two consecutive pages with zero posts from stake signature related accounts.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110454.120  Pages 6 and 7

I was thinking to apply there, the payout is very high my in comparison to my actual signature. (I had no luck so far to join good campaigns)

I will wait 2 weeks when I will hit hero rank and I will see.

Intention of my post was to invite them and share our thoughts to prevent spam from forum. At the beginning their response was fine. But its seems they have chosen different way to promote and spam over forum. To be honest their spammy activity increased more than before. They should think again about their promotional strategy. Everyone free to advertise here any valid site, it doesn't mean they are free to encourage spam on this forum.

I would like to suggest them reconsider about their promotional strategy and help build a decent forum. SteveStake should visit this thread once again to make a strong and quality promotion.

Me too, I think if they adjust the campaign a little bit it can get a very good one. Adding 1 required Merit per week to get a payout or limiting the total posts per week would be fine. The spreadsheet is not public, so I don't know how many users were disqualified or not accepted.
They pay up to $100 per week to the most constructive posters and the competition isn't very high to make the first place, but I didn't see the spreadsheet yet. I'll check out their Telegram, have a look at the spreadsheet and give it a try tomorrow.

I don't know how long they will run the campaign, they have many participants and much to pay. Most likely they won't run it very long because it could be only a temporary promotion for Stake v2.


Payments per 10 posts could also be done like this: If someone is doing x posts per week, the amount paid in BTC will be lower for every 10 comments the more you post per week. First 50 comments for e.g. Member get .0003 BTC per 10 posts, the next 50 posts get .00015 BTC per 10 posts and so on...


10 - 50 posts per week:

Jr/Member - .0003 BTC per 10 posts
Full/Sr. member - .0008 BTC per 10 post
Hero/Legendary - .0012 BTC per 10 posts

51 - 100 posts per week:

Jr/Member - .00015 BTC per 10 posts
Full/Sr. member - .0004 BTC per 10 post
Hero/Legendary - .008 BTC per 10 posts

100 - 250 posts per week:

Jr/Member - .00005 BTC per 10 posts
Full/Sr. member - .00015 BTC per 10 post
Hero/Legendary - .00025 BTC per 10 posts

More than 250 posts per week won't be paid.

I would not have anything above 100 posts/week, and I personally find that very generous in terms of how many quality posts one can output on a weekly basis.

Unless they're dedicating serious time into the forum to churn out content consistently, it's absolutely insane to assume that the average user is able to create that many quality posts.

Moreover, if they are dedicating such a large amount of their time into it, they wouldn't do it for peanuts (exceptions being forum fanatics). If we assume an average of 10 minutes to construct a quality post, that means that they're getting about $2/hr. (for reference, it took me ~12 focused minutes to do the research and writing of this post)

I don't like to think of signature campaigns as jobs because forced posts decrease quality but this is the only way I can portray the inefficacy of the system.

Quality users won't post for $2/hr.
Shitposters won't, either. Because they can churn out dozens of posts every time they log on by scanning through random general/vague threads, creating some half-assed reply they garner from reading either the thread title or some other shitposter's reply.

Repeating what has already been said or stating some obvious (or even, wrong) conclusion about a general topic adds nothing to the thread... but it's easy to do and it's quick to do. If I were to go down this path, I imagine I could hit at least one post per minute, easy. Incoherent rambling and repetition can pad a reply so even character limits or simple guards against one-liners won't really suffice.

When I factor that amount of time into it, this can easily reach $24/hr. This is nearly double that of the highest minimum wage in the US ($13.25) and is definitely something that people in poorer cultures would love to be a part of.
    
Imagine living in an area where the cost of living for the average person each month is half of what you earn every week ($400). You would be a king with one account, never mind the multiple ones that account farmers surely have in the Stake campaign.

In fact, if you did have multiple accounts and you decided to put in the estimated ~16 hours/week per account into the campaign, you would have an income higher than that of GDP/capita United States with just three thereof. That is, 3 accounts at 50 hours/week nets you $62,400 before tax.

I'm vehemently against using accounts in this way but the reality is that it happens and for good reason: it's "easy money"... to people who don't care about the forum degradation.

Here is an announcement from stevestake which maybe happening due to this thread?
But I think they need to make adjustments in their requirements to get weekly rewards like having maximum paid post and keep the participants list in public which I am insisting for many times here.

Nobody writes more than 100 quality posts a week -- nobody.

I admit the amount of BTC they pay is compelling but I wouldn't want to be associated with what looks to be an all-you-can spam contest.

For instance, both of these by Tamilson are just awful, I bolded the most telling parts:


He's commenting gibberish over an extremely serious problem (guy lost $60k worth of coins). Then doubled down after the OP corrected him, for the sake of racking up 1 more post.

Stake.com is not expressly seeking quality posts, but has a completely different approach how signature campaign should be set up. Just read the introduction from their OP :


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.0

Everything bolded is more than an invitation to spam, with total disregard for Signature Campaign Guidelines (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1684035.0), where we can read a lot of useful things, such as this part :


So we have some rules, and if there is no improvements in the given time, Staff has all the power to close this campaign.

They also have a merit contest with prizes. Check the last two topics for merit abuse in reputation, seems like they are going against one another:

Quintrix (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5115109.0) stake signature
wilburwilbur (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5114255.0) stake signature. Things backfired against PryptoMontreal (topic starter stake signature)who was caught handing himself merit from an alt account.

Overall, not well thought out campaign with low to zero control that encourages spam and indirectly merit abuse.

LOL, no comment. He whined about abusers and he also abused it, shall we tag them all?  ???

Should be fun if we can get access to the spreadsheet.

This thread has served its purpose as far as being an avenue to discuss the Stake campaign. Further discussion IMO would only be considered signature spam as everything that can be said, pretty much already has been said.

Campaigns like this are the communities fault. The site is not to blame IMO, at least not right out of the gate. You the community have the choice whether or not to join a signature campaign. Well, you have the choice on whether to apply. Most users are looking to make a buck wearing an advertisement, and don't really care about the community or bitcointalk. They want to make money. There's no shame in that, but spitting out 100 posts in 3 days is ridiculous. You the user have the choice on what sort of community member you want to be. A douchebag spammer or a person who takes pride in being a member here.

If the community joined the campaign and did not have the intention of making the max number of weekly accepted posts, then everything would be fine. That's just not how it is though. You have multiple farmers and account buyers who fuck shit up.

I'm not a fan of tagging users for signature spam unless they are blatantly doing it for monetary gain only. This to me is the community and moderators job. We the community should use the report to moderator button and report posts you think are off topic, and moderators will ban the accounts they feel are abusing the system. If we the community
isn't reporting posts, how do we expect the moderators to help out?

At what point is the site or manager to blame?

IMO the manager or site becomes at fault once the problem has been brought to their attention, and they fail to take action.


Here you clearly see the manager is taking action. What I do not like is the fact that we cannot see who is or who is not in the campaign. I believe that since the campaign is being run on this platform, then the community should have access to see the spreadsheet for the campaign. It should be publicly listed in the campaign thread. That's how it has always been for transparency as well as gives scam hunters a way to see who is breaking rules or cheating campaigns. Some might say that is for the manager to decide, not the community. Obviously my opinion differs.

Why is the spreadsheet not my business? What is it hurting by not being public?

I think by the spreadsheet not being public, Stake/PD (I assume both connected due to same owners/Mods) are putting themselves at risk for being tagged due to running a shady campaign. We the community can see a billion posts with the Stake sig, but we do not know if they are in the Stake campaign. So for all we know, Stake is supporting the spammers. With a public spreadsheet we can decipher who is or isn't in the campaign and tag appropriately.

It's kinda shady to keep everything hidden honestly. I can see not sharing details about the website for the public, but this is a spreadsheet about bitcointalk. Only thing people are going to see is how you manage participants in a signature campaign. Only details we see are stats about bitcointalk users.

Websites may feel this is invasive to en extent, but too bad. You choose to use the bitcointalk community as a platform to advertise, you must adhere to some of the stipulations of using this platform. I like community opinion on this question. Should a spreadsheet being public, be a mandatory requirement? Maybe we need a separate topic for this question alone?

So what do we do now?

Either tag them, or move on. Discussing it for another month is going to achieve nothing. Whether or not you can see a spreadsheet, you can still be reporting posts and letting the chips fall where they may.

This could be 100% users fault here if Steve removes all the spammers that have been accepted. We don't know who is in or who isn't either way, so reporting posts is a must at this point.

This is all i'm going to post for now

Off Topic portion of this post

Poll has been created for users to express opinions  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5115487.0

Should be, since signature campaign is forum related, spreadsheet should be on public. Never mind if they promote their project on other platform for advertisement like FB and Twitter bounty, that case we should not bother ourselves. But signature campaign is directly on forum and we have right to see their participant.    

Open separate topic with poll would be better option. Feel free to create one if you are not busy.

I am not agree to tag participant only for spam post if they are not promoting scam. But owner or manager deserve tag in my opinions since they are choosing new way to spam on forum and they keep it hidden.  

I think a link to a public spreadsheet has just been added - here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=1373140560)

There seems to be 3x as many people wearing their signatures and not reflected in this table, maybe someone (manager ::)) should tell them they won't be paid so no need to spew 50 posts a day.

The spreadsheet is the first signature campaign that was made by stake.com https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5092506.0 and recently he closed the signature campaign.


But for the new signature campaign https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.0 he hasn't include a spreadsheet.

Anyone likes Ice cream?

This one is even better, 87 posts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1569501;sa=showPosts;start=80) yesterday, mostly one liners in local board and only 1 post in gambling section, surprisingly, they are shilling hard for Stake in Stake's thread:
This reminds me of "buy waves because ethereum is different than ethereum classic" post (http://url=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111069.msg49906875#msg49906875)  :)

Why do I not see him tagged as a signature spammer yet?

Maybe because it is hardly a valid reason to tag someone...

But maybe you are referring to the spreadsheet?

I guess he's angry he got tagged as a sig spammer by Lucius for making huge amount of posts per week.

Obviously, there are much worse spammers out there and no one is tagging them (deisik you can do it yourself) for spamming i.e accounts mentioned by marlboroza.

Well, xvids's post technically isn't spam because it is posted in Off-Topic in thread about Ice cream (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5078574.0)  ;D

ripplecanavari (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1569501) on the other hand is spamming and this is spam burst:
https://i.imgur.com/vtqvI9r.png
https://i.imgur.com/89bysSE.png
https://i.imgur.com/TuaIdwO.png
https://i.imgur.com/ghAgN5g.png
...and should be handled by moderator.

Reporting these as well. Let's hope they get removed before payday.

Well, I have no comment about this, a scammer opened a thread and right after the spam started I don't know how these users posting without looking Op posthistory and feedbacks.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5129519.new#new

http://archive.fo/NL6U5

The first two guys were warning anyone potentially reading the thread about the dangers of using that link/casino. The third posted what amounts to nonsense.

How to exactly report spammer?

This person probably forget that they already posted this in "Suggest me some gambling site" thread http://archive.is/AKuvE:


Ok, they got link, so it is better to post it again:


Damnit, no one probably noticed this so Coin-Desk had to repeat it again:


This is better, shilling hard for Stake:







This reminds me of old spammers writing "bitcoin is great because bitcoin is money of the future and in future bitcoin will become bigger and that is why I like bitcoin for future"

This most likely is an alt account of his : Sent 4 merits (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081113.msg48495667#msg48495667) to the account for an undeserving replies the OP of that thread that ask for the suggestion isn't ok with. Also alcoholboy is spamming in the same manner with the stake signature and Thank you conclusion.

Maybe @suchmoon can scarpe everyone who is wearing the signature and regroup them for them as did with the yobit one?

Unfortunately I don't have too much time to search for more accounts of this abuser, but here is another one:



And, of course, there is more https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5119455.0, Rafie35 is already tagged.

And, of course:


Alcoholboy is Mariana White while Rafie35 is Alica Brown, I am sure somewhere on the forum there are Joana Black, Sarah Grey and all other generated names.

Reporting alcohol boy as well.

Update: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg22334499#msg22334499 more alts  ::)

Update 2:

https://i.imgur.com/2KiBVU5.png

I am not sure why alcoholboy texted me to remove negative tag from account, as I can see account alcoholboy is not tagged (yet)  ;D

Do you mean like this? (trust scores may be out of date - let me know if that's important and I'll re-scrape; post count / length is for the last 7 days)

   #  User                    BPIP Rank       Posts  AvgLen   Merit         DT score 
   1. Adriano2010 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=514126)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Adriano2010) Hero         262     227      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/514126.html)                  
   2. okala (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1108241)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=okala) Full         222     330       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1108241.html)                  
   3. rijaljun (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1004807)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rijaljun) Sr.          199     335       8 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1004807.html)                  
   4. Ailmand (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=770367)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Ailmand) Hero         194     344                          
   5. ripplecanavari (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1569501)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ripplecanavari) Member       194     215      21 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1569501.html)                  
   6. bitcoin31 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=847476)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bitcoin31) Hero         193     344       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/847476.html)                  
   7. Haunebu (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=218075)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Haunebu) Hero         180     308      30 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/218075.html)                  
   8. CryptoBry (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=994859)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=CryptoBry) Sr.          148     674      27 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/994859.html)                  
   9. feryjhie (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=329895)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=feryjhie) Hero         139     269       8 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/329895.html)                  
  10. Genemind (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=774789)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Genemind) Sr.          139     338       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/774789.html)                  
  11. traderethereum (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=837151)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=traderethereum) Hero         137     498       6 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/837151.html)                  
  12. Catmurs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1817406)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Catmurs) Jr.          135     156       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1817406.html)                  
  13. pinoycash (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=369376)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pinoycash) Hero         135     287      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/369376.html)                  
  14. Bitinity (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=449846)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bitinity) Legendary    131     387      53 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/449846.html)                  
  15. otto_diesel (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=951020)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=otto_diesel) Sr.          123     339      33 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/951020.html)                  
  16. lossnet (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1105358)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lossnet) Full         122     449      22 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1105358.html)                  
  17. Ximoandali (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2173628)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Ximoandali) Jr.          122     159       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2173628.html)                  
  18. blockman (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=816893)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=blockman) Hero         121     381       7 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/816893.html)                  
  19. mrdeposit (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=77867)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mrdeposit) Hero         121     213       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/77867.html)                  
  20. xvids (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=948175)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=xvids) Sr.          113     326      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/948175.html)                  
  21. Danslip (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=338843)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Danslip) Hero          93     178       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/338843.html)                  
  22. markstivn98 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2536129)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=markstivn98) Member        91     185      13 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2536129.html)                  
  23. Beerwizzard (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1063803)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Beerwizzard) Full          89     445      21 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1063803.html)                  
  24. cryptjh (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1188761)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=cryptjh) Full          85     304      14 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1188761.html)                  
  25. jak3 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=555318)                    BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jak3) Legendary     85     426       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/555318.html)                  
  26. BeGoods (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=452876)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BeGoods) Legendary     79     301       8 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/452876.html)                  
  27. gospodin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1339358)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gospodin) Full          78     311     143 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1339358.html)                  
  28. Zythiphill (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2222336)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Zythiphill) Jr.           75     157       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2222336.html)                  
  29. Pattart (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=132673)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Pattart) Hero          71     283                          
  30. bitcoin-shark (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=843439)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bitcoin-shark) Hero          65     201       8 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/843439.html)                  
  31. erikalui (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=141005)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=erikalui) Legendary     62     289       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/141005.html)      20: -0 / +2 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=141005) 
  32. pushups44 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=972961)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pushups44) Sr.           62     352       6 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/972961.html)                  
  33. pey (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1003871)                     BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pey) Sr.           60     243       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1003871.html)                  
  34. nauane (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=380866)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=nauane) Full          59     316                          
  35. BossMacko (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=544422)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BossMacko) Hero          58     263       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/544422.html)                  
  36. Script3d (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=697888)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Script3d) Hero          58     271       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/697888.html)                  
  37. steveabrahams (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=914450)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=steveabrahams) Sr.           54     310       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/914450.html)                  
  38. coin-investor (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=891131)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=coin-investor) Hero          53     335       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/891131.html)                  
  39. Daniel91 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=334636)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Daniel91) Legendary     52     351      45 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/334636.html)                  
  40. Yakamoto (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=325035)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Yakamoto) Legendary     50     931       6 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/325035.html)                  
  41. edisystem (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1041497)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=edisystem) Full          49     315       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1041497.html)                  
  42. Landak (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=462517)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Landak) Hero          49     323       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/462517.html)                  
  43. Bitcotalk (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=757456)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bitcotalk) Hero          48     468      17 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/757456.html)                  
  44. tsaroz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=198837)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tsaroz) Legendary     48     316      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/198837.html)                  
  45. Astvile (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=862738)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Astvile) Sr.           46     276      14 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/862738.html)                  
  46. bhabygrim (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=981553)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bhabygrim) Sr.           46     262                          
  47. big_daddy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=257004)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=big_daddy) Full          46     286     122 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/257004.html)                  
  48. dark08 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1082374)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=dark08) Full          45     287       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1082374.html)                  
  49. jakelyson (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=555534)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jakelyson) Legendary     44     314       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/555534.html)                  
  50. Cosbycoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=41735)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Cosbycoin) Hero          43     453       5 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/41735.html)                  
  51. Malsetid (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=663142)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Malsetid) Hero          43     386       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/663142.html)                  
  52. redsun114 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=558226)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=redsun114) Hero          43     446       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/558226.html)                  
  53. ricardobs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=558313)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ricardobs) Hero          43     472       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/558313.html)                  
  54. Osarman (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=776393)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Osarman) Hero          42     446       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/776393.html)                  
  55. Kiweikoo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=152850)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Kiweikoo) Hero          41     447                          
  56. OrangeSeller (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=450617)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=OrangeSeller) Hero          41     461       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/450617.html)                  
  57. starblocks (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=361524)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=starblocks) Hero          41     452       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/361524.html)                  
  58. SirLancelot (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=525060)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=SirLancelot) Hero          40     478       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/525060.html)                  
  59. neonshium (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=554221)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=neonshium) Hero          39     450      15 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/554221.html)                  
  60. MakeMoneyBtc (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=890476)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=MakeMoneyBtc) Full          37     395      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/890476.html)                  
  61. Alpinat (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=729496)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Alpinat) Sr.           36     284                          
  62. Wakhid Mukti (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=820106)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Wakhid Mukti) Full          35     432                          
  63. lyks15 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1126017)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lyks15) Full          34     344                          
  64. niisarearning (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=988719)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=niisarearning) Sr.           34     269       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/988719.html)                  
  65. n0ne (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=26401)                    BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=n0ne) Hero          31     410       8 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/26401.html)                  
  66. Coin-Desk (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2507716)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Coin-Desk) Member        30     444      10 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2507716.html)                  
  67. yesiam6 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=211163)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=yesiam6) Hero          30     305       5 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/211163.html)                  
  68. YuginKadoya (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=542292)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=YuginKadoya) Legendary     29     642      20 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/542292.html)                  
  69. bakasabo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1730428)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bakasabo) Member        26     536      45 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1730428.html)                  
  70. Akshat21 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1929411)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Akshat21) Jr.           24     220       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1929411.html)                  
  71. jakezyrus (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1080167)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jakezyrus) Full          23     479                          
  72. vennali (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=152469)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=vennali) Legendary     23     375       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/152469.html)                  
  73. bitbollo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=364070)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bitbollo) Legendary     22     361      28 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/364070.html)                  
  74. DreamStage (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=389851)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=DreamStage) Sr.           22     389       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/389851.html)                  
  75. rdbase (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=374628)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rdbase) Full          22     391      58 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/374628.html)                  
  76. smyslov (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=924304)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=smyslov) Sr.           21     341       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/924304.html)                  
  77. Yarex (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1217132)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Yarex) Member        21     238       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1217132.html)                  
  78. alcoholboy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2498684)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=alcoholboy) Jr.           19     348       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2498684.html)                  
  79. casper77 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=73499)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=casper77) Legendary     19     256       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/73499.html)                  
  80. steampunkz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=944644)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=steampunkz) Sr.           19     180      18 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/944644.html)                  
  81. MarioV (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=866540)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=MarioV) Hero          18     225       9 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/866540.html)                  
  82. rarkenin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=104529)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rarkenin) Hero          18     207                          
  83. Mike Mayor (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=836754)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Mike Mayor) Hero          15     380      10 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/836754.html)                  
  84. Symphonized (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1928906)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Symphonized) Member        15     893      14 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1928906.html)                  
  85. kurian (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1045367)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=kurian) Full          14     308                          
  86. XinXan (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=440960)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=XinXan) Hero          14     400       5 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/440960.html)                  
  87. 7788bitcoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=395871)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=7788bitcoin) Legendary     13     430                          
  88. franckuestein (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=225121)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=franckuestein) Staff         12     648      62 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/225121.html)      10: -0 / +1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=225121) 
  89. ASHLIUSZ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=798271)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ASHLIUSZ) Hero          11     344       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/798271.html)                  
  90. Cent21 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=854571)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Cent21) Hero          11     241      22 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/854571.html)                  
  91. pinoyden (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1047959)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pinoyden) Full          11     504       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1047959.html)                  
  92. StephenJH (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=86939)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=StephenJH) Hero          11     201       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/86939.html)                  
  93. Vaskiy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=452049)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Vaskiy) Legendary     11     359       4 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/452049.html)                  
  94. KennyR (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=110570)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=KennyR) Hero          10     346       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/110570.html)                  
  95. Nadziratel (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=95619)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Nadziratel) Sr.           10     238       6 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/95619.html)                  
  96. basyang (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=986087)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=basyang) Full           9     356                          
  97. BlackFor3st (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=148841)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BlackFor3st) Hero           9     507                          
  98. Ray55 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1954799)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Ray55) Jr.            9     343       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1954799.html)                  
  99. uneng (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=493772)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=uneng) Hero           9     395                          
 100. Micerker (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1098829)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Micerker) Full           8     332                          
 101. Remainder (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=782768)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Remainder) Hero           8     261      13 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/782768.html)                  
 102. alisafidel58 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=782621)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=alisafidel58) Full           7     270      25 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/782621.html)                  
 103. Carrelmae10 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1181642)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Carrelmae10) Member         7     433                          
 104. Free1bitco.in (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=555236)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Free1bitco.in) Hero           7     154                          
 105. uray (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=113074)                    BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=uray) Hero           7     562                          
 106. Bit_Happy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=10197)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bit_Happy) Legendary      6     251      19 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/10197.html)                  
 107. Lexus19 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1066825)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Lexus19) Member         6    1065       6 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1066825.html)                  
 108. Piggy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=188198)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Piggy) Hero           6     274    1031 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/188198.html)                  
 109. ioanbtc (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=934389)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ioanbtc) Sr.            5     271       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/934389.html)                  
 110. StartupAnalyst (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2254935)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=StartupAnalyst) Full           5     306     180 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2254935.html)                  
 111. dwyane36 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=662559)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=dwyane36) Hero           4     132       7 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/662559.html)                  
 112. mhanbostanci (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=434984)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mhanbostanci) Legendary      4     731     110 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/434984.html)                  
 113. otandelapaz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1110765)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=otandelapaz) Full           4     322      15 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1110765.html)                  
 114. free-bit.co.in (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=341170)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=free-bit.co.in) Hero           3     464      18 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/341170.html)      10: -0 / +1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=341170) 
 115. LUCKMCFLY (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1153977)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=LUCKMCFLY) Full           3    1560      27 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1153977.html)                  
 116. TinaK (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203926)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=TinaK) Hero           3     253                          
 117. Altcoins enthusiast (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1406625)     BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Altcoins enthusiast) Member         2     245      16 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1406625.html)                  
 118. Bardman (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=459805)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bardman) Hero           2     651      11 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/459805.html)                  
 119. bitcoinisbest (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=893749)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bitcoinisbest) Hero           2     249      22 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/893749.html)                  
 120. r1a2y3m4 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1134322)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=r1a2y3m4) Full           2     225       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1134322.html)                  
 121. gedor (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1009325)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gedor) Sr.            1      81       5 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1009325.html)                  
 122. leexhin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=976560)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=leexhin) Sr.            1     135              -2: -1 / +0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=976560) 
 123. OcTA Bd (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1700121)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=OcTA Bd) Jr.            1     108       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1700121.html)                  
 124. Probablylikely (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=980712)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Probablylikely) Full           1      49                          
 125. rizkyrz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=996159)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rizkyrz) Sr.            1     160                          
 126. umbara ardian (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=533996)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=umbara ardian) Sr.            1     115                          
 127. asayoyaasa (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=990403)              BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=asayoyaasa) Copper         0       0      30 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/990403.html)                  
 128. AuthorCRYPTO (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2248348)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=AuthorCRYPTO) Jr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2248348.html)                  
 129. Bitcoin Explorer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=390347)        BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bitcoin Explorer) Hero           0       0              10: -0 / +1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=390347) 
 130. Bond_Jamesbond (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=917911)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Bond_Jamesbond) Member         0       0                          
 131. CaptainLorca (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1419809)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=CaptainLorca) Jr.            0       0       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1419809.html)                  
 132. dolphinpuke (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=397816)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=dolphinpuke) Member         0       0              -2: -1 / +0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=397816) 
 133. emulsifryer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1004967)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=emulsifryer) Member         0       0                          
 134. EndimyonsDream (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2001597)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=EndimyonsDream) Jr.            0       0       9 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2001597.html)                  
 135. felipeva1994 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=890440)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=felipeva1994) Member         0       0                          
 136. furylmz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=983794)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=furylmz) Sr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/983794.html)                  
 137. hyunee (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1013131)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=hyunee) Full           0       0                          
 138. jjeeppeerrxx (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=413783)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jjeeppeerrxx) Member         0       0      38 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/413783.html)                  
 139. Juniness (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2168065)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Juniness) Jr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2168065.html)                  
 140. Lauren Smith (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=845797)            BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Lauren Smith) Sr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/845797.html)                  
 141. MiguelCryptoss (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2197886)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=MiguelCryptoss) Jr.            0       0       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2197886.html)                  
 142. morrisgonzalez (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2499176)          BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=morrisgonzalez) Jr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2499176.html)                  
 143. Obito (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=976373)                   BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Obito) Sr.            0       0                          
 144. OlegBarca (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=956819)               BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=OlegBarca) Member         0       0                          
 145. Pettuh4 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=933347)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Pettuh4) Sr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/933347.html)                  
 146. PsylockReborn (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1603017)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=PsylockReborn) Member         0       0      20 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1603017.html)                  
 147. PuertoLibre (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=66605)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=PuertoLibre) Legendary      0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/66605.html)                  
 148. purple.thoughts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1728451)         BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=purple.thoughts) Jr.            0       0       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1728451.html)                  
 149. rammy2k2 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=94485)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rammy2k2) Legendary      0       0       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/94485.html)                  
 150. riyadmozu19 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2141292)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=riyadmozu19) Jr.            0       0       1 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2141292.html)                  
 151. suhardi3899 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=925997)             BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=suhardi3899) Member         0       0      24 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/925997.html)                  
 152. th3nolo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=870608)                 BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=th3nolo) Hero           0       0      35 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/870608.html)                  
 153. tiptopgemdotcom (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=20610)         BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tiptopgemdotcom) Legendary      0       0              10: -0 / +1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=20610) 
 154. usekevin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=130251)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=usekevin) Hero           0       0       3 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/130251.html)                  
 155. waroenkshisha (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=952938)           BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=waroenkshisha) Sr.            0       0                          
 156. wiesen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=507529)                  BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=wiesen) Legendary      0       0                          
 157. xtin-tin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1285435)                BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=xtin-tin) Jr.            0       0       2 (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1285435.html)                  

Lol, alcoholboy must be really so drunk to distinguish between his alts right now  ;D

Ty, this is enough maybe if you can add also their rank is better but if it takes too much don't worry.

Updated the list: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111069.msg50914222#msg50914222

Is stake.com paying for posts in off-topic?

This guy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2173628) and this one (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1817406) seems to post only one-liners in there, joined the campaign one day apart, battling for the lowest word/post average with 156 vs 159 and some very insightful posts like this one.


And they both received 1 merit from Cialix (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1947568.html)

On a semi-unrelated note, do mods delete 'spam' in off-topic? If so, do short and pointless posts count as spam? I've have 24/24 good reports against Catmurs but I've avoided reporting their off-topic posts.

From what I've seen: yes they delete it, and yes pointless posts are against the rules.

As you can see they are paying for everything, and with such big number of users it is quite obvious that they can not control quality of posts, let alone whether something is spam or not. All that goes under the radar of mods is paid, included zero sense / quality posts in off-topic.

Results of reporting Coin-Desk and alcholboy: 1 post has been removed (Coin-Desk) and one report is unhandled   ::)

In the meantime, our text spinning bot Coin-Desk is looking for someone who can fix up his broken neuro-chip:

Wondering to move the thread on meta or create new thread about spam of stake dot com. I just can't spend much time to find that spammers due busy on real life. Expecting there is lot of spammer on @suchmoon list.  If we can provide valid examples, then may be admin would take action like yobit. I will try to find once I have free time.

You do understand this doesn't mean everyone in that list is posting in the campaign don't you?
As for instance I am one of the Official Brand Manager for both Primedice and Stake and I have not changed my signature neither my profile message just because i prefer to leave that way. Take that as an example.

And one more thing:
If all of you wanna try to be the good guy and just report Stake's Signature Campaign, well you are doing it wrong, you should be reporting every campaign that is currently active at Bitcointalk since each one of them incentivate spam.

Have I said anything on reporting who wear the signature?
Have I said anything on reading the users' post history?
Have I said anything on who is using the signature?

So don't try to be the good moral guy, I' ve asked the list only to know who can be on the campaign since the spreadsheet is not available.

(be free to check them all if you want to contribute to the forum but I guess you will probably not)

Salty much? Someone asked for a list users wearing a certain signature. I provided the list. Couldn't care less what your reasons for wearing that signature are.


If you really care about the "brand" perhaps you should rethink your attitude and say "thank you" to all these nice volunteers doing the job that your campaign manager should be doing.

I have already answered those questions without being salty here, in telegram and everywhere when people ask me. If you think i was salty (not even being to any specific user) maybe you wanna read my words again and interpretate as much as you want.
I just left a heads up to those who don't understand that they can actually end up with invalid conclusions / statements. This conversation is over from my side.

Edit: We do in fact warned them against spam of any kind for Bitcointalk, we also guide people to post meaningful content for Bitcointalk on telegram side and not here :-*

So, is there a list of the people officially accepted in the campaign?
I find it pretty hard to believe people are posting over +200 posts for weeks, not getting paid and still wearing that signature...


You should have explained this better to them as it seems they have understood they should post meaningful content on telegram and not here  :P

I have updated the Edit information with a more understandable explanation.

Doesn't look like your warning means anything. You can either manage the campaign properly or be rightfully ridiculed for hiring shitposters.

I'm personally experimenting by targeting one or two posters and seeing if they get banned after they get a significant number of posts deleted. They just happen to be in the Stake campaign at the moment. I've gotten Catmurs up to 87 posts deleted so far. (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Catmurs)

If your campaign is so 'reportable', maybe you should fix that.

I also agree some do not qualify as quality members (from my opinion).
Still i am not the campaign manager, i'm just helping on informing the users on why they should keep the quality above everything else.
They have also been acknowledged that they will be banned if they keep posting spam and have their posts deleted by the MODs.

Btw some of the deleted posts are related with a topic deletion, let's not forget that.

I too had participated 5-6 weeks in stake (earned no more than 0.0025 in 5-6 weeks). I once asked Stephen to hire a professional campaign manager here after watching this thread and the other thread by yahoo62278. I guess he thought I was looking for being a campaign manager for them. However, he didn't change his decision. Probably he didn't notice or think it as spam but the truth is some of the campaign members were/are still spamming although Stephen said spam posts will not get paid. There's some good member too. I was asking will I be able to make 0.10/per week by posting as much as needed (I was kidding), some good mates suggest me not to do that because it will be spam certainly. I think they are not spammers.
I had also promoted stake, in some of the weeks, I had posted 5-10 posts only. Most of the weeks no more than 20 posts. That's how a campaign should be run, a poster should act, a campaign manager should encourage, I believe.

Judging by https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=postsdeleted, Mods are very forgiving even after hundreds of posts have been deleted.

Seems Coin-desk (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2507716;sa=showPosts)/alcoholboy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2498684;sa=showPosts) released new version of spambot (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2499176), it is currently under heavy development and will be released soon. Some inside info from spambot team :


"In the meantime, while fixing repetitive errors, we are proud to announce that our spambot v1.2 can highlight your gambling site"



"Anyone who can win that can win 10% discount on our old spambot v1.1 caps-free version"

1st probable account bot:

He probably trying to abuse the contest, the coin desk has been paid

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2585516

It seems to have (mostly) worked. 43 good reports against markstivn98 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2536129) on May 7 and May 9 combined and they haven't posted since May 9th. 17 good reports against StephenJH  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=86939)on May 7th and they've logged on, but haven't made any new posts. 89 good reports against Catmurs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1817406) and they haven't made any new posts since May 7th. Either they all suddenly went from 20+ posts a day to 0 or they got a temp ban.

However, I do have 35/36 good reports against Ximoandali (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2173628) and they're still posting, but I'm still leaning to the former getting a temp ban.

How much deleted post is necessary to have to be banned? Are there any clear rules about that?
Also whether there is a rule for threads with lots of bump spam posts. There were threads where I report more than 90% of posts in 10 pages, and all of them are deleted but thread still exists.

Likely he/she will not get ban for spam. I have previous experience, even reported that kind of amount report and they were mark good but user didn't got ban. So we can't expect ban for spam post.

As far as I know, there no any rules about that. Its depend on user and reported post. Its fully depend on moderators and admin they will ban or not for reported spam post. But in addition, you could add note on report page why are you thinking that users should be banned.

StephenJH came back on May 15th, spammed another 12 posts (all good reports) and now this shows on their profile:

@StephenJH - see you in two weeks  :P

That means moderators are banning for spam post also I mean for good report. Idea is not bad to prevent spammers ;)

However, I think reporter's hard work will be worthy now.

No, it wasn't. I have reported lot of post from single user previously but they were not banned.

They always have.

Ironic  ::)

Very. I'd argue that the Stake campaign is the worst on the forum now (wouldn't have been if Yobit was still around).

A glorious Stake-started thread here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190521081654/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134267.0

I'd bet there's some alts in that thread too.

I actually think the Stake spam is worse now than it was back in the PrimeDice day. The worst of the PD spammers were quickly temp banned and most got the message once they did but there's far too many for staff to handle and it's not something we should have to deal with in the first place. There's far more people who have come to this board just for sig campaigns compared to back in the old days where it was mostly just existing users joining them, but I guess PrimeDice was the catalyst in popularising campaigns and once word got out then people flocked to the forum to abuse them and we ended up in the situation we have today where people have farmed accounts on an industrial scale to use just to earn via posting. Because Stake are seemingly accepting anyone and everyone those farmers are going to take advantage of it, especially because there's a lack of other campaigns for them to easily get on these days. All they need to do is do a bit of quality control and there wouldn't be any issues.

Could I argue that this spam is scamming my brain and thus properly tag the people behind it? :-\ That would be within the new guidelines.

That just proves that this forum is going down, so you want to tag the people running this signature, or the ones promoting the signature because these are two different things. Of course you will tag this way only signatures approved by the communists being on DT will be allowed.

It's not even an arguement anymore - it is definately the worst. My ignore cell is overflowing with stake.....lol

Seriously though, can something be done apart from constantly hammering the ignore button? For the casual reader who isn't logged in, this forum is just covered in shitposts - it's terrible.

Isn't communist about workers controlling the means of production?

---

I don't think that signature campaigns that incentivize spam should be allowed to proliferate on the forum. Paying for someone to post up to 1000+ times is certainly not something that benefits the forum... is it?

Instead of hitting the ignore button, hit the report to the mods one and write that it is just a Stake signature spam. Doing so will benefit the others reading the same shit, like you did, don't be selfish and improve your report score :)

Haha!  I usually report posts if it's just one liners or incoherant babble, but many or most of these stake post spammers are entire paragraphs so I'm a bit cautious about weather to report them or not - even if they are mindless ramblings stating the blatantly obvious. I've got a 98% reporting rate, so I guess I'm getting it mostly right.....

Insubstantial posts include those that are general, repeated, vague statements extended/padded out with inner repetitions or pointless words jammed in there, or perhaps some run-on sentences that seem like they add something of worth (perhaps not much but enough to perform outside the definition of spam) yet in reality are just sentences that restate the previously-discussed information.

Above is an example of a post that can be shortened thusly: Spam posts contain general, repeated, and/or vague statements to pad for extra length.

Latest update on this campaign is, they lowered the rate, from Bitcoin payment they've made it to dollar equal payment 
now the participants are receiving 3 times less than they were receiving when the campaign started when Bitcoin was trading at $4000 level
nice tricks.


Pay rates

Hero/Legendary - $3 per 10 posts

Sr. member - $2 per 10 posts

Full member - $1 per 10 posts

Jr/Member - 50¢ per 10 posts

I am not sure why don't they limit the amount of users who does quality post and pay a decent amount rather than allowing spam as every participant will now shit all over with the the current payment structure, the amount of spam will increase without a doubt and stake will be another campaign that will be banned just like Yobit from this board.

I think there should be a thread regarding this issue on META,then it may get attention of theymos and will conclusion to all these spam invaders just like what happened to YOBIT.

Anyone agrees that it needs to be moved to META now?

Be rest assured theymos has already seen this thread beside during the time of the whole yobit madness this signature campaign was also mentioned numerous times but I guess the fact the campaign is been managed from the forum is what's still keeping it active.

For now, we can only report spam post then wait for moderators to do their jobs if you feel it still needs theymos's intervention you can send him a DM with link to thread, no need moving thread to meta.

Just because a post is long doesn't mean it is good.  We have seen many posters go by on this forum and appear to be intelligent by typing out a magnitude of long words over many paragraphs.  These people are always participating in signature campaigns such as chip mixer to appear like they are on another level but it is really just a spammer underneath the shiny exterior.  We had members like Mr Gator and the Pharmacist crapping out line after line with no real knowledge of how bitcoin even works, couldn't even understand a very basic equation.  This reminds me of the days of the early internet when we were flooded with a barrage of advertisements, people were seeking money in any which was possible but money does indeed do things that you may want to do and if you made it this far you see that I have a lot of good points to make.  Giving out advice is something I tend to do as I have learned from the many greats like Tony Robbins and other notable speakers, which reminds me of the great Abraham Lincoln who Join Voight just said is one of the greatest presidents of all time.  But that got me thinking does this forum have a president? Well perhaps but it is more like a dictator with absolute power over everything.

But its totally off topic to this discussion. ::)

I'm sure it will increase,the bounty manager Steve defended the payment structure it now takes it or leave for bounty hunters so expect to see more spam comments some participants will now have to double their output so they can cash out in their website I read that their is a minimum threshold before you can cashout there.

Now i see where the hate is coming from lol. If you're that intelligent as you claim to be then you would understand there is actually more to Bitcointalk than just understanding how the technology works. The forum has out grown it's initial purpose to accommodating other cryptocurrency and aspect of our everyday life like politics etc. Next time you come across these posts, relax yourself read and reread again but if you still don't see some sense in what they have written then go seek for help because the problem is from you not them.


We are discussing on spam related issues here so don't think it's off topic.

Stake signature campaign could be worst than yobit in the long run, good posters will leave as the rate is the cheapest.
It's just funny that they started with a good rate and now they suddenly become the lowest, I don't know their reason, but I don't like their action.

IMO, even decent spammers would not be attracted with these rates, and they will prefer bounty hunting even though they are not certain they'll get a good reward than posting a lot to earn a decent amount which would possibly risk their account of getting ban for spamming.

They probably lowered the rate because Bitcoin went up in price. But the topic title still says "Earn up to 0.1 BTC weekly".
Let's see how many posts that requires:
Bitcoinaverage (https://bitcoinaverage.com/en/bitcoin-price/btc-to-usd): 8778.91 USD per Bitcoin.
Hero/Legendary: $3 per 10 posts > 0.00003417 BTC per post
Animated avatar: +25% > 0.00004272 BTC per post
Personal text: 0.0001 BTC weekly

That means they pay up to 2338 posts per week for the highest paying ranks, and many times more for the lowest ranks.

I actually just posted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.msg51214729#msg51214729) about this in their thread yesterday.

They are currently paying about 10% of what most other campaigns pay, except the lightlord/777coin campaigns . They replied (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5110093.msg51216624#msg51216624) to my concerns, but I am not sure they understood what my concerns are, or that he even read the majority of my post -- his reply was mostly skewed (and incorrect) information about why people should join his campaign.

IIRC, even when he opened his thread, they were still paying a fairly low rate, but had a very high maximum, which remains unchanged (0.1 BTC/week). I would say they roughly halved their /post rates, so perhaps their previous rates were roughly 20% of what most other campaigns paid.

IIRC, back in the day, they (and most /post campaigns with high post limits) would pay 0.001BTC for high ranking accounts, and the "fixed rate" campaigns, that generally required 50 posts/month would pay 0.1BTC per month, so the /post campaigns paid roughly 50% of the "fixed rate" campaigns. Except now, the higher rate campaigns now generally pay /post, and have 50 post/week maximums, or about 4x what was previously required for "fixed rate" campaigns.

Unless you are making thousands of posts/month, it does not make any sense to join their campaign if you qualify for another campaign that pays "market" rates.

I was looking now at the Chipmixer campaign (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17P52DifaD7YfvzLkX3wrxGVpKcaPHY4y57ZpI-FK754/edit#gid=830747459) and you guys have combined posts of 1831 in total in the last week, that's still lower than a one high rank member can achieve if he maximize his posts count. LOL

Thanks for showing your concern by voicing out to their thread, let's hope they'll listen to it and review their current rules.

Why does this problem remain unsolved? Is stake trying to become the next Yobit and get blacklisted?

New change:


Be prepared to see a lot more spam in these sections I guess. The Stake spammers were (mostly) sticking to Gambling discussion at first, but now more are invading the normal gambling section  :-\

At least they still pay for the megathread spam in Bitcoin discussion

Thank you everyone for taking such an interest in the campaign, if you have evidence of someone abusing a signature campaign and you'd like to see action taken against them report them here.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152812

Do I look like I am willing to do your job for you? Incompetent.

I like your logic. The reason I am with Stake is because a lot of the other campaigns are full - there are apparently waiting lists with not many slots open. I agree that all other things equal, better pay leads to better posts.

However, I disagree with the notion (not from you in particular) that a high amount of earned merits ought to be a requirement for being allowed into a campaign. What I'd like to see is for merits to flow a bit more easily and evenly in the forum so more non-spammers can rise through the ranks. In my humble view, earning merits is currently a very difficult thing to do for most people.

I just noticed there's an increase in users with many posts per week (https://loyce.club/active/7d.html).

From all Hero Members with most posts in the past week, the 15 most active ones all have a Stake signature and 14 out of those 15 are old accounts with barely any earned Merit. If they would have had to start their accounts from scratch, 1 of them would be Jr. Member and 10 of them would have had a Member Rank.

From all the Legendary Members with most post (ignoring Chart Buddy), 13 out of the 20 most actives ones have a Stake signature. Again, most of them are old accounts, and if they'd have to rank up through the Merit system, 7 out of 13 would now only have a Member Rank.

Why is Stake still paying shitposters to spam massive amounts of posts on Bitcointalk? It's a rhetorical question, their campaign manager (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5400828.0) would have been Member Rank too if it didn't reach a higher Rank before the Merit system.

Interesting, indeed. With their current pay rates and limits, you need to write 95 posts per week to get the max. payout as a Legendary member and 125 as a Hero member. That's quite a lot. I personally find it hard to even find just 50 interesting topics per week where I can post a constructive answer / new thread or guide.
I guess at least it's gone down a bit from the 200 posts per week cap in OP.. :D

You are number 15 and I am number 102 😂

Anyway, If anyone wants a good deal from them and if they are a good poster then they will get better deal from them. They pay good. I think it's a campaign where both shitposters and good posters can benefit from it. Let the moderators do their job, they get paid for it too.

Isn't that person just a Stake employee?


I think this would be akin to saying janitors get paid so you might as well piss all over the floor and smear shit on the walls because that's what they get paid to deal with. In fact, I would look at it like someone is actively paying people to go around flinging shit and piss everywhere which obviously shouldn't be allowed. Sig spam should be the campaign managers job not left for mods to clean up the mess for free. Mods don't get paid unless the posts are reported and there's plenty of reports to handle without having to deal with sig spam and most sig spam isn't reported in the first place because there's so much of it and there's not much benefit to people reporting in the first place. IT would be a full time job in of itself if you were to take on the task of reporting the sig spam.

I wouldn't doubt that you can churn out around 100 posts a week, and keep them substantial enough though. Only a few select users can do that though, and I'd prefer if Stake only hired some of the best users, and got rid of the ones which clearly aren't up to standard. Not just Stake though, I wish more signature campaigns had a higher threshold. You know, something akin to what companies do today with sustainability, they use it as a way of marketing themselves. Now, it kind of does my heading in, but I'll be honest seeing a signature campaign actually trying to look after the forum; I'd have respect for that. Especially, since campaign managers check every post, supposedly. I kind of wish they reported the one's they think aren't up to standard.

Alright, I know sometimes you can get that in between where they won't pay for it, and technically it doesn't break the forum rules as it might be substantial enough. However, I know there's cases where they are breaking forum rules, since I've seen it myself, and I'm not the poor sod that has to clean it up. Hilarious, globals, and those that moderate the main sections are.

Right. Absolutely, spot on. I'd love to fix the current reporting issue. I've said it before, but I'm really hoping the badges get implemented, but in such a way that users don't just max out their reports in a week or month or even a year to get them.

They gave opportunity to expose about their brand name as much as they can all over the gambling board with negligible pay rate compared to any other signature campaign so its a kind of business at the end. :D

---

But stake is relatively one of the highly wagered sportbook still they are not concentrating on their quality of advertising which plays a hige role when it comes to building their reputation.

I've got mixed feelings about that campaign. On the one hand I think indeed incentivizes participants to make a lot of low quality posts, and I have seen some who write poor posts. But on the other hand, I have seen some pretty decent participants. The other day I checked that one I see quite a bit had written about 70 posts over the week and to me they are of decent quality.

We don't know if that person doesn't have a main job, for example. If I didn't have a main job I think I could easily write 100 posts or more a week.

In any case, most of them write in the gambling section which is what it is. Many of you don't like it and it is not a paradigm of quality but it has been and is very important in the history of this forum even though most people write low quality posts there.

I don't necessarily have any issues with the guidelines that they've put out, since most of those users shouldn't be reaching that amount of posts every week. However, the problem is that there's some pretty poor quality users in the campaign, as there's in a lot of the signature campaigns. So, I don't think it's specifically a Stake problem, except that their guidelines do encourage low quality spammers, but it's up to the manager to actually vet the applications, and get those types of users out of the campaign, and reject any future low quality posters.

One hundred posts isn't all that much, and if you haven't got a traditional job then you probably would find that easy, and I imagine there's a few users in that position. As I said, as long as their posts are constructive I don't really have a problem with it.

At the end of the day, signature campaign is actually a way to do marketing of their casino and there is no harm if they want that their signature should be shown more than any other signatures in the forum. If they have a spam check mechanism in their campaign management, i don't think quantity should be a problem.


Well, lets have an example if a person posts few posts a week and they are mostly spam posts and then there is another person who post 50+ posts in a week but all of them are good ones, then whom we will think is spam poster?
I think the quantity of posts have nothing to do with the quality of posts. Some persons may have a lot of time to write a lot of constructive posts throughout the week.

You're right, don't get me wrong. However, the more a user is posting, generally means that each post will be of less quality, especially if they're looking to meet a target. However, that's not always the case. I remember quite a few users that were massively active in posting, and one of them is a global moderator now; hilariousandco. While, I don't know how much they were posting at their peak, they were posting quite frequently compared to others, and their quality didn't really dip as a result. So, it can be done.

There's a few examples of this though, even to this present day. I've also gone through periods where I'm much more active, for example the last few years have been absolutely crazy in terms of sucking up my time, and I think it was the back of Covid. Only now, I've starting to get my free time again.

I use this (https://loyce.club/active/7d.html) from time to time just to monitor certain things from a moderation stand point. However, that'll give you an idea of the posters that are posting a rather large amount, and their quality. For the most part, I'd say it's pretty decent, and there's some recognisable names there.

Obviously, thanks for Loyce for creating these things for the community, probably something they think of; but, these sorts of tools can be useful for moderation from time to time.

This actually kind of sparked an idea.. What about a script that monitors the posts of signature campaign participants (or all Bitcointalk accounts, for that matter) and immediately throws them into some sort of AI which has been trained with labeled datasets of shitposts and good posts.
If a post matches the 'shitpost' category with some high probability, it is going to be logged on a webpage. Whoever wants to, can browse through there and quickly report posts - maybe with a checkbox-type user interface. You could then even easily mark a whole set of e.g. 100 posts and only uncheck the ones that the AI mistakenly flagged.

Bonus points if this software only shows the content, no usernames and avatars or signatures. Judge purely based on post quality.

Would something like this sound helpful to our dear SpamBusters in the forum?

And if "generic posts" are enough for the campaign you're in, you could do that on several accounts. That's a very decent salary in most countries.

The difference with other campaigns that hire shitposters is that Stake actually pays quite good, and in Bitcoin instead of some made-up token.

This topic was created 4 years ago, and they're still paying spammers. I don't get it though: with their long-term budget and a bit more effort, they could hire users who's posts people actually read.

MindlessElectron (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1136003) removes spam from Newbies based on keywords.
An "AI" sounds a lot like an "algorithm" that decides what you see, like any social media nowadays.

I've created Finding spam and scams by keyword (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5268608.0).

That won't work: in many cases you can't judge a post without context. Depending on who posts it, a simple "Yes" or "No" can be a valuable post.

What I believe is that the conclusion you express does not follow from the premise.

At least in some cases, the quantity of posts does affect the quality. Someone who is a decent poster making 25 posts a week, if he enters a campaign like the one we are talking about and wants to reach the maximum payout, it is normal that on average his posts have less quality than when he makes 25.


Generic posts? I don't know for sure but I guess you do other things apart from writing in the forum, I don't know if it's a main job or what, but if you had no other job than writing in the forum couldn't you write more than 100 posts with decent quality? Normally you write more than 50, although some of them are updates of your threads.


You are right: you don't get it. Do you think that the target audience of that campaign needs quality to drive them to gamble in the casino?

What is said is not nearly as important as how many times advertising appears on the forum. I know you don't go there as much as I do, but I can assure you that the average user is quite mathematically illiterate, something you can check in threads that the same people who wear casino signatures, who are also customers of the casinos, open. Like:

1) They have tried the umpteenth variant of martingale and think it is bad luck that they have lost their money.
2) They create a thread regretting having lost too much money.
3) They naively believe that with bonuses and promos, the house gives them an RTP over 100, lol.

And things like that.

Talking about generic post and spam, this is the best example I found https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1980983;sa=showPosts;start=0

I understand stake have many participants to check but why best_change is paying such brilliant posters? These days you need to find something to earn merit, best way is to become a scam reported and report everything you find on the web, be in touch with other DT members and merit sources. One day you will be a legendary and the goal achieved to get paid $100 per week. Easy money, fake care for the forum.

You haven't been looking very hard, then.


Oh, OK. Conspiracy theory about the DT system and stuff. Whatever.

Let's put it this way: writing generic BS posts without reading anything can be done a lot faster than writing good posts. And if the campaign manager doesn't care, why would you? ;) ("you" not being you personally in case that wasn't clear)

You may be right. Spam pays.

One could argue that anyone who understands basic math won't be gambling for weeks or even years in a row.

I understand what you mean, but that's not how it would be supposed to work. The idea is pre-filtering by that AI, such that it only shows you posts that are most likely shitposts and / or spam. We recognize those at first glance, so a computer program trained with enough data should be able to roughly categorize posts, as well. Only the ones most likely to be useless to the forum would be displayed, and even then, a human will still need to decide whether to report them or not.

It is not meant to 'decide what we see' algorithmically, rather just be a software to facilitate people's job to find posts that are to be considered report-'worthy'. ;)

Exactly like that, just a bit... 'smarter'? But maybe that's not needed, after all. I'm all about keeping things simple and stupid, so if your method works fine (low false positive rate), that's great!

I must admit that while I spend a lot of time in this forum, I mostly visit and post in a handful of categories. Sometimes there is honestly nothing to write about, because since my last visit people either just posted interesting updates that I simply give merit to, or people didn't write any new posts or threads about a topic I'm interested or knowledgeable in at all. There are sometimes such 'quieter days' and even weeks, and sometimes there is much more discussion happening.
When I don't visit the forum for one or two days, my watch list is much fuller and I could easily spend a few hours just writing replies (although as mentioned, I avoid it if there's nothing I can really add to the discussion).

So I agree that even with unlimited time, there is a certain limit where you'll be waiting for people to reply to your posts / replies or you'd be looking at creating tons of new threads about generic things (there is only so much stuff you can actually research, play around with and become knowledgeable about in a certain timeframe). For many people, it will be most likely that they'll start visiting subforums that they got no knowledge about and just write generic threads and replies..

And that's where the magic of shitposting comes in :D Let's take the most active Stake worker (https://loyce.club/active/7d.html) for example: Legendary slapper (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=300712) made 102 posts in the last week. His last post in Gambling Discussion was #29252 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1159912.msg61748085#msg61748085) on page 1463. There are endless pages of "people" talking to each other, or their own alt accounts. Nobody reads it, nobody cares.
This guy also gives me a chat AI spam vibe (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5439193.msg61740255#msg61740255).

Leaving aside whether he is a shitposter or not, what page do you want him to post on in that thread? Those kind of threads, like in this case of the German soccer league, have many pages It wouldn't make sense to open a new thread every week.


How do you know they are alts?

I have never applied for this campaign but I do not rule it out in the future, so I expect a scrupulous scrutiny from you if I apply and get in.  ;)

I didn't want to start focusing on specific cases, but in that campaign for example we also have your friend, who sometimes writes quite interesting things and other times has also given me the impression that he hasn't read the thread very well and writes the answer to complete the quota.

Apart from that, the member of that campaign I named before, who I think writes pretty decent, constructive posts, despite writing many posts throughout the week is this one:

Hispo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2850161)

Considering the lack of Merit in that thread, I can't imagine people actually read what's being posted. So it's better not to post there, or not pay for it.

I don't, but from experience it seems likely some of them are alts.

I specifically mentioned most of campaign mambers with many weekly posts (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111069.msg61687103#msg61687103) would have had only Member Rank if not for their airdropped Merits. That doesn't apply to you, you're a "self-made Legendary" and I don't think anyone considers you a shitposter.
Not everyone in the Stake campaign is a shitposter, so if the campaign manager would be a bit tougher on them, the campaign could be cleaned up.
See:

This rule causes more spam:

Problem with stake is they allowed negative trust user to join on their campaign if they changed their rules to make it more stricter to the user who got bad status in this forum maybe it could lessen the spam happening on this forum.

Maybe they need to change some of their rules so that they can fit in the taste of majority.

Those who are participating in this signature campaign post such a huge amount because they are getting paid for that post as well. This situation can be seen if the company gives more importance to quantity than quality.

If they wanted to keep this campaign spam free then they would have implemented strict campaign rules earlier. They should change their rules to make this campaign more acceptable and stop encouraging spam posting.

Well, I just checked the telegram bot and realized I was mentioned on this thread.
For a moment I actually believed I was being called out for my posts or something. If anyone ever wants to comment on my participation while engaged on Stake's signature campaign, I am open to constructive criticism.

There are always ways to get a lil bit better.  :)

You can definitely make a point that in the end, more posts mean more visibility and a more effective advertising campaign (and this point was made earlier in the thread). However, campaign spammers tend to end up in those spam-megathreads like the one LoyceV mentioned (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1159912.0) which nobody reads and only exist to allow them to reply to each other endlessly. This would mean that only they themselves, actually end up seeing the ads.

From a purely ideological (discourage spam on this wonderful platform), but also financial standpoint, I would personally focus on trying to get the most respected and popular forum users to wear my ads, who post (in) popular threads (also getting traffic from outside the forum - e.g. someone web searching for 'How to run a Bitcoin Core full node for under 50 bucks' (https://is.gd/sBzLbp)).

The reason why many campaign managers ask to meet the posts requirements is to make sure the participants are active. It's still good for stake participants they still got half payment, some managers wouldn't even pay you if you not meet the posts requirements.

But I'm not talking which manager is good and which manager is bad, I believe each manager have their own view and rule to make the campaign become successful, they're not stupid for giving away free money if the participants not done a good job for the campaign.

@Carollzinha isn't a person who only look from black and white, you can check on the spreadsheet where there are few participants get half payment even they've met the post requirements. I think he have doing a good job.

https://i.postimg.cc/Pr1zxQhV/stake-campaign.png

They are not the only ones. Nowadays with how decentralized the system is and how many people there are in DT it is not uncommon to see negative feedback on people who write quality posts and also the feedback sometimes has nothing to do with trading risk.

That's why you will see in several campaigns a phrase saying like it's not allowed people with "legitimate" negative feedback and things like that, so the manager, if he thinks someone is worthy of entering the campaign, reviews the feedback and decides if he agrees or not.

I don't understand what is the connection between Negative feedback and spam? ???

Maybe you can see neutral feedback if they are making too many spam posts but giving negative for someone who posts spam is against the DT system and no one is doing so making any change in that rule won't make any change at all about the topic we are discussing here.

But looking at the spreadsheet not many users are making above 35 posts which is really manageable and can be high quality as well. The only con is giving extra bonus for posts made in gambling board may encourage users to posts more there even when they are not used to be.

I agree with you, unlike other campaigns, the company sends payments into the casino accounts of participants, this means they can easily check who are real active gamblers interested in the matter who would post in the gambling section even if they were not enrolled in a casino campaign and who are non-gamblers posting there just because the campaign is requiring it. The number of participants enrolled in this campaign is currently very high (70 are listed in their spreadsheet but it is not comprehensive), it means this company has a responsibility toward the forum and toward the gambling section especially since they are giving bonus payments to post there.  
You are wrong if you think that people wearing casino signatures are also customers : check the spreadsheet above, the casino username of each participant is mentioned, you just need to type /user @username into the casino chat to get the vip rank of the account and its wagering statistics : You will notice that 95% of people are not active customers actually(ie VIP bronze at least), so when they post this kind of testimonies they're usually fake. They are not even newbie gamblers most of time, just fake ones.

Although I don't doubt that there are people who don't even gamble in these signature campaigns, in most cases they are people who know about gambling.

I for example, in participating in several casino campaigns I registered in the casino, tried it a little and that's it because my thing is poker and I play in fiat sites but I know about gambling. However, there may be people who do not register with the same nickname as in bitcointalk, or who like another casino or who usually bet in a fiat casino.

Or are you telling me that those of you who comment in this thread are not casino customers?

Livecasino.io - 🔥 up to 20% cashback🔥up to 20% rakeback 🚨 instant withdrawals (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5383930.0)

In any case, given the level of some of the participants in the stake campaign, I would not be surprised if the ratio of participants who don't gamble is higher in this one.

To be fair: gambling away your earnings isn't smart. It makes sense that some gamblers join a signature campaign to get more gambling funds. But recruiting campaign participants doesn't happen on Stake, and I don't expect the majority of Bitcointalk users to be active gamblers.

You should look at what posts from real gamblers look like on a forum https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/ and compare with the BTT Gambling section. There is no doubt that a large majority of posts are made by people who don't gamble and don't care about gambling here. Why do you think there is a thread in Meta section since several months about this issue ? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5403475.0
The overall rate is certainly lower than the one of this campaign fortunately, because other campaigns don't give bonuses for posting in this section, and are more demanding on quality, but it remains high though.

I may be wrong but the main purpose of a forum is to allow people to discuss topics they are interested in, not to allow them to earn money by posting useless content. You certainly don't care about the issue because you don't like gambling, but would you be happy if most users of Bitcoin sections were no-coiners in reality?
 

I do doubt it.


Because they don't understand that this is a bitcoin forum, and not a PhD school. I used to think like that.

If the quality of that section is so bad, if it is so problematic, why does it move so much money? Why is it and has it been so important in the history of this forum?

The gambling section fulfills its function. It incentivizes people to write there, the casinos pay for that and get a clear profit, otherwise they would not do it.

This is the same thing I was saying to LoyceV. He works for a campaign where the quality of the writing is much more important than for the Stake.com campaign. The average CM user is more tech-savy and smarter in general than the average casino user. That's why you see the technical sections filled with CM signatures and the gambling section with casino signatures, with a few exceptions.

the problem is that they have set a low payment rate per post and in addition, they pay for a large number of posts. it was practically created for spammers because slightly better quality posters will not be included in the campaign where they have to write 100+ posts to be paid like in the others for 25 posts.

I think the main problem i see in this signature campaign its a economic related, because they reward the spam in terms of put in a low pay for normal posters and put a very very low pay after the 25 post so you need 100+ post to reach the limit of the payment, and we know a lot of users here are gona try to catcht that nad well we see the consecuences, really bad posts, some off topic and other things.

Its dissapointing in some ways thinking about Stake its the most big betting house here in term of money and users, its good to have so many spots to cover so a lot of people can have the chance to be enrolled, but you need to make more serious or pay better to good users.

But you can see they use the quantity over quality and in term of exposure really works.


About people here who doesnt gamble, i dont have any problem with that....BUT its quite obvius a lot of people doesnt gamble and also doesnt "make community here" you can see a lot of promotion in game and rounds or pool of predictions really profitables and only plays the same people of the forum a number like 20/30 persons, and we know they are THOUSANDS making post in the day.

So im gonna think you only come here to receive a payment and you dont give anything back to the community.

Some people like me i understand, maybe you dont have enough time and its correct or you dont like X sport, but all are going in the same boat? i dont think so.