Bitcoin Forum

I should say firstly that I very much like this board and it is already imho the best discussion board on the net. Just a few changes could make it even better.


1. No sigs until SNR
2. Much greater weighting to posting count not just length of being a member.
3. HUGE penalty for spam posting -25% of your activity for spamming after first warning.
4. More powers to Mods to help not just punish. Like help people who had accounts hacked and can prove it.
5. Ability of posters to + but not - on a new post quality rating on other peoples posts for good answers and ideas. (seen this on a few forums already)
6 .Ban on selling and buying accounts - hard to ban but no help for those getting into problems doing it.

7. Off topic( slightly) allowed in important cases. - example... the crypsty warnings kept getting removed from the alt section. Yes specifically it could be put in the service providers section. However since this was an emergency situation that all ALT users should have been made aware of from the start. If it was just one scare monger I could understand but since you had 100's of users posting their coins were being kept against their will then this was imho badness to keep taking it off to a small subsection board that nobody looked at. I luckily spotted that thread in the main alt section and immediately got out what coins i could. The boards interest should be the boards users.

SNR?

What is this even supposed to mean?

I guess an additional punishment for signature spammers wouldn't be too bad.

Easier said than done. I dislike the idea. Maybe just a single person that has access to account recovery. You don't need more than 1 active person who can deal with this.

Definitely a no for this. This is prone to abuse, and will be abused.

It is impossible to prevent trading of accounts and this is why it was never been banned.

SNR = senior - I thought that is the rank below hero? if that is not then whatever is below hero..

Number of postings should be much more important to activity rank that just being a member here for years and essentially contributing nothing much. I see lots of legends with very few posts. Then I see many people stuck on hero  or below with 1000s and 1000s of posts.

The -25% will deter those with signatures spamming in the first place since it will take them a lot of time to recover those activity points and even have the ability to have a signature again.

I'm waiting one month to get my hero account back after proving it is mine. You need more people to help those that got hacked.

Why will the +1 system get abused? it really has no weighting on activity anyway is only an indication of others impressions of the quality of your posts. Could have some rules that make it very useful.

Yes impossible to stop... but no assistance when things go wrong.


Are you previously LaudaM ?

Correct. However, I'd argue that signatures can be useful in various forms. We could regulate campaigns and enforce such a rule.

The issue is not as simple as it seems. Would you say that someone deserves more activity posting nonsense (I won't list an example, but you can find those in the members page) than e.g. Shorena (their posts tend to be of great quality)? Obviously the answer is no.

There were also talks of disabling their signature for a longer period of time. I think that a negative effect on both current and potential activity would make sense I guess.

A single active person is enough though.

Such a system tends to get abused. This forum doesn't need it and it just adds unnecessary complexity.

We don't encourage account sales. If thing go wrong, you should be on your own.

I might be.

Will just increase account trades if anything
Soo.. you mean to say mods who already care less about sig spamming should start checking each and every post?
There is already a temp ban that comes as a warning, believe me BB was harsh and not many good replacements have come up as he is temp. gone though

You mean handing over DB control to mods? That seems dangerous. At any rate, its pretty self-explainable why account recoveries because of user's stupidity who gets his account hacked, is low on theymos' priority list
Heavily abusable by members who have tons of alts.
And another old school discussion, shorena , Ecuamobi and several others might fill you in on why its a bad idea

---

---

If its the cat who's giving you all the powers, I want one too  :D

The thing to me is this.

A community can consist of those making high level tech suggestions and those who are just being friendly and helping others or discussing meaningful although not groundbreaking in the tech sense enhance the feeling of community and in the end a reason to be here. It will be impossible to have enough mods though to assess and mark fairly against some criteria the worth of each post. So we will be best in saying every post is equal except obvious spamming. The penalties for which will be so severe that nobody will risk it once they have a sig and that is the reason for most spamming on the board.

So as long as the quality of posting is friendly and not obvious spamming then we should reward posters. Without posters you have no community. If you took the 50 sharpest minds on here they would probably further crypto technically more than all the other minds if you moved them to another board. However, you need an ever growing community that can communicate on all levels to encourage the growth and interest we want in crypto. If most noobs arrived here to be face the discussions between only those that fully understand the tech and can take it further then not many would hang around.

If you say for example senior or above only can have signature and that if you are caught spamming or making lots of meaningless statements or questions after having 1 warning you have your activity reduced by 25% or more depending on how obvious and their repenting attitude.

You would see i think a lot less spamming on the board especially after people reach senior level. Else they will lose their motivation to spam.

If you are caught spamming before senior after 1 warning you are reduced by 50%.

No assistance to those wanting help for selling and buying accounts.

1. I don't think it will increase account trades if is used in conjunction with the harsh penalties for spamming once you have a sig. Although I see less reason to buy an account now that it is risky to spam your sig. Also harder to build enough activity to create an account worth selling.

2. No. I explained that so long as you are not obviously spamming all postings are given same weighting.

3. temp ban is not as good if they come back with the same activity and get their sig straight back...

4. this is not always the case. Hackers can crack the software used to run this forum. Not all persons who get their account stolen are at fault.

5. Rules could be no + on users from same IP. Only a few + per week available. Yes, this is gamable with proxy etc but still is it worth the hassle the star rating carries now activity or trust influence..On a large enough sample size i feel the power would be very useful in indicating the real average worth/helpfulness of a persons posts. It was on a few forums I've been on and worked well. Mostly those with high star ratings were giving useful and helpful posts over those with low stars.

6. I would like to know why it is a bad idea to withhold help from those that are buying and selling accounts and have run into issues. Assisting these people seems very unethical whilst at the same time providing trust ratings for them? I mean you give them means to indicate to us how trustworthy honest and helpful they are then you assist them turning into someone else who will take all of my BTC away.

https://i.imgur.com/Gfxvsey.gif
Don't make the cat angry.

---

---

Correct. Your statements make sense.

The real questions are: What exact limits do we set?; How do we properly enforce it? I can see how the activity reduction could be implemented but theymos would have to like the idea and work on it.

You have no real world evidence to back this up.

You mean if you were caught once and were already punished (25%) the next one would be 50%?

They deserve no help.

A 25% penalty would just make you a potential victim and easy to exploit if you have invested into a account like some people have done here. With a flick of the wrist you could be a step away from being handed a punishment due to manipulation by a group of accounts owned by one person.
Would stay clear of anything like that because optics already suggest that you get in the bad graces with a mod you may be in for some dark magic. At least it is stated by the few people I have seen writing protest here. What is real and what is not is besides the point.
Optics is king.

If you really want to encourage more interplay and less spam one aspect would be to encourage members that have been here a well to respond to lesser accounts. Often I will see a remark posted by a lesser account ignored but quoted by a account that has been here for a well that posted after the fact. This could be oversight but it seems to happen often.
Posting on this account I notice my view rarely holds any weight in meta and that tells me that any system to discourage spamming would also be used against new members. Can only go off what is presented and actions speak louder than words.

One other aspect that I think holds a little to much weight is length of post. Sometimes a short response makes the reader think and have to expand their own view. Its a double edged sword when you see account value sites basing a lot off how short a person comments.

Some system arond plus/minus for votes will be exploited as I often see bickering amongst people that are jockeying for more business and slagging the competition through alt accounts.

Most likely words that will not be read but I feel better stating it either way.

I think only obvious spamming should be given a warning then another obvious spam = -25% activity ...another offence -50%

I think obvious spamming is as I noticed the other day some person was putting exactly the same comment on the end of all different threads. It was outright spam since it was nothing at all to do with the coin on which thread it was posted. Also lots of small remarks on threads that seem hardly relevant at all and on multiple threads for different coins. I mean of course defining spam is not clear cut. So it will have to be obvious. I think even warnings to people who have snr hero or legend will cause them to make their posts relevant and useful.

People who feel strongly about things and start arguing often repeat themselves in threads.. but i don't see that as spam and it's good to see people passionate about their crytpo. Often a couple of people start tearing it up and so long as it's not too nasty it's actually fun to read and part of forum life/appeal.

Multiple threads about the same coin by the same person is a spam sometimes a person will start 5 or 6 threads about their alt in the main alt section and then entire front page is sometimes all about one coin and all from one poster. This should get a warning and more if continued.


Yes it's true I have no evidence it would lead to less spamming but if i was a sig spammer and I thought my activity rating was going to be slapped down 25% or 50% and it would take weeks/months to get back to snr level or above then I would be more cautious.

@zeke2345 - why would a group of people manipulate you into spamming?

It would have to be obvious spamming I think.

Manipulation in the reporting of spam, not people manipulating people to spam.
Noticed when Quickseller was having issues with escrow, a lot of alt accounts came into play. Think any one that has been here long enough can see accounts are used in dubious ways. So 25% would knock competitors and signature for some, effecting the forum more. Which might turn into tit for tat.

I disagree. The first punishment should be your first warning, else you're going easy on people.

Obvious spam is dealt with permanent bans. The situation in reality is quite different. People are re-writing what others have already written in the threads (i.e. they don't read the previous posts) and such. I don't understand why we are discussing 'types of spam' when the thread is about suggestions?

I wouldn't mind the added punishment but that really is up to theymos.

I think the activity concept is good. I know it's a bit of a pain to have to wait, but it is better than just using the number of posts. Somebody like me can easily knock out 200 or more posts in a day if we have some background tasks going on.

I was going to say that there are a lot of (to me) low value threads with hundreds of replies. Topics such as "Bitcoin is dead", " Does Bitcoin cure erectile dysfunction", "Is Bitcoin better than Obamacoin" etc seem to appear quite often. However one does have to consider the economics of maintaining the board, and if these threads finance the really useful technical discussions, then they are valuable.