I have been thinking for some time about the ways of making bitcointalk a more serious and strict forum than it is right now. I would like to share my suggestions with you and get some feedback. If they are good ones then maybe moderators could implement the necessary changes.
1. Smerit limit per post. Earning merits is generally hard, which makes them valuable on this forum. However, some people receive 15 or 20 merits for a single post, while others have only 15 merits, which they earned slowly from different people and for different posts. I think it would be better to make it impossible to send more than 5 merits for a specific post by one person. So, if the post is really good, then it can earn about 20 merits, but those merits must be sent by at least 4 different people. (questioned by hilariousetc and pugman)
Actually I put this theory long time, limit Merits per post but forum agrees on there should be no limit on merits on quality post.
Alright. Why so critical, we're not even a week in to this thing? Here's my defense of the system...
Second Flaw: No limit how much merit a good post can accumulate
Let me give an example we have 2 person, legendary A and Junior member B, A and B both are giving good post to forum but A's post are better/more liked in forum. So everybody will give Merit to A and nobody will give merit to B. Now In this situation nobody will be advancing. (Apart from Merit Source, Merits are finite).
Fixing Second Flaw We can decide that how much Merit a single post can accumulate, let say 50
This is literally what the system is meant to accomplish - rewarding the best contributions made to the forum.
3. Offered by kryptqnick and silent26: No Signature campaigns without escrows. I know that scamming on signature campaigns is not common, but why not to make it impossible? Most of legit campaigns escrow the funds anyway, so I guess making it a must should not be a problem. (questioned by hilariousetc and pugman)
4. No Signature campaigns for projects with bad reputation. Betcoin.ag accounts had red trust on this forum due to the infamous jackpot scam, but they were still advertising themselves for at least a year after that incident. I think it would be fair to forbid scamming projects to advertise themselves on this forum. (questioned by hilariousetc and pugman)
I agree with pugman. Forum created the trust policy and now its up to user how to use the Signature space. Actually for these kind of scam project, the user who are advertising should be red tagged. Marlbooza already started a thread and and tagging participants.
5. No ANN threads for shady ICOs. We all know the statistics on ICOs. While I find the general idea very appealing, the fact that most of ICOs are scamming people harms the reputation of the crypto market. I think there should be some requirements every ICO has to meet to officially enter bitcointalk.org. Among such requirements I would name an official website with a whitepaper, team and roadmap listed on it. (questioned by hilariousetc and pugman)
Until a ANN thread is not created here, how the forum will know it is shady or not.
Creation of ANN thread here does not implying any kind of credibility to the project nor do forum officially endorse any ANN (except Howey Coins, I guess) . Investor is always supposed to do DYOR
6. Rank requirement for signature campaign managers. Sometimes people with zero trust on Member or perhaps even a Junior Member rank lead signature campaigns. I think that people need experience on the forum to be Signature campaign managers. They need to know what it considered good post quality and what is bad; in which topics participants should not be welcomed to post; which projects mainly prefer specific forum sections and childboards etc. It truly seems strange to me when a Member decides which Legendary members to accept to a specific campaign. From my experience they usually don't bother making hard decisions, so they simply accept the first ones who applied. Anyway, I suggest that only people with membership rank of Senior Member and higher are allowed to lead Signature campaigns. I guess we should exclude copper members here as well, but I am not sure about that. (questioned by hilariousetc and pugman)
I think forum is biased heavily when it say about rank of "Jr. Member" or "Member" etc.
What do you think about atriz, Wapinter and needmoney (not sure but I think needmoney was in DT too)
7. Offered by seoincorporation: at least 1 merit is required to become a Junior Member of the forum.
Not new at all, Already nullius, Invoking, Hilariousetc suggested it.
10. Offered by jonemil: Add separate board on each sections dedicated only to merited topics.
It is simple if forum indroduce some kind of sort function with Merit instead of doubling the number of boards.
12. Offered by joulion86: all signature campaigns should pay in bitcoin.
Actually I made this suggestion sometime back
I think if it become rule that all bounties will be paid in bitcoins only (or any established list of Altcoins.) , I assure you then you find these managers more proactive, most stringent and will be automatically dropping the spammers from their campaigns.
If you have other suggestions you'd like to add to these ones, please attach numbers (from 7 and higher), so that everyone can address the specific suggestions easily to create feedback. I will edit this post and add them here (I'll write down the names of those who offered them as well).
Thanks!
Yes , sure
13. We should stop discussing in how to improve forum or some action items that require Theymos to act upon it unless Theymos himself asking for suggestion. I have completed more than 6 month in this forum and I saw people really brainstorming in this forum and coming up good suggestion and nothing got implemented or even explained by Theymos for not picking up suggestion.
We can use our energy to discuss what we can do in this forum to make our experience more pleasant in this forum without any action items required from Theymos.
Show Posts
