Serious users never or rarely visit those boards, so there are mostly spammers in those boards. It's a catch 22 situation. Serious users don't use those boards because they are filled with spam, and they are filled with spam because serious users aren't using them. Until we increase our efforts to deal with the spammers, the quality of discussion in these boards will not improve. I agree with other members here who have suggested more mods and patrollers, but we also need more regular users reporting the spam. I would also like to see more bans of escalating length being handed out for spammers, and more topics being locked when they have run their course and before they turn in to spam mega threads. Those boards are likely heaven for spammers. They are nearly safe in those boards. I think more patrollers are enough, and forum might not need more moderators for those boards, that will result in additional burden on forum funds (to pay for more moderators). Moreover, those boards can be kept cleaner from community-led efforts through spam reports. To do this, forum should have something new (like long-considering report badges) in order to motivate users to do more spam reports. I think we should probably have some dedicated 'sig spam' mods that deal with unsubstantial posts. There's just far too much of it for current staff to deal with and it dwarfs all the more important stuff. If we have two separate report buttons/queues like I suggested then those sig spam mods could just have access to that and handle all reports on spam so it frees up current staff to deal with the urgent things. As I've mentioned before I think we should also look at charging campaigns a fee to operate here or alt coins can pay a fee to have their own sub board and that money could be used to pay the sig spam mods as I don't think campaigns should be allowed to advertise for free here, especially when it's them that is causing 99% of the damage to the forum in the process. I think more patrollers are enough, and forum might not need more moderators for those boards, that will result in additional burden on forum funds (to pay for more moderators). The forum currently has 1250 BTC in cold storage, plus an undisclosed amount in hot wallets. It also takes in around $500,000 a year on ad revenue. Forum funds are not a hurdle to employing more moderators. Maybe, but at the same time I don't think the forum should burn through money paying for an issue that is being caused by campaigns and they should be compensating the forum for money spent trying to clear it up. Either that or change how campaigns are allowed to operate here and the bad ones should be banished. Once they realise there's repercussions for their laziness and ineptitude they'll soon change their ways. |
|
|
|
I'm new here and just check some advantages on being here in bitcointalk.org. I've noticed that earning here was one of the major goal of other people that registered in here. I don't know any issue about earning here so I can say that it's very beneficial. Another thing that I noticed is the participants of the campaign(where people earn money), how do the organizer or manager of a campaign chose the participants? so i assumed that participants are being chose by their way of posting (correct me if there are mistakes). I check a campaign and the participants, i noticed that some aren't good at posting and still earning btc. I concluded that ranks doesn't define your ideas because when it comes to campaign it is just define the amount of your payment and still lacks ideas on posting. any thoughts?
Well you've highlighted the issue with campaigns here. If everyone of them had a very good campaign manager running them then we'd see no spam. The problem is, it doesn't matter how many great managers we have when all it takes is one lousy campaign to can come here and do nothing and they immediately dwarf all the other good campaigns by accepting everyone and everyone. It's obviously not in their interests to select good participants, but just to get as much bang for their buck and unfortunately spam pays for them in this regard because the more people posting baring their signature equals more exposure they get and that's all they want at the end of the day. All we need to do is put some restrictions on how campaigns can operate here and we certainly shouldn't be tolerating those campaigns that are doing most of the damage. |
|
|
|
I have asked theymos for two report queues: one for important/urgent reports and another for sig spam or less important stuff because the report queue is getting filled with reports on sig spammers and it buries all the others so mods have to scroll through dozens and sometimes hundreds of reports just to find something that isn't sig spam related. There could either be two report buttons or a drop down menu with the most common rule infractions and that sorts them into importance somehow. How does the report queue work, exactly? Is it paginated or would it be possible to just put out a blanket search term (e.g. via CTRL/CMD+F on browsers or editors)?
I could incorporate tags in my reports, or something like [P#] where you have prioritization from say # = [1, 4] in terms of ranking. The reports are all on one page. There's just thousands of them right now and the ones on unsubstantial posts dwarf everything else. Does it really matter?
<snip>
It’s appreciated by all of us who post on the forum for the right reasons.
Personally, I don't think it matters all that much--and whether the reports are acted on or not, they certainly are appreciated. It's far better to have some reports unhandled than to not have them exist at all. I have less than 100 unhandled reports out of more than 4000 total, so I'm not complaining at all and I don't care if the unhandled ones are 'soft-bads' or not, nor do I care much for my reporting accuracy. I probably would care if it was low, but it isn't. Actmyname is likely doing a very good job in spite of mods not taking care of all of his reports, and hopefully he'll keep it up regardless of how the reports are handled. I wouldn't really look at as or call them 'soft bad'. Most of the time they're just left in the queue because no mod had decided to get involved for whatever reason. If they were truly a bad report then they'd likely be marked as so. Does it really matter?
<snip>
It’s appreciated by all of us who post on the forum for the right reasons.
Personally, I don't think it matters all that much--and whether the reports are acted on or not, they certainly are appreciated. It's far better to have some reports unhandled than to not have them exist at all. I mean, wouldn't you get anxious or even de-motivated when you report something and it doesn't get handled for days, and you don't even know why that's the case because mods can't and don't provide the explanation and why they haven't handled the report,or even if. If reporting makes you anxious I'd probably find something else to do. You can usually work out what sort of stuff to bother reporting or not by how they're handled by a mod (if they are at all). If certain hings aren't getting handled then it's up to you whether you continue reporting them or not, but giving feedback on every report we don't handle would be a nightmare and take far more time than handling the report in the first place. |
|
|
|
I hear every now and then that Bitcoin discussion / Trading discussion / Gambling discussion / altcoin discussion (and many others) are considered as spam sections. Like to hear opinion if all the above sections come in the category of spam sections and if so, where do we discuss topics related to gambling, altcoin and general bitcoin discussion ?
Why do we declare these section as spammers heaven when i do find some good discussion going on there (if not all). There are many spam posts too but we cannot say that they are 100% useless post in there.
You discuss the topics in the relevant sections regardless of whether someone has dubbed them 'spam sections' or not, but we can't stop people calling them what they like and people are allowed to have an opinion on that. Most sections are filled with spam to be honest, but some are abused more than others, but nobody is saying all posts in those subs are spam, it's just for every substantial thread it will be swamped by dozens of unsubstantial ones. Until there's repercussions on how signature campaigns can operate here then nothing much will change and people will continue to spam if they can get paid for it. |
|
|
|
Going to do my predictions today, I will have a good long think about what I put though because I didn’t do too good in the first week. Congrats to hilarious for taking the early lead.
Put them in in advance just so they're there and you don't forget, but as long as you don't lock them you can change them anytime up until kick off. That's what I normally do. Wait for any news during the week or the line-ups to be announced before you commit to anything. I normally like to see what various other pundits and predictors are saying to see if my picks are along the same lines. I usually stick to my own guns but sometimes I may tweak them if everyone else is thinking something different. Swings and roundabouts though. Sometimes you change them and they come in and sometimes the changes cost you points. Some people don't have time to put to much too thought into it or even forget to put their picks in at all and to those I would suggest putting your scores in for the month's games at least and change them if you want when you have time. You can even put the entire seasons picks in now if you wanted. That's one good thing about the superbru site. I wouldn't recommend it but it's better than not putting anything in or for those that are going on holiday or afk or whatever. |
|
|
|
I think these sorts of cases will be very rare, but they will probably work themselves out. As vod said, exclusions can be made for people who are no longer active
Not everyone is going to revise their trust list which we are seeing from Zepher's case. Over time they likely will and it's not been that long in Zepher's case, but there's also the debate of should feedback from trusted users be excluded because they're no longer active or have died? Imagine if you have a lot of feedback from users who have left the forum for whatever reasons. You could go from being pretty trusted to having little no feedback. You could make the argument that any active member would continue to get feedback from others but not always, especially if you don't do that many trades as you used to and that's why admin intervention may be better in certain cases to remove a specific feedback that's causing an issue, but maybe theymos still doesn't want to get involved in that. How about this? - You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.
It's one of the criteria of DT1 selection. Theymos can use something like this for someone being in DT2 too. Point is if someone is not active for certain amount of time then despite being in the trust list of DT1, the user will lose their DT2 status. This way their feedback will not reflect as trusted anymore unless they fill up the criteria again. Maybe make the DT2 one with a longer duration. 30 days is ok for DT1 but 30 days for DT2 would seem a little short in my opinion. It's probably not that uncommon for less active users to leave the forum for a month or so. |
|
|
|
Slow start to the season for me in the pool, 11th out of 26  but remember it’s a marathon & not a sprint  Sure is. I think I started off at the top last season then ended up pretty far down the table by the end of it. I did win one of the other pools before that though. Frank Lampard has always been the bookies favourite for the first manager to be sacked and it wouldn't surprise me if he was. I know it's only the first game and against United but that job is too big for him and far too soon. He should have stuck it out with Derby for another season or so and try to get them promoted. Then try move up. I really wasn't expecting Man U to turn them over like that so went with a draw. Still finished in first place but only by 0.5 point lead  . This season will be very tough season for Lampard. It's not worth to judge him after just one game, especially when he didn't had some important players ready to play. Chelsea lost their key player Hazard and due to transfer ban they weren't able to improve squad. Abramovich don't have much patience with managers, so I wouldn't be surprised if Lampard won't end season at Stamford Bridge. And if he will fail in Chelsea, I'm afraid it can't even ruin his career. I know, but these are all reasons why it was a bad idea taking the job. Failure with Chelsea won't ruin his career (unless he maybe gets them relegated or something), but as I said, he should have got some experience elsewhere and maybe proved himself with by doing great things with those teams. I mean, sticking around with Derby and getting them promoted would have been a huge achievement. You never know, they could have gone on to do well in the Premier League which would have further bolster his reputation. Or maybe they'd go straight back down and make it worse . |
|
|
|
I think these sorts of cases will be very rare, but they will probably work themselves out. As vod said, exclusions can be made for people who are no longer active, but maybe even theymos could step in with the rare cases where someone has died and the issue has been resolved and the feedback can be removed by him if it's silly removing someone just for one feedback, but like I said, it can still be done by current default trust members if the community deems it important enough. Trust feedback is like when someone is been cursed on whether negative or positive way, it keeps on following them till death. In situation like this, the only person that can undo it, is the person that placed it and nobody else. That's why its always advice to do the right thing at all times to avoid been marked upon negatively
People can be forgiven. DT members are added and removed and that can affect a user positively or negatively. |
|
|
|
Mutd 4:0 Chelsea
Well, congrats, it’s a big solid win for the start od the season
Frank Lampard has always been the bookies favourite for the first manager to be sacked and it wouldn't surprise me if he was. I know it's only the first game and against United but that job is too big for him and far too soon. He should have stuck it out with Derby for another season or so and try to get them promoted. Then try move up. I really wasn't expecting Man U to turn them over like that so went with a draw. Still finished in first place but only by 0.5 point lead . |
|
|
|
Don't you people think that these posts should be banned already?
No. That would be a form of censorship that would set a very bad precedent here. I hate that term "influencer", which makes me think of idiotic Youtubers who amass tons of followers and think they're gurus of some sort. The folks you mentioned are just blowhards making price predictions, which is kind of standard for many asset classes. That's not something I think ought to be banned, nor do I think Theymos is going to step in. They're silly but they have a right to think what they want about where bitcoin is headed. They belong in speculation. Report them, but I agree most of them are pretty pointless, especially if they're just random figures with no sort of theory or explanation as to why they came to that conclusion.
The whole Speculation section is somewhat pointless, because nobody really knows what the price of bitcoin is going to be in the future. The section ought to instead be called Guesswork, because that's all it is. But as long as that section exists, the guesswork posts will continue. Well I tend to agree. It's just pretty much every configuration of will bitcoin go to x y or z, but lets be honest, the fiat value of bitcoin is probably the biggest factor on why people are interested in bitcoin these days and as long as bitcoin is around people are going to be discussing the price of it. But as long as that section exists, the guesswork posts will continue.
Guessworks will stop if signature be disabled in Speculation board. People will stop making posts in Speculation boards if their posts in that board are not counted for their post-quota due to signature disabled It won't stop but it will significantly decrease. As long as bitcoin has been around people will discuss the price regardless of signature campaign or not. I think many campaigns don't even pay for posts in there either. if it is a user posting those, i don't see any problem as long as they are in speculation board. maybe they are really interested in these self claimed "experts" opinions.
People just want some reassurance. I see it all the time with gamblers. I'm forever seeing twitchy gamblers asking people if they think x team will win or score more than x amount of goals because if they see someone else say what they want to hear it gives them some confidence and faux-reassurance that they're not throwing their money away. Same goes with bitcoin. Some people get a lot more excited when they hear some celebrity or C list amateur economist or investor say bitcoin is going to go to 100k or one million. I mean, it's meaningless because it doesn't actually mean anything but it still gives people that hope for the future that they want. |
|
|
|
Maybe stupid by Klopp, they must have loads of money after getting two CL Finals in a row. I don’t know why they signed nobody, it seems dumb to me I agree.
Sign who and who do they replace? They've already got one of the best squads in the world. It's not like they probably didn't try either. Teams can't get anyone they want and there's not much point in taking just whoever they can get. It's not as easy as just signing a superstar as not many will want to go to Liverpool if they're going to be benched (and if they're going to start who do they replace from their already very strong team? Liverpool don't really have any weak links imo). Also, Spurs did pretty good last season without any signings (if I remember correctly) and finished fourth, one point behind Chelsea. Liverpool just need to keep doing what they're doing and hope they can do it better than City or hope some other teams take away some points from them. Let me quote it for more visibility. Guys JOIN. The fund already have 0.0819BTC. Be a part of it. It will have 0.1 in it once the sponsorship money comes in. First game is tonight so if anyone wants to join you don't have long left. Only 0.0025 to play and all money is split between the top 5 winners. |
|
|
|
Initially, it's clear some users have no interest engaging in a discussion, it's just a matter to post "Flash News: Russia did this and that, paragraph, read more here" but there are truly some who are. You can find whole topics of 'normal discussions' (crazy right?). Try to read the same in a Bitcoin discussion topic. I find it hard to force people to add their own thoughts and I doubt it will be better. They will add shitposts, I prefer to read "Flash News: Russia did this and that, paragraph, read more here".
How about making a discussion after the news article share in the OP mandatory then? I love it when the OP aside from sharing the news also discussed the article on hand, it acts a conversation starter on how the thread will go and it simply mitigates the chances of having a free-for-all/post-what-you-want kind of thread. Seems like it would be a faff to enforce. Noticed this user today who's posts are 100% in the Press section posting articles to www.visionary-finance.com without any further comment https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2648997 goozij20 Many of the articles are also just about blockchain and not bitcoin-related. |
|
|
|
Like wtf guys, do you not believe in freedom of speech?
Stop wasting both of our time and just let people have freedom of speech unless they are clearly a bot spamming and scamming.
So you don't believe in freedom of speech for bots or scammers? One rule for you and one rule for them? Surely scammers should have the freedom to scam? oh nice picture btw, clearly made by a neck beard reddit mod that will never come to terms with himself in the afterlife, always thinking he is better than himself. +1merit It was made by someone who obviously understands freedom of speech. Here's another one for you: But I've read the post @TimeBits at Topic:Posts deleted by moderators:107 repeatedly, but it's still not clear to me what kind of posts are deleted by moderators? (other than those marked). Would you like to see them? Nazi forum 2.0 mods live here, They target people, I can show that to, like 20 post being removed in the same 30 mins.  But I've read the post @TimeBits at Topic:Posts deleted by moderators:107 repeatedly, but it's still not clear to me what kind of posts are deleted by moderators? (other than those marked). Would you like to see them? Nazi forum 2.0 mods live here, They target people, I can show that to, like 20 post being removed in the same 30 mins. Some of the mods here, should just ignore me, just like everyone else that does not like to hear the truth does, living in a delusional world. It's not the mods job to ignore users. It's their job to enforce the rules and handle reports, which there are many that come in against you. The more you mod me here, the more I will mod you on the other side. I promise, I will remove your freedom to speech as you done to me here, heck you keep doing it I may even remove your freedom of thought.
LOL What the actual fuck. I want some of whatever you're smoking. Weed. He's a self-admitted troll but he probably has mental issues as well. Either way I wouldn't entertain him. Dear Creator,
Your posts get deleted because You violate the rules, even in this thread. Please don't send me to the eternal pit of fire though.
Nobody, including You - The Creator, is allowed to post multiple posts one after the other, which you have done in this thread. Read rule #32 of this godforsaken place.
Bingo. As Lucious just said, he's one of those people who wants to make his own rules and yet doesn't understand why they're banned and this isn't the only place he's been banned from:
-guy who used to have 2000-3000 live viewers on his stream making $500-5000 a day(sometimes an hour) then started talking about the banks and got banned from twitch, I do not regret my decision. I may be poor now in "fiat money", but at least I have a soul and have become rich in wisdom, something I can bring to the otherside with me, that is real wealth. I did my goal and planted a lot of mind seeds of liberty in the minds of many young.
I don`t know but whoever banned my old account for talking about time banking/duration distribution/self voting and the end of bitcoin mining and showing a simulation of it 6 years ago, flush them, Fiat loving fuck.
Maybe just read the rules and stop trolling and you'd be fine. You should be permabanned for ban evasion alone and sending threats is also against the rules so knock it off. |
|
|
|
Then just get rid of the board.
Why not just give someone a shot at moderating it. LeGaulois or o_e_l_e_o or both, 3-month probation. If that doesn't work then kill it. Well if it's to stay then it probably should have its own mod, along with stricter guidelines on what should and shouldn't be posted there. As for allocating new mods only theymos can do that so hopefully he'll make some changed based on this thread. Staff were pretty much in unison that something needs to change with it and if I remember correctly most were in agreement that it was no longer really needed. I used CoinIdol as an example, but I can give others. Like the one telling JP Morgan has created its blockchain & coin. Yes, it's true but it was 2 years ago. Or the one telling Italy started to do x and y, you try to verify but you won't find any other sites reporting this news, you can translate in different languages just in case but you will find nothing! zero!
Altcoin or blockchain articles don't belong there, but that's another issue in that all sorts of alt coin spam and anything vaguely mentioning blockchain also gets posted there. |
|
|
|
The problem is what websites/news sources do you count as a reliable source? Because every time I visit the board I'll just only see news articles from coinidol, coindesk, and cointelegraph and more often than not they always have a similar offering in terms of the quality of news they are offering. They always try to create news from tweets, current events and relate it to price movements in the market, criminal activities, and of course bans and regulations happening in the world. The worst part is they themselves are sourcing their news from one another and recycle it only a few tries to create their own news articles. If we will rule all this crypto specialized news websites we are only left with thomson-reuters and bloomberg as a reliable source for getting news articles the downside is they aren't even focusing on cryptocurrencies right now.
Then just get rid of the board. The Press section was created when any news article was exciting and notable when it got mentioned by a big site, but now bitcoin is mentioned every day somewhere or another, and then of course there's all the coin-prefixed sites you mention that just regurgitate the same old story or make an entire article over what some celebrity tweeted about bitcoin or because John Mcaffe says bitcoin will be worth x amount and will eat his own dick if it doesn't get there. If it stays then we either need to prohibit those sites or elaborate on what notable actually means. This was just posted in Press: How to sell EBooks for Bitcoins  In this digital era there is no idea that seems too far fetched. For all the creative writers out there the online world provides a great platform to showcase and sell your work easily without having to wait for some publication agency to approve your book. All you have to do is set up a website and start selling your eBook. Now, you must be wondering as easy as it sounds, setting up an online store can be quite challenging. But, you will soon learn that it is actually quite an easy process, one that does not require a lot of high level technical know-how and expertise. We have put together a guide that will help you bring your dream of selling your book a bit closer. https://blog.blockonomics.co/how-to-sell-ebooks-for-bitcoin-3d2b06567db8That board really isn't for this sort of stuff. |
|
|
|
Hehe, I lol'd at the title, pretty funny stuff :')
I don't know though, it seems like that could very well be a very slippery slope.
Once you start moderating which websites can and can't be used, you might end up with something that resembles censorship.
That seems a bit extreme. The Press guidelines already states notable press hits. Some clickbait article from shitcoinnews.net really shouldn't count as 'notable'. Indeed, they're just creating back-links. I doubt they even expect people to click on those links. Although, maybe they do, if they're posting hundreds of links each day.
Well whether someone clicks on them or not is besides the point really. I'm sure some do, but it's free to post here so any free advertising is better than nothing and they probably post here hoping that someone will click on them at least. I think most people probably don't click on signatures either, but it's still brand exposure, along with the backlink spam as you say. |
|
|
|
Perhaps the press board could be configured so that it does not count for activity, and that signatures are not displayed in the board. Or at the very minimum, make this true for OPs of each thread.
I believe the above should remove most if not all of the incentive to do what is being described in the OP.
The posters that are spamming their articles as described by op probably care neither about signatures or post count, they just want to drive traffic to their sites by spamming links to them. The only people that care about their sigs and post counts in there will be signature campaigners, but this is a secondary issue of the type of spam op is describing. |
|
|
|
This "legalized plagiarism" as you put it is the lowest of the low - the absolute minimum amount of work needed to make a post which will be paid by a bounty and won't be deleted. My concern would be that if the Press board is more strictly moderated or locked, then these spammers would simply move to another board.
It's only really there because it's pretty much the only board where you're legally allowed to get away with it. It's a board where essentially plagiarism is allowed as long as it follows the Press format and that's why people have taken advantage of it. Remove it and I doubt people will just start posting it elsewhere. If they do, they should probably be warned and then temp banned, especially if all or most of their posts are just press or promo articles. At the very minimum some restrictions should be put in place and I think enforcing the notable Press hits clause should be applied ie no crypto-related sources. |
|
|
|
I was at the game yesterday, I saw enough to see that we (Liverpool) are at least equal in quality to Man City. We hit the post three times & had a Salah header cleared off the line. Man City were hanging on at the end, no other team in the league pushes Man City to defend with the whole team on the edge of their box.
It’s going to be a fun season. Man City and Liverpool are so much better than every other team in the PL, maybe even Europe.
Let’s see what happens, it’s going to be a wild ride.
That's true, Liverpool played a brilliant game in the match. Certainly both clubs are strong and wild candidates for the PL next season. That means, other clubs must really compete if they want to become champions in the EPL. Indeed, both teams are of the same quality. But, Manchester City has better players sitting on the bench and as the championship goes to its end, they will need fresh legs to play in some games. Liverpool is going to lose the title the same way they did last year. I think the table will probably resemble last years, especially with the top three and City winning again, Liverpool coming in second and Spurs moving up from Fourth into Third. Hoping Wolves can do a bit better and push for top 5 but I doubt it as the competition is too strong. I'll be rooting for Liverpool to win though. If anyone wants to join BitcoinTalk's Premier League pool there's not long left before the start of the season on Friday. It's 0.0025 to join and all money is split between the top 5 winners. If you enjoy football and betting on it without breaking the bank and sticking to a fixed limit then check it out. You can join here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5154317.0 |
|
|
|
|
I really wish this would be made a priority. Far too many people are completely ignorant to the rules and oblivious as to what to do here. A simple and short message is all we need detailing the most commonly broken rules and links to further guides and stickies that go into depth about things so they can read up on them if they wish. So many people just have no idea where to even find this stuff and Meta is usually the last board they go into so being directed to these threads when they sign up will be very helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
