Second what is sig spam? Is there a sticky that has a in depth answer like less than 10 words, posts within 5mins, 100 posts a day, 300 a week etc
A tendency to make posts in order to boost your post count, and you have an ad in your signature, particularly one that pays you per post. There is no secret invisible line that you shouldn't cross in terms of numbers, it's mostly subjective. There are people who just don't post very well in general, post "too much", or don't really have anything to say, they just like to participate in the community and post. This itself is fine. But when you add an ad to these kinds of posters, it's difficult or impossible to tell if they just aren't quality posters or if they are attempting to boost their post count. I used to err on the side of caution here because I do not want to ban the former, just the latter, but too many of the latter are slipping through the cracks because it's very difficult to gauge someone's intentions. This is the main thing that has changed lately. Thanks  That is exactly what I am looking for.  it's difficult or impossible to tell if they just aren't quality posters or if they are attempting to boost their post count. I used to err on the side of caution here because I do not want to ban the former, just the latter, but too many of the latter are slipping through the cracks because it's very difficult to gauge someone's intentions There are already a few in the campaign, that are simply not quality posters, and is actually posting as they usually do. But there are also the other kind, who is trying to boost their post count. The issue is when checking, both of the posts are almost exactly the same quality. atm, I am simply judging by the effort into making the posts, but I am looking for a more efficient way to distinguish between them if possible. Thanks |
|
|
|
Congratz to DD for crossing the 50 million bets mark!Awaiting official declaration of results for the contests.
|
|
|
|
How is your constructive post count grade counted?
I checked last weeks stats, and I made 34 constructive posts, and I got a C- rating, while someone else made 23 constructive posts, and got a B rating.
It turns out the ratings are kinda arbitrary. I last week I spent a lot of time posting in "techincal discussion" helping others who were having trouble with bitcoin software (seemingly quite constructive behavior) and I got my lowest rating yet. Another week my rating went from A, down to D with a note that I had posted too often on a given day. After I explained to the folks that actually this had been over 2 days, they changed my rating back to B. I still can't really figure out what it's supposed to mean. So I just decided not to worry about the ratings anymore. Posting in gambling section is encouraged, i remember you post a lot in gambling section in the week you got A and bonus. IMO those posts in techinical disscussion are constructive but not relevant to gamble or dice. Most of geeks may not be interested in dice and gamble, that's why the rate is lower. Maybe sig campaign manager will explain the reason to you.  Currently, it is calculated based on constructiveness, consistency mainly, ,then number and boards (both less relevant). tspacepilot got D initially, because he made 50% around 45 posts in 24 hours, which was noted as not consistent. From this week, we might switch to all constructive grading system. But, those who made 50% posts + in 1 o 2 days will be noted. I am sure that the ratings are in no way arbitrary. Why is that a participants cant posts 50 posts per day? If someone manage to get 50 posts per day, I think it is great since the campaign will get more advertisement as there are more post with the signature. It is quite all right. But if he posts some 5 posts a day, and the last 2 days some 50 posts a day, that is inconsistent. |
|
|
|
19/04/2015
1JCb21yNidSjAjvwiQPevga6yLbeK8XkDc
i think you are the winner! Congrats man! very lucky on you. also congrats to scotch who win for #50,000,000 rolls!  Off by less than 7 hours.  April 19 1MCiA3FtqxpqhTL3rF9fWbLAt8pfFWN4z1 Congratz to the winner*! *Not confirmed yet. |
|
|
|
I might try the next round but only if there's a new address, it's too confusing with your already used address.  lol. Sorry. I will send everything back and start a new round later.  Improvements: 1. New address, no confusion. 2. No change of rules. 3. SImplified rules. Thanks |
|
|
|
How is your constructive post count grade counted?
I checked last weeks stats, and I made 34 constructive posts, and I got a C- rating, while someone else made 23 constructive posts, and got a B rating.
It turns out the ratings are kinda arbitrary. I last week I spent a lot of time posting in "techincal discussion" helping others who were having trouble with bitcoin software (seemingly quite constructive behavior) and I got my lowest rating yet. Another week my rating went from A, down to D with a note that I had posted too often on a given day. After I explained to the folks that actually this had been over 2 days, they changed my rating back to B. I still can't really figure out what it's supposed to mean. So I just decided not to worry about the ratings anymore. Posting in gambling section is encouraged, i remember you post a lot in gambling section in the week you got A and bonus. IMO those posts in techinical disscussion are constructive but not relevant to gamble or dice. Most of geeks may not be interested in dice and gamble, that's why the rate is lower. Maybe sig campaign manager will explain the reason to you. Currently, it is calculated based on constructiveness, consistency mainly, ,then number and boards (both less relevant). tspacepilot got D initially, because he made 50% around 45 posts in 24 hours, which was noted as not consistent. From this week, we might switch to all constructive grading system. But, those who made 50% posts + in 1 o 2 days will be noted. I am sure that the ratings are in no way arbitrary. |
|
|
|
I see nothing wrong with advertising the fact you pay to any address, and have no phone verification... that is something I dont like which I means I like this campaign and would like to enroll: Name: thejaytiesto Position: Full Member Bitcoin Address: 19LzHygeEKDdvF49HoQUGUJScomawma9n4 Link to Recent posts: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=381086;sa=showPostslet me know if I pass to change signature, cheers. Wear the sig before applying, lol. |
|
|
|
Let us make it more exciting!! Minimum time gap has been dropped to 100 confirmations. No more changes. |
|
|
|
have you done this before? i'm cool with sending you 5 btc but how sure will it be that i am not the one being scammed? i'll sleep first and let the scripts run. when i wake up we can arrange the escrow. i have 30 btc in the wallet where the script is running for now. everything is automatic so those who want to try the game can play even while i sleep.
Use one from this list: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855778.0Preferably devthedev or Quickseller. Good luck P.S. Try setting up a site too, I think they have more confidence in a site that pure thread. Dunno why. |
|
|
|
|
Here is what i think:
1. OP doesn't deserve the money, because it doesn't belong to him
2. SIgnature campaign participants have a right yet, small in the amount, calculated on above standard rate.
3. Those who got scammed has a higher claim since the amount originally belongs to them. Since it is difficult to establish genuine claims (from fake ones), and since it requires considerable time and effort on the part of the person to make a fair decision (he can also charge a fee for doing it), it comes the thiird best alternative.
it is to be noted that escrow will have a higher claim over the amount than the participants, and he will ahve the right to decide on which to choose.
4. The two best alternatives that remain is
a. Doing what is professionally justifiable.
Go with the terms of the agreement. (Give partial amount to participants, and the rest as per terms)
b. Go with what is ethically right.
Since none of the stakeholders can be established to have a reasonable claim over the funds, the funds may be given as donation for a good cause. (after deducting a reasonable amount to participants and escrow)
|
|
|
|
Yep. sorry, I added the quotes in the message. Do you want an escrow? I am willing to be one. No fee. Tips appreciated. kind of ecrow. seriously? no fee? how can i be sure that it will be ok? how does it work anyway? Yeah. the normal fee is 1%. But many escrows do it for free too. It involves just holding and releasing funds, right? I mean no other responsibilities? It works like this: 1. You send a part of the funds to the escrow. say 5 BTC? (less if you are lowegin the max bet) an amount that will cover any losses made by the participant. 2. Players play. 3. The security is that, if you end up scamming etc. (which is quite prevallent here, though you don't seem like such a person ) the escrow will be able to cover the scammed amount of funds of the players. 4. If nothing happens, after a period or when the game closes, or when you requests, the funds are send back to you, after the escrow posting here letting everyone know that the funds are no longer at escrow. You can also pick one from here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855778.0devthedev, and Quickseller is recommended, since they are around most of the time. Edit: I got to go now. If you are going to use escrow, you one on the list. Thanks |
|
|
|
This game can go on forever. There is always profit to be earned for the next person even when someone send in 1 btc.
It will not go on forever. There is risk that the next person sends too (that is the game goes on longer - forget forever) making him not to send in th first place lol. |
|
|
|
Yep. sorry, I added the quotes in the message. Do you want an escrow? I am willing to be one. No fee. Tips appreciated. kind of ecrow. |
|
|
|
This One No phone verification, Highest payouts, Completely transparent, Independent trusted escrow, Payout to ANY address, Referral link allowed, Weekly payments, and a lot more!! Here are few reasons Why marco laughed  No phone verification, Bit-x require Payout to ANY address ONLY to Bit-x address Added a disclaimer. Now everything should be okay. lol now its get promenent, When some one sees it BIT-x will comes in his mind. Ok No problem, these are the best part of sales Pitch Disclaimer removed. I really liked it tho. DA DICE Signature Campaign!No phone verification, Highest payouts, Completely transparent, Independent trusted escrow, Payout to ANY address, Referral link allowed, Weekly payments, and a lot more!! Disclaimer: Bolded text is completely coincidential, and does not relate in any way to another campaign |
|
|
|
The game is on: 0.01 BTC send by anonymous awesome guy with 15T4NgsXyB3zDSjXgsoHx56PuJWfDLq3Rb address. The prize will of course be send to the same address the funds are received from. Prize pool at 0.11 BTC at the time of update. |
|
|
|
The spreadsheet is not open to public,can you open it?
What do you mean? It is working all right from my end. Yes it is working my end also, hopefully op turns up and shares what could be the problem. Sounds like a problem your end though doesn't it. I am pretty sure that the problem is not on OPs end. I rather think he didn't actually check the spreadsheet and instead rephrased the same question asked above. |
|
|
|
This One No phone verification, Highest payouts, Completely transparent, Independent trusted escrow, Payout to ANY address, Referral link allowed, Weekly payments, and a lot more!! Here are few reasons Why marco laughed No phone verification, Bit-x require Payout to ANY address ONLY to Bit-x address Added a disclaimer. Now everything should be okay. P.S. Will remove it in a couple of minutes. |
|
|
|
This One No phone verification, Highest payouts, Completely transparent, Independent trusted escrow, Payout to ANY address, Referral link allowed, Weekly payments, and a lot more!! Here are few reasons Why marco laughed No phone verification, Bit-x require Payout to ANY address ONLY to Bit-x address lol. As I said those are the set of features, people like me will be looking at. I want them to get that in first glance. That is the real reason I put it. Yep, I made it also look like that. But that was just for the fun, lol. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
