Yes, there are always two sides to things.
So, how about the idea of write-restricted areas that are accessible (for posting) only by invitation or, as was suggested above by Jet Cash, only for accounts with a certain rank?
I'd like to suggest a third alternative to use the number of merits received, instead of the rank / total number of merits. I've seen posts from hero and legendary members that don't pass muster, and those individuals have actually not received any merits, aside from the initial allocation. Although I have no idea how much effort this would take to implement, I can't imaging it would be too difficult. And since awarded merits are to a large extent (although not completely) reflective of the quality of the contributions, it seems like an appropriate yardstick.
And using the awarded merits as an entry point to the write-restricted areas would not materially affect legitimate users. Since users can still read the forums, they are not loosing out on the content. But only those who have demonstrated in the open areas that they can provide valuable input and have been recognized as doing so by having received merits, can start contributing actively to those write-restricted areas. Whether this applies to sections in the forum, or at the thread level is perhaps a secondary question, but I can't see how this would not lift the quality, while not being too restrictive either.
Any thoughts?
I don't think it's a terrible suggestion. It really all depends on what sections will be rank/merit restricted. If we limit all Bitcoin related sections and only allow people to rank up in the altcoin, Beginners, and local boards we'll just see an increase of spam there. Yes, it might be restricted to one section, but that just means whoever is moderating that section or frequents those sections will be overwhelmed with low quality posts and people attempting to get merits by making their poor quality posts look constructive or of an outstanding quality. Possibly, we could make merits spendable to unlock certain sections or certain threads. If someone is willing to spend 1 merit to unlock a thread then you would probably expect them to at least try and get that merit back by posting in that thread. Although, this is assuming that everyone cares about merits not everyone will and the likelihood not many people make enough posts let alone quality posts to get enough merit to do this. I don't think this is necessary and is adding a sort of pay wall behind threads which not every post needs to be constructive. I don't think this is a good idea side wide, but could be an option for those people who make self moderated threads and want the discussion to be of high quality. They wouldn't receive the merit it would just be lost forever to avoid abuse. This would also have it's drawbacks including less sMerits being spent on quality posts, although we could just leave that up to the merit sources in the future when there's a lot more of them around. |
|
|
|
This is the reason why I've put the altcoin/bounty sections on ignore, but I've visited there to report some of these kinds of posts, and it's ridiculous how many of them there are. Mods can ban the accounts one by one if they're reported, but there's nothing stopping the spammers from creating an unlimited number of them. So how can we stop that, short of requiring a fee for registration? I don't see an easy answer to that.
A lot of people who come to this forum likely don't have Bitcoin though and are looking to learn more about it. These are the people who I don't want to be restricted. Implementing a registration fee would likely prevent the spam we are currently having, but we would also lose users who want to learn about Bitcoin. Not everyone who comes here will even have Bitcoin for the whole time they've registered. That's not because they are into alt accounts but, because they are interested in the technology and like to participate in discussion. Limit the access to section for new accounts can be a solition but I don't know if this will be a problem for regulars users and for the admin.
To what rank though? If it's something like jr member then they'll just spam elsewhere until they reach that rank. We might find that some people will be lazy and wouldn't do it, but that's when they pay for bumping services. As long as people can make money they'll continue to find ways around it. I might be optimistic, but I think if we had more people actively reporting in that section we might be able to make it more tolerable. |
|
|
|
From your comments I take it that you don't think there is anything else that can be considered (aside from the merit system) that would increase the quality of the discussions? It would be disappointing if the quality issue is just a fact of life which simply has to be accepted.
There probably are ways to go about dealing with the spam, but I don't think this can be done without restrictions which affect legitimate users. At the moment we've only stopped users who post bad quality posts from ranking up not removing it. Generally though I think the forum is in a much better place than it was a year or two ago. There's a constant juggling act when implementing restrictions and dealing with the spam. If there was a solution which couldn't be abused and wouldn't limit legitimate users that would be great and would probably be implemented in a heart beat. |
|
|
|
|
Some users have suggested that a up vote could be introduced which would show that they appreciate the post but, don't think it's worth a merit. The only thing with Stack exchanges system it wouldn't likely work at this forum. Stackexchange is primary used for asking and answering questions. But, this forum is much more complicated than that, and there's probably no real incentive of having an alternate account on stackexchange where here there's multiple reasons why someone may have an alt.
This opens the possibility of abuse, but not only from alt accounts. A lot of people have made a lot of enemies around here specifically those who point out scams and would be targeted by these down votes. This is also why a lot of people including myself are against the idea of a demerit.
I think if we ever introduce a system like this it would have to be limited to a 'like' and you could like a post. Honestly though, I don't think it's a big priority and there's probably better things to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
When there is a lot of accounts spamming these types of messages check the OP and see if they are offering any bonus for users posting on their topic and if they are report the thread for Incentivising instead of reporting all the posts individually. If you are really determined a few of them will not ask this in the OP, rather their twitter/website.
|
|
|
|
Who reduced my report accuracy to 96% from %97? they were all repeating previous posts on previous pages, if you don't have the time to read my reports and check my previous reports to see the reason for reporting. don't take it on me please.
Showing signs of entitlement isn't really the best way to go about this. If you aren't willing to put in the effort of clarifying why you are reporting and given a detailed description and reference any past reports then you can't expect the moderators to either. Don't you know? it's theymos. embarrassingly creepy is wearing the copper membership tag as a legendary member. why? show me somebody like him, I will kiss their asses too. if you could turn everything you touch in to gold, I will kiss your ass as well. if something doesn't turn in to gold, he should ask why and find the reason himself. if I tell you the reason, you'd make fun of me and would call me a backward thinking terrorist.
My master actmyname. There we have it boys and girls theymos is the second coming of our Saviour Satoshi Nakamoto Jesus Christ. Although, I would prefer if his touch would turn spam posts into good content, but I guess we can't have everything. By the way, the only argument you could probably make about buying copper membership when you are already of sufficient rank other than supporting the forum is that someone seeks status and likes to 'show off'. I wouldn't say it's embarrassing. EDIT: now they have locked some of the threads containing my post(s) to see what other excuses I could come up with for not reporting.
Don't you just hate it when forum staff have a personal vendetta against you? Honestly, they have better things to do. What you should have said (only a suggestion): As a global moderator and forum staff, I would like to voice my concerns. digaran is incompetent because he is not good at speaking english even though I can understand him. but forum has to hire a native english speaker. we don't want to cause any confusions in the future. he might delete some of the posts because of poor understanding of the language. this is alone a very good reason.
I'd also like to ask our dear friend Flying Hellfish to apply for a full time job and becomes the new moderator. theymos should pay him a full time job's salary and Flying Hellfish must work a full time job and if there is any need for another moderator, again digaran is not a good candidate period. we need to pay one of the staff members, an already experienced staff member to do the work. thanks before and after and in between.
What I can get from your post: digiron man, simply put. we don't like you man, why would you insist on this? let us pay a full time job's salary to Flying Hellfish. he might not work a full time, but it's not something you should concern yourself with. he is an american citizen and that is enough.
A neutral forum moderator should say: either Flying Hellfish applies for a full time job or we should wait and see if anybody else applies. this community deserves better.
Alia honey, where are you? I need a recharge sweety, come to papa.
Forum staff aren't employees that you keep implying they are. They don't need to be on good behavior and show the "customer is always right" and they aren't governed by strict policies on how to deal with certain scenarios or how much time they need to spend on the forum. What you do expect from them is a level head when moderating and to show as little bias as possible when moderating. They can show as much bias as they want if it's not related to their role as a member of staff and they can have less popular opinions. This isn't a job application rather it's a position which is available to those who can give up their spare time in order to better the forum. How can you not know? you are here for years and don't know what he wants? theymos wants to help people. he also wants people to help him. he wants to create opportunities for even Millions of people to earn money and improve their lives. he is trying to make major changes by supporting Bitcoin. he is also trying to motivate forum members to improve the quality of discussions. he wants to give people a chance for a better life.
People don't care, they don't get it. they would keep farming accounts and posting garbage. this is what they can do. nobody would help them not even their own governments. they would see no difference here, everybody trying to take and stay on top. when they see there is no justice, they would think
It's better to earn as much as they can before it's too late.
What theymos wants, is loyalty. he wants to trust people to work towards the same goal, not to build cartels and take control of everything. not to betray his trust. he wants more people like himself in charge. to do what he would do. all he has so far is power hungry people. garbage posters are posting garbage and people of authority are using their positions for their own benefits.
I get it you like a debate, but hilariousandco was referring to moderation and from what I can gather from past moderators is there isn't a policy rather guidelines which the moderators can follow but, ultimately they use their discretion when handling forum issues. You could argue that the only goal theymos has for the forum is providing a platform for people to have discussions about Bitcoin & cryptocurrency without censorship as evidenced by him taking up the role of admin and showing a desire to work towards these goals through fair moderation. You want more obvious reasons? if there was any obvious reasons. why would you all feel threatened? you either think I could really become a mod or you think theymos doesn't know what is best and needs a reminder such as "obvious reasons". thank you for your vote. conclusion is obvious reasons plus idiot troll.
Well, theymos did actually ask everyone to discuss those who apply here. |
|
|
|
I would also like to vote Sir rickbig41 but he's already a moderator in Philippines local board. Monitoring and moderating two section at a time is a little difficult (I guess). Also suggesting Sir Jet  He's also now a global moderator which I believe is a somewhat recent thing? Because this people have easily the experience to be mods and just didnt go there anymore because nobody was giving a fuck regarding moderation of the sub in the last 3 years.
I could get 1000 x 5 legit reports in 1 day in this trash can.
Ps:
No thanks i dont want to be mod.
I'm not doubting you could get a 1000 reports each day or even more for that matter, but judging by the amount of reports which have been made no one is willing to do just that. Even if we were to add up the top 20 reporters in Politics and Society it wouldn't be anywhere close. Just because someone can doesn't mean they do or will. |
|
|
|
Probably not one of his best statements I must say. I guess he's trying to shorten his response that because Bitcoin is limited to 21 million and can't be printed off or fabricated like conventional currencies it's more legitimate. I generally like Steve Wozniak but, he seems to use his authority figure here (mathematician) to back up his claim without going into the details of why it's limited to 21 million and why it's more legitimate than other systems. Of course, I haven't seen the original interview(?) and it's likely that this has been taken out of context or is a snip bit of what he actually said. Do you have the source? Steve Wozniak is a clever man! And I think it is more crypto than math.
My prediction for BTC is 200000$ till 2020!
More crypto than math? What do you even mean by that statement? Maths is involved in everything and crypto is a by product of that. Theere's no disputing that Steve Wozniak is incredibly smart and talented, but this isn't a quote that particularly outlines that. |
|
|
|
The application thread for moderator on P&S become a debating session, I believe this was created to look for a mod?
Not to insult each other ?
It may have gone a little off topic in some regards, but I still think it's relevant to theymos who has to articulate an opinion on those who are applying. Some of the view points of the members "insulting" each other would have likely helped him in identifying a good mod who is going to try their best to not censor users whilst dealing with spam. To be honest last 11 reporters have less reported posts together than it is number in "top 20 reporters".
This is why ideally we would want someone who is very active in the section already as it appears there isn't a whole lot of reports and the moderator can't rely on them. Of course, once this section has a dedicated moderator this will likely change. Not only active in that section, but a user who is regular across the board and is online a fair amount to deal with any reports coming their way. |
|
|
|
Just like technical support got renamed to Bitcoin technical support it's probably a good idea to do the same for the beginners section. Not sure what to do about all the merit discussion. It's clearly getting tedious for anyone who's been on the board for more than a week. It seems excessive to prevent discussion with a rule, but it would also make a mess to move every pointless merit thread into Meta. I think all we can really do is dissuade merit discussion rather than disallow it completely. Perhaps Lauda could update their guide with a tip strongly encouraging newbies to look at existing threads where someone has almost certainly already asked the same question, rather than starting yet another new thread about merit. This depends on the topic at hand, but most merit threads and others in the beginners section could probably be moved to archival and a moderator can include a link to a relevant thread which has the information asked. For example, if they were asking a question regarding how merit works then it can be moved to archival and include a link to hilariousandco's FAQ Yes this would require leaving a 'ghost' of the thread to include the link, however it would prevent needless replies and further bumping of the thread. If the OP actually wanted to find out the answer they can check their post history. Another alternative would be the moderator replying to the thread with the links, and then moving it to archival. Just outright trashing the thread is probably unfair as from a beginners stand point they may think a question/thread like this is acceptable and fits in that section. |
|
|
|
I will try to be simple :
- Depth1 = actual sources, limited number even 200 aren't that good number imo to cover whole forums parts.
- Depth2 = good users that may collected a reasonable amount of smerit but they have actually less. They might be chosen in the future as sources but they should wait years maybe.
People are complaining about their posts aren't receiving the proper attention (i am not talking about trashy ones), sources couldn't cover all subs (local,...etc), number of users are increasing constantly...etc.
Depth2 are active users in many subs, all they need is more smerit to share with others, someone with +100 smerit doesn't deserve to be in depth2, while someone with 10 smerit (and +100 spent) may deserves to be in.
It is all about flexibility & decentralisation and at the same time keeping the Merit system cheat-free as possible.
The merit system is very early doors at the moment, and merit sources will be in the hundreds. I don't think it's been limited to 200 as far as I know. Adding a depth 2 would just complicate a relatively simple system. Plus, I don't think it brings any major advantages. If a person is deemed good then he'll likely be added as a merit source. If someone has run out of their initial sMerit and doesn't generate enough on a regular basis to show they have the capabilities of picking out quality content but, has a eye for good posts then they can fill in an application and send it off to theymos. I don't think we need to over complicate by adding a depth 2. |
|
|
|
During ~3 months one troll/floodster with offensive language offended users and developers of this topic (until they created self-moderate topic). There was a few hundred reports from different users, but there was no reaction from the moderators. I do not wrote this post with claims or demands, just wanna to understand the policy of the forum. Depending on what you mean by "floodster" offensive language alone will not result in the post getting deleted or the user banned. The developers did the right thing in terms of creating a self moderated thread. If you ever want to know why a report wasn't handled/marked bad then you can contact a moderator. It's up to them if they answer you or not. |
|
|
|
|
That sucks. Used this for checking accounts that I reported. I guess the only saving grace is not that much damage has been done and it came relatively early in the development otherwise it would of taken more than 22 days. Plus, I don't think you'll be overlooking backups anymore.
Any idea how they gained access?
|
|
|
|
Chances are the Mod who handles the ticket can't ban the user. Most Mods can only nuke Newbies. The post will get deleted, but the user won't get banned.
This may be true, although the mods aren't robots and can pass up on taking a action and leave it in the queue for someone who does have the capability of taking more serious actions against the account. For example, I've reported a few people in the past which I assume were left as I've received messages from cyrus telling me the accounts have been banned a few hours after the initial report. Threads are able to include more information than you could on a report. The report field is quite limited and I often find myself having to recheck what I've written. Plus, I'm not sure how clear longer reports are for the moderators. |
|
|
|
I would think one of the criteria of merit sources is that they have to all cover different areas of the forum, be good at spotting quality posts, and be active.Eventually, as hinted by theymos there will be hundreds of merit sources so it won't be so much of an issue in the future that quality posts are getting missed. Although, I do like the idea of normal users being able to transfer their sMerit to others. For example, Lauda recently said this: This is not a problem with the merit system, this is a problem with the quality of the content and the sockpuppets. For reference: I have around 300 sMerit right now and nobody to give them to, nor do I plan to look through garbage to find someone. I'm still waiting for a destroy merit option.
This probably wouldn't be ideal, and if users could transfer their sMerit to people that they believe would distribute it correctly and be willing to look for good quality posts then this might be a nice little feature. |
|
|
|
|
There's different reasons to have an alt account, and not all of them are malicious. Sometimes especially when you are running a business on one account you may not want to associate your personal opinions with your main account.
We see this on several sites such as Reddit where people will make a throwaway account to ask a certain question. Maybe a question which gives away personal information etc.
It's the same here, although alt accounts can be used for malicious purposes and I would say the majority of alt accounts these days are used to abuse bounties and signature campaigns.
|
|
|
|
what you mean about backend?
I have not lifetime earnings.. because game started with litecoin after accepted bitcoin and bitcoin cash now.
you can check stats on wallets.
+1900 bets.
advertisements? no need it.. it's gamble site only, it's not faucet
What he likely means by backend is that there's actual code running website and not just a placeholder with no functional code behind it. Of course this can be verified by an escrow or by giving genuinely interested users a free no risk, no return bet for them to validate that there's actual functional code behind the site. |
|
|
|
It's likely going to be faster to just do it via Bitcoin core than downloading a torrent which may or may not be compromised and reindex it. A torrent used to be offered over at bitcoin.org [OUTDATED] but, with the latest editions of the Bitcoin Core client there's no real benefit from doing it and thus isn't updated anymore. Depending on whether you want to host a full node yourself or not a lightweight client might be more beneficial. |
|
|
|
Take a look at this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2559282.0Just because this is in the altcoin section and is primarily directed at thread announcements offering bonus coins for commenting on their thread you are doing the same as a merit bonus and I would think that the same rule would apply to this case. Obviously, a moderator would be able to tell you for certain, but I can't see why this is any different as it has the same outcome (bumping the thread even if that's not the intention) You've got an informative thread there and I'm sure people will naturally add to it without the incentive. |
|
|
|
I am looking for the best bitcoin wallet.
What do you recommend guys?
Use blockchain.info wallet if you want to store bitcoin. I am using that wallet to store only my bitcoin. In my country, we have a wallet and an exchanger. I'm from the Philippines by the way. coins.ph is popular among bitcoin investors, where you can store BTC and ETH, cashout and convert PHP to BTC or ETH. It's useful, but if you're talking about in general, I suggest you use blockchain.info. Don't worry, you'll get many suggestions here. Do not use blockchain.info to store Bitcoin. This isn't because it isn't trustworthy either. achow101 went through on some of the downsides of using blockchain.info here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1914800.0As you can see from that text he explains that it's a poorly written wallet and there's been several issues with fees not being calculated correctly. As far as I know with newly generated addresses you can't actually get the private key, but please someone correct me if I'm wrong here. This is obviously an issue because you do not have complete control over your funds, and if the website were to go down then there's no way for you to access your coins. blockchain.info is very popular due to how easy it is, it doesn't require any setup and is very easy to just jump into generate an address and start receiving Bitcoin. Although, this might be good if you are just starting in Bitcoin (though I would argue it's better to start how you mean to go on) but, when storing Bitcoin for the long term it's recommended to be in complete control, and if possible generate the private key offline. This advice also goes for exchanges you shouldn't store any amount of Bitcoin for a long period of time on their wallets. My general advice is to only ever store Bitcoin on an exchange when you are going to be exchanging it very soon. (within 12 hours) The best wallet depends entirely on your preferences. Bitcoin core generally is a popular choice and support is available via the technical support section of this forum. Bitcoin core requires you to download the whole blockchain and store it locally on your storage device. This may not be the best option if you are lacking in space or patience. Electrum is probably the second most recommended wallet which doesn't require you to download and store the whole blockchain. So it's quicker to setup and start using and doesn't clog up your hard drives. Electrum has had a few security vulnerabilities recently which have required the user to update their software to avoid any issues. Hardware wallets are also pretty cool devices which protect you from common mistakes that are easily made via desktop wallets. Although, hardware wallets require an initial investment, although if you plan on holding a large amount of coins then it's certainly worth it if you are going to be accessing them a lot. Generally, you need to ask yourself these questions: Do I require full access to my funds? (Yes should always be the answer here) Do I have the patience and storage capacity to download and store the whole blockchain? (If no look at lightweight clients such as Electrum) Do I require regular access to the wallet? (If you need to access the wallet online regularly then I would recommend a hardware wallet to avoid falling down some of the pitfalls of accessing a typical wallet regularly on an insecure computer) Honestly, if you are new or not there's just better options out there than using a online wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
