They shouldn't if the user mentioned fits the profile. Just because someone has a grudge against someone else, that doesn't mean that either party doesn't fit the profile of a list.
I think that goes without saying, but the mentioned user probably isn't fitting the description of the rest included in the list. Especially the reasons that were given by Tman. -Snip-
I've had a look at most of the users on the list and they are all spamming. Added all of them to the list. Glad that my list is being put too use. I'm likely going to create my own thread as I've already added another 300 to the list. I haven't updated it yet due to formatting and archiving the posts can be time consuming. |
|
|
|
It might be easier to spot this helpful thread if it was in Meta section, a lot of genuine newly created account will be going there, they may find it interesting to read in case their intention is to join in a signature campaign of yours? And I wish that shitposters are going to change his/her mind after reading this helpful thread of yours. This isn't related to Meta, and signature campaigns aren't either. Meta is for discussion about the forum. Signature campaigns aren't the forum. I would suggest you ban OGNasty from any of your campaigns..
we all know that he is a dickhead.. he runs a borderline scamclub.. he bullies people with his DT1 position..
also he is generally a person that should be banned from stuff.. I am sure he was bullied at school, his mrs left him... so maybe you should ban him from anything you do..
also - for all that dont know how to use your own trust list.. you can exclude OG by adding a ~before his name in your own trust list..
Personal grudges should be left out of public lists like these. |
|
|
|
Anyone abusing merit will be easily to identify especially if they are selling it to random accounts. Not to mention this should prevent people from farming hundreds of accounts and selling them.
And then what? It's easy too to identify trust system abuse, yet it continues all the same! If you think anyone is abusing the trust system then go and post about it in the reputation section with evidence. If anyone else agrees with you then they will likely be given a negative rating just like people abusing the merit system. |
|
|
|
I think that we need to review the formula for raising the rank:
Rank = number of posts * time of arrival on the forum * merit * activati;
That Merit was not the main factor of raising the rank on the forum, because the shadow business for the sale of merit will be huge.
And the multiplayer will be an order of magnitude smaller.
Anyone abusing merit will be easily to identify especially if they are selling it to random accounts. Not to mention this should prevent people from farming hundreds of accounts and selling them. The problem is that nobody will put merit to Newbie and Jr. Member because they will be able to give nothing in exchange
People will be newbies & Jr members for longer, which means as long as they keep on posting well thought out posts they should increase over time. I'm glad that the amount of merit needed is high. |
|
|
|
|
What's the forums policy on posts that are quoting a message which has been deleted? For example, when reporting posts and they have been deleted, occasionally someone has already quoted that message and replied. The response may be constructive and isn't a reportable offense on it's own.
I see this occasionally in the altcoin section and have never known what to do so have left it.
|
|
|
|
So merit is something like "like". It may be but it seems to me that it's hard to get a higher rank because someone has to give up their merit points.
It shouldn't be compared to a 'like' a like is something totally different. It's likely what these merit points will be used for but, hopefully merit points won't just be given out to posts because they agree with them, but because they provide new discussion, and well thought out arguments/points. Even if you disagree with a post, if it brings up valid points and decent discussion then it should be merited in my opinion and I'm hoping we'll see this. |
|
|
|
Early observations are that the topic starter is receiving several merits, whilst any thought out responses aren't receiving any not including this thread. I generally like the idea of this and supported it when it was first suggested.
Topic starters in general have an inherent advantage since that's usually the first post users see and in the case of ANN-like threads, the post they primarily come for. See reddit's frontpage for examples. Not much we can do about it aside from leading by example (whoops  ). That's true. I'm just hoping this system will reward people who generally think of their replies and not those who are posting 'news' and annoucement threads. I see what you did there  Hi I am reading this Merit system and people are claiming it wil stop spam.
But I did not understand how it stop spam. Spam will stop when you enforce some check to curb the spam or punish the spammer.
Adding one more point for advancement of rank only stop people advancing rank.
One think I am not understanding from where people get impression only lower rank member spam and legendary/Hero cannot spam.
If we want forum constructive, legendary are more experienced and a new rank created on top of them that make a competition between them and I think we might really see some good articles but instead we distributed free pass to them.
There is no fix guideline how to give merit . (Oh Tom like Harry post so he will give merit to Harry is rubbish, Some criteria to be fixed when the post is worthy of merit). I think this will just create new type of market like buy and sell of merits/ buying of legendary accounts etc.
Within an hours we have examples of system abuse (where people get Merits for worthless post) Nobody know in future how much this merit system will be abuse.
Again leaving all things behind, Administrator please explain clearly what problem we are trying to solve here.
If it is spam , how it will be stopped when there is no system to punish the spammers.
If it is for creating some constructive in this forum then why the most experienced in this forum are exempted to do anything positive in this forum?
It's not a perfect solution, but it does prevent users building up accounts and joining signature campaigns. It isn't likely to affect those who are already higher ranked members. But, it will prevent account farmers, and those simply who don't deserve higher ranks because they spammed their way to it. This system also relies on those giving merits to not just give it out randomly and to posts they agree with. I'm hoping the sources have been picked carefully and those sources will use the system for what it was implemented for. |
|
|
|
Early observations are that the topic starter is receiving several merits, whilst any thought out responses aren't receiving any not including this thread. I generally like the idea of this and supported it when it was first suggested. I already don't like the way clicking on +merit takes you away from the thread. Can you please have it open in a new window?
Yes just faced it, Try to Keep pressing Ctrl before clicking "+Merit " It will pop the window in another tab. I also have a question. Do we get Merit after getting a new rank or we have to earn Merits from other users? If that's the case then even if I reach 1200 activity I will not have Legendary rank unless i have required merits for that, Is that correct? You have to earn it through other members. Otherwise, this merit system wouldn't do what it's suppose to do as several members would be able to bypass the merit system by just waiting long enough. |
|
|
|
Another idea which could work, something like merging the SMAS list into the trust system: - On every profile, besides Trust, there's an option to mark user as spammer
- This instantly makes that user's signature invisible for the user who marked him, or add him into the ignore list, to be decided
- If the user who marked him is on DT1 or DT2; staff; or any other list to be decided, then the marked user losses the right to wear a signature. This way, it's not up to signature managers to allow them into a campaign or not. The forum would disable the signature for him
Some details should be discussed, but that would be the idea. Quite like the sound of this system. Something which is separate from the trust system is needed to deal with the spammers currently. Campaign managers would still decide who they let in, but this would likely filter out the majority of poor posters. Possibly put this forward to theymos and see what sort of input he has too it. It'll probably need some tweaks, and determining the list would be tricky as I believe it should be completely separate from the trust system. Staff would probably be the best to be put on this list, but they are struggling with the workload of their moderating jobs so probably wouldn't have time to add users to this list. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's valid proof if it was only in the your profile. I don't think profile changes are recorded. If you've posted it publicly or sent it via a message and it was deleted the admins will be able to recover it.
If you have valid evidence you would still need to wait a few months it seems as there's a number of people who have been waiting 3+ months.
|
|
|
|
But wait how does actmyname enter on DT network? Does he/she do any good contribution on this furom? Or he became DT Just for the fact that he his turn coat, sticking, praising, agree what DT says and make his name beautiful his his sponsor.
People are normally added by merit. Not only that but DefaultTrust members have to be active and have made contributions towards the trust system, for example leaving trust on accounts. It's also beneficial that the DefaultTrust members have unique trust lists and aren't just listing the same people. You don't get on the DefaultTrust by agreeing with existing members on it. We've had many disagreements in the past and for certain not everyone on the list agrees with the current situation going on with the negatives for spammers. I will say though, generally the members which are on the list are rational when leaving trust. The recent surge in popularity is going to bring new members. Many of them are going to be from countries that do not have English as their first language. And surprise, surprise, you do NOT have a child board for every language. NOR is it OK of you to expect people to not ask newbie questions until they "go learn english".
Try finding trustworthy members willing to put in the work to moderate those sections for every single local language out there. It's simply not possible. There is a section for people who speak a language which hasn't got a dedicated board though and if there are enough activity of that language theymos normally tries and finds a moderator suitable for it and make it a dedicated board. |
|
|
|
If you expect them to perform a exit scam then take all of your investment out and warn others like you have done here. People can then make their own minds ups. It does look like something is going on, but it's speculation at this point.
I have been using PaxFul for buying some iTunes Gift cards and so other kind of stuff like PayPal money in there. But yes, it is incredible that they are taking forever in order to answer to their support tickets, and most times they are not even answering them at all. It was a good decentralized exchange (if i can call it like a descentralized one) But i enjoyed this one, and it is pretty sad that they are full of shit right now. Could just be slow support around this time of year for what ever reason. I've never used them but I imagine they haven't got a very big team to be able to cover all of the support tickets. It's just general good advice to take any money out and wait until the situation is cleared up. |
|
|
|
|
If you expect them to perform a exit scam then take all of your investment out and warn others like you have done here. People can then make their own minds ups. It does look like something is going on, but it's speculation at this point.
|
|
|
|
Report the posts. Most of them are dealt with within a few hours and it seems that when a moderator/admin has seen the reports they are able to rapidly delete them, at least faster than you can report. There's literally thousands of posts which should be deleted in that section a day. mprep is fighting a losing battle as well as the other globals/admins which step in to help at times. It's really the combination of every aspect of the system:
-sig bounties
-hype
-the freedom to create any ico/coin for free
-last but not least the absurd amounts of money to be made from noobs.
It must be frustrating for the mods that this forum is becoming a vital part of the mechanism that makes the whole cryptoscene look like the wild west. It was fun for a while but now it's getting out of hand.
But there are ways of doing quality checks. There are numerous sites analysing icos on different aspects like transparency, funds allocation etc. You can set out minimum criteria for icos and coins. Now people look at the number of pages and 'the community' which is indeed mostly a pack of paid shills.
It doesn't matter on the project legitimacy it will be spammed regardless. If users can get free coins, via a airdrop for example they will spam that thread with both off topic replies and shitty posts like "Good luck". Although, this sort of spamming does happen in every single topic created in the annoucement, bounties and tokens sections there is a pattern in that promise of free coins via airdrop or some sort of other method results in more spam. Honestly, the only way you would actually combat this is by limited users further and only allowing certain members to post in these sections. Then you are hurting those that are legitimately contributing to the thread. No one likes restrictions and you often see many higher ranked members suggesting newbies jail and other similar restrictions. Why? Because they wouldn't be limited by these restrictions so they only see it as a good solution and not the hassle it generates for those who actually want to contribute. Again, this wouldn't even work. Take a look of my list here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2740829.msg28395872#msg28395872That includes only members and up. Most of those linked have been spamming several threads in the altcoin section. This was only collected in 2/3 days. It isn't just lower ranked members which are the problem here. Have you noticed the amount of threads and posts there? I've been here for 4 years and the last few months it's getting completely out of hand. I counted: in half an hour you get 4 (!) pages of new posts just in the ANN section. 4!!! Every 10 minutes there seems to be a new ICO or coin. This needs to stop, there needs to be some quality check. Any suggestions?
You can quality check the original posts as much as you want. Most of them would likely get through because it isn't the thread itself that is the problem. It's the people posting in them (paid to do so or not) which is the major problem here. The mods can't manually go through all the posts and quality check and whitelist all of the replies which get posted in these sections. |
|
|
|
I'm not saying he's perfect and I might not agree with everything he does.
* Lauda gets a traumatic nightmare induced by Q1 2017.  I want to make clear after reading my reply again. That I'm talking about forum related actions and not nothing to do with the nonsense allegations. I notice the bozo said [Have proofs] but of course he didn't. And he won't ever.
Quite frankly. It's bullshit that this can be thrown out there without any repercussions. |
|
|
|
|
Strong accusations which shouldn't be taken lightly. But, let's be honest this is probably a thread trying to hurt Lauda via the headline, and you will likely never present the information required to prove anything.
He's the most hated by the people he catches doing wrong. He's appreciated by the rest of us for the amount of work he puts in. I'm not saying he's perfect and I might not agree with everything he does. But, it's obvious that he's doing what he's doing for the betterment of the forum.
Cough up the credentials to your account to someone who is neutral and trustworthy to verify these accusations. Screenshots or any other proof will not be sufficient.
|
|
|
|
I don't think you were targeted for 1-2 years, at all. ....and for sure i`ll get banned on this account aswell.
You stated that you wanted to follow the rules, right? I wanted to follow the Rulles but you became a donkey and never listen to me. Well, the last post "steamproject made was September 29, 2017. Assuming you were banned shortly after that. You posted on the account you opened this thread with on the November 21, 2017 in the altcoin section. Seems like ban evading to me, unless for some reason your posts were deleted on steamproject and banned several months after. |
|
|
|
|
This is the typical "That guy was speeding too" excuse. You've been caught and by the sounds of it warned multiple times. Bumps tend to go unnoticed due to the amount of replies which are made by the hour in the marketplace that doesn't mean they won't get dealt with if seen/reported and certainly doesn't mean you are being targeted.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
