@mprep, given that any discussion of NTF should really be in Altcoins boards, I wonder if this thread belongs there? I didn’t want to open a new thread because of it, but I reported that thread twice, and even though the report was marked as good it is still in Bitcoin Discussion... It doesn't, moved it, thanks for the heads up. Maybe the OP has been moving it back, don't really know. I've PMed him about it, just in case. |
|
|
|
|
Probably (based on the rather vague description) Altcoin discussion. All NFTs, by their literal definition ("non fungible token"), are altcoins and as such topics about them belong in one of the "Alternate cryptocurrencies" subsections.
|
|
|
|
Gonna go with 60 Going to go with 61, thanks. I'll take 60, thanks.
Do you keep testing your lucky number, mister mprep?  It worked the first time  , might as well stick with it (at least for the time being). |
|
|
|
|
Going to go with 61, thanks.
|
|
|
|
The issue with a meticulous and hardline standard for "a rule from the unofficial list of official Bitcointalk rules" (and one that requires subjective judgement no less) is exactly that - it's an unofficial attempt at compiling common practices across several boards and over a dozen different moderators. What one moderator deems as an ad, another might consider as a regular post. Me trying to really nail down what exactly is and what isn't an ad will only reflect my own policy, which will give a false impression of clarity and a lot hurt feelings when it inevitably gets enforced on a post that doesn't match the description. This issue ties into the fact that any attempt to definitively codify rules that require substantial subjective interpretation is going to be going against how theymos wants the forum to be moderated: I actively disbelieve in the idea of a "rule of law" where hard rules exist and are strictly applied across the board as if we're all robots. Every case should be considered individually in the context of the forum's mission.
- I don't believe in creating definitive rule lists.
Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up for you to decide. |
|
|
|
|
Incentivizing posting in exchange for bitcoins is allowed but restricted to Games and Rounds. The incentive doesn't have to be guaranteed for each and every user (e.g. running a free BTC raffle with only 1 winner is completely fine). As such, I don't see anything wrong rules-wise with giving away free spins at a casino, provided that if you win during a free-spin, you get BTC.
|
|
|
|
When it comes to creation of new boards, an already existing board has to be dominated / overwhelmed by a specific subset of topics (e.g. NFT announcements) discussed in that board. To avoid repeating myself some more, I'll just quote what I've said in the past (with some edits): As with all sub-forum requests, I'm gonna ask a question - how many topics about Satoshi NFT are currently on the first 3 or so pages of any board? Or on several boards combined? If there aren't enough topics (at least 20 on the frontpage and around 10 on later pages in my experience) to fill a board (meaning such topics do not dominate the discussion sphere of an existing board), what's the point of making a new section that'll be dead on arrival.
Unless a subset of possible board topics is dominating the front page (+50% of topics on the front page belong to said subset), it's highly unlikely that it'll have a sub-section created for it. Not much point in creating a board that will be dead on arrival.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, boards are created not to encourage discussion of a subject but to stop a certain subject from dominating a board meant for a larger array of topics.
|
|
|
|
I'll take 60.
Consistency is a sign of skill. Why change what works . Also, if I win (even the consolation prize), I'll know my new and scientifically proven©®™ lucky number. |
|
|
|
You do realize that some of your arguments contradict? This is a complete joke, go ahead, instead of reducing the spam and fighting scam, you are wasting energy for something like this.
What-about-ism isn't an argument. I handle all kinds of rule offenses every day. Just cause I'm not omniscient and omnipotent doesn't mean I shouldn't enforce clear-cut rule violations when I notice them. Also, if you see contradictions, feel free to point them out. Edit 1: Nobody was being paid in exchange for posting - you decide you d want to put it this way but one may argue here, even objectively.
From the deleted giveaway post: Get 10 USDT - no deposit needed!
<...>
2. Reply to this post with your BC.GAME username in this thread
3. You will receive a 10 USDT shitlink once verified you are tracked correctly Seems pretty clear cut to me. Edit 2: Bringing up previous bans, yeah - as unjustified really, which is why one of them was reversed and the other one was also discussed highly with various opinions on how to "interprete" the rules. The reversed ban (participating in an on-forum altcoin giveaway) didn't increase the duration of your current one though it should've given you enough info that there's rules against on-forum altcoin giveaways. I don't see any opinions on interpretations of the other ban (which happened prior to the one which got reversed) since I couldn't find any threads regarding it. Feel free to link me the thread though if it wasn't reversed, there's no reason as to why that should count as the ban not existing.
We need a forum moderator, not a lawyer. Lawyers are good at winning arguments. For the god sake, this is a forum, and we are dumb people (/sarcasm) hanging around. Our sin is that we love this space. When we make a post, we just post it. Only keep the commons in mind that we are not spamming and not harming others.
efialtis is an experienced member promoting his business on Bitcointalk. The level of professionalism expected of such a user is higher than someone who's just "hanging around". But this place turns out to be a law enforcement agency where someone makes a small mistake (without being aware*) and they get kicked out very easily. All the blood and sweat means nothing at all at the end.
The ban isn't permanent, this isn't a small mistake nor is this the first time the user has shown ignorance of the forum's rules. I don't understand why other mods do not notice such things and keep banning users. It's always you who bring yourself to the spotlight for similar cases.
Because when someone disagrees with my decision, I feel the need to explain my position and to hear out theirs. That's why I've started the unnoficial rules thread and why I respond to the extremely wide majority of PMs I receive - I don't want my decisions to seem arbitrary and want to make sure the banned user and the community understand my reasoning, even if they disagree with it. In certain cases, the community's or the banned user's arguments manage to convince me in which case I both reduce or remove the punishment as well adjust how I handle future cases. I've seen numerous ban appeal threads where the mod who issued the ban (whoever they may be) never responded and while I don't blame them, I don't feel like that's how I want to respond to users questioning my decisions (unless it's a really clear cut case and community has already said everything I would've said myself). When it comes to enforcing rules regarding altcoin giveaways (which is what I assume you're alluding to with "similar cases"), the reason I enforce them more often compared to other mods because, well, I used to (and technically still am) the altcoin board moderator and thus have both seen theymos ban users for running on-forum altcoin giveaways as well as issued many bans for such offenses as well. While I moderate the entire forum, my "expertise" (if you could call it that) is dealing with altcoin-related violations, wherever they may be on the forum. And aside from plagiarism, running an on-forum altcoin giveaway is one of the most harshly punished offenses on the forum due to both how much spam they generate and theymos's hardline stance against them. *Do you think if efialtis knew that he will get banned for this, then he would post such thing? It did not strike his mind (in fact, this does not strike my mind too as a bannable post) the way it struck in your mind, or he would not make such a post. This has nothing to do with his experience and getting banned previously - the altcoin giveaway rule is too complicated to understand, and the interpretation is very different for different users. Were I to ignore all the users who ran altcoin giveaways and "didn't know" it was prohibited, we might as well strike the "no altcoin giveaways" rule out of the rule book since most people who break the rules do so because they didn't do their due diligence before posting on the boards. |
|
|
|
I issued the ban. People who incentivize posting in a thread in exchange for altcoins usually get suspended for 30 days. Since this is your 2nd time being banned (3rd time if we were to count the ban that was ended early; I don't but just adding in this info for completion's sake), the duration is doubled (as with most consecutive bans being issued). Posting the giveaway outside the altcoin sections doesn't indemnify you nor should it (IMO) reduce the punishment since you've simply violated yet another rule. From https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0: 2. No off-topic posts.
<...>
14. All altcoin related discussion belong in the Alternate cryptocurrencies and its child boards.
15. No on-forum altcoin giveaways.
<...>
I have/had no idea that something like I posted was against the rules, even less so in my own thread (I didn`t post it in giveaways section for that very reason, being USDT and no Bitcoin) - so what should have been done?! While in certain cases leniency can be applied, you: 1) Have been on Bitcointalk for over 2 years. 2) Conducted a substantial amount of business deals on Bitcointalk (based on your Trust feedback). 3) Extensively represent a business / commercial entity. 4) Violated several rules while representing said entity. 4.1) Posted a giveaway that's outside Games and Rounds (Bitcoin giveaways are restricted to Games and Rounds) 4.2) The giveaway is giving away altcoins in exchange for posting in your thread (violating one of the few zero-tolerance rules on the forum) 4.3) Posted altcoin content outside the altcoin sections 5) Have already been banned in the past for violating the forum's rules (not counting the ban that was ended early). 6) Have also been banned (though IIRC the ban was ended early) for participating in an on-forum altcoin giveaway (=4.2) that was posted in the main boards (=4.3) (meaning you should be aware of the rule's existence or at least gotten curious as to what the rule is). Which leads me to a simple conclusion - there is no valid excuse for you to not know the forum's rules or where and how certain type of content should be posted before posting it.
So if I wrote "send me an email" instead - which I usually do - that would be fine? I am getting the point but seriously, some sort of reviewing the individual case instead of generic action would make sense, no? Oh, there was not a single response to this post btw... lol
If you accepted entries to your giveaway (that doesn't have a requirement to post in one or more threads) via PM or via off-forum means (Google Forms, email, other external websites), yes, that'd be fine. |
|
|
|
When I was applying I wanted to choose a bunch of different numbers but all of them had already been claimed. Didn't really expect a "eh, it'll do" number to be the lucky one but I guess it's fitting for a randomly drawn raffle.
Thanks a bunch to Ratimov for both the raffle and the prize. I've PM'ed you the BTC address.
Congratulations, mprep. You have chosen a random number and won. As they say, randomness is not random. I have sent you a prize to your address. Prize received, thanks |
|
|
|
|
When I was applying I wanted to choose a bunch of different numbers but all of them had already been claimed. Didn't really expect a "eh, it'll do" number to be the lucky one but I guess it's fitting for a randomly drawn raffle.
Thanks a bunch to Ratimov for both the raffle and the prize. I've PM'ed you the BTC address.
|
|
|
|
Most giveaway threads are no longer allowed in the Alternate cryptocurrencies sections. From now on, posting or replying to such threads could result in being banned. Existing threads will be locked.
Specifically, you are not allowed to give people any incentive to post insubstantial posts in your threads. You can't offer to pay people who post their addresses, usernames, etc. You can do giveaways off-site and link to the giveaway page in a thread, but you can't give people any bonus for replying to your thread.
[.....]
Heya, i wanna do a private airdrop for a asset on the stellar chain. My only goal is to get more people creating a trustline to that specific asset and then answer with their federation or wallet address so i can send them their token. Is that still ok over here?  Regards, hacky Seems like your giveaway incentivizes posting within one or more specific threads ("answer with their federation or wallet address") in exchange for altcoins ("a asset on the stellar chain"). So no, it's not allowed. You're free to post an announcement for your giveaway in Bounties (Altcoins) but accept entries via Bitcointalk PM (either ask users to PM you or PM a user specifically created for the airdrop). You can also accept entries off-site (e.g. via Google Forms). |
|
|
|
Giveaways, games, raffles, airdrops and other promotional campaigns that pay out a part or all of their rewards in altcoins do not belong in Games and Rounds. Giveaways and other similar promotional campaigns that pay out in altcoins and do not require users to post in your thread / topic to participate can be be posted in Bounties (Altcoins). Make sure to read the stickied threads in the aforementioned board before you post there. Giveaways that require users to post in one or more specific threads / topics in exchange for altcoins are prohibited forum-wide. The same forum-wide restrictions apply to social media / bounty campaigns that require a user to complete a low effort task (e.g. liking, following, subscribing, retweeting, tweeting a single tweet, joining a channel or group, etc.) and post in one or more specific threads / topics (either as a direct requirement or as proof of participation) in exchange for altcoins. |
|
|
|
While others in the thread have already covered the most common ways to help the forum, I'll add a few more: - If you have sMerit left over, merit high quality posts (especially if they were made by someone of a lower rank as that'll help them to rank up).
- If you have something to promote, bid on the forum's monthly ad auction thread. The link to the current auction thread can be found at the top of https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adinfo. You both get to advertise and support the forum.
- If you don't mind ads, disable ad block. If the ad is promoting something that you're interested in, check it out. New paying customers coming in via the ads is a win-win-win for all parties involved: the user finds a service / website he needed, the service / website gets a return on their ad investment and Bitcointalk shows that its ads are effective at attracting customers. Don't randomly click on ads you couldn't care less about though - that helps no one.
- Offer services / goods on the forum. The marketplace boards (both regular and in the altcoin sections) are a big part of Bitcointalk. The more commercial activity there, the more likely business-minded users will choose Bitcointalk as their main platform for commerce.
However, as people have pointed out, there's a reason why Bitcointalk removed its donation address - it doesn't need financial support at the moment. As for mods, if you really want to gift a moderator (or any other user for that matter) some BTC, most moderators have a Bitcoin address in their profile. Click on their username and look for the "Bitcoin address:" field. If you're gonna pick a moderator to gift some BTC to, pick one of the dedicated board mods (who isn't a global moderator or admin). |
|
|
|
|
"Search Messages", top left side in your first screenshot, under "Preferences". If you don't remember any single word from that PM, type in "a" (without parentheses) or some other common short word (e.g. "the", "I", "you", etc.) into the "Search for:" field and that should do. Make sure to fill in the "by user:" field as well.
|
|
|
|
If I understood the premise correctly (you don't have to post in either of the threads to participate in the LTC part of the giveaway / low-effort bounty) then yes, that's completely fine. That's good to know. I understand the point you made at the start of this post, but considering how difficult it is to interpret the rules of Bitcointalk by regular users sometimes, and the fact that OP had clear intentions to give out bitcoin by escrowing the coins, could he be pardoned and have the permanent ban changed to a 2-week temp ban instead? His original thread would have to be re-written to be in line with the rules, either the way I explained in my previous post, or any other way that is better and/or more suitable. Each ban is reviewed case-by-case and the decisions the staff make in this particular case don't need to have repercussions on other similar cases just like unbanning a user who copy/pasted wont make all copy/pasters unbanned. For the record, I have not participated in the campaign by OP nor do I know him. Just in case someone asks. But I don't think that with him gone this community will either be safer, cleaner or a better place. The ban isn't permanent - it is (or was; see end of post) 30 days.
-quote snip-
Although I am still hitting my head against the wall to understand mprep's interpretation, the topic could just move to altcoin (bounty) section since it's obvious that intention of OP was not promoting LTC but paying in LTC (low value amount to avoid dust payment) and BTC to perform a task which is to tweet Elon. How would one determine if the task is not substantial. Those who will get paid in LTC was asked to make a certain tweet which was already given but those who will be paid in BTC was ask to make their own tweet, but it has to go with the original idea of OP. This is where it gets even worse. Initially OP had plan to pay everyone using BTC. But when I suggested him that he should consider paying the small amount using an ALT (possibly I suggested LTC) to avoid dust output of BTC he agreed. Then I revised the terms and give him the revised terms to update his original post. With years of experience if my understanding of rule is not clear then how would we expect a user like OP (who is very new to this forum) will understand this special rule correctly. In fact, this rule is becoming confusing as we speak. If we focus on only the responses of this topic we will see except mprep and maybe PN7, rest of us are thinking the thread was just fine and actually protesting the action that mprep has taken. How would you now apply the rule now when it's very clear that OP's intension was modified by me, and he reposted the topic after taking my suggestion. If it really is a bannable offence (let's say all of us are wrong but only mprep's interpretation is right) then does OP deserve ban, or it should be me? The intention is irrelevant - the task and payment method is what's at fault. I could say that I'm paying X amount of BTC in coin Y and that'd still count as incentivizing posting in exchange for altcoins since all you are doing is changing the way you measure the amount of coin Y. As for what task is considered substantial, that has to be assessed on a case-by case basis. I listed all the most common cases in the pinned thread in Bounties (Altcoins) of what's allowed and what's not but in situations where those examples don't apply, it's up to the mod to decide whether the bounty is something that's dodging (intentionally or otherwise) the spirit of the "no on-forum altcoin giveaways" rule or is it something that no longer resembles a giveaway in the amount of effort the participant has to undergo. As for who's at fault, the onus on complying with the rules falls on the person making the decision to give away altcoins. Obviously, if such an interpretation is being maliciously abused to run altcoin giveaways with impunity while burning random fall guys, the same punishment may be applied to the person "suggesting" the idea (though this far from what has happened here).
<...>
I am just wondering why low-effort and incentivized posting is allowed for bitcoin giveaways. Those are still spam posts even though bitcoin is the reward.
Cause only on-forum altcoin giveaways are prohibited as per forum policy. As to why, I can't look into theymos's head and tell definitively but if I had to guess it's a mix of (1) the forum being BitcoinTalk, (2) any amount of BTC given away being worth something as opposed to a coin that you could create out of thin air, (3) the policy being consistent (no exceptions for specific altcoins) and (4) altcoin giveaways in the past generating tons of spam both directly (large number of low value threads and posts) and indirectly (if a user who's just there for the giveaways needs to reach a certain rank, he's rather likely to just spam the forum till he reaches it).
I've also seen many casinos give away small amounts of Bitcoin credited to the user's account. Those amounts are often lower than the withdrawal fees, and those giveaways don't get banned.
One could argue this isn't Bitcoin, but a token on a website. I can't say this is better than paying LTC on-chain.
You could argue that but crediting a gambling site's balance with BTC is still a promise to give BTC (essentially sending funds to a custodial wallet). Now, there's an entire discussion on custodial wallets and coin ownership to be had there ("not your keys, not your coins" etc, etc), but the common-sense perceived obligation on the part of the custodian is that the wallet owner has ownership over what's stated in said wallet (both in terms of the type of coin and amount). As can be seen from past events, that obligation isn't always honored but the forum doesn't moderate scams. However, when it comes to LTC, you have to keep in mind that the forum considers it to be at the same level as No-Name-Coin that the dev could print billions of at no cost. So while most forum users would agree that LTC has a perceptible cost to acquire, there is no "established altcoin giveaways are good tho" rule for the sake of consistency and altcoins being second fiddle to the coin the forum was created for. This could change in the future (if theymos decides so) but I have no reason to believe anything of sort applies here.
Having read through all the arguments / points of view and (as I've mentioned) being on the fence myself about reducing the ban duration to 14 days, I've realized there's quite a bit of confusion and lack of information about this particular aspect of the "no on-forum altcoin giveaways" rule outside the altcoin sections. There's a reason I've started the unnoficial list of rules thread back in 2014 - information about how a regular user should behave was scarce and scattered all around the forum. So while I still believe that the banned user in question broke a number of rules by starting that thread, I no longer think the punishment fits the offense. Had the user ran a giveaway promoting a business, one could expect a much higher degree of professionalism and thus more thorough due diligence. However, since the user was just someone who felt like giving away BTC in the first place, considering the lack of a sticky in Games and Rounds I think this warrants a more lenient, albeit still rather strict treatment. Reduced ban duration to 14 days minus time already being banned. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
