Same here, except not seeing my unhandled report count go down is what mostly stays my hand at reporting more. 


Totally agree, and the part I bolded I have since incorporated into my reports (ie - pointing out that all/most of the user's other posts are the same as the reported post). Hopefully that will result in nuking rather than single post deletions.

That said, what human - even one that has to rely on Google Translate to make an "Engrish" post - would write something like:


(pulled from the post history of the user/bot you reported).

Yep, that's what I worry about, too, when I report several posts in a row; don't want to overwhelm the poor mods with the likes of, "outstanding idea, irreproachable logo, advisable plan!" 

But, it isn't as bad as I thought. I randomly clicked on the last page of about 30 more ANN threads and only found one more example of word salad like the above. Either that or the mods already got to them...

Not yet - see this post from the previous page:

I strongly suspect these are spambots set up to bump threads rather than eventually join sig campaigns, etc, so red tagging won't affect them in the slightest. Consequently, banning the "users" and marking the IP as evil would likely be the best deterrent.

I'm seeing this style of post all over the altcoin ANN threads now. I just found (and reported) three on the last page of the Bismuth thread and I just picked that one at random, implying there are literally thousands of these spambot posts to deal with.

Kinda depressing, actually.

Read post #92, ya lazy newb.

No, FPGAs are several times more expensive than ASICs for the same computational power; their only advantage over ASICs is that they can be reprogrammed (within limits) if a coin forks. They are not nearly as flexible in this regard as GPUs, however. You can sort of think of FPGA miners as halfway between the flexibility of a GPU and the high efficiency of an ASIC.

Oh, I definitely agree the accounts need to be nuked, rather than individual posts;  I was more saying that threads like this could serve as a convenient source of examples of similar behavior so the moderator that receives a spam report is more inclined to nuke the account rather than delete a single post/thread or even issue a temp ban.

It might even make sense to create a sticky thread here in meta with such examples, though such a thread might eventually become unwieldy given the endless creativity of the spammers and bot-coders.

Hmmm... I wasn't taking a side in this pie-fight, nor did I declare whether I was or was not one of those delighting in your misery (and I'm still not declaring, but if you look at my post history you might notice my wit leans acerbic...).

Nobody has paid attention to the OP for awhile now; some heavy-hitters have been hammering on mdayonliner, instead. The schadenfreude is running thick and strong up in here. 

FWIW, I feel like the purpose of this thread is to give a head's-up to the mods about a new form of violation/spamming, so that when we report such threads the mods are more likely to nuke the bastards rather than mark our report as bad (or simply not handle it).

My last transaction of 22 ZEN was finally confirmed after about 4.5 hours! What basically happened was that the same transaction fee was used when I transferred 22 ZEN as for the 0.11 ZEN test transaction. Unfortunately, you can't change the transaction fee amount on the web wallet at myzenwallet.io right now so my recommendation is to limit the amount you send per transaction if you need the ZEN to show up at the destination address in a timely manner.

And a big thanks to @MedaR for helping me out via PM!

I finally got around to installing the Arizen wallet today and successfully sent a tiny test amount from the web wallet to the Arizen wallet. When I went to send a much larger amount (22 ZEN) the transaction has remained unconfirmed for about an hour. I then tried to use the "Fix unconfirmed transactions" function on the web wallet but it failed with error code 400. Any ideas on what to do next?


* - https://myzenwallet.io

Well, that escalated quickly... see post by @marlboroza!?!

I figured these accounts in particular were likely bots; I quoted a post from each of them earlier in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4477847.msg40391200#msg40391200 but wasn't entirely sure they were worth reporting. So, thanks for the confirmation. I was going to send each of them a PM asking if they were human or dancer, but you saved me the effort.

Joining the party here... I've been coming across lots of "word salad"* posts lately but when I have reported similar posts in the past they either remain unhandled or marked bad.

Here's are some examples of the type of nonsense I keep seeing (all pulled from the infamous Arbitao [ANN] thread):





I can't help but note a certain similarity in style, which makes me think this is a not-too-bright conversational bot that just remixes some choice phrases to avoid getting nailed for plagiarism.



* - "word salad" is a term from psychiatry that indicates someone is well down the road to schizophrenia.

OP is trolling, and you fed him. Tsk.

Indeed, the sentence - "The price of Bitcoin is affected by many factors." - could be very common, but Google returned 3 other posts that were entirely the same. In other words, it wasn't just the first sentence that was identical, but the entire post. Those posts have since been deleted from the forum because, lol, plagiarized shitposting, but Google still has them in its archive.

And that wasn't even the post you got tagged for, apparently, making your ban all the more appropriate (though to be sure, just one example of plagiarizing is sufficient).

I did a Google search of the first sentence of your last post and it returned 3 other identical posts, so you are just another plagiarizing shitposter. Buh-bye!

I can't believe the brazen request to send money directly to "The Keepers" - you totally called it.

And thanks to @marlboroza and @OgNasty for painting this scammer red.

@neotronix - I am singularly uninterested in any defense you might put forward; as far as I am concerned you are bitconnect 2.0 and I thought the original bitconnect was a Ponzi/pyramid scheme, too, before it imploded so spectacularly.