|
Posted this elsewhere, figured I should post it here.
I'm pushing for a way to easily disable signature advertising on a per user basis, it would be a setting in your profile you could set yourself. Either filter them by keywords or regex, disable special characters and formatting to make signatures less obnoxious, or something similar.
If one can disable forum ads, one should be able to disable sig ads as well. Since signature ads are so much more prolific it only makes sense. Shouldn't have to disable signatures entirely just because because of ads, users should have the choice. Signature advertising would still be possible, just less effective, and would cut down on the spam without so many users needing to be moderated/banned.
It would also mean sig campaigns would need to be much more responsible. If your campaign has lots of spammers in it that you are not controlling, then people are going to block your ads. If your ad is obnoxious, people will block it.
|
|
|
|
I'm pushing for a way to easily disable signature advertising on a per user basis, it would be a setting in your profile you could set yourself. Either filter them by keywords or regex, disable special characters and formatting to make signatures less obnoxious, or something similar. If one can disable forum ads, one should be able to disable sig ads as well. Since signature ads are so much more prolific it only makes sense. Shouldn't have to disable signatures entirely just because because of ads, users should have the choice. Signature advertising would still be possible, just less effective, and would cut down on the spam without so many users needing to be moderated/banned. It would also mean sig campaigns would need to be much more responsible. If your campaign has lots of spammers in it that you are not controlling, then people are going to block your ads. If your ad is obnoxious, people will block it. Edit: I've made a thread to discuss possible signature changes here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=985516 |
|
|
|
Can't watch a thread without posting in it, can't unwatch a thread without deleting your post (which doesn't always work). (fixed by theymos)
Oh, I'm in another SMF forum where exactly this is an issue. Might one get their hands on this fix, somehow, please?  To be exact, we are wondering if there's a way to stop seeing a thread in "unreadreplies", like when someone posts in a thread which proceeds to degenerate into unending spam and trolling and keeps showing up although you don't want to see it anymore. If this is something else, never mind. No, that's exactly it. Show new replies to your posts is kind of useless because you have to post in a thread to make it show up there, and a lot of people are lurkers and don't have anything to say, they just want to be kept up to date on specific threads without going to a dozen different boards to find them. And then once it's there, there is no way to remove it. IIRC some people reported success by deleting their posts in that thread, but some didn't, but with how large some threads are it can be hard to find all your posts. Theymos made the watchlist himself, mostly to get around this specific issue, it was causing lots of nonsense posts (I remember one particular user posted "hmm..." in every thread he was interested in). It has all the features of show new replies, also the watch and unwatch button, and watch boards. Theymos handles the technical side though, I'm no coder or anything, computers are just a hobby at best for me. I don't know if what he did will work on new versions of SMF. You'll have to talk to him about that. |
|
|
|
Based on what I've been seeing the staff/mods are really working on cracking down more aggressively on sig campaign spammers and account farmers. Perhaps that's why your ban was a bit more extreme. Here's a recent post by Badbear in another thread:
Typical sig spammer ban duration escalation is now 14 days, 60 days, permanent. If it's someone I truly feel just needs a warning it will be 7, 30, permanent. This needs to stop so I'm going to be much more aggressive. If 8t doesn't work there's only 2 options left, and neither are good.
I do not unban accounts because they were sold. Many accounts being sold are on their second or third offense.
OP and all his alts are banned.
So it seems like they've bumped up the minimum sentence to 14 days from whatever it was prior. It's mainly the second, used to be 30 typically. @OP, it wasn't because you made a comment about not being banned, it was because you were mentioned in other threads I keep up on. I would've banned you earlier if I saw you. |
|
|
|
|
Quit your job and bum around Europe/Asia on a clapped out motorbike. It builds character.
|
|
|
|
If you bought the account and the account was banned later without you doing anything. I think it is not ban evading on your side. Ban evasion is for the banned account owner that violated the forum rules. Since you did not violated any forum rules and you are not banned you are not ban evading at all. On your new bought account that was banned, I think you have the right to appeal it to the admins that you only bought the account. You have to prove that you are not the alt of the banned account seller, I think admins can easily verify that you are not an alt. How exactly does the banning system work for spamming? Is there 3 strikes your out banned for good. Or is there a waiting period. Typical sig spammer ban duration escalation is now 14 days, 60 days, permanent. If it's someone I truly feel just needs a warning it will be 7, 30, permanent. This needs to stop so I'm going to be much more aggressive. If 8t doesn't work there's only 2 options left, and neither are good. I do not unban accounts because they were sold. Many accounts being sold are on their second or third offense. OP and all his alts are banned. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for not just ignoring the spammers. If all campaign managers cared as much spam wouldn't be such a big issue as it is now.
|
|
|
|
It could be different mods responding to the reports. I think the mods have no way of knowing if the account is banned or not. I think only the admins can see flashing red in the profile of a ban user.
Autoban that appears in modlog is permabanned by the mods. I wonder what calci did to get permanbanned.
All those accounts = calci. Posts may not appear too bad until you multiply it times 14 and realize he made ~200 similar posts in the past 2 days. First ban was the ban, second was because I already had a tab open for that profile and hitting ban again was faster than refreshing the page to see if I had banned that one. The last 2 were IP bans (rest were regular account bans) after I was done to increase the amount of evil on those IPS for a while, they'll decay over time. |
|
|
|
|
It was a joke, good grief.
You said you weren't a fascist pig, so I said denied.
|
|
|
|
First, a need for a moderator is realized in a specific section, Theymos then looks over people's report history, as people who report posts and have a decent ratio of good:bad reports show that they understand the forum rules. After that, he will contact the best candidate to ask if they would like to become a mod. If you choose to accept, you then have to pass a written exam. If you score high enough, then is on to the physical portion. All of the moderators circle you with oak planks and beat you about the head and chest. If you are able to stay on your feet after 2 minutes, you are then able to pass to the mental section of the test. We find the most infuriating people to assault you verbally. Keep in mind there is no holding back. If you have any shameful secrets, they will come out, and no one that you know or care about is off limits. If you have not snapped, you are a "Plebian" a "junior" moderator accepted into the circle who must triumph over a few more tasks before you are finally ready to get the Staff title, and become a publically known moderator. Each task is different, some times its as easy as fighting a lion using only non carbon based materials. Sometimes you have to break into fort knox (thats my favorite one), or maybe prove the existance of extraterrestrial life, or solve the world's monetary issues. Once done with your task, you will emit a faint glow, and your limbs are now able to grow back. You are now a full fledged moderator.  Sorry I couldn't help myself, everything before the "If you choose to accept" is the real answer. Thanks for the help? Now maybe I should report your post as spam...  Oh snap. You are just the kind of fascist pig the mods look for! lol Me fascist? Me Pig? Um no, more like an anti-fascist bacon eater.  |
|
|
|
|
Yeah I saw that, got him.
|
|
|
|
SMF sucks pretty bad for a forum of this size, and is not at all good enough. They make too many assumptions and don't give enough choices for certain things. Theymos fixed some things, this would be broken in any upgrade and would need to be done again. No way to see all threads created by a user. Can't watch a thread without posting in it, can't unwatch a thread without deleting your post (which doesn't always work). (fixed by theymos) No way to add notes to a user that would be visible to mods, only admins. Only admins can ban people (somewhat fixed by theymos). No ban queue, we literally have a thread in the staff forum called banning where mods post to report bans. No way for non-admin mods to see current ban status (I can actually see big red warning text in a user's profile when they are banned, which is handy and saves a lot of time, there's even a button to click on to take you to the ban where you can see reason and duration, I am amazed they got that right). No way to ban multiple people at the same time, and bans are so slow it's painful, I almost want to stab myself. I have stuff to do and limited time here, just do it already sdaasdjasdjkliuodas. (partially fixed by theymos, but those are only for permanent bans). Speaking of which, when you go to ban someone, better hope he hasn't been banned before, it will give you an error. Then you get to click on ban list, and go through page by page looking for the previous ban so you can see the reason and duration. Search? What's that? Get bent. Then modify the ban group (typically the username, I add a number) so it will go through and do it again. Then wait (see above). No way to see previous bans of a user without poring over the banlist, which has no search. No way to see deleted posts without using the forum search, or poring over the post history. Want to see who locked or moved a thread? Sure just go check the modlog. There's even a search bar!!! But wait, it only searches by the moderator who took the action. No way to search the other fields, such as thread, user involved, date, etc. I honestly feel like I'm being trolled when I see that. Have fun looking through page after page (20 results per page, and there's a lot of pages). Honestly I could go on and on and on...and on and on.  |
|
|
|
|
Don't pm me about this, pm theymos. I was just giving you a heads up about the email. I have other things on my plate.
|
|
|
|
I would like to know if I joined this campaign and got banned, what happens to my pay? Thx From the OP: - All users who receive valid negative trust and/or are banned for spam or likewise during the course of the campaign will be denied payment.but will you communicate marco about banned users? Last time lobster has been banned but he didn't noticed it Doesn't really matter if we do, he doesn't care about who we ban, and has his own definition for spam. I suspect the part about banned users is just a clause he can invoke as long as he agrees and doesn't want to pay someone. There are so many reasons to ban someone for spam that won't be evident just from looking in their post history it's ridiculous to even say this. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973859.msg10658095#msg10658095This user let me know their username and if they are telling the trust they do not seem to have spammed at all. Will double check now.
|
|
|
|
|
I merged them and deleted the redundant posts.
|
|
|
|
bump
was a consensus reached? I noticed a huge backlog of russian reports that need to be processed.
Yep. As I wrote here, most users (25 to 22) voted in favor of the absence of moderator in the Russian section\remain in the same situation as now. The only one who handles the reports over the past few months is a global moderator i think. - Many people do not like to lose the ability to place a ton of referral links.
- Someone in favor of the absence of moderator in the Russian section. Because it must be anarchy (i don't know why confuse cryptoanarchy and anarchy).
- Someone important to be able to write useless or low value posts just to them counted in signature campaigns.
So I decided not to raise this issue. Edited: removed references to the message of our moderator with his referral link. Sorry for poor english. There is moderation, except it's currently by people who can't read russian. There needs to be a moderator there. Was there a consensus on this disregarding the folks who want no moderation? |
|
|
|
|
I excluded him because someone in my trust list has him on their trust list. To everyone else he would have been level 3, thus not in the default trust network at the default depth of 2. Being directly in default trust itself meant he was at level 2 for me, and I found his ratings to be inaccurate. And yes that's just my opinion, and it's my trust list.
Anyone can exclude someone. Someone who is in default trust is not in my trust network due to people in my trust list excluding him. Exclusions are more effective the higher up you are in someone's trust list/default trust.
|
|
|
|
|
You could've just changed the email in the profile.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
