Added 2 more new rules:

---

Added and added you to the credits as well, thanks for the heads up.

AFAIK rel="ugc" sends the same signal to Google as the old rel="nofollow" - "I don't endorse or vouch for this website". The only difference is that the signal has more granularity (identifiying the particular reason as to why the website doesn't vouch for the URL). Anyone still spamming with the effective nofollow-like links on their SEO spam is most likely doing one or more of the following:

• Doing it as a hired marketing agency and partially deceiving their client who expects dofollow links.
• Hoping to rank up to where their links become dofollow
• Are fine with getting nofollow backlinks (e.g. if the link is visible, to entice potential visitors)
• Havent bothered figuring out or monitoring if their links are dofollow

There's other reasons, but in general, those that are still spamming links that have been nofollow for 2 years now are probably not going to stop as those who do care have already figured it out and directed their efforts elsewhere.

While the discussion seems to have expanded beyond just site-wide technological solutions (to detecting, catching and discussing larger cases of SEO / link spam), rel="ugc" attributes on links posted by Newbies (so essentially anyone without any merit points) are already being added since around January, 2021:


Someone did notice the rel="ugc" attributes on signature links but I haven't seen the change to newbie links mentioned here (hence this post). Nevertheless, do keep reporting any cases of SEO spam you notice - especially if posted by non-newbie users. Also, the age of the post doesn't really matter if it's SEO spam.

The answer is "it depends". If a user has not indicated that he's open to certain (or all) commercial communication, sending such PMs would be considered as unsolicited. When it comes to non-commercial or ambigous types of communication, if it's not something the user expects nor something a regular user (as per the moderator's discretion) would expect, that would count as unsolicited. So while thanking a user due to the helpfullness of their post via PM would be unsolicited, as with all rules, a moderator's discretion applies (see rule 23).

Yes, that's ban evading. A person posting or sending PMs in the forum while one of the accounts they use has been banned is considered as ban evasion.

Appreciate the repeated feedback. It's been a pleasure working with you as well.

Bump

Bump

The name doesn't matter. If it matches the description outlined in this thread's OP or the pinned threads in Bounties (Altcoins) it's not allowed.

In most cases it's just low value (rule 1). Report it as such.

AFAIK in terms of forum policy, this assesment of mine still applies:


If you want rules to be made in regards to AI posts, your going to have to petition theymos about it (e.g. make a thread requesting a change in forum policy).

Sorry, I'm not on Upwork or any other freelancing websites.


While I can provide a basic design for a client's project (or work with an existing design), I mostly work on frontend and backend development as opposed to UI / UX design. If you're looking for a UI / UX designer, I can't really help you with that, sorry.

It really depends on the size and complexity of the project. Some may be as short as a few days, others may last months or even years.

Yes.

While it may vary between staff members, I tend to only contact PM reporters if their reports are regular, persistent and completely off the mark (so essentially intentional or unintentional PM report spam) or if the report requires follow up (extra info, etc.).

As I've mentioned, if you keep making bad PM reports, one of the mods will probably PM you about it. As for what happens, it really depends: if this is the first report on that user and the PM in question isn't blatant bot spam or malware, it'll probably be noted down and a ban will be issued only when there's more than a single valid report on that user.

Not really.

NFTs, by their own definition, are tokens so yes. Read through the pinned threads in Bounties (Altcoins) before you post your thread there though.

If entering your raffle doesn't require users to post on a Bitcointalk thread (no "post in our ANN thread" task, accepting entries off-forum (e.g. via Google Forms)), there are no restrictions on whether the task is low effort or not. If you do accept raffle entries via your Bitcointalk bounty thread, you are not allowed to accept entries for "low effort tasks (e.g. signups or proof of participation for liking, following, subscribing, retweeting, tweeting a single tweet, joining a channel or group, etc.)" (from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3953664.0).

Proxy / IP bans and account bans are completely separate in terms of policy. If you were automatically proxy / IP banned, all that means is that Bitcointalk's software flagged your IP as suspicious. It's a measure to reduce automated spam and make the account creation process for repeat offenders more difficult. It is not intended to definitively ban you from participating on Bitcointalk. However, if your account was permanently banned, you as a person are no longer welcome on Bitcointalk no matter the IP address or computer you used to make your new account. You are free to appeal the ban but that's all you're allowed to do while the ban is still active.

I don't see a reason to add any additional clarification to the unnoficial list as rule 25 is as clear as day as to what is ban evasion and that it's not allowed.

P.S. The user has now been banned for ban evasion.

Nope, sorry. As I've mentioned in the OP, I mostly specialize in Python (with Django), C# and frontend JS (hence why I've pre-empted "If your project strictly requires" to the list of other languages).

I understand that but I can't. The privacy of the reporters is important and as such, I can't reveal as to who they were. In general, I'd suggest refraining from inviting users to participate in campaigns unless you are completely sure that they're fine with it.

If there are 2 reports made, one of an old PM (e.g. a year ago) and another recently (e.g. a day ago), that would count as 2 reports (if the old PM is really old (e.g. 5 years old), it might be counted as a half report or ignored altogether) albeit this may be the aforementioned circumstances that may reduce the ban duration. Some other moderators might only consider this as 1.5 (essentially waiting for another report to come in before a ban is issued). Again, it really depends on the moderator handling the situation. However, at least IMO if there are 2 reports, both of which are of old PMs, with one being reported back then and another one recently, it's probably gonna be counted as a single report.

And yes, once you've been banned, only reports of PMs you've sent after your ban will be counted towards a second (hopefully non-existant) ban.

While due to privacy concerns in regards to the PM reporters I'm going to have to be rather vague on the details, you were banned for sending one or more PMs to users, offering them to join one or more campaigns which you were involved in, which were then reported by multiple users as unsolicited. Other campaign managers have been banned for the same thing in the past.

As for thresholds, there are no hard ones besides it being reported by more than a single user (past reports of previous unsolicited PMs also count towards that number) and the usual ban for the first offense is 7 days (though if the unsolicited messages are of a non-commercial nature or there are other circumstances, the moderator might reduce it to 3-5 days). Really, the punishment is usually decided by each moderator on a case by case basis and as such I can only highlight the trends.