Agreed with your other reason. But the 2nd one, which I have quoted, isn't a good solution, IMO. I have received 1 merit. Someone posted an article in Beginners and Help, I had read the exact one from a website. Then I shared the link by replying to his article and also mentioned that he had copied the article. SOmeone gave me a merit. Later, the thread was deleted for plagiarism.
I don't know whether my reply would deserve a merit or not. But what if someone gave merit in a post which really deserve merit and the thread got deleted somehow. Willn't it take down the real reward? I think it will not motivate people.
At the end of the day, quality posts can be made, and then deleted after. I say automatically removing the merit once its been deleted isn't exactly the best approach. What I would say is, if the post is deleted directly by a moderator or whatever then it should be removed. However, if you made a reply in a thread which was removed it shouldn't. So, only if directly removed should merit be removed too. Self moderated threads shouldn't count. At least that's my point of view on the situation. |
|
|
|
Guess every Minute maybe 10 new Users or (bots) register here , or more !
From 100 users i think 10 joining for search about Coin or crypto related things !
From the last 90 there 40 Bounty Hunters and Shit Spam posters and the rest are Bot spamming Accounts !
If you look on the post history of the most newbies you can see it !
The whole thing are good explaind from @The Pharmacist !
I know a few weeks back when there wasn't restrictions on deleting your own comments the bot accounts were being created at mass just to post a comment, and then delete it. It was really annoying to actually report. |
|
|
|
Mine is hidden too. I can see it's hidden if I open my profile in other browser.
How do I make sure it's hidden? Where is the settings?
Bare in mind that admins will always be able to see your email address even if its hidden. Otherwise, bL4nkcode advise will hide it from all other members on the forum. |
|
|
|
Introducing deMerit sources would be a good decision to remove some Merits given to Newbies by mistake, like this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5030749.0Another idea could be if we increase the rank requirements for Jr. Members later again. Most of them who received 1 Merit now will continue shitposting, not all of them, but most of them. If we wait a few weeks now and then change the rules again that it's necessary to earn 2 Merits to get a Jr. Member we can check their new comments after the account got his 1 Merit. If he didn't change his posting behaviour and continued his shitposting, this second Merit he needs now to be Jr. Member will be refused. This can be another measure to prevent mistakenly given Merits. Demerit has its usages, and I'm not saying it's a terrible idea. However, just because a demerit source disagrees with a merit source or someone who rewarded the merit, doesn't mean that they should have the ruling over them. Mistakes happen, and they could perhaps be removed by a global moderator or something, but I guess they have enough on their hands. I don't think giving someone the right to just demerit when they disagree with something is the best solution. Everyone has different opinions on quality of posts from users. |
|
|
|
I get your idea, but this could be abused easily/misused in many ways. Increasing merit requirement for some ranks, limiting signature features for few ranks and permanent ban for obvious merit abuse are far better and should be easier to be implemented.
Report button on merit page and hidden list of trusted member (which only can be seen by moderator/admin when see reports) should be better.
Merit abuse is pretty damn hard to spot, unless its blatantly obvious. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll be finding that many abusers with the low requirement of 1 merit. If we had a 5 merit requirement for Jr member then it would of been easier to identify abusers I think. |
|
|
|
i have read it but it kinda hard for me and his account is not hacked just need to be unlocked we have all access to this account including email
Doesn't matter. It might be hard for you, but there's several video tutorials out there that you could follow. The information is out there you just need to find it, and pay attention. It doesn't matter if the account is just locked. Proof of ownership is still required. |
|
|
|
Not really required, IMO.
Jr. Members can't do much. People are focusing a little too much on a ranking system, and concentrating their time on something that's not very important. If I were you, I'd rather go play football or you know...go get yourself wasted.
I'm against the idea of demerits to be honest. However, the current problem we have is newbies actually making an effort to make 1 good quality post or a few until they receive their merit, and they'll then go back to spamming their bounty shit, and we'll be no better off. I would of personally preferred the merit requirement to be higher. |
|
|
|
I think you create this post in the hope to get merit. I'm have neutral relationship to bounty because it's a part of this forum.
Like almost all newbies right now. It's a pain that you have to actually look at their post history now, because they might just be trying to post 1 good quality post, get their merit, and go back to their shitty spamming ways as soon as they can get enrolled on a campaign. |
|
|
|
Not 100% related. But, considering I've decided not to jump into the champions league pool, and I'm keeping a very close eye on Liverpool this season, because I think they might go, and win the league finally...they made PSG look like school boys at times. Very impressive. They aren't even at top gear, and some of their star players aren't even sharp yet. Yet they are still getting results. Think they could do it? I've not won a single yellow cap  Fuck. I totally forgot about these things. I'm actually going to sit down like I intended on doing weeks ago, and make my predictions up until the beginning of November just so I don't miss anymore. |
|
|
|
|
I don't see the big deal, honestly. 1 merit is so easy to come by that any decent poster will eventually get it, and they can carry on earning their monies. The only problem I see is when people have a hundred alternate newbie accounts instead of Jr members now, and they've stopped earning, and can't put bread on the table. At least it stops the spam though. Maybe, this will demotivate others from creating a hundred accounts just to earn on bounties.
|
|
|
|
|
1 merit is easy to earn. Its not like people are losing 100 merits or more by getting ranked down. They are literally only losing a couple which should be easy to achieve for genuine users. This restriction implementation will really separate the spammers from the good posters. If it doesn't then we'll have to look at more harsh restrictions in the future in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
You don't need to cancel the rank. Just get rid of Junior signatures completely and only let them have a signature until the achieve Member rank with ten merit. Junior rank still has its place and I think the one merit requirement at least sets them apart from the worst or the worst of Newbies who can't even get that. Let's make them step it up before they're allowed to earn by posting here though and ten merit is a good aptitude test for that.
Yeah, this would be nice. But, judging by themos' words he doesn't want to add too many restrictions, and this one would likely be a little to harsh in his book. I support the idea though, especially if this current solution doesn't prove beneficial in a few months time. I guess this would be the final draw until removing signature campaigns themselves. Imagine the uproar in Meta if that ever did happen. |
|
|
|
Even worse than back in January.
I kind of just woke up and haven't read the deluge of posts here yet, but are all of these Jr. Members that got busted back down to Newbie level going to get kicked out of their signature campaigns? I would imagine they'd have to be since they can no longer wear any signature, right? That sucks for them, but it's good for the forum overall.
Theymos, I applaud you for doing this. It took some balls, but it was the right thing to do.
Hopefully, the signature campaign managers give them tough love, and allow them 1 week to get a merit or they are kicked out. I imagine we'll be catching a few alt accounts meriting each other in the next few days. |
|
|
|
|
In some of these sections there just isn't enough users reporting to be able to clean it. Even if we hired 2 moderators per section there's still so much activity going on here 24/7 that it would still be a mess. If we had a few dozen people reporting in these sections from different timezones, and then the mod can then delete it when they come online. It would probably help a lot more.
|
|
|
|
This situation will be at least as annoying as the spam that occurred after the introduction of the merit system. The measure was long overdue and many users were asking for it.  I'm calling it the "pissed off newbie invasion". I expect for a few weeks at least we'll have half a dozen threads opened addressing the new implementation, and everyone rehashing what has already been said in the main thread. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, some due diligence is needed. The thing is they might make a really good post that would normally deserve some merit, but once they've received that merit they are just going to fall into old habits, and spam again because they've got their goal, and can continue earning via bounties.
|
|
|
|
One merit might take a while to gather, but it's not unreasonable to ask before being promoted.
For the new merit sources, perhaps they could be given the guidance to focus specifically on accounts with 0 merits (and a quick review of their post history). That way new members won't get frustrated, since they should receive a merit relatively soon if their post history is "normal".
I don't think that "buying" older accounts is a problem necessarily. If moderators ban spammers, it's a lot of money to keep buying new accounts just to spam.
1 merit is simple to get. It's hardly a restrictions for half decent members, and with the newly added merit sources there should be a lot more merit being distributed. Spammers don't change just because they have bought an account, and are usually banned or found out by the scam busters of the community. |
|
|
|
|
Even when Palace are struggling Zaha always looks somewhat impressive. When they were against Liverpool? A few weeks back I remember him being the only one threatening. Honestly, I can see a bigger team coming in for him in the future. Even if he's only used as a backup for one of the top 6 teams. He's definitely capable of coming on, and scoring. Especially against tired legs.
|
|
|
|
I agree. I also think if a deck of cards was ever produced with bitcointalk members on their faces, QS should be one of the jokers. Maybe Spoetnik could be the other, but he abandoned the forum a while ago if I'm not mistaken.
Anyway, the criteria seem reasonable. There's really no other way to measure forum recognition if you want to do so at least somewhat quantitatively. One flaw in this is that Satoshi is ranked #40 as I write this. He probably should get grandfathered in and pegged at #1 or #2 or something. I get that he hasn't been active in years, but damn.
Okay, lets crowdfund this deck of cards idea. Would be interesting. Yeah, I guess it is based on Bitcointalk though. If it was Bitcoin then sure. But, I guess a lot of people haven't even read Satoshi's posts. I know I have, and a few other people would of read every single one, but I guess he's no longer that impactful in the current Bitcointalk. Maybe something like "mentions" should be a factor, i.e. how many times your name is mentioned in other people's posts. Not easy to implement though.
Theymos to be #1 closely followed by Lauda, and Vod. |
|
|
|
Liverpool are looking strong. They haven't even hit top gear, and they are still getting results. Yeah, Tottenham were missing some key players, and didn't play too well themselves, but they had the majority of the possession in the first half, and then they conceded that goal, and that was pretty much it. A pity Liverpool conceded though. I thought they deserved the clean sheet. Superbru showed only 53% of players picked a United win, and the way Watford laid siege in the end, a draw might have been a fair result.
Watford have impressed early this season. I think United might of been a bit lucky at the end there. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
