Well I have reported some actually that I find when I am naturally browsing. I mean most were years ago when it was rare to see a real spam or bot. I have not really been using the alt discussion boards much but once it was the only place I posted. I had never been on the bitcoin board much nor really any other board. I was very much into the altcoin board which has sadly been hammered the most of all the boards from this latest price rally. I mean you could have 100 mods there and really it would be hard to fix it up because most posts may be low quality yet give no specific reason they can be deleted. So they just build up until like we know the good posters are drown out and stop posting ( i hope temp)

So what i am saying is even if you moved everyone that broke the rules or clearly spammed. Then you would not dent the ton of fake discussions or even the real discussions with no real value.

I have suggested before a system in meta before that would replace the negative experience of searching for negative actions and reporting them with a system where you would search for positive things and reward them. I feel you would have a better chance of preventing spam but even more importantly the low quality dilution stuff reaching the main boards with that system than removing it once it is there.

Sadly nobody liked the idea or else there were flaws in it that I did not realise.

I mean if you reported every low quality post in alt discussion it would be quite a nightmare because some are not exactly low quality enough to be spam but on the other hand many parrot the same message over and over in a slightly different way. I mean deleting them is kind of cruel because to some they may have made some effort to express themselves and to get it deleted could be genuinely like a smack in the face.

Where as if they were not singled out for deletion but merely not merited like 99% of other posts that surround them that would be easier for the mods and reporters (now called rewarders) and less disheartening for the poster that as yet is not advanced enough to make a contribution that the rewarders consider worthy of merit.

A form of decentralised noob jail renamed as junior discussion boards to me are the perfect answer with everyone less than 5? 10 or 15? merits held back from the senior discussion boards (everyone else with greater than 5 10 or 15_.

I didn't see you had replied to this. It must have gone to the next page before I realised.

So yes I agree with this.. so could be a great option. We find one copy and paste (not just like a helpful guide or film quote for a joke)
Then there is 2 options. Pay 0.1btc  or 0.25btc or or more depending on post history size for a full review to ascertain over all quality and rate of incidence. If exceeding the 1.1000 threshold the ban stands on perm. If it is less then they can have a 3 month or 6 month sig ban but stay members.

Well if they are not really enthusiasts and only here to sig spam with no other interest then perhaps there is no real need for them to remain.

I think some smart person on this board who is familiar with game theory could create a very good system that would one get rid of spammer and the net negative and give suitable punishment to those that are net positive but got lazy or even perhaps a little greedy at odd intervals.

@PT - seems like a fair assessment of events and fair offer. I will perhaps take you up on that. I don't agree though that making a good post there and getting no merits is essentially their own fault or they have no reason to make comparison to similar posts in say meta. It is only the fault though of the spammers as I have stated several times before. There needs to be a board for people to discuss alt coins on. It was previously a great board with lots of excellent posters.

@suchmoon - what do you mean it is a sore subject for me?

I misread your intent. I thought you were saying the entire board (the entire forum).

Anyway why not just pull the data as per my criteria and leave me referenced in the OP
Or remove me and just leave the data as it is.

People can analyse and make their own opinions on it. I see no need for us few individuals to go around and around stating our opinions on it over and over. Let's just pull the top 200 remove the votes of the top 300 and meta board and leave it there. Or just leave it as it is and remove my references from the op.

Then run some scripts to keep it updated. I feel that being a dynamic stats table will encourage either more balanced merit distribution over time or a more correct insight into how merit works and good posters will not come here from alt discussion wondering how some on the board get huge merit and they get none.

There could be dynamic tables for all different boards that could do similar things for people to look at.

Please relax - re read the other thread and ones before that or ask r1s2g3 and you will see what you saying is not true. If you want to just remove the top 0.13% that is fine. However to reference correctly my opinions you must abide by the criteria I had specified or it is a misrepresentation of what I was saying. I am not moving the goal posts as you are suggesting. If you want me to find the posts where I said already the top 300 and meta board then I will if you are unable.

See the language again "incessant rants"  I notice a lot of your posts and not just in my direction take this kind of aggressive already dismissive tone. I don't think it is suitable for anyone but especially not someone who I have found to be generally making unreasonable assumptions and unable to provide any grounding for them. These are strawmen like the ones you often accuse me of and sometimes guilty of but I am learning fast. Nobody is suggesting removing the whole boards merits so why say it. Please don't go all irrational on me already.

Now again please relax. If loyce wants to reference my opinions and then provide alternative argument on the data he pulled he should not misrepresent them and rather push the data through the full set of conditions I had been basing my opinion on. Actually they were assumptions and due to something dmdrdmdr pointed out that I had actually not factored in I feel the reductions may be proven not to be as extreme as I had assumed. I may need to revise the average reduction down to around  mid 70s% not in the high 80's. Some more some less of course. A nice comparison chart like r1s2g3 made with original rank and revised rank would be the best way to display it.

I am not afraid to be out by quite some margin (being wrong during a debate is not a big deal if you are willing to change your opinion when required) since as I say only the reality is worth realising.

Now please fairly consider and reread before posting anything else.

@Coolcryptovator

You need to realise pulling data is a great talent and the effort required is commendable and worthy of merit.
However being a moderator requires you to process data and make an optimal and fair decision. These 2 things do not go hand in hand.
I am not at all sure that many here in meta that I have discussed/debated with honestly have that quality.


If we get any new mods especially from the list that I have seen around  I hope that there is lot criteria in place to guide decisions.
The best thing about this board (along with other things) was the fairness of the moderation... and getting more heavy handed or less fair (not properly considering and weighing all information) will be the only thing that will damage what made it great.

Loyce does seem a nice person and honest and even fair (based on his reasoning) but I feel still needs to work on his critical thinking and reasoning process before he will consistently make the optimal and fairest decisions based upon correct analysis of information with regularity.

To be a mod you should be able to produce reasoning to demonstrate most of the opinions you make are optimal.
 
Again this is not aimed at loyce specifically the same can be said of many on the list that I have debated with since finding meta recently.




 

After my last post I'm not sure why you are suggesting I am trying to maul anyone.

Are you saying that I did not previously and actually requested (r1s2g3 do this on PM even before even posting it on the forum) removing the top 300 from the top 200?  I will find the post if you like. This is not as you are suggesting some new request.

The result will be the result.  The numbers will be the numbers. You can not tweak them. I have explained why I have suggested the top 300 previously.

I don't want a result. The stats are the stats. Where as the statements you have previously made...well..... (i won't keep posting them because it is not nice for you )

Anyway, I am sure you don't want to go through all this again today do you. Take a day off from me and relax. You know what happens when you get all stressed out. I take no pleasure in seeing you get angry upset and irrational. I mean already we are all having a semi civil conversation and you appear instantly with "the troll". Try to be more friendly and lighten up. I was once told by a very smart person on this board that the argument itself is far more important than the tone someone uses to present it. That part of what he said has stuck with me.

 Now just have a nice day. I've already said numerous times I have nothing against you and that you are net positive so just chill out. I even said you had a good idea the other day. but you can be too aggressive and irrational at times. I mean disagree for sure but come with a sensible counter argument and just remain calm. I am a very open minded person actually. I would far rather discover an undesirable reality than live in my own  self constructed matrix.



@dmdrdmdr

thanks for explaining that to me.

against the rules

common sense and human analysis should find it okay and almost worthy of merit

Well, to say that is true in one way. However not all threads on the alt sections can be grouped as spam mega threads. I also view any good post regardless of location is a good post in its own right and can provide basis to an insight into who is capable of making and will put the effort into making a positive contribution to the board.


I will just say though that is not correct to reference someones claims with out entirely stating the criteria they made clear those claims were based upon. It is is a misrepresentation.


@ dmdrdmdr

Those look like 2 cases of blatant merit abuse. I don't think we should include clear merit abuse to skew our understanding of general patterns we can observe.  I mean this actually demonstrates even more clearly that high merit score does not relate to high quality poster. Since they are certainly not the best posters on the alt board.

could anyone lay it out like this too

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603

but without the weird scrolling bit on the sheet.

If anyone could get the top 200 - remove the top 200 -250- 300 and meta board  then put it up in the format above that would be great. Then just keep that updated and no need to comment on it again in future people can look at it a draw their own conclusions.

Actually a sheet like that that was updated but actually only included merit from each board would probably be very interesting. Since dmdr already demonstrated the 2 top merited in alt discussion were blatant abusers. So what I mean is a table that takes the top earners from each board and removes the real top 200 (overall on all board receivers and their merits given). If that is what dmdrdmdr did  then it immediately identified some serious abusers.

This is great work. However is not exactly what I was after since I feel the concentration of meta board is highly disproportionate to the main bitcoin and altcoin discussion boards. With a handfull of posters dominating this entire sub board and doing a good job at the same time answering questions, keeping the board free of spammers, analysing merit .

Can you though remove merit given on meta club too. Just to demonstrate what will happen.

That would be interesting I mean most members on this forum never visit meta so that would be more of a sensible comparison to those that join bitcoin talk to talk about bitcoin or altcoins.

I mean my initial claim was that if the top 300 merits were removed from the top 200 (this is because there I assumed there are bunch that want into the foxy hole so are bestowing merit upon their desired club in the hop of some returns of even gaining access) and removing meta board.
I had the top 200 removed already https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603


But if you want to remove the top 200 and meta clubs that will go a long way to demonstrate most lose 80% +  if full conditions are met.. as I assumed in the other thread. I mean I had thought the topic was finished with and everyone was happy to let it drop. However if you want to reconfirm what I said was true then that is great. I will give you some merits once you fulfill a true representation of what I said in the other thread but don't half meet my criteria for my statements and then assume you have made a rebuttal.

Great work so far and I do appreciate the effort.

Sad to hear that I am on ignore but I do understand that you did not enjoy me asking you to substantiate certain claims which were untrue.

Hopefully you will get over that and realise I am only actually stating things as they really are. It is not meant to upset people only serve as basis of how we can improve things over time.

People are taking this the wrong way.

I have already said that I am giving more merit to those that are already in the 0.13% too so it is not essentially a criticism merely demonstrating that because it is far easier to collide with a good post in meta than a good post in alt discussion the merit scores are skewed drastically away from boards where there are the vast majority of the population and therefore it is dangerous to make to many assumptions on the scores without investigating fully where they originate before placing any value on them.

For instance a poster posting only in alt discussion that has earned only 20 merits total could actually be as good or better poster than someone earning 400 merits in meta. That's all there is to it.

Not looking for another huge debate on this. You can just pull the stats as I set in the criteria for my statement in the other threads and leave it at that. People can draw their own conclusions. I hope you can change the OP though because you are directly referencing my statements without fulfilling the criteria I set as the basis.

@foxy
I am only concerned you have not given a high enough reward in this case. Please revise.

I had already requested and been given this data some weeks previously by r1s2g3 as I posted many times before...  in many threads loyce references

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SAi_b3umCcFJO2dMoLYjWCjNz1JhOLWrsRHhYQK-nb8/edit#gid=429409603

 

LOL thank god you're here I was getting concerned. I can rest easy now. You will be waiting until you provide them I'm afraid. Or perhaps you have already posted them. Or you're not born yet. Depends what vibrational level foxy has you set at.

I wish I had time to do that or had the motivation. You seem generally like a good member and were reasonable on another thread where I think there was some heavy handedness occurring so it's not like scam hunting where there is a reward at the end. It's not like I want you banned or want to say you are net negative. However I don't feel the discussion was viewed objectively by some here and some claims have been made that are unrealistic at best.

 I mean just at a quick browse on your post history I can notice plenty of merits from people that are aligning with you in this thread. Do I say this is some collusion and dark purpose. No. I say there is a lot of collisions (not collusions) between a few people on a small board and they align with the views each other has therefore they want to bestow merit. Fair enough.

Let me state again.. merit is subjective so give it as you will to whom you wish. That is fine and I am not saying the top 0.13% post junk I mean a lot of good posters are in there and there probably is a high concentration of pretty good posters and some real top level posters. A lot of mediocre but well meaning posters who collaborate to achieve very good things. All should have some merit.

Just saying higher merit = better poster is not true. It is impossible to make that statement and I think rank depending on it past a certain level say full member is a bit harsh. Especially to posters of alt boards.

No need for further discussion. It just seems that some high merit posters will not accept this and want to continue arguing it is some kind of objective score achieved against some strict criteria which every post has been matched against.

Unless you can isolate some reason why this is not how it is and prove it or at least provide some sensible corroborating evidence then just stop posting and going around in circles. I'm sure most people arguing here are doing some good work and benefit the board but I can't just agree with them when I believe they are wrong about certain things.

Go re-read the entire other thread. Then ask me again if you are still confused. It seems quite straight forward. It will cover all of your questions but if not then be sure to propose them again on the appropriate thread.

The only part valid for this thread is the financial motivation for posting. I was just suggesting that if you wanted people to have no means of saying that your posts may be financially motivated you could remove your signature and prove that you would post regardless of getting paid per post.  You wish to continue getting paid to post. That is fair enough. The rest will become clearer once you read the entire other thread and if not I will answer any outstanding questions.

This thread will be derailed otherwise.

I have said all that I feel inclined to on the subject of making fun of those that have copy and pasted. So better not to clutter this with those explanations.
The other thread is far better suited.

Also I don't recall specifically singling you out for giving disproportionately. I may be suffering memory loss like such moon, I may have done so in the future or perhaps like fox says you are more of a receiver than a giver.... that is between you two..


@foxy

there is no need be like that...

I've not had an encounter with your in over 5 years then all of a sudden everytime I turn around you're behind me again

Easiest way to find out for yourself is look at the top 30 receivers of your merit or just ask the names of the people that have crammed into your foxhole now and then. However having time travel and no space displacement abilities is not cool.

I accepted your account of events I have no idea why the others here are finding it essential to

1/ continue the conversation
2/ provide alternative excuses scenarios

It's like they don't believe your account of events or something. Haters...

That's it you're getting the hang of it now.

You need to answer questions  regarding your crazy statements not just continuously asking more and more questions that seem reasonable to you.

Have a think for a while and try again. Don't rush things. I know you need to take your time to get it all worked out in your mind first.

@tp

You don't want to remove your sig and you like getting paid to post. Fair enough nothing wrong with that. Financial motivation to post is not essentially worthy of scorn.
It's not that you are backing up pals (people you are very familiar with and share a lot of merit appreciation with) it is that you are meriting and agreeing with statements they are making that are incorrect time and time again. If one of loyce, suchmoon, marboroza, The pharmacist is there another one will surely follow. Are you guys notified if one of the others makes a post?


@suchmoon

Who could have imagined you would show up here (from the future with the fresh fox scent on you).




Anyway not to derail this thread l will say simply I don't find it in the spirit of this board to ridicule people banned if they are not consistent of clearly financially motivated copy and pasters. I feel only pitty when I see some of the others begging and grovelling for probably their only means of making some bucks. I certainly don't feel I want to start ridiculing them.  The worst offenders will not appeal here they know there is no chance. Tell marboroza and loyce to hurry up it feels wrong with out them here.

Let me try to cut through the word salad excuses and exciting advances in time travel with foxs

@ suchmoon I still see no answers to the questions.

@malb

1st and last are related.

Middle one is just avoiding demonstrating your earned merits are reduced by 90%

There will always be some far fetched nonsense excuse.
Tell me how your story of meriting applies to fox pups smerit spamming of pharmacist. I mean walk me through it so he is browsing the board naturally reading and finding posts naturally to merit (not browsing his pals post history looking for excuses to give merit to them) and he runs out of smerits?? then what happens. Describe a realistic scenario that leads to this kind of merit history. I am ready to  change my opinion on fox pup given some realistic scenerio.

I mean really since you are all merit stats experts I would have thought you would all be falling over yourselves to provide data demonstrating my claims that your earned merit would be reduced by 90% is incorrect..... sadly it seems you will be so keen to to provide such data because you know I am correct.

Next I wonder if you took fox pups 3k plus merit and look what % went to his top ... let's say 30 pals that he runs out of merit for but never forgets to top them up as soon as he gets some more?

" I don't care how poor or desperate these plagiarists are"

"My conscience doesn't bother me about taking the piss out of those kinds of people"

The pharmacist the potential mod and DT member super merit achiever....



I would not advise making statements based upon your moral compass nor your critical decision making capabilities.

Maybe they are just pretending to be desperate and are secret billionaires begging for airdrop and sig crumbs. I mean can you provide alternative explanation for newish accounts begging and pleading to keep their full or snr member accounts?

There are 2 kinds of assumptions

1. bank alarm going off - guy running out with gun and swag bag and mask - - assuming he could have just robbed the bank?

2. guy posting a guide saying  I have compiled these guides from other guides I found on the net - -  assuming he is claiming the work as his own..


You see there are sensible and reasonable assumptions and completely clueless crazy assumptions. Not all assumptions are equal if you want to make optimal sense of the world.


Also I notice you have a very well paid sig on. Would you care to remove it to prove that you are not here for financial reasons at all??

I will remove my sig so long as You, Loyce, and all the others earing nice bucks from their sigs do so?  What do you guys say. Let's all not have any sigs for a year?  I mean we are not all here just motivated by money are we? we are real enthusiasts.

I will do it if you guys all do the same. Let us set a good example to those greedy 3rd world desperate people here to earn bucks and not here for the pure brilliance of being part of the decentralised trustless movement here.

LET'S BE CLEAR I am saying the real spammers (the worst kind) will not even bother to come here and appeal. I am talking those who have made the odd mistake generally and are being ridiculed is not my idea of being constructive. Sure most deserve to be banned according to the rules fair enough... but I would not say making a game to ridicule them is at all in the spirit of this forum.

Start finding the real people who have scammed or look like real scammers and turn your attention to painting them in the light they should be not picking on easy targets.

I don't mean to be rude to you specifically but I find you to be searching down all your pals who are disagreeing with me and giving merit and support to them when they are clearly wrong and making crazy statements. Please find something sensible to do or else make a sensible and credible argument of your own instead of just meriting nonsense and agreeing with quite mad statements.

HOMEMADE -  meta club home of the merit cycle and back slappers of btc.

I am not answering any more of your questions until you answer mine.  That is flat refusal by you many times in a row to answer questions directly regarding statements you have made. It is impossible to maintain a sensible discussion under those conditions.

Don't think it is in the spirit of this board.

1. most of these people are poor as fuck and even though they need to be banned I can't say I have no idea why they do this.
The ones begging and trying to find excuses are probably the poorest and most desperate of all. I feel sorry for some of them.

2. some people have semi legit reasons and have already been made fun of and their valid "excuses" have been ridiculed. Luckily although they were accused and not banned so this gives me faith in the moderation here to a reasonable degree.

3. Just provide the evidence that then need a ban and just leave it at that.

I'm sure there are more useful things people who really want to contribute to the board can be doing rather than ridiculing the poorest and sometimes most desperate of people.

I have to say the real bad copy and pasters will never even bother coming here to complain since they know it is completely futile.

I agree with you. I expect5 that there is a lot of money waiting for someone if they could produce such software and the forum agrees to a 0.25btc review or greater depending on amount of posts.

Also i feel with a perm sig ban this would work just like a perm ban if they are really only here for the money and to spam.

I think it should be auto sig perm ban because real enthusiasts (which they claim to be) will not give a shit about that. It is the loss of their posts real enthusiasts will consider the biggest issue.  

They can pay 0.25btc maybe or greater for full review if they want that cut down to a 6 month sig ban (if only 1 in 1000 ration is found) and if too much is found then full perm ban.