"THE LIST"

[dothebeats]

Errm, you do realize that there are only few countries who consider bitcoins as "illegal" right? And if you say that being a part of bitcoin is not good, then why the hell did you even involve yourself and joined this forum in the first place? Also, what do you mean when you say "legal"? Under some regulations and authority?

What's the need to be so rude? I dint reply to you so if you don't agree, just IGNORE my comment. I know that Bitcoin is not legal in my country and sooner the time will come when I will stop using it. I am surprised that sometime back I had sent you a PM explaining you about DDos attack when you had asked me about the same and this is the reply I get that "why the hell have I joined this forum." Thanks and I feel honored now.

Anyways, this post was about ignoring newbies and I need to stick to that only. I hope that newbie jail is implemented soon as they not only spam the forum but also misuse the trust rating.

Uhhm, I didn't want to be rude in any way. If you got offended by that comment, my deepest apologies. I'm just stating my point, but I guess it offended you so I'm sorry about that.


Going back to the topic, sometimes even users with higher ranks (especially those who are enrolled in signature campaigns) spams too. I can see some users here that are in the Member status up that spams a lot. Boosting post count is one of the reasons I can think of. Other than that, I don't know. Also, newbies--as you've mentioned--tend to post the same thread over and over again, though we couldn't blame them, assuming that they knew nothing about the forum and where the topics are in the first place.

[franckuestein]

Thanks for the list @macsga.
I'm going to start checking that profiles to decide if it's appropriate (or not) adding them to my bitcointalk ignore list.

They're just sockpuppets accounts or something else?

[redsn0w]

So what is your solution for all who are wearing a signature ad?  Are you using the grue scrypt (through a browser extension)? Again it's a forum for all the type of people, not only for who has some knowledge (or maybe 'high knowledge in bitcoin').

The script won't stop the topics being bumped or hide the crap content (just hides the sigs) - how many times do I have to repeat it is the "crap content" not the "actual ad sig" that is the problem.

I'd happily see my own sig go and ban sigs altogether from the forum.

Ok, so the sig ad generate crap posts. Is this your thought? Then the real problem are the various signature ad campaign and the crap posts are generated by users that don't know what write in their  'posts'. This, I think is the problem... but I don't know how to resolve it at all.

The signature campaigns aren't the problem; the users enrolled in such campaigns are. I mean, come on, you don't want to spend your time reading crap posts and other spammy content. You came here to view relevant discussions that may be of help to bitcoin and to the community as well. I think the best solution--if people still want the signature campaigns to be present--is to limit the number of users entering these campaigns and set up some standards before accepting users and considering them "eligible" in joining one. Doing so may decrease users who most of the time posts crap and other spammy content just to boost their post count.

This, it's a nice and (maybe) real solution but all the manager/maintainers of the signature campaign should cooperate in the selection of the valid users. I have suggested to pay all the quality posts and not the number posts, but it is obviously a lot of work and it will be not a good promotion to those services related to bitcoin.

[CIYAM]

This, it's a nice and (maybe) real solution but all the manager/maintainers of the signature campaign should cooperate in the selection of the valid users. I have suggested to pay all the quality posts and not the number posts, but it is obviously a lot of work and it will be not a good promotion to those services related to bitcoin.

Hmm... so the managers of the ad sig campaigns should "vet the posts".

I doubt that they really care as from their economic perspective all that matters is the number of posts that have their sig.

You have heard the term "any publicity is good publicity" I presume?

(they are happy enough to force that work upon the mods as there is *zero* penalty for them)

[dothebeats]

So what is your solution for all who are wearing a signature ad?  Are you using the grue scrypt (through a browser extension)? Again it's a forum for all the type of people, not only for who has some knowledge (or maybe 'high knowledge in bitcoin').

The script won't stop the topics being bumped or hide the crap content (just hides the sigs) - how many times do I have to repeat it is the "crap content" not the "actual ad sig" that is the problem.

I'd happily see my own sig go and ban sigs altogether from the forum.

Ok, so the sig ad generate crap posts. Is this your thought? Then the real problem are the various signature ad campaign and the crap posts are generated by users that don't know what write in their  'posts'. This, I think is the problem... but I don't know how to resolve it at all.

The signature campaigns aren't the problem; the users enrolled in such campaigns are. I mean, come on, you don't want to spend your time reading crap posts and other spammy content. You came here to view relevant discussions that may be of help to bitcoin and to the community as well. I think the best solution--if people still want the signature campaigns to be present--is to limit the number of users entering these campaigns and set up some standards before accepting users and considering them "eligible" in joining one. Doing so may decrease users who most of the time posts crap and other spammy content just to boost their post count.

This, it's a nice and (maybe) real solution but all the manager/maintainers of the signature campaign should cooperate in the selection of the valid users. I have suggested to pay all the quality posts and not the number posts, but it is obviously a lot of work and it will be not a good promotion to those services related to bitcoin.

Well if you really want to filter the crap apart from the valuable ones, you really need to do some heavy work to achieve positive results. Campaign managers do a lot of work, but filtering and setting some standards before accepting users is a good way for them to save money, too. so why not add an extra effort in managing the said campaigns? Setting limits to the number of users who are eligible to join the campaign is just one way of reducing the number of crappy posts in this forum. If this is done by campaign managers, we could still see the valuable topics that should be discussed regarding bitcoins.

[redsn0w]

This, it's a nice and (maybe) real solution but all the manager/maintainers of the signature campaign should cooperate in the selection of the valid users. I have suggested to pay all the quality posts and not the number posts, but it is obviously a lot of work and it will be not a good promotion to those services related to bitcoin.

Hmm... so the managers of the ad sig campaigns should "vet the posts".

I doubt that they really care as from their economic perspective all that matters is the number of posts that have their sig.

You have heard the term "any publicity is good publicity" I presume?

(they are happy enough to force that work upon the mods as there is *zero* penalty for them)

Yes I have heard that term and I agree with you, the users are posting crap posts (and they are victim of themselves) and they are banned from the forum but this is not the real solution to the problem.

Well if you really want to filter the crap apart from the valuable ones, you really need to do some heavy work to achieve positive results. Campaign managers do a lot of work, but filtering and setting some standards before accepting users is a good way for them to save money, too. so why not add an extra effort in managing the said campaigns? Setting limits to the number of users who are eligible to join the campaign is just one way of reducing the number of crappy posts in this forum. If this is done by campaign managers, we could still see the valuable topics that should be discussed regarding bitcoins.

You should open a thread in the service discussion and ask if the various sig. campaign manager will help you in that cause but as CIYAM written in his post "any publicity is good publicity". I predict a new spam wave with the introduction of the "avatar campaign" maybe the unique valid solution is the "ignore function".

[CIYAM]

I predict a new spam wave with the introduction of the "avatar campaign" maybe the unique valid solution is the "ignore function".

Unfortunately the "ignore" function is rather poor as you still see in your watchlist (or new replies to your post) the reply even if when you click on it the new post shows "this user is currently ignored" (i.e. it is like a known salesperson calling your phone where you can see that they are someone you don't want to talk to but you still had to be annoyed by your phone ringing in the first place).

I have prototyped with my own forum how to completely get rid of all ignored posters posts (so they don't even register at all) - hopefully maybe the new forum will do a better job of this (technically it isn't that hard to do).

[dothebeats]

Well if you really want to filter the crap apart from the valuable ones, you really need to do some heavy work to achieve positive results. Campaign managers do a lot of work, but filtering and setting some standards before accepting users is a good way for them to save money, too. so why not add an extra effort in managing the said campaigns? Setting limits to the number of users who are eligible to join the campaign is just one way of reducing the number of crappy posts in this forum. If this is done by campaign managers, we could still see the valuable topics that should be discussed regarding bitcoins.

You should open a thread in the service discussion and ask if the various sig. campaign manager will help you in that cause but as CIYAM written in his post "any publicity is good publicity". I predict a new spam wave with the introduction of the "avatar campaign" maybe the unique valid solution is the "ignore function".

I would look into it, seeing that avatar campaign might soon take place in this forum. Advertisements such as these from services should really select those who will enter the campaign accordingly. Thanks for the reply.

[Muhammed Zakir]

=snip=
Anyways, this post was about ignoring newbies and I need to stick to that only. I hope that newbie jail is implemented soon as they not only spam the forum but also misuse the trust rating.

Newbie Jail won't come back. It is useless and make "real" contributors to turn away from forum. Spammers will spam. AFAIK you only need to wait some hours to get out of the Jail and there won't be any limit thereafter. But the current time-limit is prettier than Newbie Jail as time-limit is there. It will help to decrease spam in a long run but Newbie Jail will only decrease spam at first, after they are out, they are free to make as many posts as they want without any time limit.

Well if you really want to filter the crap apart from the valuable ones, you really need to do some heavy work to achieve positive results. Campaign managers do a lot of work, but filtering and setting some standards before accepting users is a good way for them to save money, too. so why not add an extra effort in managing the said campaigns? Setting limits to the number of users who are eligible to join the campaign is just one way of reducing the number of crappy posts in this forum. If this is done by campaign managers, we could still see the valuable topics that should be discussed regarding bitcoins.

Most of them won't. Read CIYAM's post. In simple sentence, more posts = more advertisement.

Crap posts will be deleted, anyway and they don't want to pay for it but they may get some view before the crap gets deleted.

[macsga]

Thanks for the list @macsga.
I'm going to start checking that profiles to decide if it's appropriate (or not) adding them to my bitcointalk ignore list.

They're just sockpuppets accounts or something else?

Mostly sockpuppets and some offensive users there. It's been questioned if they will remain, or if the list will get bigger. Under no circumstances this is a list that will contain only "bears" or "bulls". This list is an effort to contain the spam & insultive posts of certain individuals and I decided to share it with you because it was a common thought into the Wall Observer thread (where is the place they tend to abuse more).

Cheers.

[goldkey0070]

what is a troll??

[macsga]

what is a troll??

troll
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll

[goldkey0070]

good word for that  lol...so how does bitcointalk get rid of bots making stupid messages... i that that was a troll

[spooderman]

the trolls on this forums are doing my head.

please tell me stolfi is in there?

[macsga]

the trolls on this forums are doing my head.

please tell me stolfi is in there?

No; despite his erroneous and misleading posts, I find him amusing and sometimes (when I have the time) I like responding to him. He's not much of a troll really, I think that in order to prove his points he makes a great effort trying to reason the unreasonable. This alone amuses me...

If you want though, you can easily add him to your list...

[gentlemand]

the trolls on this forums are doing my head.

please tell me stolfi is in there?

He's not directly abusive or overwhelmingly pointless. Quite a few people do engage with him, though I've no idea why.

I have had him on ignore for an awful long time though and once I realised he was on Reddit I specifically downloaded an extension purely to ignore him.

Not A List candidate in the same way as most of those names though.

[goldkey0070]

extensions for the Forum moderation 

[macsga]

the trolls on this forums are doing my head.

please tell me stolfi is in there?

He's not directly abusive or overwhelmingly pointless. Quite a few people do engage with him, though I've no idea why.

I have had him on ignore for an awful long time though and once I realised he was on Reddit I specifically downloaded an extension purely to ignore him.

Not A List candidate in the same way as most of those names though.

If you think and try to reason why all these people come in here trying to disrupt a good idea for a better economic future; there's only one answer coming in mind. That is to gain a piece of the pie. What way? By trying to persuade others that their "solution" is not viable, it's not worth it, it's a Ponzi etc etc. Being in academia I like to think that Stolfi doesn't fall into that category though.

I've met many professors that are naive enough to believe that THEIR opinion is the only one which matters, no matter what you will do to convince them otherwise. That's not the way Scientists work. We tend to throw an idea and hope for a sane discussion that either will prove us right or wrong. It works in Physics, Chemistry, Biology even IT. It doesn't seem to be working for Economic Science though.

Not to mention I don't count Economics as a "science" at all...

[gentlemand]

If you think and try to reason why all these people come in here trying to disrupt a good idea for a better economic future; there's only one answer coming in mind. That is to gain a piece of the pie. What way? By trying to persuade others that their "solution" is not viable, it's not worth it, it's a Ponzi etc etc. Being in academia I like to think that Stolfi doesn't fall into that category though.

I've met many professors that are naive enough to believe that THEIR opinion is the only one which matters, no matter what you will do to convince them otherwise. That's not the way Scientists work. We tend to throw an idea and hope for a sane discussion that either will prove us right or wrong. It works in Physics, Chemistry, Biology even IT. It doesn't seem to be working for Economic Science though.

Not to mention I don't count Economics a "science" at all...

Even though I don't read a single word he writes, he does make me wonder. He's an important fella in his field and surely has better things to do than write vast tracts on something he's convinced is out to get us all. Where does the time come from?

Ah well. I'm sure he's a delight to sit around a campfire with on Ipanema beach as long as you steer the subject away from that area.

[macsga]

If you think and try to reason why all these people come in here trying to disrupt a good idea for a better economic future; there's only one answer coming in mind. That is to gain a piece of the pie. What way? By trying to persuade others that their "solution" is not viable, it's not worth it, it's a Ponzi etc etc. Being in academia I like to think that Stolfi doesn't fall into that category though.

I've met many professors that are naive enough to believe that THEIR opinion is the only one which matters, no matter what you will do to convince them otherwise. That's not the way Scientists work. We tend to throw an idea and hope for a sane discussion that either will prove us right or wrong. It works in Physics, Chemistry, Biology even IT. It doesn't seem to be working for Economic Science though.

Not to mention I don't count Economics a "science" at all...

Even though I don't read a single word he writes, he does make me wonder. He's an important fella in his field and surely has better things to do than write vast tracts on something he's convinced is out to get us all. Where does the time come from?

Ah well. I'm sure he's a delight to sit around a campfire with on Ipanema beach as long as you steer the subject away from that area.

He's not the only one you know. Even Yianis (Varoufakis) has the same opinion about BTC. He's convinced that due to its non-inflational properties it will never be able to be what's destined to. You know; maybe they're right; but this project, if you look deeper it incorporates more than one science and -up until now- it proves them wrong! What'll be? I don't know. Neither they do.

We humans are rather peculiar with change. We tend to oppose to it; we don't like new stuff messing around with our lives and disrupting our future to a way that (in this case) is unimaginable and probably totally unpredictable. That's the problem. Besides, both Stolfi & Varoufakis are Economists (OK Yianis is first a Mathematician and he has my respect just for that); and they may don't want BTC to succeed; because this will render their job obsolete...