Define spam.

[ndnh]

This is getting weird.

Need some definitions opinions  about spam or insubstantial posts.

Should a campaign kick out members who do:
1. Forced posting? (i.e. making constructive posts for the campaign alone)
2. Make posts that he usually do but are not exactly constructive.
3. Somewhere in between constructive and not constructive.
4. Kicked by another campaign for spamming. But does not seem to be spamming as per the views of this manager?


Obvious spams are easily found and removed. But I am having trouble with the above ones.


Thanks

[bigbitmine]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam

[marcotheminer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam

There's the official definition.

But for signature campaigns we need to look at other kinds of spam.

[ndnh]

lol.

Can this be considered spamming?  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562;sa=showPosts

[bigbitmine]

I know.  Didn't really have anything really useful to add as I've not long been awake.  So I thought I'd throw the spam I had at it.

[bigbitmine]

lol.

Can this be considered spamming?  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562;sa=showPosts

Is that you?  Doesn't attach the name.  There's a ton of posts though.  You could be the forums most wanted.

I basically consider spamming.  Meaningless, gibberish, time wasting and complete utter shit.

[shorena]

This is getting weird.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eacxC3D4uo

Need some definitions of spam or insubstantial posts.

I hope opinions are fine as well.

Should a campaign kick out members who do:
1. Forced posting? (i.e. making constructive posts for the campaign alone)

I wonder how you would detect that. This would imply that you could somehow reveal the intentions someone has when posting. I dont think this is possible and wild assumption would only get people pissed of.

2. Make posts that he usually do but are not exactly constructive.

I would not force someone to change their posting habits. Maybe talk to them about those cases and discuss a different pay rate. This would certainly require more work unless you could settle for a general terms, e.g. -10% off on all posts, but the unconstructive ones still count.

3. Somewhere in between constructive and not constructive.

Since there is no fine line I would give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to improve. Tell the participant openly what you think could be improve or what should be avoided in the future.

4. Kicked by another campaign for spamming. But does not seem to be spamming as per the views of this manager?

In this case its probably a good idea talk to the manager what exactly they thought was spammy. It might be possible that the spammy posts had been removed by mods or the user in question.

Obvious spams are easily found and removed. But I am having trouble with the above ones.


Thanks

[--Encrypted--]

generally, spam = sending the same message over and over again.
nonconstructive and short posts are not spamming, they're just worthless. much like spams.

though if I was managing a campaign, I'd disqualify the "thanks for this and that", "denied", "repaid", "bid" posts too.
basically, everything that's not going to do any good to the conversation shouldn't count.



P.S.
I hate it when 5 replies were posted while I was typing.  

[ndnh]

lol.

Can this be considered spamming?  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562;sa=showPosts

Is that you?  Doesn't attach the name.  There's a ton of posts though.  You could be the forums most wanted.

I basically consider spamming.  Meaningless, gibberish, time wasting and complete utter shit.

No. Certainly not me lol.

He was reported as spamming.?

[michaeladair]

A thing to add to your list, which is my personal opinion... someone who does not care about adding punctuation, correct spelling, texting lingo, and especially those who don't capitalize. I mean, spam is usually made really fast by the user because they do not care about wasting their time on a constructive post. A few errors here and there are fine but if it is all errors then it bugs me. When people delve into using texting lingo like, "U R a gr8 m4n", it shows that they do not want to waste their time making a non spammy post.

EDIT: Improper Grammar also bugs me.

[Quickseller]

No, no, no, no.

To say that people are not going to be influenced to post when they are receiving payment for doing so is just ludicrous.

It isn't realistic that every single post that someone makes is going to be written by a genius. It needs to be understood that people are going to maybe not be the best writers/posters and may not be able to make the best quality posts but still put in the appropriate level of effort into posting. There is no reason to discriminate against them.

[Muhammed Zakir]

lol.

Can this be considered spamming?  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562;sa=showPosts

Is that you?  Doesn't attach the name.  There's a ton of posts though.  You could be the forums most wanted.

I basically consider spamming.  Meaningless, gibberish, time wasting and complete utter shit.

No. Certainly not me lol.

He was reported as spamming.?

His all posts aren't spammy but a few might be.

You maybe talking about this.

Character counts plays no role. I've seen several members (recently Hazir: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562, sorry for singling out, there are many others in every campaign) who post long posts which are mostly fluff.

Something like (example only):

Example topic: Where will you see Bitcoin in 10 years?

The topic has already received 20+ pages of replies.

Example reply: I sincerely believe, in my honest opinion, that people will continue using BTC at an accelerating rate due to the benefits it brings forward to society and how it can free us from greedy corporations and central authorities. I believe we will see a huge increase in the number of people that use Bitcoin once developing nations hear about it's advances; but only once they have the adequate infrastructure.


Now that reply is completely useless, it is full of fluff and made for the sole reason to increase a user's post count. It is spam, especially when 20+ of those are made daily. Such a post does not need any knowledge whatsoever to be posted (often common knowledge about Bitcoin is regurgitated for adding to the post count).

Even posts that seem to be 'constructive' are sometimes (often with high posters in signature campaigns); useless spam posts. Hope that makes sense.

[ndnh]

This is getting weird.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eacxC3D4uo

Need some definitions of spam or insubstantial posts.

I hope opinions are fine as well.

lol. That is what I meant.
OP updated.

Should a campaign kick out members who do:
1. Forced posting? (i.e. making constructive posts for the campaign alone)

I wonder how you would detect that. This would imply that you could somehow reveal the intentions someone has when posting. I dont think this is possible and wild assumption would only get people pissed of.

Dunno. That is why I asked. Glad to see someone who thinks like me.

2. Make posts that he usually do but are not exactly constructive.

I would not force someone to change their posting habits. Maybe talk to them about those cases and discuss a different pay rate. This would certainly require more work unless you could settle for a general terms, e.g. -10% off on all posts, but the unconstructive ones still count.

I don't really like that idea though. It would be mean giving people I like higher rates than those I don't. Plus, everything will be too much in my hand. Don't want dictatorship.

3. Somewhere in between constructive and not constructive.

Since there is no fine line I would give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to improve. Tell the participant openly what you think could be improve or what should be avoided in the future.

Yeah, that is what we have been doing till now. Now going to make enrollment a little stricter, since we are 80% plus full.

4. Kicked by another campaign for spamming. But does not seem to be spamming as per the views of this manager?

In this case its probably a good idea talk to the manager what exactly they thought was spammy. It might be possible that the spammy posts had been removed by mods or the user in question.

Yeah.

Thanks for your opinion.

[--Encrypted--]

lol.

Can this be considered spamming?  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=252562;sa=showPosts

this guy have it worse by faaaaar.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=301123;sa=showPosts

last hundred posts are written in one line. didn't bother to check the rest

[ndnh]

A thing to add to your list, which is my personal opinion... someone who does not care about adding punctuation, correct spelling, texting lingo, and especially those who don't capitalize. I mean, spam is usually made really fast by the user because they do not care about wasting their time on a constructive post. A few errors here and there are fine but if it is all errors then it bugs me. When people delve into using texting lingo like, "U R a gr8 m4n", it shows that they do not want to waste their time making a non spammy post.

EDIT: Improper Grammar also bugs me.

I had removed that part from the campaign definition of constructiveness, simply because it won't be fair to ban all those who may not have a good knowledge of English. That would be unfair, IMO.

[michaeladair]

A thing to add to your list, which is my personal opinion... someone who does not care about adding punctuation, correct spelling, texting lingo, and especially those who don't capitalize. I mean, spam is usually made really fast by the user because they do not care about wasting their time on a constructive post. A few errors here and there are fine but if it is all errors then it bugs me. When people delve into using texting lingo like, "U R a gr8 m4n", it shows that they do not want to waste their time making a non spammy post.

EDIT: Improper Grammar also bugs me.

I had removed that part from the campaign definition of constructiveness, simply because it won't be fair to ban all those who may not have a good knowledge of English. That would be unfair, IMO.

I just can't wait until Earth gets one Universal language so then my Empire of Grammar Nazis will Rise.

[Sarthak]

I suppose Spam post (supposing you are referring to "signature  spam") is anything you post just for the purpose of getting paid and contains nothing constructive. In simple:
Posts that you wouldn't post if you weren't getting paid but you are posting just because you are getting paid

PS: This post is short but not spam because it contains my personal opinion

[ndnh]

I suppose Spam post (supposing you are referring to "signature  spam") is anything you post just for the purpose of getting paid and contains nothing constructive. In simple:
Posts that you wouldn't post if you weren't getting paid but you are posting just because you are getting paid

PS: This post is short but not spam because it contains my personal opinion

The (modified  ) question is, if the participant is really taking the effort in making the post, and the post is constructive, but he is making it look so, and he is posting actually for the campaign alone, will that be spam?

[erikalui]

For me spam is:

1. Posting on a job topic when they aren't interested in the job. It sometimes gets irritating as people fill the pages of such threads with just their opinion and people who re genuinely interested in doing the task ignore it or think that the OP isn't paying. I find several users doing this just to make fun and increase their post count.


2. Posting in a news article topic and then replying to off topic posts. Sometimes it's likely that a user can go off topic when it comes to sensitive issues but that is not always the case.

3. Posting long replies but when you look at the reply, there is not even a single sentence that truly makes sense.

4. Posting too many emoticons.


5. Posting by just reading the title and not the content. (sometimes the title and the content does not match and that happens when the OP itself is a troll)


I wouldn't consider user asking questions in thread (if they don't understand the content of a topic) as spam as they genuinely may be interested in gaining knowledge. Sigs shouldn't restrict them from asking questions. Also, the above points are for both users (with/without a sig). Am not saying that I have never done the above as I am also human and I do make mistakes.

[Sarthak]

The (modified  ) question is, if the participant is really taking the effort in making the post, and the post is constructive, but he is making it look so, and he is posting actually for the campaign alone, will that be spam?

I don't clearly get you! You are saying the post is "constructive" and you are asking if it is a spam! How can a constructive post be a spam