Are members of sig ad campaigns only banned or other members as well are banned?

[erikalui]

I have reported few posts of users who don't belong to any campaign (fortunately) but their posts make no sense. They aren't newbies which is more surprising. I have noticed that they keep making senseless posts and go off topic in the thread created by them. I also noticed that my reports have not been addressed yet as my accuracy hasn't changed but they are indeed spamming (if I am not wrong).

For eg: A user creates a thread about a news article and talks about sun, moon, trees and I don't know what else. Isn't that considered going off topic in their own post? If they were wearing a signature, they might have been probably banned but now their posts are being considered non-spammy?

I know that what appears to me as spam may not be valid for a MOD but going off topic isn't considered spam?

Also, there are many topics which are created about Miracles of (a holy book) and finally all are having fun in these threads. It's only my opinion.

[1715268590]

1715268590

[umairsaleem]

It seems that users who didn't wearing sig would be banned too, but the odds to be banned is significantly lower than people with the paid sig.

Just leave that newbies alone, we shouldn't stop people from participating in this forum, right?

[Sarthak]

It seems that users who didn't wearing sig would be banned too, but the odds to be banned is significantly lower than people with the paid sig.

Just leave that newbies alone, we shouldn't stop people from participating in this forum, right?

Yes, your're right! Spammers wearing signature are frequently banned rather than the spammers/newbies wearing no signatures!! We can never stop those newbie spammers! There are almost 250 newbies registering per day and almost 200 are used for making useless spams! Its impossible to stop them!

And the newbie in your example doesn't get banned nor does any person wearing signature will be banned for posting off-topic! If the person who is posting offtopic himself created the thread, it would be moved by a moderator to the right thread! Not necessary that he'll get banned!

[erikalui]

It seems that users who didn't wearing sig would be banned too, but the odds to be banned is significantly lower than people with the paid sig.

Just leave that newbies alone, we shouldn't stop people from participating in this forum, right?

Yes, your're right! Spammers wearing signature are frequently banned rather than the spammers/newbies wearing no signatures!! We can never stop those newbie spammers! There are almost 250 newbies registering per day and almost 200 are used for making useless spams! Its impossible to stop them!

And the newbie in your example doesn't get banned nor does any person wearing signature will be banned for posting off-topic! If the person who is posting offtopic himself created the thread, it would be moved by a moderator to the right thread! Not necessary that he'll get banned!

You missed this:

They aren't newbies which is more surprising.

The members are mostly Full, Sr., Hero members and still they are spamming. Mostly, newbies who are trolls get banned but I have noticed that these senior members aren't banned. May be I am wrong here.

[EpicFail]

For eg: A user creates a thread about a news article and talks about sun, moon, trees and I don't know what else. Isn't that considered going off topic in their own post? If they were wearing a signature, they might have been probably banned but now their posts are being considered non-spammy?

Please post an example. Maybe their off-topic comment were entertaining enough to others.

[erikalui]

For eg: A user creates a thread about a news article and talks about sun, moon, trees and I don't know what else. Isn't that considered going off topic in their own post? If they were wearing a signature, they might have been probably banned but now their posts are being considered non-spammy?

Please post an example. Maybe their off-topic comment were entertaining enough to others.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11106350#msg11106350

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117124#msg11117124

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117228#msg11117228

Sorry to the OP but the posts dint make sense to me. 

[Sarthak]

The members are mostly Full, Sr., Hero members and still they are spamming. Mostly, newbies who are trolls get banned but I have noticed that these senior members aren't banned. May be I am wrong here.

I think you are wrong! I know some of them who got banned:
Full member: Madness
Senior member: I guess there are many peple but I know none of them
Hero: marcotheminer
Legendary: Crazyearner
Even though hero members and Legendary members rarely get banned, they have got banned

[erikalui]

I think you are wrong! I know some of them who got banned:
Full member: Madness
Senior member: I guess there are many peple but I know none of them
Hero: marcotheminer
Legendary: Crazyearner
Even though hero members and Legendary members rarely get banned, they have got banned

Correct me if I'm wrong. They all are Sig ad campaign members except Marco who was banned for PM spamming.

[marcotheminer]

I think you are wrong! I know some of them who got banned:
Full member: Madness
Senior member: I guess there are many peple but I know none of them
Hero: marcotheminer
Legendary: Crazyearner
Even though hero members and Legendary members rarely get banned, they have got banned

Correct me if I'm wrong. They all are Sig ad campaign members except Marco who was banned for PM spamming.

Yep. I sent a targeted PM to campaign managers but oh well.

[EpicFail]

For eg: A user creates a thread about a news article and talks about sun, moon, trees and I don't know what else. Isn't that considered going off topic in their own post? If they were wearing a signature, they might have been probably banned but now their posts are being considered non-spammy?

Please post an example. Maybe their off-topic comment were entertaining enough to others.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11106350#msg11106350

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117124#msg11117124

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117228#msg11117228

Sorry to the OP but the posts dint make sense to me. 

You are probably not a geek, but I understood what was said. There were obtuse references to geeky stuff that many on the forum would get.

[Sarthak]

I think you are wrong! I know some of them who got banned:
Full member: Madness
Senior member: I guess there are many peple but I know none of them
Hero: marcotheminer
Legendary: Crazyearner
Even though hero members and Legendary members rarely get banned, they have got banned

Correct me if I'm wrong. They all are Sig ad campaign members except Marco who was banned for PM spamming.

No you're not wrong! Madness was banned twice for sig spamming and crazyearner's post were not constructive and majority of his posts were 1-2 liner! I haven't heard of any senior member getting banned since I joined the forum but I think there are many! Do you know any?

Btw I am waiting for theymos to implement this

Yeah, I'm thinking that a good response to sig spam might be to ban the person for ~5 days and disable all but the most basic styling in their signature for 60+ days. (With times increasing for repeat offenders.)

[redsn0w]

@erikalui,

I remember that BadBear said "each users is a case different than other. So also if you report an users it should pass a few days or week before that he is banned. It is obvious than who is wearing a sig ad 'has' the precedence respect who is not wearing a sig ad, but I think also the users who is not paying for post should be 'examined' and after banned (if they continue to make insubstantial posts).

Is the problem the posts or the fact that someone is wearing a sig ad? Or maybe both thing.

[erikalui]

You are probably not a geek, but I understood what was said. There were obtuse references to geeky stuff that many on the forum would get.

What is your definition of a geek here:

1. a digital-technology expert or enthusiast (a term of pride as self-reference, but often used disparagingly by others).
2. a person who has excessive enthusiasm for and some expertise about a specialized subject or activity:
a foreign-film geek.
3. a peculiar person, especially one who is perceived to be overly intellectual, unfashionable, or socially awkward.

In any case, I don't relate to the above meanings so you're right. The topic was about a news article but it went a bit off topic. I would like a MODs opinion though to know if I should/not report such posts.

@erikalui,

I remember that BadBear said "each users is a case different than other. So also if you report an users it should pass a few days or week before that he is banned. It is obvious than who is wearing a sig ad 'has' the precedence respect who is not wearing a sig ad, but I think also the users who is not paying for post should be 'examined' and after banned (if they continue to make insubstantial posts).

Is the problem the posts or the fact that someone is wearing a sig ad? Or maybe both thing.

@bold: Even I want to know this. On other forums, a user is open to posting whatever he wants and engage in a conversation but since here the case is wearing a signature/not wearing a signature, it's unfair if only sig members are banned and the others are not. Rules should be same for both but as of now, there seems to be a difference between the two members.

[Sarthak]

Personally I feel I am getting freedom to post when I don't wear a signature! But I have to wear signature to earn $$
For example:
When someone helps me or writes a very long post for my understanding, I feel like I must atleast say "thank you"! I can do this with no hesitation when I don't wear a signature but the case is different when I wear a signature! I cannot even say a short and sweet "thank you" for their time and effort. I am afraid that it will be considered as a signature spam and doesn't leave a good impression to people! Hey Macro, you are the bit-x sig manager, is it ok if I post a short and sweet "thank you" when I feel its needed?

[redsn0w]

Personally I feel I am getting freedom to post when I don't wear a signature! But I have to wear signature to earn $$
For example:
When someone helps me or writes a very long post for my understanding, I feel like I must atleast say "thank you"! I can do this with no hesitation when I don't wear a signature but the case is different when I wear a signature! I cannot even say a short and sweet "thank you" for their time and effort.

It may be not a problem for marcotheminer, the problem here is that the users should be valued in the same way. If someone write a post to say "thank you" in this case it is not a spam because the definition of spam is not that.

I am afraid that it will be considered as a signature spam and doesn't leave a good impression to people! Hey Macro, you are the bit-x sig manager, is it ok if I post a short and sweet "thank you" when I feel its needed?

I do not know what should I think... but maybe I will try to say something : the problem here is the incentive to post, so I am paid for my post but when these posts are not insubstantial where is the problem?Then the problem will be the signature (too flashy) in this case there is the useful scrypt wrote by grue (you can find it here).

In the conclusion, I want to say another thing: this is a forum and it is impossible to write each post better than the previous (so it may happen that 2-3 posts can be considered insubstantial). We should remember that the meaning of constructive is (in a lot of case) subjective and not objective.

This thread may be linked to this other : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1028868.0

[dothebeats]

Personally I feel I am getting freedom to post when I don't wear a signature! But I have to wear signature to earn $$
For example:
When someone helps me or writes a very long post for my understanding, I feel like I must atleast say "thank you"! I can do this with no hesitation when I don't wear a signature but the case is different when I wear a signature! I cannot even say a short and sweet "thank you" for their time and effort. I am afraid that it will be considered as a signature spam and doesn't leave a good impression to people! Hey Macro, you are the bit-x sig manager, is it ok if I post a short and sweet "thank you" when I feel its needed?

If you want to thank someone sincerely, making a private message directed to them might do it. Also, if you are hesitant that a simple "thank you" on a thread might be a reason for you to get banned, why not do the first sentence? In that case, you expressed your gratitude sincerely without getting the impression that you'll likely to get banned because of a simple thank you that you've done in a thread.

You are probably not a geek, but I understood what was said. There were obtuse references to geeky stuff that many on the forum would get.

What is your definition of a geek here:

1. a digital-technology expert or enthusiast (a term of pride as self-reference, but often used disparagingly by others).
2. a person who has excessive enthusiasm for and some expertise about a specialized subject or activity:
a foreign-film geek.
3. a peculiar person, especially one who is perceived to be overly intellectual, unfashionable, or socially awkward.

In any case, I don't relate to the above meanings so you're right. The topic was about a news article but it went a bit off topic. I would like a MODs opinion though to know if I should/not report such posts.

@erikalui,

I remember that BadBear said "each users is a case different than other. So also if you report an users it should pass a few days or week before that he is banned. It is obvious than who is wearing a sig ad 'has' the precedence respect who is not wearing a sig ad, but I think also the users who is not paying for post should be 'examined' and after banned (if they continue to make insubstantial posts).

Is the problem the posts or the fact that someone is wearing a sig ad? Or maybe both thing.

@bold: Even I want to know this. On other forums, a user is open to posting whatever he wants and engage in a conversation but since here the case is wearing a signature/not wearing a signature, it's unfair if only sig members are banned and the others are not. Rules should be same for both but as of now, there seems to be a difference between the two members.

Actually, users who aren't enrolled in any signature campaign receive a ban for certain reasons. It's just that members who are enrolled in a signature campaign often intent to boost their post count in order to receive a good pay, thus disrupting several topics by posting nonsense, insubstantial, or spammy posts. However, as for the users who aren't enrolled in such a campaign, they can be banned for doing the same thing like the signature campaign members, though they are likely receive a warning rather than receiving a straight ban if they continue on doing such things. Posting too much that are off-topic and unrelated to a topic can be enough grounds for any members here in bitcointalk to get banned. It's just that the intention of signature campaign members to get a high pay by posting nonsense, unrelated, off-topic posts isn't that acceptable.

[Superhitech]

For eg: A user creates a thread about a news article and talks about sun, moon, trees and I don't know what else. Isn't that considered going off topic in their own post? If they were wearing a signature, they might have been probably banned but now their posts are being considered non-spammy?

Please post an example. Maybe their off-topic comment were entertaining enough to others.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11106350#msg11106350

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117124#msg11117124

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026514.msg11117228#msg11117228

Sorry to the OP but the posts dint make sense to me. 

The 1st post was a news article, and the second and third posts were a joke.

Also, these posts were made in the "politics and society" subforum. The "politics and society" and "off-topic" sections are moderated less than other subforums, and the mods are less strict about posts made in these 2 sections.

[Grand_Voyageur]

Personally I feel I am getting freedom to post when I don't wear a signature! But I have to wear signature to earn $$
For example:
When someone helps me or writes a very long post for my understanding, I feel like I must atleast say "thank you"! I can do this with no hesitation when I don't wear a signature but the case is different when I wear a signature! I cannot even say a short and sweet "thank you" for their time and effort. I am afraid that it will be considered as a signature spam and doesn't leave a good impression to people! Hey Macro, you are the bit-x sig manager, is it ok if I post a short and sweet "thank you" when I feel its needed?

IMHO, If you wear a signature while posting such a post maybe a it could be considered as signature spam. However, IMO a new short post, just to say thank you, is not necessary in this case since you could edit your original question post to add a line with the words like: Question solved. Thank you to <put username here> for help/clarification.


Just my 2 satoshi, however.

[marcotheminer]

Personally I feel I am getting freedom to post when I don't wear a signature! But I have to wear signature to earn $$
For example:
When someone helps me or writes a very long post for my understanding, I feel like I must atleast say "thank you"! I can do this with no hesitation when I don't wear a signature but the case is different when I wear a signature! I cannot even say a short and sweet "thank you" for their time and effort. I am afraid that it will be considered as a signature spam and doesn't leave a good impression to people! Hey Macro, you are the bit-x sig manager, is it ok if I post a short and sweet "thank you" when I feel its needed?

Sure it's not a problem if you do. However, if it's obvious that you're just posting thank yous everywhere then it's an issue.

[crazyearner]

Have been banned on here for 14 days due to my posts being so called repetitive or summing up other peoples posts that I had no intention of doing so.

Yet I get bannered for 14 days for this then reduced down to 3 days and then reinstated and get an apology for the original ban been reduced down then to be reinstated and changed to 7 days that turned out to be almost 10 days or close to the original 14 days.. was advised if not sure if you're doing it intentionally or not, but then got told I was. To this day it still makes me wonder why I got banned when I still do not understand the logic in this but I have my thoughts as to why not just going off the claims that where made as to why I got banned in the first place.

Kind of beats the point of posting on a forum when speaking on subject and responding to what others are speaking about on topic. So if I was to post totally out of content on here and talk about the stock market and investments on someone's topic and that wasn't the topic then this would be off topic and also out of content. Summing up a persons post would be almost exactly what another person would have said and just changed a few statements if am correct if am not then I do not know.. And again I had never done this in any of my posts nor have any intention of, so how are any of my posts repetitive or summing up someone else's posts. How on earth my posts get marked as summing up other peoples posts and been on here for close to 4 years or so is stupid.

Maybe in future if mods want to ban for this sort of thing maybe to point out actual posts and statements and topics and explain in detail why x person got banned and suspended from posting and then detailing what the mistake is so that a person can learn from it and not to  get banned and banned again. Banning with no explanation and examples is stupid. This will only cause a knock on effect for people to post less and often not use other communities.

Me getting banned on here has only ever happened once and within the years of been on here it is a shame to see such a good or was a good place for this to happen. As now I hardly post on here well, I do but not as much as I use to because of getting banned and not shown or explained in full detail of what I did wrong where I went wrong, so I still to this day have no idea where or what posts have done wrong in and no doubt sometime in the future I will no longer be posting on here due to bad moderation of the forums.

Yes I said bad because of what people are getting banned for is kinda stupid. You might think am wrong I might be but when I ran and still part of an mod team elsewhere, people get warned first to alert them, 2nd warning comes with a light restriction and 3d time comes with a ban for 7 to 14 days depending on what was banned for.

Hitting up with a 14 day ban for being accused of posting and rounding up or summing up other peoples posts without stating and showing this kinda defeats the object of a ban. How is a person to learn from it. Highly unlikely in my case as am part dyslectic and I need things clearly outlining to me why or what has gone on so I can learn from it and understand better.

Not going to go into names who banned me as no doubt I would get banned for saying names, never know might get banned for this post too. However on a serious note, Moderation team seriously needs a re employment of who is in charge and to employ better mods. Some are fantastic on here over different sections and do their job proper.