Appeal to Sig-Campaign Managers to Exclude "Meta" & "Politics & Society"

[shorena]

-snip-
The signature campaigns seem to be getting more professional and serious in their administration and a message along the lines of "why are you wasting your money paying this bozo to spam all this" might be effective.

Good luck!

I am be a bit more polite, but I currently do exactly this with ndnhc as an experiment. I will probably ask marco as well.

[Quickseller]

One thing I would add to my first post in this thread is that if enough campaigns ban enough sections then it will likely lead to the ultimate banning of paid signatures. The reason being is that it is going to push shit posts/threads into sections like technical support and technical discussion which is intended go discuss advanced topics. Additionally sections like Bitcoin discussion will see even more of shit posts and threads asking ridiculously stupid questions beyond the point that it would be possible to keep clean which would defeat the point of having a Bitcoin discussion forum in the first place.

[Lauda]

-snip-
The issue are the spammers. Luckily ndnhc and marco are willing to cooperate. What about the other campaigns? I'm not sure how many people are in them but I'm sure that it would still make a difference.

IMHO dadice and bit-x are the big ones. The smaller ones might become a problem in the future though. Same as with the sections[2] you might just shove the problem elsewhere.

Indeed. Although a few smaller campaigns add up. I'm not sure what is worse, a member or hero member spamming.

One thing I would add to my first post in this thread is that if enough campaigns ban enough sections then it will likely lead to the ultimate banning of paid signatures. The reason being is that it is going to push shit posts/threads into sections like technical support and technical discussion which is intended go discuss advanced topics. Additionally sections like Bitcoin discussion will see even more of shit posts and threads asking ridiculously stupid questions beyond the point that it would be possible to keep clean which would defeat the point of having a Bitcoin discussion forum in the first place.

This is what I and hilarious have said here. This is not how you solve this problem. It is actually just mitigating or moving it. Almost all the section should get counted.
There are 2 solutions to this: a) Signature campaign managers lower their tolerance a lot; b) Moderators lower their tolerance and start banning.
Option b) would work if the managers kicked out anyone who got banned for spamming.

[redsn0w]

What does it mean for you the word 'spam'? I think if someone make/write 10-20 or 100 posts per day should not be considered spammer (if his posts are substantial and constructive). Because if someone else who is not wearing a sig ad make the same thing he will not (probable) be banned. In that case the problem is the sig ad (and not the post content itself) and the solution is only to limit the posts (counted) by the various signature campaign maintainers.

[Lauda]

What does it mean for you the word 'spam'? I think if someone make/write 10-20 or 100 posts per day should not be considered spammer (if his posts are substantial and constructive). Because if someone else who is not wearing a sig ad make the same thing he will not (probable) be banned. In that case the problem is the sig ad (and not the post content itself) and the solution is only to limit the posts (counted) by the various signature campaign maintainers.

It's the change in behavior. If he was doing 10-20 posts per day before, and after joining a signature campaign he starts doing 50-100 then something is wrong.
He's posting for the wrong reasons. Even if the post is somewhat constructive/decent (I said somewhat!) I would consider that spam as he is only doing it to get more money. Wouldn't you?

[Quickseller]

Well yes I have argued that not counting certain sections is just going to move the problem (and hilariousandco has pointed out that it will result in campaigns getting free advertising). However my additional point here is that pushing the problem to other sections will result in some sections would become overwhelmed with signature related useless posts that should not have any of such posts (and will stand out because they traditionally have a small volume of posts) and other sections will be overwhelmed by so many insubstantial posts that moderators cannot sufficiently moderate.

I don't think stricter moderation is the solution because people will eventually figure out how to evade their bans and will simply come back under different accounts and continue to spam. If campaign managers are more strict about which accounts they accept into campaigns and which accounts they allow to continue to participate as this will result in people being prevented from participating in sig deals in the first place and in some situations will not get paid for their shit posts.

My arguement is that if managers push insubstantial posts into other subs then the ultimate consequence will be that paid signature deals will be disallowed all together.