Recommendation "All the Sig campaign Must have (Report signature abuse) Link"

[erikalui]

This post shouldn't be in meta as it's a suggestion for only signature campaigns and for the manages of the campaign.

It's arguable, especially if he's suggesting the forum admins essentially 'force' campaigns to do this or to have a 'proper' report link in the signature (like we do for posts already).

I don't think it would be a good idea to 'force' the campaign managers to have this feature then as in any case we can message the respective managers if we notice an abuse.

It's mainly an idea for managers and this would be like making the forum admins go 'out of the way' for these signature campaigns by making this a compulsion. The respective managers can think about adopting it though.

[1714729652]

1714729652

[1714729652]

1714729652

[1714729652]

1714729652

[1714729652]

1714729652

[botany]

Stingle doesn't even enforce all of the rules in his campaign. I PM'ed him a few weeks ago about someone who had two accounts enrolled in paid signature campaigns, one of which was in his campaign, and was due for payment in two days, and gave him blockchain evidence that was undeniable however he paid them on time and allowed them to continue participating. The person was a heavy user of luckybit.

By undeniable do you mean recent?
Sometimes, accounts get sold and that really queers thing up.

[Quickseller]

Stingle doesn't even enforce all of the rules in his campaign. I PM'ed him a few weeks ago about someone who had two accounts enrolled in paid signature campaigns, one of which was in his campaign, and was due for payment in two days, and gave him blockchain evidence that was undeniable however he paid them on time and allowed them to continue participating. The person was a heavy user of luckybit.

By undeniable do you mean recent?
Sometimes, accounts get sold and that really queers thing up.

I would need to double check, however IIRC, the two addresses that were spend linked together were addresses that were then currently receiving signature payouts.

Edit:

payment has been received everytime on time. nice campaign here. joining avatar campaign also. gimme a few minutes and ill switch avatars

this proves that yahoo62278 was in a signature campaign as of the first week of June (and it was in one in late May as well). The "1yahoo..." address is in its profile.

payment received

reapply affiliate

https://blockchain.info/tx/cc60e7acdf0404a2287e77ab0f8f4d5c40098ca8c536b930a2643791d2ebd0ae

^^^bet

1ERwwmMeM89U88hCtY8M8tAy84h1kmNZem

^^^ address

Posts:   519
Activity:   308

The address 1ERwwmMeM89U88hCtY8M8tAy84h1kmNZem is linked to the 1Yahoo.... address via https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/04b6188f73607e28/addresses

If you look at the transactions of that wallet, you will see that there are a lot of transactions to and from luckybit.it

[LFC_Bitcoin]

If anybody spams or does lots of crappy non constructive posts they get kicked off the campaign or banned so what's the issue? I'm speaking as a long term participant in the Da Dice signature & avatar campaigns. I get 100 constructive posts every week & whilst I can only speak from experience of the Da Dice campaigns....they kick anybody who has poor post quality any way.

I think maybe there should be a maximum post cap per week on all signature campaigns, limited to 150 maybe but that's it. You can't censor people.

To be honest though the worst posters/trolls I've seen on this forum are in the Bitcoin Discussion & Bitcoin Speculation threads & they're not part of signature campaigns.

[shorena]

If anybody spams or does lots of crappy non constructive posts they get kicked off the campaign or banned so what's the issue? I'm speaking as a long term participant in the Da Dice signature & avatar campaigns. I get 100 constructive posts every week & whilst I can only speak from experience of the Da Dice campaigns....they kick anybody who has poor post quality any way.

DaDice is very good in that regard. My experience with other campaigns and their managers has been different. Some do not seem to care at all, as Quickseller states with their example. Some are not even active on the forum in order to notice a possible PM in the first place.

I think maybe there should be a maximum post cap per week on all signature campaigns, limited to 150 maybe but that's it. You can't censor people.

Just because its a different interference in their freedom to do business here, its ok? Im not sure I get you. Either its not a big deal or interference by the staff is required. Besides, its hardly censorship. It would be more of a regulation regarding certain business. We already have those e.g. ponzis go into a specific section, same with faucets and possibly more in the future. Granted this regulation would directly dictate how to do business here and not only where.

To be honest though the worst posters/trolls I've seen on this forum are in the Bitcoin Discussion & Bitcoin Speculation threads & they're not part of signature campaigns.

Try politics and society.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

@shorena


I just meant if all signature campaigns had a max post cap (that they'll pay out on per week) e.g. 150 then post quality is likely to be fairly high. I'm sure nobody really wants to do over 150 a week any way really if it's not paid.

I'm not here to criticise any campaigns but some have no limit per week, I've seen several users making hundreds of posts a week.

I don't think staff need to step in on anybody at the moment but obviously if there are unlimited pay per post campaigns they're obviously more likely to be abused than Da Dice for example who pay for a max of 100 posts.

[shorena]

@shorena


I just meant if all signature campaigns had a max post cap (that they'll pay out on per week) e.g. 150 then post quality is likely to be fairly high. I'm sure nobody really wants to do over 150 a week any way really if it's not paid.

Quickseller did more than the limit in the past even though it was not paid.

I'm not here to criticise any campaigns but some have no limit per week, I've seen several users making hundreds of posts a week.

I dont think its that simple. There are very active and contributing members with a paid signature. If they make 300 constructive posts per week, why not paid them a fair price for it? IMHO limits are either an easy way to "reduce spam" without actually doing anything or just a limit on how much those running the campaign are willing to pay. It does not remove the need to check your participants.

I don't think staff need to step in on anybody at the moment but obviously if there are unlimited pay per post campaigns they're obviously more likely to be abused than Da Dice for example who pay for a max of 100 posts.

IMHO the reputation of a campaigns manager and their ability to fight spam is more important. If "it is known"[1] that a certain campaign has very strict anti spam rules and dedicated managers to enforce them, it will get avoided by those trying to game the campaign for a few (million) satoshi. If the campaign is mainly run by bots that can easily fooled by adding some bullshit at the end of each post, it will be done and mods have to step in. I have said this in the past and I will say it again, this is not something you want the staff to handle. It should be handled by campaigns and their managers. If this gets to much work for staff, they will not double the mods, they will just ban paid signatures. A ban on paid signatures in demand since I can remember by many old members.

IMHO this is a simple "get your act together you dont want a higher authority to solve this for you" situation.


[1] http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/53532811.jpg

[saddampbuh]

if you find someone's posts to be of low quality put them on ignore and you wont have to see their signature, i dont see how it affects you.

[Grand_Voyageur]

if you find someone's posts to be of low quality put them on ignore and you wont have to see their signature, i dont see how it affects you.

If you find someone publishing posts here violating forum rules - included posting low quality/pointless/uninteresting posts - while wearing a paid signature (or avatar) advertising, you should click on put a few words to describe the violation, click Submit and let  the Mods decide about it. Maybe, if you wish to be kind enough with campaign managers, you could also let them known about by PM.
IMHO, Spam affect all of us & cannot be solved just by not having a signature shown on our screens.

[Digital_Lord]

I saw many people who are just posting garbage, their post make no sense, just increasing their post count, don't know what they are posting.
Im just saying that Post should make a sense, should not be a senseless and garbage.

because majority of campaigns are paying per post and some of them don't even have weekly/monthly cap, there is actually almost impossible to avoid this behaviour of some users..only way is just disable sig. campaigns for whole board or allow only campaigns paying per period with soft min. post count..

Please, tell me more about there campaigns without limits,

OP this is a stupid idea, newbies and jr members dont have enough sig space to add this

[JLynn171]

Stingle doesn't even enforce all of the rules in his campaign. I PM'ed him a few weeks ago about someone who had two accounts enrolled in paid signature campaigns, one of which was in his campaign, and was due for payment in two days, and gave him blockchain evidence that was undeniable however he paid them on time and allowed them to continue participating. The person was a heavy user of luckybit.

By undeniable do you mean recent?
Sometimes, accounts get sold and that really queers thing up.

I would need to double check, however IIRC, the two addresses that were spend linked together were addresses that were then currently receiving signature payouts.

Edit:

payment has been received everytime on time. nice campaign here. joining avatar campaign also. gimme a few minutes and ill switch avatars

this proves that yahoo62278 was in a signature campaign as of the first week of June (and it was in one in late May as well). The "1yahoo..." address is in its profile.

payment received

reapply affiliate

https://blockchain.info/tx/cc60e7acdf0404a2287e77ab0f8f4d5c40098ca8c536b930a2643791d2ebd0ae

^^^bet

1ERwwmMeM89U88hCtY8M8tAy84h1kmNZem

^^^ address

Posts:   519
Activity:   308

The address 1ERwwmMeM89U88hCtY8M8tAy84h1kmNZem is linked to the 1Yahoo.... address via https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/04b6188f73607e28/addresses

If you look at the transactions of that wallet, you will see that there are a lot of transactions to and from luckybit.it

you should investigate a little further this is actully just  fresh address i let BC make after having coins stolen...  dunno how it would be linked yahoo besides maybe he's either given me a little btc or i've given him, we've been part of same community for 2-3 years so tx's between us is common... if you have any further questions can you please address me without blindly accusing me or atleast give me a link to  a thread you accusing me of something in via p.m. so i will atleast know about this

but the thing that puzzles me the most is how you "caught" this with proof that is umm ununderstable to me (sorry i not that "techy") but the 3-4 different poker sites which have strict rules and good security against multi accounts, and the other forums/casinos/dice/gambling sites ALL missed it... I know you have "trusted reputation" here as you are long standing member and im not the most active on this forum, but i have long standing trust over the gambling community and if you knew me at all (which i think you should before putting my name out there in a negative way especially just something you suspect but couldnt be able to prove) you would know me "Girlscout" is not yahoo

lol please let me know how me and yahoo trusting each other with a shared private key is undeniable proof? because im denying you accusations