Why isn't this user banned yet?

[Bifta]

He is not a scammer (AFAIK), so negative trust is defiantly not appropriate.

I do agree that he should be removed from the campaign because his posts reflect poorly on the company that he is advertising for.

Then what will stop him joining another campaign and doing exactly the same? People have been neg trusted for adding gibberish to the end of posts to meet quotas, and yet copying previous posts and information from websites isn't negative trust worthy?

I think it is neg trust worthy, and even ban worthy. There have actually been people/bots on this forum that all their posts are just copy and paste from earlier in the thread or from elsewhere, word for word. I'm pretty sure that they got banned for doing that.

How would you know what is going on in the staff section? Unless you have an alt that is staff 

It's been said by hilariousandco (and probably others) that it is being discussed there several times, QS is just saying information that he saw elsewhere on the forum. Not that amazing.

Oh. Must've missed that.

[1713583990]

1713583990

[1713583990]

1713583990

[1713583990]

1713583990

[Quickseller]

He is not a scammer (AFAIK), so negative trust is defiantly not appropriate.

I do agree that he should be removed from the campaign because his posts reflect poorly on the company that he is advertising for.

Then what will stop him joining another campaign and doing exactly the same? People have been neg trusted for adding gibberish to the end of posts to meet quotas, and yet copying previous posts and information from websites isn't negative trust worthy?

His previous post history is not strong, so any campaign that is doing their due diligence will see this weak post history and not accept him in their campaign.

People who copy previous posts and information from websites (and adding gibberish to the end of posts) is cheating their signature campaigns because they are attempting to receive something they are not otherwise entitled to receive. AFAIK this person is not engaged in this kind of activity. What this person is doing is posting solely because he will receive payment from the post, and that is not stealing.

[freedomno1]

People will always try to maximize their post and well its easy to make 50 posts daily just need some dedication and found some active topics,last week someone had around 6 accounts doing similiar posts like i like bananas,bananas i like ,banana are delicious,these kind the op that runs the signature should alwayss confirm and check the post otherwise just receive and pay others as escrow will lead into a spam bomb.

That one would be a bit to obvious and would just get tag-flagged or at least I would report.
I guess unless it was in Off-Topic and not paid for posts then ... let them go bananas
Either way from new forum software we will have this issue at least till halving when the new forum which likely addresses this problem will have open beta.

48 posts in 1 day, I bet that guy will not reach that number if his post's are not paid. This is what you get when one of your rules is "No minimum posts, no maximum posts, no worries! Do not spam.", He definitely missed the last 3 words

Indeed. Though I've made over 40 posts today, and I hope most people consider me to be a decently constructive poster...

Hope. It's a shame that there are people like these who make everyone who posts a lot and has a signature ad seem bad. Though I normally post in bursts.

He-he making it to Legend is an achievement in itself to prove your good most of the time more less and sometimes I also do spurts if Bitcoin seems to be doing something interesting, although I am not certain if their is ever ban forgiveness if your good for 1 or 2 years after the last ban.
Or if we keep a solid 3 striker.

[Wapinter]

Signature campaigners themselves check the quality of post before paying to members using their respective signature.I think they are the right people to decide because they are paying for posting after all.Other users can simply put them on ignor list if they find their posts useless or repetitve

I don't think they care. They only want their stuff advertised, so to them it doesn't really matter. They are definitely NOT the right people to be judging this. There are many campaigns where the posters are all low quality posters yet they still get paid for all of their posts.

I dont think thats the case with all campaign mangers.They do care about the quality of post I can say this from my own experience.My current campaign manger do not approve of all posts they are very selective when it comes to quality of post.Constuctive or quality post is subjective hence what campaign managers deem constructive,should be taken as constructive.Even staff can make mistakes in judging the quality of posts.
I think campaign managers should be requested to be more judicious in selecting quality post

[minifrij]

People who copy previous posts and information from websites (and adding gibberish to the end of posts) is cheating their signature campaigns because they are attempting to receive something they are not otherwise entitled to receive. AFAIK this person is not engaged in this kind of activity. What this person is doing is posting solely because he will receive payment from the post, and that is not stealing.

I posted several examples of him doing that, which I found within the first two to three pages of his recent posts, on the previous page. He doesn't do it for the entirety of his posts, but for a great deal copy-pasted text accounts for the majority of his post body. While it is not the entirety of the post, it is still not good at all and he should be punished for it. Here's a link to the post just in case you missed it, though you posted directly after.

[Nextgen]

Posting only to be paid is allowed here so nothing will be done. Amph writes useless nonsense like that and has never been banned for it (he even publicly stated he only posts for the pay). Just give up on making these threads as the forum allows this activity. I think the only ones who get banned are the really obvious 1-5 word posters.

there are some neutral people alive on the forum ,
hilar,amph,notlist are having thousands of posts its just that they frame their post in a nice way but it is just spam.

[minifrij]

hilar,amph,notlist are having thousands of posts its just that they frame their post in a nice way but it is just spam.

While I cannot talk for notlist3d and I agree with Amph, hilariousandco does not spam. Do you really think he would be accepted into the Global Moderator group if he did?

[mexxer-2]

Posting only to be paid is allowed here so nothing will be done. Amph writes useless nonsense like that and has never been banned for it (he even publicly stated he only posts for the pay). Just give up on making these threads as the forum allows this activity. I think the only ones who get banned are the really obvious 1-5 word posters.

there are some neutral people alive on the forum ,
hilar,amph,notlist are having thousands of posts its just that they frame their post in a nice way but it is just spam.

Can't tell about amph but wouldn't accuse a Global moderator of spamming and as for notlist3d he just seems to be interested in posting mainly on Bitcoin discussion/Economics board which actually is what the campaign needs from participants.

[Quickseller]

People who copy previous posts and information from websites (and adding gibberish to the end of posts) is cheating their signature campaigns because they are attempting to receive something they are not otherwise entitled to receive. AFAIK this person is not engaged in this kind of activity. What this person is doing is posting solely because he will receive payment from the post, and that is not stealing.

I posted several examples of him doing that, which I found within the first two to three pages of his recent posts, on the previous page. He doesn't do it for the entirety of his posts, but for a great deal copy-pasted text accounts for the majority of his post body. While it is not the entirety of the post, it is still not good at all and he should be punished for it. Here's a link to the post just in case you missed it, though you posted directly after.

It looks like he uses the bold feature to respond to specific parts of a post (as opposed to the quote feature). I would not consider that to be copy/pasting posts personally. For example if you look at this post he responded to SebasianJu's part of his post that he bolded.

Here's a link to the post just in case you missed it, though you posted directly after

I have notifications that someone made a post after I started working on my post turned off for when I bid on auctions/when I am attempting to snipe on auctions.

[minifrij]

It looks like he uses the bold feature to respond to specific parts of a post (as opposed to the quote feature). I would not consider that to be copy/pasting posts personally. For example if you look at this post he responded to SebasianJu's part of his post that he bolded.

I'm not sure how the Bit-X bot works, though if I am correct in thinking that it disregards the characters in a quote, he is still doing it to lengthen his post characters to meet the quota. Regardless, I will accept I may have jumped the gun on that example, however what about the other three examples I gave? Surely copying useless information from a website and adding a small message of his own to the end or 'quoting' the same text twice isn't acceptable?

[Quickseller]

It looks like he uses the bold feature to respond to specific parts of a post (as opposed to the quote feature). I would not consider that to be copy/pasting posts personally. For example if you look at this post he responded to SebasianJu's part of his post that he bolded.

I'm not sure how the Bit-X bot works, though if I am correct in thinking that it disregards the characters in a quote, he is still doing it to lengthen his post characters to meet the quota. Regardless, I will accept I may have jumped the gun on that example, however what about the other three examples I gave? Surely copying useless information from a website and adding a small message of his own to the end or 'quoting' the same text twice isn't acceptable?

Some people use  ">>" to signify a quote when posting, and I really do not see how using bold is any different. I don't think he is trying to hide the fact that he is using bold to quote another post, while the person who was adding random strings of text in small font was clearly attempting to hide this.

Also I believe that his posts would still be at least 75 characters even if the bolded text was ignored, for example his post responding to sesbian was 83 characters.

The only posts that would not make the cut would be this one and possibly this one, and I am not even sure he was making those posts with the intent to deceive or game how much he is going to be paid out. 

As I mentioned previously, I think this is an example as to why using bots is not a good way to manage signature campaigns, and it is also probably not a good idea to use post length to measure if a post will be paid out or not (a one liner would count as being eligible for payment if posts under 75 characters are not paid).

[monbux]

eh, I am not sure if this person should be banned as I would not quite consider his posts to be insubstantial. However I certainly agree that he is only posting to earn money from his signature campaign which reflects poorly on both the company he is representing (via his signature), and on the campaign manger itself.

I would not want him in a campaign that I was running personally.

His posts are insubstantial because it's all bullshit - I'd bet that he'd disappear the day signature campaigns are banned (if they do get banned).
It's obviously that he is posting only to earn money... but that isn't the reason I called him out.  He continues to post meaningless crap with no interest on the actual topic of the OP. I would consider that insubstantial, or at least a bannable offence.

[knowhow]

All people here nervous first moderators will ban anyone that abuse  and post nonsense content.Second who chooses to pay or not pay is the op of each  signature,as long as post construtive we cant do nothing against it and wont affect anyone.If you are at your signature complaining that other user that has unlimited posts avaible is posting heavily,let them ,the only person with power to act is the signature owner and the op who is leading it.And yes most of the signatures needs advertising soo paying to some members and get new investors is the way  well they need us,better then hire some ads company to send visits...

[Bifta]

Signature campaigners themselves check the quality of post before paying to members using their respective signature.I think they are the right people to decide because they are paying for posting after all.Other users can simply put them on ignor list if they find their posts useless or repetitve

I don't think they care. They only want their stuff advertised, so to them it doesn't really matter. They are definitely NOT the right people to be judging this. There are many campaigns where the posters are all low quality posters yet they still get paid for all of their posts.

I dont think thats the case with all campaign mangers.They do care about the quality of post I can say this from my own experience.My current campaign manger do not approve of all posts they are very selective when it comes to quality of post.Constuctive or quality post is subjective hence what campaign managers deem constructive,should be taken as constructive.Even staff can make mistakes in judging the quality of posts.
I think campaign managers should be requested to be more judicious in selecting quality post

Some are, but some are also not very selective. Whoever runs yobit and steadyturtle don't seem to care as much since those in those campaigns tend to spam, but they still get paid. I agree, there are some very good and meticulous campaign managers who are good at judging and paying constructive posts, but there are also campaign managers that aren't.

[monbux]

We got news.

Hey marco,

Can you please check this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1220253.0
Please review this user's posting... although it may seem long in "length", it is all spam and non-contributing posts.

I've removed him, without pay.

Thank you for the message!

Regards

[bitcoin revo]

We got news.

Hey marco,

Can you please check this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1220253.0
Please review this user's posting... although it may seem long in "length", it is all spam and non-contributing posts.

I've removed him, without pay.

Thank you for the message!

Regards

Hey!!! Great work, guys.

I only now noticed this thread, and I have to say that I noticed melisande doing some pretty bad posts in the past. I'm glad to hear that he was finally put to justice.

Maybe the Yobit signature campaign next?

[Blazed]

Maybe I should make a public shame list in meta for all of the useless spam posters. Add the shit posters to it and point campaign managers and staff at it.

[mexxer-2]

Maybe I should make a public shame list in meta for all of the useless spam posters. Add the shit posters to it and point campaign managers and staff at it.

Something like DannyHamilton's ignore list?

[Blazed]

Maybe I should make a public shame list in meta for all of the useless spam posters. Add the shit posters to it and point campaign managers and staff at it.

Something like DannyHamilton's ignore list?

Exactly, have everyone keep posting the useless posters for all to see in one easy list.

[Athertle]

Maybe I should make a public shame list in meta for all of the useless spam posters. Add the shit posters to it and point campaign managers and staff at it.

You would probably be faced with a lot of hate (mainly by the people you add). But I would support creating the list.

What about some kind of public voting thing for the quality of users' posts? Not sure how that would work.