New Way to cut down Sig Spam

[Pro Gamers]

Its better to have a fixed rate for sig campaign per week like what ore-mine.org does, with fixed rate spammers will avoided too much bump, thank you, and many spam posts.

Not really no. Fixed rates with reasonable requirements in posts do not lead to less spam, but to spam spread over several accounts. This in turn will increase the demand for accounts of a certain level (Full Member+). Thus we will have more farm spam.

What might be a solution though is to proxy ban those running the campaigns. E.g. if you run a campaign and X (maybe 10 or a percentage based number) participants had to be banned for spam you will get banned as well. Accounts running the campaigns can not be replaced as easily as those posting and it would give them a very strong incentive to clean up among their participants.

That can be effective but also can kill sig campaigns. Campaign manager can do all the work so instead of the sig campaign itself the campaign manager should be one responsible for this matter.

[botany]

Its better to have a fixed rate for sig campaign per week like what ore-mine.org does, with fixed rate spammers will avoided too much bump, thank you, and many spam posts.

Not really no. Fixed rates with reasonable requirements in posts do not lead to less spam, but to spam spread over several accounts. This in turn will increase the demand for accounts of a certain level (Full Member+). Thus we will have more farm spam.

What might be a solution though is to proxy ban those running the campaigns. E.g. if you run a campaign and X (maybe 10 or a percentage based number) participants had to be banned for spam you will get banned as well. Accounts running the campaigns can not be replaced as easily as those posting and it would give them a very strong incentive to clean up among their participants.

People will just create use and throw accounts to run signature campaigns, or move the running of campaigns to other sites. This suggestion was shot down before.

I don't think acting on campaign managers would work, they'll just stop posting here, or use anon accounts. While using anon accounts now would be a red flag for a sig campaign, it would eventually become normal and accepted, similar to how it's the norm to see a one post newbie selling a hero account.

[Amph]

i thought the majority of the campaign if not all don't pay for posting in the off-topic section, at least you can consider their "spamming" genuine there...

[MrBig]

The only way is shutting down sig campaigns, honestly.

I agree, although I doubt this will happen. It becomes a chore having to wade through all the crap to find the posts that actually add some value to a conversation. A lot of 'members', and I use that term loosely, can't even write English properly. Just take a look at some of the posts in this thread:

If you want to get rid of spammer is contact who helding the signature campaign or his manager.
And about the rule , it should make for not posting on selected section

Maybe you should report rivoke to your campaign manager...

Its better to have a fixed rate for sig campaign per week like what ore-mine.org does, with fixed rate spammers will avoided too much bump

Did you get that bump when your momma dropped you on your head, or were you always this stupid?

Simply spammers will continue their spams whether in off-topic or elsewhere.
For example, in the other compagns that don't pay posts in the off topic section, politics... spammers will bombard game & rounds.

Don't forget the Meta section. Spammers sure like posting there too

The suggestion is a good thing to reduce the spam a bit but the big step is convincing the campaign managers to not count those which their somehow firm of their rules that first implemented and if you dig a bit deeper

Oh yeah, dem managers is always their firming dem rulez an ting

The main reason for so many spams is due to automated signatures and even worst if there's no limit in postings. Shorena is right. However, fixed rate campaigns does lessen the load on the manager when counting posts. They should review each participant individually and ensure that they aren't spamming and is contributing something to the discussion at the very list. I have joined many campaigns which only recruits high quality posters and it does work well.

Obviously those campaigns didn't recruit only high quality posters if they let someone like you join...

You didn't understand what shorena said. It is not the limiting of post, she is referring to the fixed rate for lower ranked accounts, people tend to spam to raise their pay rate so thus they will make a lot of post and thus that will result to spam

Also it is not the automated counting that does the problem. It is not a problem to have a bot to count the posts but I think implementing a rule that a participant must take care of the image of the campaign might lessen spamming, let's say there is a rule that if you want to get paid, you need to be sure your posts are constructive, if you want to get paid you need to take care of other participants, such reporting them if they are making spammy posts. Participants should be given a responsibility like this.

Such reporting, many WOW

Have you once imagine how this forum will look like without all the spammers making those insubstantial posting? The thing is, we want to get rid of the spammers and not the signature campaign itself. I doubt people will keep working in their postings if they are not getting paid by it (for some maybe). The forums activity benefits from the ongoing signature campaigns.

Oh the horror! What a terrible thought to imagine...

On a more serious note:

It's almost as if some of these posts were written in another language and passed through Google Translate. There's a difference between making grammatical errors here and there, and making it blatantly obvious that you really suck at English. Coupled with meaningless tripe and redundant baloney, the forum can become rather unsavoury at times, if you know what I mean.

[XinXan]

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

[xinzark]

I don't think such idea gonna work. Naming that board "off-topic" holds a specific reason.
In my opinion theymos did very good by keeping off-topic because he is fulfilling spammers desire
That is the only place where whole spammers belong to. You can only see that place full of spams.
So, give them place. We know non-spammers won't go there.

And yes your plan of hiding signature in that section might help in Reducing spams I guess

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

I agree. He only have anger that's why he is posting bullshits in red color
Control your attitude mate

[MrBig]

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

Oh put a sock in it. I average like 1 post per 3 days, while you average like 5. I go for months at a time without posting, and I write in legible English. Plus I don't have a paid signature. Unlike you, I have no incentive to post. If paid signatures were banned tomorrow, you and most of your ilk would likely slither away back to your fetid hovels, or your posting frequency would become like the libido of a 99 year-old man. Maybe you should spend the money you earn from your signature on some English lessons.

I don't think such idea gonna work. Naming that board "off-topic" holds a specific reason.
In my opinion theymos did very good by keeping off-topic because he is fulfilling spammers desire
That is the only place where whole spammers belong to. You can only see that place full of spams.
So, give them place. We know non-spammers won't go there.

And yes your plan of hiding signature in that section might help in Reducing spams I guess

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

I agree. He only have anger that's why he is posting bullshits in red color
Control your attitude mate

Lol, so you're trying to tell me that indiscernible drivel you just posted isn't spam

Funny how you and the poster above you both have usernames that start with Xin. Gee, I wonder if you're related.

[XinXan]

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

Oh put a sock in it. I average like 1 post per 3 days, while you average like 5. I go for months at a time without posting, and I write in legible English. Plus I don't have a paid signature. Unlike you, I have no incentive to post. If paid signatures were banned tomorrow, you and most of your ilk would likely slither away back to your fetid hovels, or your posting frequency would become like the libido of a 99 year-old man. Maybe you should spend the money you earn from your signature on some English lessons.

I don't think such idea gonna work. Naming that board "off-topic" holds a specific reason.
In my opinion theymos did very good by keeping off-topic because he is fulfilling spammers desire
That is the only place where whole spammers belong to. You can only see that place full of spams.
So, give them place. We know non-spammers won't go there.

And yes your plan of hiding signature in that section might help in Reducing spams I guess

Damn Mr.big you sure got those sneaky sig spammers with your post. Did you check your own posts lately? If you were wearing a signature you would have been banned most likely due to your super low quality posting but i guess you feel better by throwing shit at other people. I think people is looking too much into spammers that wear signatures when there are spammers like this guy with totally worthless posts without any signature that are still here.

I agree. He only have anger that's why he is posting bullshits in red color
Control your attitude mate

Lol, so you're trying to tell me that indiscernible drivel you just posted isn't spam

Funny how you and the poster above you both have usernames that start with Xin. Gee, I wonder if you're related.

But you still post shit nonetheless, what does it matter if you are posting less per day or if your english is good? Spam is spam. Funny how you bash sig spammers when your posts are 1/10 in quality.

[MrBig]

But you still post shit nonetheless, what does it matter if you are posting less per day or if your english is good? Spam is spam. Funny how you bash sig spammers when your posts are 1/10 in quality.

Your posts aren't exactly the pinnacle of enlightenment, doofus. It does matter actually, because I haven't noticed threads popping up about members like me, but countless ones complaining about paid signature spammers such as yourself. Why do you deny the obvious; that you and the majority of paid signature members only post to get paid? Just look at this thread; the OP made a post about cutting down on signature spam, and almost all of the replies came from people spamming their signatures for some bit crumbs. How ironic is that?

You can keep denying the obvious, which even you yourself know to be true, or you can just admit what everyone already knows, and tell me to get lost because the admin and mods allow you to spam your paid signatures. Either way, I don't care, and I'll continue to ridicule and poke fun at the mediocre advertisements posing as actual forum posts as I please.

[Mikestang]

The standards for almost every sig campaign are laxed, that's why you get a bunch of garbage posters.  Banning campaigns is not a viable solution, because since when has prohibition solved any problem?  Answer: it hasn't.

I am proud to be a member of the sig campaign I am in because it's members are vetted for quality posting and the campaign manager does his job well.  If all the campaigns paid this much attention to who was in and what they were posting this website would clean up dramatically.

Editorial comment: I post a couple times a day, same as before I was in a campaign, so why not get some coin for something I do anyway.  My campaign doesn't honor posts in meta, so this post is "free".

[Slark]

I wish someone with authority could disable signatures completely for everyone for some test period of time.
I want to see if that helps reduce spam on bitcointalk. Because from what I could see on other big boards, Reddit included, spam is still overwhelming there.

[GannickusX]

I wish someone with authority could disable signatures completely for everyone for some test period of time.
I want to see if that helps reduce spam on bitcointalk. Because from what I could see on other big boards, Reddit included, spam is still overwhelming there.

It would but when there were almost no signatures people posted crap too, i once got like 10 posts deleted in like 3 days and never got banned, of course no signature back then so really the sig campaigns have brought the spammers to atention but there were plenty of them back then

[tarsua]

I wish someone with authority could disable signatures completely for everyone for some test period of time.
I want to see if that helps reduce spam on bitcointalk. Because from what I could see on other big boards, Reddit included, spam is still overwhelming there.

It would but when there were almost no signatures people posted crap too, i once got like 10 posts deleted in like 3 days and never got banned, of course no signature back then so really the sig campaigns have brought the spammers to atention but there were plenty of them back then

Back then they had nothing to gain, now spammers are spamming with the intention to make money, cut down their most profitable board and they will surely get banned as spam is easier to catch when not in off-topic
cutting signatures completely would stop them indefinately

[Snorek]

Back then they had nothing to gain, now spammers are spamming with the intention to make money, cut down their most profitable board and they will surely get banned as spam is easier to catch when not in off-topic
cutting signatures completely would stop them indefinately

I recently rarely look what people post in off-topic, but I used to post there a lot in the past, it was fun. Restricting boards is not the answer, spam will likely move to the unrestricted sub boards.
I also don't think that off topic is so profitable since 95% signature campaigns do not pay for posts done in off top section.

Bitcointalk is now very big forum and spam will not end, no matter what. Even if you remove signature campaigns, spam is it is here to stay. They only answer is moderation.

[MrBig]

One solution may be to allow users to vote posts up or down, with posts that receive many down votes becoming hidden. Then adding an option to ignore all users with many negative posts. I've noticed some websites have such a system implemented in their comments section.

It would but when there were almost no signatures people posted crap too, i once got like 10 posts deleted in like 3 days and never got banned, of course no signature back then so really the sig campaigns have brought the spammers to atention but there were plenty of them back then

The quality of spam has gone down while the quantity of it has gone up since paid signatures have become popular. Obviously not every post is going to be a treasure trove of information. But if we had cheap posts back then, we got straight up knock-offs nowadays. Online money-making forums advertise posting on bitcointalk as a way to make money: http://thebot.net/threads/make-money-posting-on-btctalk.321232/

Of course, the 'Engrish' speakers on those sites see that opportunity and figure that it's more profitable than making 10 cents per 1000 captchas and descend upon here like hyenas on carrion. These aren't people like Mikestang who post here anyway and figure, 'why not get paid for what I already do?' Rather, they're only posting here because it's the best way for them to make money online. It's not very difficult to spot them either, especially since they become very defensive whenever someone calls them out.

[hilariousandco]

I wish someone with authority could disable signatures completely for everyone for some test period of time.
I want to see if that helps reduce spam on bitcointalk. Because from what I could see on other big boards, Reddit included, spam is still overwhelming there.

Would be an interesting experiment for sure. If signatures were banned shitposts and traffic would drastically decrease but there will always be spam and trolls. In fact, most of the disruptive  trolls here never have signatures. I think we need to crack down on shitposters though and hopefully just banning people who put no/minimal effort in will quickly get the idea. Campaign managers need to step up their game too and start moderating their participants.

Back then they had nothing to gain, now spammers are spamming with the intention to make money, cut down their most profitable board and they will surely get banned as spam is easier to catch when not in off-topic
cutting signatures completely would stop them indefinately

I recently rarely look what people post in off-topic, but I used to post there a lot in the past, it was fun. Restricting boards is not the answer, spam will likely move to the unrestricted sub boards.
I also don't think that off topic is so profitable since 95% signature campaigns do not pay for posts done in off top section.

Most campaigns don't pay for off topic but it's the ones that do that are causing the problem. Go look there and you will see all the shit posts are being made by people with a yobit signature because they can get away with easily spamming one word responses. Go look in games and rounds and you'll see it plastered with secondstrade sigs. Why? Because bizzarely they pay for that sub (and don't for off topic). Those campaigns are the worst offenders here because they don't do anything to actually manage their campaign and pay people automatically whatever drivel they post. Personally, I think those campaigns should be treated the same as sig spammers and banned as they're the ones causing it. Probably going to leave both campaigns negative feedback soon until they clean up their act but a ban will be more appropriate.

One solution may be to allow users to vote posts up or down, with posts that receive many down votes becoming hidden. Then adding an option to ignore all users with many negative posts. I've noticed some websites have such a system implemented in their comments section.

Wouldn't work and would easily be abused by people with bots and multiple accounts. If someone didn't like you or something you said then they would just use their alt army to downvote you. If people are obviously posting crap then they should just be temp banned until they get the message. If they don't then a perma ban should follow. I wouldn't be opposed to removing signatures entirely if my suggestions ultimately don't work but I think we can quickly get on top of spam  by both mods and signature campaign managers being more strict. If people aren't going to get paid for shitposts or banned for making them then they either will up their game or not bother making them at all.

[GannickusX]

I wish someone with authority could disable signatures completely for everyone for some test period of time.
I want to see if that helps reduce spam on bitcointalk. Because from what I could see on other big boards, Reddit included, spam is still overwhelming there.

Would be an interesting experiment for sure. If signatures were banned shitposts and traffic would drastically decrease but there will always be spam and trolls. In fact, most of the disruptive  trolls here never have signatures. I think we need to crack down on shitposters though and hopefully just banning people who put no/minimal effort in will quickly get the idea. Campaign managers need to step up their game too and start moderating their participants.

Back then they had nothing to gain, now spammers are spamming with the intention to make money, cut down their most profitable board and they will surely get banned as spam is easier to catch when not in off-topic
cutting signatures completely would stop them indefinately

I recently rarely look what people post in off-topic, but I used to post there a lot in the past, it was fun. Restricting boards is not the answer, spam will likely move to the unrestricted sub boards.
I also don't think that off topic is so profitable since 95% signature campaigns do not pay for posts done in off top section.

Most campaigns don't pay for off topic but it's the ones that do that are causing the problem. Go look there and you will see all the shit posts are being made by people with a yobit signature because they can get away with easily spamming one word responses. Go look in games and rounds and you'll see it plastered with secondstrade sigs. Why? Because bizzarely they pay for that sub (and don't for off topic). Those campaigns are the worst offenders here because they don't do anything to actually manage their campaign and pay people automatically whatever drivel they post. Personally, I think those campaigns should be treated the same as sig spammers and banned as they're the ones causing it. Probably going to leave both campaigns negative feedback soon until they clean up their act but a ban will be more appropriate.

One solution may be to allow users to vote posts up or down, with posts that receive many down votes becoming hidden. Then adding an option to ignore all users with many negative posts. I've noticed some websites have such a system implemented in their comments section.

Wouldn't work and would easily be abused by people with bots and multiple accounts. If someone didn't like you or something you said then they would just use their alt army to downvote you. If people are obviously posting crap then they should just be temp banned until they get the message. If they don't then a perma ban should follow. I wouldn't be opposed to removing signatures entirely if my suggestions ultimately don't work but I think we can quickly get on top of spam  by both mods and signature campaign managers being more strict. If people aren't going to get paid for shitposts or banned for making them then they either will up their game or not bother making them at all.

Well the voting option may not be that bad, you could always make only full members and above to be able to vote posts, of course poeple can buy full members accounts but how man? Like if someone really hates you at most he is going to have 5 accounts and you could make 30 negative votes for a post to be hidden. Legendary members votes could also be worth more and people with good trust too, seriously this could be a good idea, it wont stop the spam but it would help and it's a simple thing to do.

[hilariousandco]

It's not a good idea. It will easily be abused by people trying to censor others. Doesn't it already happen on reddit? If a post is bad or spam report it. You're basically giving regular users the ability to moderate the forum which is never a good idea.

[GannickusX]

It's not a good idea. It will easily be abused by people trying to censor others. Doesn't it already happen on reddit? If a post is bad or spam report it. You're basically giving regular users the ability to moderate the forum which is never a good idea.

It doesn't really happen on reddit, i have been browsing reddit for years and the downvotes are usually right and even if they are not it takes a lot of downvotes to hide someone's comment and even after that you can still show the comment anyways, it's not like it gets deleted.

[shorena]

It's not a good idea. It will easily be abused by people trying to censor others. Doesn't it already happen on reddit? If a post is bad or spam report it. You're basically giving regular users the ability to moderate the forum which is never a good idea.

It doesn't really happen on reddit, i have been browsing reddit for years and the downvotes are usually right and even if they are not it takes a lot of downvotes to hide someone's comment and even after that you can still show the comment anyways, it's not like it gets deleted.

There is an ignore button already, but a reddit system is IMHO not suitable for a discussion(!) board. It removes unpopular opinions. Yes I can do the extra click and read it, but over time most - me included - will just ignore it. I dont like the idea of a hive mind deciding what is worth to be seen and what not. I rare use the ignore function for the every same reason. I can spot a post not worth reading after I read the first (half-) sentence, but that user might have an interesting post from time to time.