Signature-free week

[pawel7777]

As in topic. Anyone else curious how would the forum activity/post quality look like if all the signatures (paid and non-paid) were temporarily removed for a fixed period i.e. one week or better yet, one month? Announced in advance obviously.

It could give a pretty good info on how the signature campaigns affect the forum.

-----

Bonus question, are there any stats available on number of members by rank?

[mekar sari]

hi , I see you do not wear a signature , why ? 

[Sir_lagsalot]

hi , I see you do not wear a signature , why ? 

He's showing it as a message. He doesn't want to promote campaigns, because he believes that most of the posts here are just for money. He believes that campaigns agree just filling up the forum with spam, which in most cases is true.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

The idea is stupid, if the signature ban is pre-announced, people will just spam  in the period before the ban

[lolxxxx]

If thete is anything happens like that then i bet there will be only 50% users who will still posts and take part in discussions.however i don't think that signature will be ban or stopped for a week or even a day because its profitable.

[jacee]

That wouldn't happen. If signature would be pause, Your point is invalid is right. People would spam their way through the week before the said pause. Also it makes no sense why it will be benificial to anyone or anything in the forum. The post activity in the forum would drop because afaik 80% of members around here post because they are getting paid.

[rapsaodan84]

The idea is stupid, if the signature ban is pre-announced, people will just spam  in the period before the ban

I think that's the idea, to know how much people would spam before the ban and how little they'd post during it
it'd be sad to know (confirm?) most people is here just because of the signature payment

[botany]

The idea is stupid, if the signature ban is pre-announced, people will just spam  in the period before the ban

Most signature campaigns have a cap on the number of posts eligible for payment (on a daily/weekly/monthly basis).
So if signature campaigns aren't going to be around for a month, spamming prior to this won't help.

[bittraffic]

gotta understand signatures means business. It's what makes users stay.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

gotta understand signatures means business. It's what makes users stay.

At the same time, the objective of the forum is to facilitate bitcoin discussion, not to act as a medium to earn bitcoin

[Xenophoto]

Well, I bet the majority of people in here will stop posting except for mods and for those people who are doing transactions in here. The people who are always in the discussion threads will stop posting because there's no point in posting if there's no signature campaign. There'd be some people who'd continue posting though for the sake of keeping their accounts alive and to make them seem that they don't mind not getting paid by posting.

[Lutpin]

The people who are always in the discussion threads will stop posting because there's no point in posting if there's no signature campaign.

You're wrong. The ones solely posting for their signature earnings will stop posting, so far I agree. But on the other hand, most of them don't contribute much to a discussion anyway, do they?
On the other hand, there are many reasons for engaging in a discussion besides signature earnings.

There'd be some people who'd continue posting though for the sake of keeping their accounts alive and to make them seem that they don't mind not getting paid by posting.

There'd also be those people who either have never been part of a signature campaign or have not altered their way of posting by being in a signature campaign (both were still existent, last I've heard), which would not at all be influenced by this "signature-fee week" (besides their earnings dropping for the latter, which wouldn't change their posting style).

gotta understand signatures means business. It's what makes users stay.

Fun fact: It's also what makes users leave.


That being said,...

The idea is stupid -snip-

[aioc]

In my opinion it help the forum to gain traffic,it is up to signature moderator to ban those who spam with their signature link on their profile..

If you look around further there are also members who do not use a signature that are also spamming the forum..

[BitHodler]

Throughout the years there have been many of these 'stop this' or 'do this with signature campaigns' threads popping up. Did it help or solve anything? Nope.

As the user above me also mentioned; it helps this forum getting traffic, and that for free!

The only thing that can be done is that campaign managers browse through the post history of all people participating in their signature campaign, and kick out spammers and bots.

[actmyname]

In my opinion it help the forum to gain traffic,it is up to signature moderator to ban those who spam with their signature link on their profile..

If you look around further there are also members who do not use a signature that are also spamming the forum..

1. Forum traffic through the usage of allowing users to promote websites encourages unhealthy discussion that leads to spam. I'm not so sure that that kind of traffic is what the forum really needs. If you have a restaurant and fill it with children, that's also traffic. But is it good traffic?

2. Members who do not use a signature and spam are most likely account farmers as well. There shouldn't be a reason for spam in the first place, anyway.