Illiterate sig spammers

[BitHodler]

I think bitcointalk should allow to wear signatures only starting from Sr. Member or Hero Member rank. It would help to decrease amount of spam. Offcourse, it won't help to avoid spam from farmed accounts
And I think signature campaign managers should be stricter. It looks like some of them don't care about quality of campaign participants posts.
And it would be good if moderators would lock topics when question was already answered and spamers only starts to repeat it in different words.

I am sure that when only hero members and up are allowed to participate in signature campaigns, that it drastically decreases the amount of spam and nonsense in this forum.

As you also stated, it won't completely solve the problem, but I am quite sure that around 75% of the garbage will be gone.

Signature campaigns are something cool and unique, so it would be sad to see them go away because certain people are only posting nonsense.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I think bitcointalk should allow to wear signatures only starting from Sr. Member or Hero Member rank. It would help to decrease amount of spam. Offcourse, it won't help to avoid spam from farmed accounts
And I think signature campaign managers should be stricter. It looks like some of them don't care about quality of campaign participants posts.
And it would be good if moderators would lock topics when question was already answered and spamers only starts to repeat it in different words.

This might be a decent idea, and it's one that's been bandied about at least since I joined this forum last year.  The problem is that people buy and sell accounts all the time, and a potential sig spammer could--and will, definitely--buy a hero account thinking they can earn their initial outlay back very quickly by shitposting.  Of course, no one thinks their posts are shitposts, which is why they come to meta whining about getting permabanned.

So then you wouldn't mind not having a signature anymore? You could, after all, disable it right now as all you reply on is Micro Earnings and a signature is unnecessary there. (Or anywhere lest you own a service/product)

I don't understand your point here.  The point of wearing a signature is to advertise, which is what anyone does in any of the sections.  Right?

[tokeweed]

I think bitcointalk should allow to wear signatures only starting from Sr. Member or Hero Member rank. It would help to decrease amount of spam. Offcourse, it won't help to avoid spam from farmed accounts
And I think signature campaign managers should be stricter. It looks like some of them don't care about quality of campaign participants posts.
And it would be good if moderators would lock topics when question was already answered and spamers only starts to repeat it in different words.

This might be a decent idea, and it's one that's been bandied about at least since I joined this forum last year.  The problem is that people buy and sell accounts all the time, and a potential sig spammer could--and will, definitely--buy a hero account thinking they can earn their initial outlay back very quickly by shitposting.  Of course, no one thinks their posts are shitposts, which is why they come to meta whining about getting permabanned.

Then it would be a good idea to take it a step further.  Disallow all accounts from participating from sig campaigns except Legendary accounts.  That status takes a long time to attain and you're not even sure when exactly you get it.  I'm pretty sure over 90% of account farmers will give up shit posting after a couple of weeks once they realize reaching Legendary is almost futile.

Another cause of account farming on here is because people sell these accounts.  Does Bitcointalk still allow selling of accounts?  There was a time that no one really cared.  I think that should be stopped as well.

[European Central Bank]

The problem is that people buy and sell accounts all the time, and a potential sig spammer could--and will, definitely--buy a hero account thinking they can earn their initial outlay back very quickly by shitposting.  Of course, no one thinks their posts are shitposts, which is why they come to meta whining about getting permabanned.

there are fewer seniors and heroes than the lower ranks. it would be easier to keep track of them and it's only gonna take a few to be exterminated in a short space of time for people to realize they'd better shape up or ship out. a bought account is wasted if it's wiped out in no time.

[Quickseller]

You could however argue that these people have come here to start a business.

I don't understand. Unless someone is running a business and a signature campaign, I don't see how advertising for a website is comparable to starting a business.

Sometimes in newspaper stands, and at the grocery store, there will be certain publications that are given away for free that contain both advertisements and various articles. These publications are in the business of writing articles, and selling advertisements to be displayed nearby such articles. Someone who comes to bitcointalk solely for participating in signature campaigns, among other people, are in the business of writing posts and selling advertisements to be displayed under these posts.

I also find the people who work in the little kiosks at the mall to be very annoying, however I do not propose banning those kiosks from malls. I don't think we should ban people from coming here for the sole purpose of earning signature campaign money, as long as they do not break the other rules, including not making low quality/low content posts.

Me neither, which is why I didn't say we should. All I said was that I don't think users who come here only for signature campaign earnings are viable for the forum in the long run; as soon as any sort of monetary incentive disappears, so does a large portion of people who 'love BitcoinTalk'.

I think there are most people that come here for the sole purpose of participating in signature campaigns then you realize. This is probably a high percentage of the people that participate in signature campaigns (I believe that many people who can be described this way have several alt accounts each participating in a signature campaign) are here solely for that reason. I also believe that some of these people will develop a genuine interest in the discussions that they eventually participate in, so they came for the money, but they stay for the Bitcoin (discussions).

I think [...] should allow [...] signature (campaign) only for xx ranking

I think this would only drive up the price of these ranking accounts, and drive down the price of accounts. I don't think this would do very much in terms of reducing signature spam, nor would it do very much to address the issue of low quality posts.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I think bitcointalk should allow to wear signatures only starting from Sr. Member or Hero Member rank. It would help to decrease amount of spam. Offcourse, it won't help to avoid spam from farmed accounts
And I think signature campaign managers should be stricter. It looks like some of them don't care about quality of campaign participants posts.
And it would be good if moderators would lock topics when question was already answered and spamers only starts to repeat it in different words.

This might be a decent idea, and it's one that's been bandied about at least since I joined this forum last year.  The problem is that people buy and sell accounts all the time, and a potential sig spammer could--and will, definitely--buy a hero account thinking they can earn their initial outlay back very quickly by shitposting.  Of course, no one thinks their posts are shitposts, which is why they come to meta whining about getting permabanned.

Then it would be a good idea to take it a step further.  Disallow all accounts from participating from sig campaigns except Legendary accounts.  That status takes a long time to attain and you're not even sure when exactly you get it.  I'm pretty sure over 90% of account farmers will give up shit posting after a couple of weeks once they realize reaching Legendary is almost futile.

Another cause of account farming on here is because people sell these accounts.  Does Bitcointalk still allow selling of accounts?  There was a time that no one really cared.  I think that should be stopped as well.

That's not a bad idea at all.  I would be cool with that even though I'd have to wait to rejoin one.  These shit spammers would certainly not have the drive to rank an account up and wouldn't be able to even if they tried.

Quickseller's argument is retarded as usual.   Who gives two shits about how it moves the price of accounts--oh, that's right, the account sellers who could care less if people use them to scam and spam.  He has done so much dishonest stuff on this forum that it boggles my mind that he even shares his opinion like this.

[tokeweed]

A good alternative would be to use Steemit while you're waiting for Legendary status or if sig campaigns get banned.  If you know how to blog or write good, insightful articles then it's the way to go.  At first I used to ignore Steemit, but if I had no choice and wanna get something for posting good content then that leaves me no choice but to use it.

[rizzlarolla]

jonnyjash

Out of 85 posts (in 6 days as a member), 14 posts just "agree."  These are the 14 entire posts. (not snipped, his dots)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=885862;sa=showPosts;start=0

i secondly that this...
great idea...good one.
This is a great idea.. Nice one.. Loving it.
Good work...nice one,loving it.
I absolutely agree that
I absolutely agree with you
I absolutely agree with you
I secondly agree with you
i absolutely agree with you..
i absolutely secondly agree with you
i absolutely second that
I absolutely second agree   
i absolutely secondly agree..
i absolutely secondly that...

This is copy/paste, or just copy/copy, or just shitposting spam?
Anyone absolutely secondly agree with that?

[criptix]

As others have mentioned these sorts of threads pop up every week or so and it gets tiring responding to the same question over and over. We're currently discussing ways to combat spam but can't really make any big changes without admin input but most of us agree those sort of shit threads mentioned in the op should be locked and probably will be.

I stole this..

You know whats tiring?

People who just barely read the OP and then proceed to click the "reply" button meanwhile ignoring 6 pages in between OP and your own reply.

[rizzlarolla]

As others have mentioned these sorts of threads pop up every week or so and it gets tiring responding to the same question over and over. We're currently discussing ways to combat spam but can't really make any big changes without admin input but most of us agree those sort of shit threads mentioned in the op should be locked and probably will be.

I stole this..

You know whats tiring?

People who just barely read the OP and then proceed to click the "reply" button meanwhile ignoring 6 pages in between OP and your own reply.

Not sure what Milkduds point is here.

Interesting that we didnt get a single input from a staff member. They might have given up on this one :S

As others have mentioned these sorts of threads pop up every week or so and it gets tiring responding to the same question over and over. We're currently discussing ways to combat spam but can't really make any big changes without admin input but most of us agree those sort of shit threads mentioned in the op should be locked and probably will be.

[jackg]

As others have mentioned these sorts of threads pop up every week or so and it gets tiring responding to the same question over and over. We're currently discussing ways to combat spam but can't really make any big changes without admin input but most of us agree those sort of shit threads mentioned in the op should be locked and probably will be.

I stole this..

You know whats tiring?

People who just barely read the OP and then proceed to click the "reply" button meanwhile ignoring 6 pages in between OP and your own reply.

Not sure what Milkduds point is here.

Interesting that we didnt get a single input from a staff member. They might have given up on this one :S

As others have mentioned these sorts of threads pop up every week or so and it gets tiring responding to the same question over and over. We're currently discussing ways to combat spam but can't really make any big changes without admin input but most of us agree those sort of shit threads mentioned in the op should be locked and probably will be.

That's odd for a user to post about something that has already been stated (and not contextually in response to anything)?
Though, criptix, he appears to have read more than the OP and reading 120 posts just to post your own opinion seems a little big to do. I usually read the firist and last page (at least).

A good alternative would be to use Steemit while you're waiting for Legendary status or if sig campaigns get banned.  If you know how to blog or write good, insightful articles then it's the way to go.  At first I used to ignore Steemit, but if I had no choice and wanna get something for posting good content then that leaves me no choice but to use it.

How much have you earned from steemit though? It's probably harder to earn there and you yourself must make more from your BitcoinAG signature campaign than you do from steemit. Also, you need to target specific audiences instead of the entire group of users like you can do here.

[tokeweed]

It's not all about how much you earn, it's about getting some value in what you were going to do anyway.  I guess in a way, Bitcointalk spoiled me.  Before I really didn't think much about sig campaigns and getting some BTC for posting.  I was happy with the way things were.  But when I got in to a sig campaign and then I saw this thread with the mods saying that they are thinking of removing all sig campaigns, I'm like 'Wait a minute...  I want to continue getting something for my time here so it wouldn't be considered a total waste.'

Steemit was designed for this kind of thing, so I might as well try it if sig campaigns are totally banned.  

Edit:  There's is a good case for allowing sig campaigns only for Legendary members or having the signature functionality only enabled for them. 

1.  They basically know what we're talking about when it comes to crypto and didn't reach the rank by being stupid.
2.  They have been in the forum for a long time and were awarded the highest rank.  So that and the account signature enabled will be treated     
     more as a privilege than something given outright.
3.  Legendary status will be valued more not just in monetary terms, but also as a bragging right earned in the forum and it should be that way.

[Ðire]

1.  They basically know what we're talking about when it comes to crypto and didn't reach the rank by being stupid.

Maybe most legendaries picked up how cryptocurrencies work in their time here, but I'm sure that there are legendaries that either

a) just posted random crap in off-topic or "what do you do with bitcoin" type threads or
b) bought the account and don't know the difference between a block and a bitcoin, but are adept that barely passing the post rules and sweeping in the money every week.

[Milkduds]

Had no point just like the thread,you can not expect this forum to grow if you are always attacking aspects of it.
The continued grunting about signatures achieves little other setting the stage for people to dismiss people based on their signature.

Dare some one to compile all the threads on the nasty signature spammers,bet you notice a pattern or two.

[European Central Bank]

Maybe most legendaries picked up how cryptocurrencies work in their time here, but I'm sure that there are legendaries that either

a) just posted random crap in off-topic or "what do you do with bitcoin" type threads or
b) bought the account and don't know the difference between a block and a bitcoin, but are adept that barely passing the post rules and sweeping in the money every week.

yeah. up until recently legendary members would've signed up in 2012 or before when getting into this needed serious research. now there are legends who signed up in 2013/14 and being here for long enough don't automatically make you a crypto god. 

but it's about as good an indicator that you won't end up paying a total moron as there is. or maybe a campaign owner could set a quiz. there are way less of them so at least they're easier to keep on a tight leash.

If sig campaigns were restricted to legend only, I dunno what it would do to account values. most newbies couldn't afford what they'd cost and roi would be uneconomic. I guess it would clear up most the issues.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Had no point just like the thread,you can not expect this forum to grow if you are always attacking aspects of it.
The continued grunting about signatures achieves little other setting the stage for people to dismiss people based on their signature.

Dare some one to compile all the threads on the nasty signature spammers,bet you notice a pattern or two.

Yeah well, welcome to bitcointalk.  This has been going on since the start of sig campaigns, and that was well before I got here.   It's a healthy debate.   The real problem isn't in the debate itself but in all the garbage that gets posted.  And the more I think about it the more I really like the proposed legendary restriction.  I wouldn't mind an invite-only section here, too, that could be free of shitposters.  Or something.   There's just too much crap to sift through here.

[actmyname]

Had no point just like the thread,you can not expect this forum to grow if you are always attacking aspects of it.
The continued grunting about signatures achieves little other setting the stage for people to dismiss people based on their signature.

Dare some one to compile all the threads on the nasty signature spammers,bet you notice a pattern or two.

Yeah well, welcome to bitcointalk.  This has been going on since the start of sig campaigns, and that was well before I got here.   It's a healthy debate.   The real problem isn't in the debate itself but in all the garbage that gets posted.  And the more I think about it the more I really like the proposed legendary restriction.  I wouldn't mind an invite-only section here, too, that could be free of shitposters.  Or something.   There's just too much crap to sift through here.

Let's not forget in Meta that there's dozens of threads pertaining to the same question, like the leet post count threads or removal of signatures (campaign or not). I think what would also clear up some space in Meta is if there was a master thread of hacked accounts. Instead of having a scores of them pop up every week, we can at least limit it to a single thread where it can be even organized by someone.

Hell, I'm willing to compile that sort of data! (Shoot a PM if anybody's on board)

As I've mentioned previously, would it be a good idea to create a sort of "master list" for spammer reports in a thread? "That's what the report function is used for," sure, but it could at least pool several accounts with blatant results together, and if the list could (potentially) help to:

perhaps speed up the ban hammer by half a day

Is it time to create that thread?

[Milkduds]

Had no point just like the thread,you can not expect this forum to grow if you are always attacking aspects of it.
The continued grunting about signatures achieves little other setting the stage for people to dismiss people based on their signature.

Dare some one to compile all the threads on the nasty signature spammers,bet you notice a pattern or two.

Yeah well, welcome to bitcointalk.  This has been going on since the start of sig campaigns, and that was well before I got here.   It's a healthy debate.   The real problem isn't in the debate itself but in all the garbage that gets posted.  And the more I think about it the more I really like the proposed legendary restriction.  I wouldn't mind an invite-only section here, too, that could be free of shitposters.  Or something.   There's just too much crap to sift through here.

I agree with you but the politics in this forum will always control the narrative. Restrictions would work in a ideal setting if you can find that unbiased person to screen quality and be able to put up with reading crap.

[rizzlarolla]

Is it time to create that thread?

To post this kind of stuff?

THe first X11 ASIC miner on the market .. massive snip

http://cryptomining-blog.com/7752-what-we-dont-like-about-the-ibelink-dm384m-x11-asic-miner/

THe first X11 ASIC miner on the market .. massive snip

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1260666.msg14788785#msg14788785
Locked thread. poster Kahir. May 8 2016
But this reason can be justified and unjustified! Trust me, I know some people that had their accounts limited and even frozen and this has killed their income earning over eBay, and they lived from selling stuff on eBay!
Whenever you have a single person that is deciding your destiny during a dispute, you never how will this end!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1260666.msg13086174#msg13086174
Locked thread. Poster Mickeyb. Nov 27 2015.
But this reason can be justified and unjustified! Trust me, I know some people that had their accounts limited and even frozen and this has killed their income earning over eBay, and they lived from selling stuff on eBay!
Whenever you have a single person that is deciding your destiny during a dispute, you never how will this end!

I've been involved in Bitcoin since early 2010...back when you could still mine with video cards. In the interest of full transparency I put about 10 BTC into the Neucoin presale. It might be gone now, but I was aware of the risk going in.
Honestly I don't think Neucoin is a scam. They went to a lot of trouble to be appear very professional, and in the whole grand scheme of things didn't take in that much money to justify everything it appears they did. The "scam", if there is one, could come as a pump and dump. But a lot of things are pumped, especially in crypto, and I'm not against riding a pump and dump for some quick profits. I've done that with a few other coins and generally have sold profitably, but much earlier than I should have.
e.g., Gawminers was obviously a scam from the beginning, and by the time Paycoin came along I really couldn't understand why people were still engaged. I bought some equipment early on from Gawminers. I received it, but was very skeptical about how they ran their business and pretty quickly stopped buying from them. I actually got a several thousand dollar miner for free from them at one point.

I've been involved in Bitcoin since early 2010...back when you could still mine with video cards. In the interest of full transparency I put about 10 BTC into the Neucoin presale. It might be gone now, but I was aware of the risk going in.
Honestly I don't think Neucoin is a scam. They went to a lot of trouble to be appear very professional, and in the whole grand scheme of things didn't take in that much money to justify everything it appears they did. The "scam", if there is one, could come as a pump and dump. But a lot of things are pumped, especially in crypto, and I'm not against riding a pump and dump for some quick profits. I've done that with a few other coins and generally have sold profitably, but much earlier than I should have.
e.g., Gawminers was obviously a scam from the beginning, and by the time Paycoin came along I really couldn't understand why people were still engaged. I bought some equipment early on from Gawminers. I received it, but was very skeptical about how they ran their business and pretty quickly stopped buying from them. I actually got a several thousand dollar miner for free from them at one point.

Should I make a business here. I could ask for btc from offenders before posting details?

[actmyname]

-recycling bin snip-

It would help to create a single thread to view and report spamming/copypasting content. I wouldn't like to see these threads pop up day and night. As well as this, I could (previously mentioned) compile a list and reference (like the alternate account thread)