Why can't we post and post?

[migueltiu]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

[hilariousetc]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

I don't think there's many if any managers who will ban people for merely posting more than 14 posts a week and many users do many more than that. In fact, many campaigns usually require a minimum amount of posts or pay for a maximum of 50 posts a week etc but campaign managers should be looking at quality not quantity. If your posts are substantial and not just churned out to hit your 14 activity quota every fortnight you should be fine but no manager should be accepting poor quality posters onto their campaign if they're doing their job properly. It's just a shame that there are many managers doing absolutely nothing at all about spam on their campaigns.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

I don't think there's many if any managers who will ban people for merely posting more than 14 posts a week and many users do many more than that. In fact, many campaigns usually require a minimum amount of posts or pay for a maximum of 50 posts a week etc but campaign managers should be looking at quality not quantity. If your posts are substantial and not just churned out to hit your 14 activity quota every fortnight you should be fine but no manager should be accepting poor quality posters onto their campaign if they're doing their job properly. It's just a shame that there are many managers doing absolutely nothing at all about spam on their campaigns.

Dude, I'm embarrassed to admit this, but when I was in the Yobit campaign, I would frequently make 20 posts a day.  That's when I had a good desktop computer and could crank out posts pretty quickly.   And yeah, not all of them were of great quality, and I was sucked in by the money.   But I never got banned even for that crazy amount of posting. 

People who make tons of posts who put no thought into them, and write them in extremely broken English--those are the idiots that are going to get posts deleted or get banned.  I certainly don't read posts where I have to decipher what's being said.   I just skip right over those, and I know I'm not alone.   Those are garbage, and mods are cracking down on garbage posts.

You ever seen the altcoin token/airdrop section?  It's a full-blackout shit blizzard over there. It's no wonder people are getting banned.

[Taki]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

I don't think there's many if any managers who will ban people for merely posting more than 14 posts a week and many users do many more than that. In fact, many campaigns usually require a minimum amount of posts or pay for a maximum of 50 posts a week etc but campaign managers should be looking at quality not quantity. If your posts are substantial and not just churned out to hit your 14 activity quota every fortnight you should be fine but no manager should be accepting poor quality posters onto their campaign if they're doing their job properly. It's just a shame that there are many managers doing absolutely nothing at all about spam on their campaigns.

But the guy doesn't seem as a maker of poor posts. Yes, I also know all those rules and norms by which the forum will n any pretentious to you, but I am agree with the main idea of the thread, I also don't understand why an active commentator who is really interested in bitcoin and good enough to reply to any comment in the thread he started would be count as a spammer by the forum? Even if he is not in any campaign.

[CoolSkeleton]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

I don't think there's many if any managers who will ban people for merely posting more than 14 posts a week and many users do many more than that. In fact, many campaigns usually require a minimum amount of posts or pay for a maximum of 50 posts a week etc but campaign managers should be looking at quality not quantity. If your posts are substantial and not just churned out to hit your 14 activity quota every fortnight you should be fine but no manager should be accepting poor quality posters onto their campaign if they're doing their job properly. It's just a shame that there are many managers doing absolutely nothing at all about spam on their campaigns.

But the guy doesn't seem as a maker of poor posts. Yes, I also know all those rules and norms by which the forum will n any pretentious to you, but I am agree with the main idea of the thread, I also don't understand why an active commentator who is really interested in bitcoin and good enough to reply to any comment in the thread he started would be count as a spammer by the forum? Even if he is not in any campaign.

i needd to do some posts now, mb they will not so helpfull, but i tried to do them not absolutley usless. I want to do my campain, and i don't want to get ban. On the side i reading a lot of themes so i can get some knowlege about cryptocurrency, so mb ban is not fair in this situation? Anyway, this is forum and ppl can write not absolutley nonsensical posts

[Lykslyks]

Hi guys, I am new here and I am constantly online here on the forum to read, comment and share insights of what I know. Apparently, as i've ventured in the Market (service) section, some signature managers would not or would disregard members who are post spamming; those who post 14 times or more within a week. Why would it be spamming when we try our best to reply with the best of our knowledge?

As far as i know it will be considered as spamming when you don't consider an interval between your post. You can post more than 14 a week but make sure that when you post a reply, the thought of your post must be different to others.

[Pearls Before Swine]

i needd to do some posts now, mb they will not so helpfull, but i tried to do them not absolutley usless. I want to do my campain, and i don't want to get ban. On the side i reading a lot of themes so i can get some knowlege about cryptocurrency, so mb ban is not fair in this situation? Anyway, this is forum and ppl can write not absolutley nonsensical posts

The above is a perfect example of the type of post that will quickly get banned.
Bad english, sloppily written, and very hard to understand.  Nobody wants to read crap
like this.  And if you're making these kinds of posts rapid fire, you're going to get banned. 

As said, you can be a prolific poster and make 100 posts in a week or more, but only if
they're well thought out, well written, and in easily understandable language.  That's not
what you usually see from people who write a lot of posts, though.  They're usually poor
quality and could most likely be considered spammy.