Bitcoin Forum
September 19, 2018, 11:48:10 PM *
News: ♦♦ Bitcoin Core users must update to 0.16.3 [Torrent]. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Ideas for improving post quality?  (Read 4272 times)
iasenko
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 468


Vod's BTT Public Information Project - bpip.org


View Profile WWW
January 18, 2018, 10:34:12 PM
 #141

Here is my idea and contribution to the community.

There are two type of Newbie spammers, the ones that are really new and have no idea what to do here in the forum and trying to joint bounties and repeatingly asking how to rank up. (I was the same in the beginning)

BTW is really messy here in the forum if you need find info. The search engine is horrible and the main guidelines are scatterd arround on differents posts.As a newbie it was really difficult for me to find what I needed.

The other ones are the side/fake accounts - for trade or extra profit.

For the first ones I have created one Rank and Activity calculator so they can stop asking every day when they are going to rank up.
Now I created hopefully something usefull and something that was missing from my point of view. Many people are here only for the bounties, and this is what they want: A list with all the bounties, here is what I created:
Google form to be filled by the bounty manager I have to note that it does not collect email addresses:
https://goo.gl/forms/hXdTSWTwSc7pvg6H3
The spredsheet with the answers:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CFL41C6zmkKkzBpqgghR93WGIvqp8N_XT4WlqeW4vkg/edit#gid=1594220160
I want to hear your opinion on this idea.

For the fake accounts I do report every suspicious activity I spot.

1537400890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537400890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537400890
Reply with quote  #2

1537400890
Report to moderator
1537400890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537400890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537400890
Reply with quote  #2

1537400890
Report to moderator
1537400890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537400890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537400890
Reply with quote  #2

1537400890
Report to moderator
Einax Airdrops and Bounties made easy! List your ERC-20 token
FREE
ETH markets launching soon!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1537400890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537400890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537400890
Reply with quote  #2

1537400890
Report to moderator
1537400890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1537400890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1537400890
Reply with quote  #2

1537400890
Report to moderator
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 41


View Profile
January 19, 2018, 08:47:28 PM
 #142

I agree. The forum actually deserves a very thorough update. Both in technical possibilities as in moderation structure. So many things could be so much better. The suggestions of hilariousetc are patchwork that is only to the advantage of arrived forum members (who are definately not always the true assets of this forum).
hilariousandco
Cupper Member
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1316


everithyng will be ok


View Profile
January 20, 2018, 06:34:09 AM
 #143

I agree. The forum actually deserves a very thorough update. Both in technical possibilities as in moderation structure. So many things could be so much better. The suggestions of hilariousetc are patchwork that is only to the advantage of arrived forum members (who are definately not always the true assets of this forum).

I'm not sure how my suggestions are 'patchwork' or how they are 'to the advantage of arrived forum members' as under my proposal everyone would have to pay for a signature from Newbies to Heroes to Staff. Do you actually have any bright ideas to stop the plague of spam and shitposting? You always seem quick to shoot down others proposals but have yet to suggest any viable solutions yourself other than just biased whining.

      ▄▄████████▄▄
   ▄████████████████▄
 ▄█████▀▀       ▀▀████                              
▄████▀            ████      ████                  ████
█████           ▄████▀     ████▌                 ▐████
█████           ▀▀▀▀      ▐████                  ████▌    ▄▄
 █████▄                  ▄█████████▀            ▐████   ▄███▀
   ▀█████▄▄        ▄▄███████████▀▀   ▄▄▄▄       ████  ▄███▀     ▄▄▄▄
      ▀███████▄    ▀████▀████▀     ▄████▀███   ▐███████▀▀    ▄███▀ ██▌
         ▀▀██████▄▄     ▐████    ▄████  ▐██▌   ███████     ▄███▀  ▄██▌
    ▄▄▄▄     ▀▀█████    ████    ▄███▀   ███   ▐███▌███    ▐████▄▄███▀
  █████▀▀      ▀████▌  ▐████    ████   ▄███   ████ ▐███   ████
 ████▀          ████▌  ▐████▄▄██████▄▄█████▄▄█████  ▀███  ▀████▄▄▄▄██           ▄████▄  ▄████▄  ██▄██▄██▄
████▌          █████    ▀████▀▀  ▀████▀  ▀██▀ ███▀   ▀███   ▀▀████▀▀           ██▀     ██▀  ▀██ ██  ██  ██
████▄       ▄▄████▀                                   ▀███▄▄      ▄▄██  ▄████▄ ██▄     ██▄  ▄██ ██  ██  ██
 ██████████████▀▀                                       ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▀████▀  ▀████▀  ▀████▀  ██  ██  ██
   ▀██████▀▀▀



▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬
The Bitcoin Casino
▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█                         █
█       ██                █
█      █▄▄█               █
█     █▀  ▀█              █
█                         █
█       ▄▄                █
█     ▄████▄              █
█   ▄████████▄            █
█   ▀████████▀            █
█     ▀████▀              █
█       ▀▀                █
█                         █
█                         █
█                         █
█                         █
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀
▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮
Provably fair
Free faucet

▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬
12 exclusive games
And many more...

▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▮█▮ ▬▬▬▬▬▬



                ▄▄
               ▄▀▀
               ▀█
      █▀▄  ▄▄▄▄█▀▀█▄▄ ▄▀█
      █  ▀▀          ▀  █
      █▌        ██▌ █   █▌
      ▐█       ▐█████   ▐█ ▄▄ ▄▄▄
      █▌        ▀▀▀▀     █ █ ▀   █
      █       ▀▄▄▄▄▄▀     ▀    ▄▀
      █         ▀▀           ▄▀
     ▄▀                    ▄▀
   ▄▀                     █
 ▄▀                       █
█   █▄█                   █
 ▀▀▀  █       ▄▄▄▄▄       █
      █       █   █       █
      ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀   ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀
2girls
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 579
Merit: 253


View Profile
January 20, 2018, 07:41:25 AM
 #144

I think you should come up with few definite options which you know you want to implement and give the option of selection by us in form of Poll etc. The one agreed most  can be implemented.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 41


View Profile
January 21, 2018, 11:10:22 AM
 #145

I'm not sure how my suggestions are 'patchwork' or how they are 'to the advantage of arrived forum members' as under my proposal everyone would have to pay for a signature from Newbies to Heroes to Staff. Do you actually have any bright ideas to stop the plague of spam and shitposting? You always seem quick to shoot down others proposals but have yet to suggest any viable solutions yourself other than just biased whining.

I have given my suggestions earlier. They were to govern the forum in total from principles instead of maintaining outlaw trust moderation. If you don't install principles you'll be bound to get the spamming as here discussed, and a whole lot of nastiness more, which however may get you red trust points when discussed. The reason that I call your suggestion 'patchwork' is because I consider all suggestions that are not about installing grounding principles patchwork.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 41


View Profile
January 21, 2018, 11:11:18 AM
 #146

I think you should come up with few definite options which you know you want to implement and give the option of selection by us in form of Poll etc. The one agreed most  can be implemented.

Are the myriads of spammers allowed to vote too?
Klara_karlovna
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 68


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 12:57:54 AM
Merited by novogum (6), AUruHM (2)
 #147

I am against the removal of signatures or paying for it. If in the end project became scam we was to work in minus Cry
May be better for all if the project will be to pay after ICO for example 5% of the sig. company?

johnleo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 100


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 06:13:23 AM
 #148

the most annoying thing for me is social media bounty report in the thread, would you please force all the bounty manager to make a google form about it! thank you
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 41


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 08:37:11 AM
 #149

I basically advocate the installing of clear rules and objective, fair moderation (get rid of that hideous trust system).

If the above is not considered I make a contrary suggestion to those who plea for letting members pay for wearing signatures. I then suggest to make full signature and avatar possibilities available to all members, as soon as they register. That will take away the incentive to spam for reaching higher rankings. And since bounty managers demand constructive posts they will become your free moderators, in case members want to spam to fulfull their bounty tasks. How about that?
Orino Suimuri
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 129
Merit: 10

OPEN Platform - Powering Blockchain Acceptance


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 08:52:17 AM
 #150

Hello, I'm very happy to see that what I proposed here when I was just a newbie wasn't a total bullshit :-)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2605767.msg26598663#msg26598663   

May be I merit a merit :-)  Ok, just kidding.

Btw, don't you think there is a risk as for example in twitter - with usual #followback hashtag - that people will give undiscriminately merits to everyone, just with the aim to receive merits back?

Or that circles of friends will give a lot of merits each other?
Or someone will start to sell merits?

This "merit" idea is great, but I think that there is still space for improvement, as it seems to me open to a lot of abuses.

Just my two cents.

TheQuin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 672


Freebitco.in Forum Dude https://bit.ly/2I9BVS2


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 09:09:21 AM
 #151

Btw, don't you think there is a risk as for example in twitter - with usual #followback hashtag - that people will give undiscriminately merits to everyone, just with the aim to receive merits back?

Or that circles of friends will give a lot of merits each other?
Or someone will start to sell merits?

Two reasons this will not really work. 1) Most people start off with a limited number of sMerits to give away and will soon run out. 2) It's transparent so it will be obvious if it is happening so anyone who is a merit source being caught will probably get banned.

Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 41


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 11:37:09 AM
 #152

Hello, I'm very happy to see that what I proposed here when I was just a newbie wasn't a total bullshit :-)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2605767.msg26598663#msg26598663   

May be I merit a merit :-)  Ok, just kidding.

Btw, don't you think there is a risk as for example in twitter - with usual #followback hashtag - that people will give undiscriminately merits to everyone, just with the aim to receive merits back?

Or that circles of friends will give a lot of merits each other?
Or someone will start to sell merits?

This "merit" idea is great, but I think that there is still space for improvement, as it seems to me open to a lot of abuses.

Just my two cents.

Is there a link to the explanation of the merit system as it is implemented?

Chances are high that the merit system will be abused, just as the trust system. It's actually the same thing doubled, isn't it? If you trust someone you give him merit and if you distrust someone you don't give him merit.

Well, if the forum owner wants subjective instead of objective governance it is his / her choice. I am personally dissapointed though.
minifrij
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1066



View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 11:39:47 AM
 #153

Is there a link to the explanation of the merit system as it is implemented?
The thread by theymos would be a good place to start.

If you trust someone you give him merit and if you distrust someone you don't give him merit.
Merit is given based on the quality of posts, and is a finite resource. I can understand the comparison to the trust system, but they aren't as alike as it may seem.
Lutpin
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1737


Trust my feedback, I'm a cunt.


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 11:41:59 AM
 #154

If you trust someone you give him merit and if you distrust someone you don't give him merit.
Merit is given based on the quality of posts, and is a finite resource. I can understand the comparison to the trust system, but they aren't as alike as it may seem.
A few basic differences:

Trust is unlimited, I can give out 100 positive trust ratings today, and not lose anything (maybe my credibility, people would stop caring about my ratings, if I just spam them, but you get the idea).

sMerit is limited. I have a responsibility with it. I can use my sMerit to reward good posts, incentive good behaviour with that (publicly shown) reward and help make this forum a better place by increasing the post quality.
Or I can waste/sell it (likely be banned for doing so), incentive spam and contribute to the already very evident problematic of shitposting.

I cant do both, as I have limited ressources. I have to decide, and if I care about this place, this is an easy decision.


▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄██████████████████████▄
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
   ███████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
██████████
███████



             ▄████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████▄
            ██                          ▄▄▄▄▄▄                           ██
           ██  ██████                ▄██████████▄     ████████████████████▀
          ██  ████████             ▄████▀   ▀████▄    ████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
         ██  ████  ████           ████▀       ▀██▀    ████
        ██  ████    ████        ▄███▀                 ████

       ██  ████      ████       ███▀                  ████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
      ██  ████        ████      ███                   ██████████████
     ██  ████          ████     ███▄                  ████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

    ██  ████████████████████    ▀████                 ████
   ██  ██████████████████████    ▀████▄        ▄██▄   ████

  ██  ████                ████     ▀████▄   ▄████▀    ████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ██  ████                  ████      ▀██████████▀     ████████████████████▄
  ██                                    ▀▀▀▀▀▀                           ██
   ▀█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████▀
monarx911@i.ua
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 253


New Economy Ledger - NEL - Microfinance Platform


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 01:43:52 PM
Merited by Klara_karlovna (2)
 #155

What are everyone's ideas for improving post quality?

I have mostly ruled out:

 - Removing signatures or sig ads globally.
 - Requiring payment to wear sig ads.
 - Banning account sales.

I'm glad you're finally at least open to discussion about what can be done as the forum has become unmanageable and is only going to get worse as more and more people realise you can earn decent money just by posting (or copy and pasting), but why have you ruled these out? Removing signatures from ranks and making them a paid privilege is one of the only ways to stop account farming pretty much 100%. It's never going to stop as long as signatures are tied to ranks/activity. All it does is encourage mass shitposting to 'rank up'. You don't even have to remove signatures fully either. Maybe everybody can only have some sort of very basic signature like yours or the current Junior or Member level signature and for a bigger one with colour etc you have to donate. I think this would essentially price most shitposters out of having unlimited accounts and limit them to only what they can afford. You could also even offer them alongside being able to rank up naturally over time. It wont stop account farming fully but it will cut it down considerably and I'm sure many users would much rather pay $100 or so to bypass the restrictions to get a bigger signature rather than have to wait 6-16 months or whatever it is to just shitpost to achieve Full Member or Hero status etc.

Also, prohibiting account sales would also help and improve the image of the forum. It's not exactly difficult to do or enforce either. Most people selling accounts here now are either just hackers, shitposting farmers, or straight up scammers trying to sell non-existent accounts they don't even have. Allowing people to purchase the signatures from us would put a stop to this shady business completely.

A couple of ideas that have been floating around in my head:

1. To attain ranks above Member, you'd have to earn some number of merit points. Merit points would be awarded in a monthly vote on best posts of the previous month, with various measures (TBD) to prevent gaming of the vote. Winning merit points might also come with a BTC prize.

I certainly wouldn't be against trying something like this but I think it will just cause more confusion and more threads asking why they're not a Member yet or begging to be voted for or whatever.

2. Create or designate some sections as "serious discussion" sections, with no signatures. In those sections or maybe in different ones, also have poster restrictions such as Member rank or above only.

This is actually something I was going to suggest. How about we trial a sub board of bitcoin discussion where posts in there don't count towards activity or post count and signatures aren't displayed at all? Sig spammers and farmers would leave it well enough alone then and only people who were interested in decent discussion would contribute. The forum is currently plagued with what I call 'hit and runners' (and others have noticed this too). Basically users will just make a quick half-assed post consisting of a sentence or two then move onto the next thread and repeat the process. You can quote and respond to them either calling out their incorrect bullshit they've just posted or offering an intelligent contribution to further something they've said but you'll never get a response as they'll never return as they don't care to actually have an intelligent discussion about anything as that's too much effort for them; they just want to hash out their one or two liners as quickly as possible for payment and move on to the next thread because time is money and they get paid no more or less whether their post is 1 line or 10.

And/or allow topic-creators to set these restrictions on their topics, similar to selfmod topics.

This is also something I've suggested in the past. It would be good for campaigns and giveaway threads who want to limit participation to only certain membergroups and above, so being able to set certain restrictions on who can post in there would be beneficial. Maybe being able to block specific usernames as well for those people who feel like they're being constantly harassed or trolled by certain individuals.

What do you think of these ideas, and what other ideas do people have?

Punishing lazy campaigns and their managers would go a long way or just blacklisting their signatures would help (which is what was meant to happen with the Signature Guidelines thread). It can't be acceptable for campaigns to do nothing about spam at all and if they started having their accounts banned and/or threads trashed they'd soon get the idea. I also don't think it would be a bad idea charging ICOs a fee to make their Announcements here or to run a signature campaign as it's these lazy crapcoin campaigns that are causing the most headaches and 99% of spam and staff workload and they should have to compensate for that. The forum loses revenue every time someone chooses to run a signature campaign over bidding on forum ad slots and the worst thing is staff have to clean up their mess for free whilst they rake in millions.
completely agree with you! And glad that they began to take action, the forum turned into a trash can, find a clever text is very difficult

▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██     ████████    ██▄
▄███      ▀██████    ███▄

▄▄▄▄▄    ▄    ▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄
█████    ██▄   ▀██    █████
▀▀▀▀▀    ▀▀▀▀    ▀    ▀▀▀▀▀

▀███    ██████▄      ███▀
▀██    ████████     ██▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
nel.──────   NEW ECONOMY LEDGER   ──────
.HELP DEVELOPING COMMUNITIES.
.EARN INTEREST...............................
          ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄              ▀y
   ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄  ▀▄▀▄▀     ▀▄▀▄  ▀▄ ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ ▄ ▄
▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▀ ▀ ▀▄▀  ▀   ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▀
 ▄  j▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ ▄▀a       ▄ ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄  c▀
      ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▀        ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▄
       ▄▀▄▀▄▀          ▄▀▄ ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▀▄
        ▀▄ ▄ ▄         ▄▀▄▀▄▀ ▀▄e ▀▄▀▄▀ ▀
          ▀▄▀▄▀▄      ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄    ▀▄▀▄  ▀
           ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄      ▀▄▀▄▀        ▄▀▄ ▄ ▀▄▀
            ▀▄▀▄▀▄▀       ▀▄▀   ▄         ▄▀▄
             ▄▀▄▀          ▄▀  ▀         ▀▄▀▄▀
             ▄▀▄                             ▀  ▀▄
            ▀▄▀                                 ▀
█████████████▄
███████████████▄
█████████████████▄
█████▀▀     ███████▄
████  ██▄   ██  ████
███▀▀▀████▀▀██▀▀▀███
███   ██▀██▄██   ███
███▄▄▄██▄▄████▄▄▄███
████  ██   ▀██  ████
█████▄▄      ▄▄█████
████████████████████
████████████████████
████████████████████
TELEGRAM
YOUTUBE
TWITTER
[]
▄▄▄███████████████▄▄▄
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
█████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████
▀█████████████████▀
▀█████████████▀
▀█████████▀
▀███▀
Based on         
NEM
TECHNOLOGY
otreza
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 02:12:06 PM
 #156

What are everyone's ideas for improving post quality?

I have mostly ruled out:

 - Removing signatures or sig ads globally.
 - Requiring payment to wear sig ads.
 - Banning account sales.

A couple of ideas that have been floating around in my head:

1. To attain ranks above Member, you'd have to earn some number of merit points. Merit points would be awarded in a monthly vote on best posts of the previous month, with various measures (TBD) to prevent gaming of the vote. Winning merit points might also come with a BTC prize.

2. Create or designate some sections as "serious discussion" sections, with no signatures. In those sections or maybe in different ones, also have poster restrictions such as Member rank or above only. And/or allow topic-creators to set these restrictions on their topics, similar to selfmod topics.

What do you think of these ideas, and what other ideas do people have?

With Merit system the newbie's posts became longer with a big mount of information but they are still useless, because everybody needs time to figure out what's going on and stop making "too long - didn't read" posts but still be able to rise in member rank.

As for me it was easier ignoring "greeting posts" before rather then now the same "greetingposts-like" but with more shit in it.
pri3oner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 100


THE DECENTRALIZED BETTING EXCHANGE


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 04:10:22 PM
 #157

What are everyone's ideas for improving post quality?

I have mostly ruled out:

 - Removing signatures or sig ads globally.
 - Requiring payment to wear sig ads.


Da hell is happening right  now? Am I wrong: somebody will require payment from me to wear signature ads? lol what? and in addition, removing them?
Please, correct me.

minifrij
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1066



View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 05:02:17 PM
 #158

Da hell is happening right  now? Am I wrong: somebody will require payment from me to wear signature ads? lol what? and in addition, removing them?
Yes, you are wrong. Do you see the words 'I have mostly ruled out' above those suggestions?

However, the first of theymos' suggestions have been implemented:
1. To attain ranks above Member, you'd have to earn some number of merit points. Merit points would be awarded in a monthly vote on best posts of the previous month, with various measures (TBD) to prevent gaming of the vote. Winning merit points might also come with a BTC prize.
EcuaMobi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554
Merit: 1180


https://Ecua.Mobi


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2018, 07:51:10 PM
Merited by jambola2 (1), DarkStar_ (1)
 #159

I've written an idea to reduce spam which I really think would work.
It makes more sense to discuss it here so I'm quoting it along with some replies.

Another idea which could work, something like merging the SMAS list into the trust system:

  • On every profile, besides Trust, there's an option to mark user as spammer
  • This instantly makes that user's signature invisible for the user who marked him, or add him into the ignore list, to be decided
  • If the user who marked him is on DT1 or DT2; staff; or any other list to be decided, then the marked user losses the right to wear a signature. This way, it's not up to signature managers to allow them into a campaign or not. The forum would disable the signature for him

Some details should be discussed, but that would be the idea.

I like this. A lot.
The limitation of SMAS right now is that it doesnt have a full impact.
People who get blacklisted can search campaigns that dont enforce SMAS rules and continue their habits there.

If the forum would get on board with an approach like this, the impact would be magnitudes higher.

How can we prevent system misuse?(keep hiding some signature).
By:
  • Managing the list. People can be removed from the list if they wrongfully tag people as spammers
  • By requiring more than one person to tag a person to remove signature privileges. I'd say 2 tags are enough
  • By allowing others to untag users, then the sum (tags - untags) would have to be 2 or more

jambola2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1016


Large scale, green crypto mining ICO


View Profile
January 25, 2018, 08:53:59 PM
 #160

What about more aggressive community-driven moderation?

I noticed today that Pharmacist (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=487418) has probably >100 negative trusts sent out that just mark a user as a spammer.
This seems relatively effective, as it would block them from signature campaigns, but somewhat rubs me the wrong way because it seems to detract from the regular purpose of the trust system.

I somewhat like this idea:
Another idea which could work, something like merging the SMAS list into the trust system:

  • On every profile, besides Trust, there's an option to mark user as spammer
  • This instantly makes that user's signature invisible for the user who marked him, or add him into the ignore list, to be decided
  • If the user who marked him is on DT1 or DT2; staff; or any other list to be decided, then the marked user losses the right to wear a signature. This way, it's not up to signature managers to allow them into a campaign or not. The forum would disable the signature for him

Some details should be discussed, but that would be the idea.

But what about instead of targetting signatures, making it a community moderated "block". When a user is reported, some heuristic could be applied and if the "score" of the users that reported is high enough, the user would be temporarily banned or at least pushed further up a moderation queue.

████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████  ▀███████████▀  ███████▀▀       ▀▀███████████████████▄▀████  ▀██████████  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐██              ███            ████
████   ▀█████████▀   █████▀  ▄▄████████▄▀██████████████████▄▀███   ▀█████████  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  ▄ ▀███████▀ ▄  ███▀  ▄█████████████▄██████████████████ ███  █▄ ▀███████  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  █▄ ▀█████▀ ▄█  ██▀ ▄██████████████████████████████████ ███  ███  ██████  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  ██▄ ▀███▀ ▄██  ██ ▄██████████████████████████████████▀ ███  ████▄ ▀████  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████          ▐█████
████  ███▄ ▀█▀ ▄███  ██ ██████████████████████████████████▀ ▄███  ██████  ▀██  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  ████▄   ▄████  ██ ▐███████████████████████████████▀  ▄████  ███████▄ ▀█  ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  ██████▄██████  ███ ██████████████████▄▀█████████▀  ▄██████  █████████▄   ████▌ ▐████████████▌ ▐████████  █████████  ██████████████
████  █████████████  ███▄▀███████████████████▄▄       ▄▄████████  ██████████▄  ████▌            ██▌ ▐████████  █████████            ████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████


███████████████████  WHITEPAPER  ████
█ █ ██  ANN THREAD  █████████████████ █ █

.
FACEBOOK      TWITTER      LINKEDIN
.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!