Bitcoin Forum
July 30, 2021, 04:12:55 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Solutions for the spam problem?  (Read 1668 times)
Blazed
Casascius Addict
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1119



View Profile WWW
January 26, 2018, 03:20:58 PM
 #61

To my understanding the trust system is in place to prevent people from being scammed when making trades. If it is then used to mark spammers also then we are effectively sentencing them to be unable to trade or to trade at a disadvantage because their post quality isn't up to scratch. Some may argue that is fair and they should lose their rights to trade in the forum if they do not respect it by not spamming. Personally I don't think it's really something that is fair, at least without proper forewarning that it can be the case.

One thing that is quite clear from the discussion is that proper guidelines need to be in place under any future system as to what constitutes spam. I'm of the belief that it won't be possible to make decisions on spam entirely objective so would suggest something along the lines of guidelines for what definitely constitutes spam and then anything else is down to the judgement of the trusted few.

Simple first guidelines could be things such as:
any post that is under x characters/words
any post that is incoherent or even in the wrong language


I can't think of much more immediately right now but I'm sure if everyone puts their brain power together a short list of things that are 100% spam or close enough can be agreed upon. This list can then work as a starting point, it can be written up for new members to read so that they are aware of it and then it can be used as a basis to at least remove a level of the spam. The more complex spam is going to need dedicated people and the right people to ensure it's tackled effectively and fairly.
                                  

Length should not really be a factor imo. Sometimes a simple 3-5 word response is all that is needed. The issue here is that you can not just make a set rule of what is spam and what is not...everything is subjective. Say someone asks a question and they get 20 answers from 20 people that all basically say the same thing. Obviously people are replying for the posts even if they are all worded well...
1627618375
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1627618375

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1627618375
Reply with quote  #2

1627618375
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Husires
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500



View Profile
January 26, 2018, 03:21:08 PM
 #62

Looks like I was wrong to allow the negatives, but I do think it would have worked. We can only hope the new merit system will help with it.
No.
red trust does not mean the end of life, but you can not enter Signature Campaign which is the main goal of creating this accounts.
80% of this account stop/reduce posting after getting red trust. What does this mean? Wink

actmyname and The Pharmacist start giving more wise feedback last days.

We can not equate them with scammers, but that is the only weapon until now.

BUY CRYPTO AT REASONABLE RATES
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀ ▀█████▄
██████ ▄█▄ ██████
██████ █████ ██████
█████ ▄ ███ ▄ █████
████▌▐██ █ ██▌▐████
███▄ ▀▀▌ ▐▀▀ ▄███
▀████▄▄ ▄▄████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀█▀█████▄
████        ▀████
███████  ███  █████
███████      ▀█████
███████  ███  █████
████        ▄████
▀█████▄█▄█████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
▄▄███████▄▄
▄█████▀▀▀█████▄
██████   ▐███████
██████▌   ▀▀███████
█████▀    ▄████████
████▄    ▀▀▀▀▀▀████
███▌         ▄███
▀█████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
&OTHER
COINS
Blazed
Casascius Addict
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1119



View Profile WWW
January 26, 2018, 03:23:37 PM
 #63

Looks like I was wrong to allow the negatives, but I do think it would have worked. We can only hope the new merit system will help with it.
No.
red trust does not mean the end of life, but you can not enter Signature Campaign which is the main goal of creating this accounts.
80% of this account stop/reduce posting after getting red trust. What does this mean? Wink

actmyname and The Pharmacist start giving more wise feedback last days.

We can not equate them with scammers, but that is the only weapon until now.

They only cared about red because it prevents them from joining campaigns. All the spammers only post here for the pay they do not care about the forum just the coins they earn... I bet there are a few people who own hundreds and hundreds of accounts and profit very well.
cryptocrusher
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 136



View Profile
January 26, 2018, 03:31:05 PM
 #64

To my understanding the trust system is in place to prevent people from being scammed when making trades. If it is then used to mark spammers also then we are effectively sentencing them to be unable to trade or to trade at a disadvantage because their post quality isn't up to scratch. Some may argue that is fair and they should lose their rights to trade in the forum if they do not respect it by not spamming. Personally I don't think it's really something that is fair, at least without proper forewarning that it can be the case.

One thing that is quite clear from the discussion is that proper guidelines need to be in place under any future system as to what constitutes spam. I'm of the belief that it won't be possible to make decisions on spam entirely objective so would suggest something along the lines of guidelines for what definitely constitutes spam and then anything else is down to the judgement of the trusted few.

Simple first guidelines could be things such as:
any post that is under x characters/words
any post that is incoherent or even in the wrong language


I can't think of much more immediately right now but I'm sure if everyone puts their brain power together a short list of things that are 100% spam or close enough can be agreed upon. This list can then work as a starting point, it can be written up for new members to read so that they are aware of it and then it can be used as a basis to at least remove a level of the spam. The more complex spam is going to need dedicated people and the right people to ensure it's tackled effectively and fairly.
                                  

Length should not really be a factor imo. Sometimes a simple 3-5 word response is all that is needed. The issue here is that you can not just make a set rule of what is spam and what is not...everything is subjective. Say someone asks a question and they get 20 answers from 20 people that all basically say the same thing. Obviously people are replying for the posts even if they are all worded well...

Length within reason should not be a factor but I think it would be safe to say for starters that any post that is 1 word only is definitely spam. The case you described isn't really something that can ever be covered by any set rules and that's where you would need people to be able to make judgement calls.

But if you could get to the stage where you had something that said along the lines of 'the following can and will be considered as spam, however this does not mean that anything that passes these guidelines can also not be considered as spam'. It's at least a starting point for the community to have some clarity as to what is expected or what can be punished.

              b e t f o r m ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ SMART CONTRACT POWERED SOCIAL BETTING PLATFORM
                                                     A p p Download ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Google Play   App Store     [ WEB VERSION ]                                 ❱❱JOIN b e t f o r m❰❰
                       F o l l o w us ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ WHITEPAPER TELEGRAM FACEBOOK TWITTER
stompix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 2254



View Profile
January 26, 2018, 03:43:31 PM
 #65

They only cared about red because it prevents them from joining campaigns. All the spammers only post here for the pay they do not care about the forum just the coins they earn... I bet there are a few people who own hundreds and hundreds of accounts and profit very well.

I wonder if there is somebody stupid enough to take that bet on  Wink
Of course they care about the red trust only because it prevents them for earning money, maybe except for this guy....

I'm also running for Full Member, not for the money per se, but for airdrops and others alike, and to think that i need 90 merits to achieve

The merit system is one way of preventing spammers and is not infallible. Some will get through, and we need something to stop the ones that do and the ones that are already "safe" since they achieved higher ranks before this.

I agree that the red tag was not designed for that,  it was something like a drug of last resort that might have some unfortunate consequences and of course EcuaMobi idea sounds pretty good but it has one big flaw, it needs to be enforced on the forum.
Till then....what?Huh



LoyceV
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 8516


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
January 26, 2018, 07:31:59 PM
 #66

Length within reason should not be a factor but I think it would be safe to say for starters that any post that is 1 word only is definitely spam.
I made this one-word post just two days ago. Now tell me: is this spam? Or is this an informative answer reasuring someone on something that I had just explained right before his question?
In case your wondering: my signature doesn't pay for posts under 100 characters. If I would extend my one-word post to more than 100 characters, then it would indeed become spam.

Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
January 28, 2018, 07:32:59 PM
Last edit: January 28, 2018, 09:32:10 PM by Thule
Merited by stingers (1)
 #67

You guys are totaly out of control and total noobs.
You have no experience with big message boards and spam fighting at all.
What you are doing is destroying and killing a whole messageboard.
Best example is the marketing forum blackhatworld where mods have high noses like you and won't let questioning their decissions.They made some subforums basicly only useable for members with a certain rank to "protect" their members from scammers.
The result is that these subforums are basicly all dead after 3 months because a forum lives from the varity of diffrent users.

You are also pathetic claiming to fight scammers and spammers for the good of the board but are abusing the merit system already yourself giving merit point in your own group circle for shit posts or even single words like "butthead".Giving 50 merit for a post like "butthead" like Lauda did seems to me the best example of your high quality and your pseudo leadership
You have some people here which are the biggest spammers and scammers.Lauda and his group abused and destroyed so many legit accounts its just shocking but the most shocking part is they give a shit about destroying legit accounts.
Most of them even bought themself back in the days accounts as colleteral when lending coins so maybe we should also give them a scammer status.

I'm also shocked since the BCT guideline says clearly selling accounts is allowed and i even asked a mod before trying to buy one for a friend to be able to post pictures on his service thread.
And now i got abused and being called a scammer for following BCT guideline and a Mod's reply.

You are fucking nuts.
I can show you at least 200 people who got wrongly abused who already sent me PM's and everything.

You want to fight spam by destroying legal accounts and giving a fuck about it ?Maybe start with your own main accounts and feel how it is to be abused with false claims.

You know when reading the guideline i was really fascinated how professional it was cause it was layed out so nobody could get abused by such a small snop group like you are

Quote
Q: Why haven't you banned <insert scammer username here> who is an obvious scammer?
A: Possible (or real, not for me to decide) scams are not moderated to prevent moderator abuse. If we start picking out which ones we call "scammers" and ban, we would make a lot of decisions based on biased opinions.

Talking exectly about your abuse

Quote
Q: I saw a guy selling Bitcointalk accounts. Why is that allowed?
A: Since we can't effectively prevent these sales (proxies, TOR, sales in other forums), we don't because otherwise we would be giving the users a false sense of security.

Guideline is clearly saying selling accounts is allowed.So if somebody register and tries to buy an account when reading that guideline you instantly tag him as scammer.
Where did you even fucking posted that buying accounts its prohabited ?There is no fucking sticky at all.
And most important i think the rule of a global moderator is higher than some decissions of some punks who declared themself to fight against spam.

If spammers wanted they could destroy this board so quickly you wouldn't even be able to do anything about it.
They could use Xrumer to flood your board or create a bot with 50 accounts and start abusing the trust rating for each and every account.The possibilities are endless and you think
you will come and handle that by playing sheriff ?
You wanna know what is going to happen ?Smart people will stop posting because of getting tired of you punks always to fear to get a negativ rating since everyone clearly sees how often you abuse it.
It already happened on many messageboards where whole senior communities stopped posting because of punks like you who try to control everything.

The forum main idea was decentralisation of power.What you do is a clearly centralisation of power and even trying to force project managers and ITO's to accept your rules or to be defamed (which is the biggest NO GO i ever read)
I agree the spam needs to be limited but there are other more effectiv ways and most important with your pathetic behavior against community members expecially Lauda abusing massivly the trust system and who proofed many times saying he won't talk to the average guy made you become the problem #1 on this board and not the spam or even scammers.
The trust feedback have been already been abused by you guys so massivly that the admin had to create a new solution after receiving massiv complains since YOU ARE CURRENTLY THE MAIN CANCER ON THIS BOARD with your massiv abuse and not spammers

You are fucking control freaks on a board which tried to be decentralised as much as possible.
Crypto is going Mainstream 2018-19 you want to ban all the noobs which will join this board over the next 2 years or tag them as scammers and spammers?

@blazed you are responsible for the massiv abuse Lauda did with his group and it should be you who should degrate these nuts people who clearly have no understanding of decentralisation but just for self benefit.
You are bassicly responsible that hundreds of legit accounts got destroyed.

Something what the community always tried to prevent at all cost that no innocent member gets ever harmed even if it means having spammers and scammers on board.

@blazed

Quote
Most of the red users I have seen are guilty of shit posting for pay
What did you do to the ones which were not guitly ?
I bet nothing

You totaly lost the main idea of this messageboard on which grounds it was build
And your avatar is a joke based on your acting
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
January 29, 2018, 08:24:41 PM
 #68

No comment blazed on your disgusting action ?
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 05:47:55 PM
 #69

blazed everyone is waiting for you action.You try to sit it out ?

You created garbage you will be treated like garbage
Lutpin
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1868


Goodbye, Z.


View Profile WWW
January 30, 2018, 06:02:14 PM
 #70

No comment blazed on your disgusting action ?
Lets talk about your disgusting actions, for a second.
Your trust page reads like a satire account (and I'm talking about the sent ones, not the received ones).
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=355462

Some of the greatest hits of feedbacks you've given:

"Lutpin and Lauda Gang" ~ negative trust to The Pharmacist.
"I don't like him." ~ negative trust to akamit.
"for giving merit in this way" ~ negative trust to klaaas.

Maybe you should start with improving your own standards.
You created garbage you will be treated like garbage

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



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

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

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

  ██  ████                ████     ▀████▄   ▄████▀    ████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ██  ████                  ████      ▀██████████▀     ████████████████████▄
  ██                                    ▀▀▀▀▀▀                           ██
   ▀█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████▀
pablito1989
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 18


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 06:23:17 PM
 #71

Just FORBID signatures. Just it. Spam will be cutted off by 90%
So easy.
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 08:56:50 PM
 #72

No comment blazed on your disgusting action ?
Lets talk about your disgusting actions, for a second.
Your trust page reads like a satire account (and I'm talking about the sent ones, not the received ones).
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=355462

Some of the greatest hits of feedbacks you've given:

"Lutpin and Lauda Gang" ~ negative trust to The Pharmacist.
"I don't like him." ~ negative trust to akamit.
"for giving merit in this way" ~ negative trust to klaaas.

Maybe you should start with improving your own standards.
You created garbage you will be treated like garbage


Why should i improve my own standards ?
I just lowered my standards to your and Lauda's level .
Why are you so pissed about it ?
When people got pissed about Lauda's behavior you had no issue even defended Lauda.
So go talk first with Lauda and her gang before you wanna talk with me
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 09:00:00 PM
 #73

Just FORBID signatures. Just it. Spam will be cutted off by 90%
So easy.


They would never allow it since their most income comes from ACE .
So Signatures are making them money and thats the reason they like to dominate everything there and try to dictact their own rules to ITO's to increase their profits.
Of course no conflict of interrest since they make everything just based on own benefit
TheBeardedBaby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 2425


Wearing my signature for free :) tnx BestChange.


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 11:15:53 PM
Last edit: January 31, 2018, 12:26:56 AM by iasenko
 #74

Can I suggest another way of pointing out the spammers?
Just add the number of the reported and deleted posts of the user, set a level for a certain amount of deleted posts and you have a working system with minimal effort of implementation. It will increase the work of the moderators for sure, but will keep the forum cleaner.





.
.




░██████████████████░
████████████████████
█████████▀░░░███████
█████████░░▄████████
███████▀▀░░▀▀███████
███████▄▄░░▄▄███████
█████████░░█████████

█████████░░█████████

█████████▄▄█████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████▀▀▀█▀███
███░▀█████▀░░░░░▀███
███▌░░░▀▀▀░░░░░░████
████▄░░░░░░░░░░░████
█████▀░░░░░░░░░█████

██████▄░░░░░▄▄██████

█████▄▄▄▄███████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
░██████████████████░
████████████████████
████████████████████
███████████▀▀░░▐████
███████▀▀░░░░░█████
████▀░░░▄█▀░░░▐█████
█████▄▄█▀░░░░░██████

███████▌▄▄▄▐██████

████████████████████

████████████████████

░██████████████████░
pablito1989
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 18


View Profile
January 30, 2018, 11:17:28 PM
 #75

Just FORBID signatures. Just it. Spam will be cutted off by 90%
So easy.


They would never allow it since their most income comes from ACE .
So Signatures are making them money and thats the reason they like to dominate everything there and try to dictact their own rules to ITO's to increase their profits.
Of course no conflict of interrest since they make everything just based on own benefit

ofc, I know that... I just answered to the topic question: "Solutions for the spam problem?"
No signatures = No run to ranks = No spam
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2018, 03:20:47 PM
 #76

Time to revive this. @EcuaMobi && @ibminer:
Do you find it appropriate to leave feedback in the form of neutral trust for spammers (e.g. "Shitposter.", "Spammer."). There are very different views regarding the trust system. Some feel like feedback is okay to give in almost all cases, while others do not. I'm just curious as to what you two think and whether we could/should be doing it[1].

[1] I already did it for a few obvious cases, thus wondering if I should continue or remove those.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
ducdr
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 147
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2018, 03:36:35 PM
 #77

Can I suggest another way of pointing out the spammers?
Just add the number of the reported and deleted posts of the user, set a level for a certain amount of deleted posts and you have a working system with minimal effort of implementation. It will increase the work of the moderators for sure, but will keep the forum cleaner.
Don't agree. Smart spammers never let their posts being deleted. So your proposal is not good, might not solve the spamming waves in the forum.
I dont know how to fight them more efficiently than merit system, which actually good tool for this purpose.
My recommendation is high qualities posts will usually have more words than shit posts. Hence, how about minimum words per post?
EcuaMobi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1443


https://Ecua.Mobi


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2018, 05:11:35 PM
 #78

Time to revive this. @EcuaMobi && @ibminer:
Do you find it appropriate to leave feedback in the form of neutral trust for spammers (e.g. "Shitposter.", "Spammer."). There are very different views regarding the trust system. Some feel like feedback is okay to give in almost all cases, while others do not. I'm just curious as to what you two think and whether we could/should be doing it[1].

[1] I already did it for a few obvious cases, thus wondering if I should continue or remove those.

I haven't changed my opinion: I think negative trust should be given to scammers or untrustworthy users, including spammers who try to defraud signature managers or others with their posts, but not because of the fact they spam but because they try to defraud. I know that may be subjective.

Neutral feedback can be used for comments, such as "Spammer" or other useful information unrelated to trustworthiness. I don't see any issues about using neutral trust for this.

Spammer should be controlled by others means: reporting & banning, merit (I hope it does help) or other ideas.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2884


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2018, 12:27:14 AM
 #79

I haven't changed my opinion: I think negative trust should be given to scammers or untrustworthy users, including spammers who try to defraud signature managers or others with their posts, but not because of the fact they spam but because they try to defraud. I know that may be subjective.
I didn't expect you to, especially not this quickly. I wasn't talking about that though/I wasn't giving out negative ratings based on that recently either. I did it for a bit in late 2017, but quickly withdrew those.

Neutral feedback can be used for comments, such as "Spammer" or other useful information unrelated to trustworthiness. I don't see any issues about using neutral trust for this.
Alright, so we do agree that neutral feedback is appropriate in labeling someone as such. How would you handle a retaliatory negative rating that is completely false, other than ignoring it?

Spammer should be controlled by others means: reporting & banning, merit (I hope it does help) or other ideas.
The 1st isn't and hasn't been working for a long time due to several reasons. The 2nd will take some time before we can evaluate its effect. The 3rd, unfortunately, may never see a comment from theymos let alone get implemented.

@ibminer?

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
EcuaMobi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1443


https://Ecua.Mobi


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2018, 12:45:16 AM
 #80

How would you handle a retaliatory negative rating that is completely false, other than ignoring it?
I would just ignore it most of the cases. I'd consider some blatant lies (falsely accusing us as scammers, for example) as untrustworthy, and therefore could deserve negative trust.

Spammer should be controlled by others means: reporting & banning, merit (I hope it does help) or other ideas.
The 3rd, unfortunately, may never see a comment from theymos let alone get implemented.
Yes, unfortunately. I was hoping he posts about that. I may insist after a while when Meta isn't full of threads about Merit.

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!