Here are my notes for all of the participants. Please remember that this is my personal opinion, and in no way reflect the views of the moderators, staff, or any other members of this forum. If you don't like it,
start your own challenge. lol
These comments can also be seen on
the spreadsheet.
GC2263: While it is apparent that this user took a bit of time to write posts, all of them are in generic topics that don't contribute much to crypto as a whole; they are blanket-statement topics that are based heavily on speculation. All of your posts have been in "mega" threads.
xWolfx: Disqualified. This user has not posted a single post throughout Round 2.bitperson: Overall good posts. Some are short, but they are direct and contributive to the topic at hand. A lot of posts in Merit threads, but probably because Merit is still a widely-discussed issue.
Badingding: Disqualified. Only 1 post during Round 2.BTC_Anon: Every English post is in Off-Topic and short meaningless answers. Please try to be more contributive to relevant topics. Your posts are generic, and I consider this to be direcly in line with shitposting. Please put some more thought into your posts moving forward, and don't be afraid to browse other boards.
Sudhik: Only 6 posts (out of 22 valid posts) are outside of the Altcoin Bounties board. English is apparently not this user's native language. 5 of the 6 posts are poorly written and do not contribute to the overall thread. They are generic statements posted in generic threads that (in my opinion) are just designed to fluff their post count. The 6th post is for a speculatively
potentially dangerous service for a pre-ICO product that hasn't proven itself in the industry as of yet. 18 posts in Bounties section. It's obvious that this user's primary purpose of using these forums is to make money, which is fine with me, but please try harder to contribute to more than just megathreads in the future.
Blue Tyrant: Good posts continue to come out of Blue Tyrant! However, this week, it seems as if there were a lot more [informative] posts without references or citations where there easily could have been, given a little time to do research. Making statements like these are great, but having a source would solidify your statement even more. This is just nitpicky, I know, but try not to make definitive statements without backing them up.
monchi: 8 out 9 qualified posts are in general Bitcoin Discussion topics that were designed to raise posts counts. These threads lack true contribution to the crypto industry, and are based speculatively on opinion-based answers. Your answers are generic and speculative. While it's good to engage in conversations about Bitcoin and crypto, try not to do so in posts that don't require much thought to answer.
thelma987: Nearly the entirety of your posts in Round 2 are in megathreads. In ALL of your posts, nearly the same variation of your posts have already been provided before you. This is what is considered to be "shitposting"; when you post in a thread that has DOZENS of pages without reading any of the context outside of the original post. Please do not do this; this is the very type of behavior that this challenge was designed to combat. A couple of your posts are decent, but again, they've been posted in megathreads
nullius: Another solid week for nullius. While there was some repetition in given topics (mainly the Danos thread), and nullius heavily favors the Meta board, his ability to construct contributive post is [still] amazing. They were extremely well thought out, even in posts that were filled with banter and humor. There has been a lack of technical posts that we're used to, but if anyone would like to keep themselves entertained for a few hours, read through nullius's post history on a weekly basis.
Toughit: I'm particularly loving this user's interaction with nullius (does not affect score). Great technical knowledge about mining, and contributions to the forums regarding Bitcoin/Altcoin mining are great! This user is a good example to show that the Merit system needs more outliers on the Altcoin boards. While board distribution is weak comared to other participants, the post quality is great! Keep it up!
detector: First of all, please refrain from posting in Serious Discussion. Your posts there are not contributive, and if they were removed, would have no effect whatsoever on the topics that you've posted in. Otherwise, your posts are decent, but not great. They're either heavily based on opinionated speculation, or based on redundant obvious facts that provide no contribution to the thread. In the future, try to think about your post before posting your replies. Ask yourself "How can I stand out and be different with my post?".
OninLoki: DISQUALIFIED: Applied and joined ContractNet campaign merely 4 HOURS before Round 2 ended.
s2break: EVERY SINGLE POST (with the exception of 1 sMerit review post and a reply in my thread) is about bounties. Please note that the purpose of my challenge was to help eliminate users joining the forums for the SOLE purpose of earning money.
KP Oli: Does not qualify. Only 1 post during Round 2.
vlad230: When positioning yourself as an expert on any subject (given your narrative posting style in several of your posts), please cite sources or references when making such definitive statements. If a post sounds like it's positioned on facts, users will want to see the source of those facts. Other than those few posts, your posting ability is good, and your knowledge on mining seems to be high. Good job on referencing some of your past post history! Your ability to research things is obviously on a sleuth level, as is depicted in your posts about connecting known alt accounts.
buyandsale: Your posts are redundant. They are one-liners. They are what is generally known as shitposts. Absolutely no thought went into any of your posts. This is obvious by seeing that the post that required the most thought was your application to this challenge. Are you serious about this challenge? Try to understand why some members are putting up our own money to keep this challenge ongoing. And then ask yourself if you really belong here. Please try to commit yourself in trying to make this forum a better place!
vlom: Does not qualify. Only 5 posts during Round 2.
Jack Dragon: Does not qualify. Only 2 posts during Round 2.
shahzadafzal: Be careful with your speculative posting. Just because you believe strongly about a subject does not mean that it is factual, so you should stop presenting your posts as facts. Otherwise, great job on taking the time to write out your posts. While I can tell English is not your first language, it shows that you put a lot of thought into your posts. In the future, I would love to see you stray away from posting in as many speculative threads (such as in Bitcoin Discussion).
Sellingaccs: Classic example of "short and sweet" types of posts. Goes to show that you can be contributive without having to post extensively long posts. You are obviously knowledgeable in technical aspects of cryptocurrency. I like how you focus your experience here on the services aspects of the forums. Your banter is noteworthy, and I [surprisingly] enjoyed reading through your post history
fahad.khan: Does not qualify. Only 3 posts during Round 2. (although this is partially my fault for overlooking this user's previous application)
