[Spammer Blacklist] The Shitlist

[LoyceV]

Kudos to @actmyname to help the forum identify the worst spammer but whether it is negative, positive or neutral rating the guideline theymos gave regarding rating is very simple and clear.

- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.

That was posted before theymos changed the Trust system, and the feedback descriptions:

Read the description per Type carefully:
     
Note that the description for Positive, Neutral and Negative is different than it was 4 months ago: it was changed when Trust Flags were introduced.

My personal interpretation of Neutral feedback is this:

Neutral (shown as =1)

• Use Neutral feedback for anything that doesn't mean someone can or can't be trusted. This can be good feedback, for instance when someone helped you out.
• I think Neutral Feedback is currently undervalued on Bitcointalk. It's a great tool to de-escalate without drastic consequences. Please use it when appropriate.

And theymos said this:

LoyceV's guide seems reasonable.

[1713454252]

1713454252

[1713454252]

1713454252

[1713454252]

1713454252

[KualaBit]

~snipped

Thank you for the information however, theymos also stated that:

 - Exercise a lot of forgiveness. People shouldn't be "permanently branded" as a result of small mistakes from which we've all moved past.
 

This neutral rating somehow is permanently branding any account that is tagged to be one of the worst spammers of all time..  A little tweak on the sentence may do, probably.

Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to forum standards. This user is part the top 1000 worst spammers of all time.

I believe actmyname will be actively monitoring his list and update or remove his neutral rating to those who were tagged if they have proven that they had improved over time? Since, theymos also stated that:

But if they correct the problem and don't seem likely to do it again, remove the rating or replace it with a neutral.

That said, thank you for hearing me out.

[actmyname]

This neutral rating somehow is permanently branding any account that is tagged to be one of the worst spammers of all time..  A little tweak on the sentence may do, probably.

I agree. Changing it to simply

:: This should make it better both for determining the severity of the spammer and for reducing the "top N worst" branding.

The people on the list are being monitored, of course. Though, I find that most of these users in the past have stopped posting for some time or altogether, resuming their one-liners as if nothing happened. Or sometimes the most egregious spammers will continue to post insipid surface-level remarks that relate to the topic title for a couple days.I'm starting to change around some of these neutral ratings.

[JollyGood]

Excellent thread. Thank you for the efforts you put in to compile this list of useless spammers that people should just avoid. I think there should be more lists stating which users are sock-puppets, trolls and paid shills too...

[Scam Exposey]

Excellent thread. Thank you for the efforts you put in to compile this list of useless spammers that people should just avoid. I think there should be more lists stating which users are sock-puppets, trolls and paid shills too...

So you think it will be beneficial to the forum if you can drive them out here?

Do you think this forum will be alive if you are the one left making a noise here? How's the traffic  afterwards?

There's another forum gaining a good exposure now so provably if this certain abuse will continue this legendary forum will slowly die.

And your heads seems bloated to much and you are so self entitled person who tell that they are useless since for me every user is important.

I expect this forum die in future if this war freaks still exist here.

[JollyGood]

~snip~

I expect this forum die in future if this war freaks still exist here.

Ok well thank you for your opinion, even if others including myself disagree with you at least you are entitled to write whatever you want.

That is the beauty of the forum, no matter how distasteful others may think of what someone else has written we all accept we are entitled to our opinions.

I think actmyname did an excellent service to this forum with thread but you can hold a different opinion if you wish.

[JustinBounty]

I love the idea but I think forcing your standards to other users who might be not as well educated and fluent with English is not the right idea.

The feedback left on users profile is "Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to forum standards."

The problem here is that you are setting the forum standard, the better option might have been leaving a feedback like "Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to my standards. This is for my own reference and nothing to do with forum officially."

Also tagging something like "This user is part the top 1000 worst spammers of all time." shows you mean to insult the user instead of making a list to help yourself in future. Who gave you the permission to call someone a spammer just because you didn't like his English? Would be be fine if someone calls you a spammer because your Spanish is not on point?

If you are actually intending to make the list for reference in future then leaving a small and non-insulting feedback might have been sufficient. If you want to insult users because of their language, I think you are not presenting yourself in the best manner and need to do better.

[actmyname]

I love the idea but I think forcing your standards to other users who might be not as well educated and fluent with English is not the right idea.

The feedback left on users profile is "Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to forum standards."

The problem here is that you are setting the forum standard

No. Read my response in this post:

Moderators considered reports of your posts good. This means that moderators thought that at least 50 of your posts broke the forum rules, most likely regarding spam.

Feel free to check one past report dump as well, if you'd like: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bPPBarEeNdvNhJH9hb24Y3Kp6Xeo6Z_m/view

[JustinBounty]

I love the idea but I think forcing your standards to other users who might be not as well educated and fluent with English is not the right idea.

The feedback left on users profile is "Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to forum standards."

The problem here is that you are setting the forum standard

No. Read my response in this post:

Moderators considered reports of your posts good. This means that moderators thought that at least 50 of your posts broke the forum rules, most likely regarding spam.

Feel free to check one past report dump as well, if you'd like: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bPPBarEeNdvNhJH9hb24Y3Kp6Xeo6Z_m/view

Satisfied but ratings can be more soft, can't deny that.

[actmyname]

Satisfied but ratings can be more soft, can't deny that.

Agree to disagree. For now, I'm not too concerned about the older feedback with the "top 1000 spammer" metric as it should apply: hardly anyone has more than 50 good reports against them and in the case of most users on this list, it's not just one or two posts - it's swathes of pages of consecutive spam posts.

I would say that it's a bit generous to give the benefit of the doubt to users that don't put any effort into their replies.
Not fluent in English? Here's a possible solution: use the Local section or learn enough English to be constructive? I certainly don't wander into the Local sections with broken grammar talking about how the bitcoin will go up or down and that it's unpredictable and that you should buy the dip.
Doesn't make sense to enter a signature campaign that primarily asks for English-based board posting without the skills to do so, wouldn't you agree?

[JustinBounty]

Not fluent in English? Here's a possible solution: use the Local section or learn enough English to be constructive? I certainly don't wander into the Local sections with broken grammar talking about how the bitcoin will go up or down and that it's unpredictable and that you should buy the dip.
Doesn't make sense to enter a signature campaign that primarily asks for English-based board posting without the skills to do so, wouldn't you agree?

Not fluent in English? Here's a possible solution: use the Local section or learn enough English to be constructive?

How does one determine he is now fluent in English and ready to spam the forum with better English? Someone must be better than you at English and according to them you should be learning now, so are you moving to local sections? (Please don't, we need some good posters)


I certainly don't wander into the Local sections with broken grammar talking about how the bitcoin will go up or down and that it's unpredictable and that you should buy the dip.

Maybe someone starts the same trend as you have here in the local boards, then where shall the user go?


Doesn't make sense to enter a signature campaign that primarily asks for English-based board posting without the skills to do so, wouldn't you agree?

There is a designated signature campaign manager to moderate that and if you don't trust the manager to remove the spammers then the feedback shall be more suited to the manager as opposed to the participant.

[actmyname]

Not fluent in English? Here's a possible solution: use the Local section or learn enough English to be constructive?

How does one determine he is now fluent in English and ready to spam the forum with better English? Someone must be better than you at English and according to them you should be learning now, so are you moving to local sections? (Please don't, we need some good posters)

You are the one who brought up fluency:

I love the idea but I think forcing your standards to other users who might be not as well educated and fluent with English is not the right idea.

I'm simply responding to the notion that the lack of English proficiency can somehow serve as an excuse for spamming the forum.

I certainly don't wander into the Local sections with broken grammar talking about how the bitcoin will go up or down and that it's unpredictable and that you should buy the dip.

Maybe someone starts the same trend as you have here in the local boards, then where shall the user go?

Is that what the Local boards are like currently? If not, then I don't see how this is relevant. I also don't see the Local boards getting as many posts as the main boards nor a reasonable likelihood for your hypothetical situation. Seems to me like it's a bit of a false equivalency - especially comparing a current problem with a future potential problem.

Doesn't make sense to enter a signature campaign that primarily asks for English-based board posting without the skills to do so, wouldn't you agree?

There is a designated signature campaign manager to moderate that and if you don't trust the manager to remove the spammers then the feedback shall be more suited to the manager as opposed to the participant.

How is that relevant to the constructiveness of your posts? The signature managers are not the same people who moderate the forum. You can see that from the users on the blacklist: plenty have joined campaigns and yet have scores of posts that are considered unsubstantial? You don't get to spam just because the manager accepted your spam. You receive the consequences for your own actions.EDIT/MAR24:

February in full.

Code:

167| tiang_tower
153| Sadlife
79 | Bitcoin Seller
76 | guydin
71 | Lantind
71 | Iceblast
50 | SistaFista

Total reports: 1058
Total users: 31
Average reports/user: 34.12
Worst offender: tiang_tower

January in full.

Code:

266| Google+
246| semobo
237| Kasabus
227| daniahya
223| reliable
201| lobo13hf
195| monineklutak
173| Vishnu.Reang
171| royalfestus
152| XCANA
140| $anounimus$
139| sangjoewara
138| Wildwest
134| memed97
121| Distinctin
121| bigcash2011
117| devil2man
117| Desscount
116| laredo7mm
108| ngocdhbk2
101| Willitivity
99 | kesmex
98 | miningguru
98 | bitbunnny
96 | bitpotter
91 | Oceat
89 | molsewid
89 | ipanks
89 | Henrobakkara
86 | rahmathidayat93
84 | preikaler
82 | ife2020
81 | pantek talacuik
80 | Wahyuihib
80 | DeadCoin
79 | lousie9
79 | imteaz
77 | desticy
73 | grandpix
71 | sniveel
71 | ice098
70 | thienlonghue
64 | Anonylz
61 | Jocuserious
60 | Surrapatt
60 | Rahman11
60 | GatotKaca
60 | Astvile
59 | shanghai
58 | Mahmudmach
57 | Rana590
56 | amonymous
55 | swordking
55 | rhodelmabanal
54 | Ludmilla_rose1995
54 | jaocoincrypto18
52 | killerfrost
51 | crazy-pilot

[JustinBounty]

I like how you reply on point and within the topic itself. I don't have much merits to send but I actually appreciate your ability to explain your actions which unfortunately not all the high ranked and highly respected members have.

I was feeling bored and I rather lose to an intellect than winning against an idiot, so I started this debate. Thanks for the explanation, satisfied.

[actmyname]

March.

Code:

233| StartupAnalyst
210| Tessnik
206| bitcoin31
186| TopT3ns
170| pilosopotasyo
169| rahmatullah9305
157| zaim7413
154| martina14
135| NoG-NoG
131| Nhor1011
125| usekevin
119| zonefloor
119| shiming
116| yurez
115| gaston castano
114| samcrypto
109| Godday
107| poldanmig
106| fuer44
101| ahmia39
100| Irdina
99 | sammyp
97 | tippytoes
96 | cryptoknightt
95 | tarable
89 | ringgo96
89 | Maestro75
89 | Genemind
89 | awakpane
84 | GreenStox
81 | Davian144
80 | naikturun
80 | DonFacundo
79 | kingzpro
74 | peterpanda
70 | Alert31
69 | cytpoway121
69 | atjiat
67 | Malam90
67 | Luqman
66 | TelolettOm
65 | qazgroup
63 | HyunBin
57 | xZork
55 | EmmaGod
54 | LUCKMCFLY
54 | cute nmp
53 | Meta anggraini
51 | Kez1817
51 | Adreman23

Total reports: 5966
Total users: 93
Average reports/user: 64.15
Worst offender: StartupAnalyst

[StartupAnalyst]

[~snip]
Worst offender: StartupAnalyst

Well, well, well, mister...
And may I ask, did you just complain about all my posts in a row? Or maybe you read at least a tenth of them?


Or maybe the moderator who thoughtlessly satisfied your complaints read at least half of those deleted posts before deleting them?

I just don't understand how he could read several posts in two seconds and hit delete for both. And he did it over 200 times.


I don't believe he was able to read those two messages and delete them, and  specially to have enough time to think about their meaning.


Moreover to be able in a split second to make an adequate and well-considered decision on their compliance or non-compliance with the rules of the forum.  I myself have made many complaints about posts that violate forum rules, and I'm sure that my posts were not.

By the statistics of my complaints (shown in the screenshot below) I think you could understand that I know the rules of the forum and have never deliberately violated them.

[examplens]

I don't believe he was able to read those two messages and delete them, and  specially to have enough time to think about their meaning.

By the statistics of my complaints (shown in the screenshot below) I think you could understand that I know the rules of the forum and have never deliberately violated them.

it’s not just up to the moderator, someone else reported your post and moderators check it before a final decision about deleting it. So, usually is very possible that a minimum of two users think that your posts are offtopic.
As you say, you had 40 good reports but can you imagine that there are some users who had >10k reports with 99-100% accuracy, I guess mods don't need to check specially each post when reports come from proven spam reporters.

[StartupAnalyst]

I don't believe he was able to read those two messages and delete them, and  specially to have enough time to think about their meaning.

By the statistics of my complaints (shown in the screenshot below) I think you could understand that I know the rules of the forum and have never deliberately violated them.

it’s not just up to the moderator, someone else reported your post and moderators check it before a final decision about deleting it. So, usually is very possible that a minimum of two users think that your posts are offtopic.
As you say, you had 40 good reports but can you imagine that there are some users who had >10k reports with 99-100% accuracy, I guess mods don't need to check specially each post when reports come from proven spam reporters.

Well, apparently it is worth it, at least to avoid such unpleasant moments on the forum, after all, this is their job! And no matter how many thousands of reports, all users are equal and have the right to justice, or am I wrong?
Otherwise it turns out that this is corruption in its purest form, can we allow it to exist in our new world? How then our community is more developed than the adherents of dollars or other fiat currencies?

Also, I would like to point out that I came to this forum with 0 merits, do you think I could get over 300 merits just by leaving spam here?

[LoyceV]

Well, apparently it is worth it, at least to avoid such unpleasant moments on the forum, after all, this is their job! And no matter how many thousands of reports, all users are equal and have the right to justice, or am I wrong?

If you disagree with moderation, you should open a topic in Meta, with clear examples of the posts you think shouldn't have been deleted.

[examplens]

Well, apparently it is worth it, at least to avoid such unpleasant moments on the forum, after all, this is their job! And no matter how many thousands of reports, all users are equal and have the right to justice, or am I wrong?
Otherwise it turns out that this is corruption in its purest form, can we allow it to exist in our new world? How then our community is more developed than the adherents of dollars or other fiat currencies?

Also, I would like to point out that I came to this forum with 0 merits, do you think I could get over 300 merits just by leaving spam here?

of course, you won't accept the suggestion. of course, for moderators, it matters a number of reports and percentage of good reports. it makes their job easier.
In a way, you linked corruption to your case, although it is still unclear why you think someone has benefited from deleting your posts.

[zonefloor]

180-odd comments were deleted within 10 seconds. So are these moderators now android? It will review my posts in 10 seconds. Who are you and with what right do you add me to the list you set in your own style?

You complain about people's posts and cause their comments to be deleted. Then you add them to your spam list. You are one of the main spammers and someone who disrespects people's rights.