possible answer to getting rid of all the trash threads here

[cryptohunter]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board

junior boards opened for btc and alt sections for all the...

which ico is best threads, my ico is best threads, i will copy and paste other threads to boost my post count threads, etc

the boards simply moves too fast with many many duplicate threads and most are just pump my ico threads anyway by armies of sockpuppet accounts with zero merit

mods need demerit powers really for obvious spammers who have purchased high level accounts but never post anything of worth and just use them to spam for different icos

[1714119881]

1714119881

[SFR10]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board

It won't work:

• They will ask someone else to create it for them.
• They will buy accounts with at least 100 merits.

mods need demerit powers really for obvious spammers

That's not enough (they need users that report such cases [so they can handle it and possibly ban them as well]).

[bitart]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board
...

Seems similar to the idea that simply won't let newbies and juniors to open a topic, only in selected threads (kind of newbie jail for topic opening)
Allowing only 100+ merited members to open topics would make the price of these accounts higher.
Also, imagine that there's a really good ICO that wants to advertise on the forum, but without an account with 100+ merits they have no chance to open their thread... (I know there are really a few of these kind of ICOs that are not scam/spam, etc...)

[Welsh]

Some already use managers for their threads. Limiting thread creation would only hinder certain people, and then they would just hire people like the rest of competition. There's no simple answer to anything regarding moderation.

Moderators or even merit sources should not be given demerit points, and I'm hoping that this isn't implemented in the future. It will only be abused, and misused.

[digaran]

What is better to do is to charge a fee for posting, only allowing copper members to open a topic in certain sections and increasing the amount of copper membership purchase.

[funsponge]

What is better to do is to charge a fee for posting, only allowing copper members to open a topic in certain sections and increasing the amount of copper membership purchase.

Charging a fee especially with Bitcoin and it's fees would be just in practicable and wouldn't really stop people from purchasing copper membership just to bypass it as copper membership isn't that expensive. Having copper members only being able to create threads is a better idea than allowing everyone to though. 

[botany]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board

junior boards opened for btc and alt sections for all the

which ico is best threads

the boards simply move to fast with many many duplicate threads and most are just pump my ico threads anyway by armies of sockpuppet accounts with zero merit

mods need demerit powers really for obvious spammers who have purchased high level accounts but never post anything of worth and just use them to spam for different icos

Having restrictions for starting threads (basis ranks) has been suggested for a long time. The general consensus is that might be too restrictive. The problems is not just with low value threads, it is with the multiple accounts spamming in them. It might take some, but the merit system will definitely have an impact.

[cryptohunter]

The board is a mess. The average thread content a year ago was worthwhile.

Now both the main boards are beyond any reasonable moderation. There is too much low quality volume. It is a mass of which ico is best and copy and paste bots reposting threads over and over.

The real members that did post quality content are leaving.

The board needs to be slowed down and 90% of the trash cut away.

You can't even start to moderate this much volume with most new members not even bothering to pretend to keep to the boards guidelines.

100 merit or cant start a thread on the main boards.
mods will stand of chance of moderating to some degree after that

sure some will find workarounds but mods need to get on top of what can not be automated.

Junior boards or noob jails are essential - the merit system is good but does nothing to prevent people spamming their project and building a ton of bots and puppet accounts to spam with them. I see entire threads pages long all pump the same shit and not 1 account has any merit in pages and pages of accounts.

It used to be great to drop in here and read some really interesting and great discussions by the more knowledgeable members and get to ask them some questions..but now just pages and pages of nothing but ico pumpers and spammers and noobs asking the same questions over and over again.

Honestly I don't think the main alt board is really even moderated now, and I don't blame them, it moves to fast and nobody there even tried to adhere to the rules.

[Lutpin]

Did you consider to start doing something yourself and help with moderation by eg reporting the threads/posts you see as problematic to moderators?

[pugman]

This would hurt a lot of legitimate users here. This has been discussed to hell and back in the past and it has been turned down every single time. theymos values freedom of speech way too much.

The board is a mess. The average thread content a year ago was worthwhile.

A year ago the board was less spammy but it wasn't as worthwhile as you think it was. Go and read the topics back in 2012-13 or even 2014 , you'll know.

Now both the main boards are beyond any reasonable moderation. There is too much low quality volume. It is a mass of which ico is best and copy and paste bots reposting threads over and over.

This has been going on for years. Ever visited the Off-topic board? Things are much worse there.

The real members that did post quality content are leaving.
The board needs to be slowed down and 90% of the trash cut away.

You can't even start to moderate this much volume with most new members not even bothering to pretend to keep to the boards guidelines.

100 merit or cant start a thread on the main boards.
mods will stand of chance of moderating to some degree after that

sure some will find workarounds but mods need to get on top of what can not be automated.

Junior boards or noob jails are essential - the merit system is good but does nothing to prevent people spamming their project and building a ton of bots and puppet accounts to spam with them. I see entire threads pages long all pump the same shit and not 1 account has any merit in pages and pages of accounts.

It used to be great to drop in here and read some really interesting and great discussions by the more knowledgeable members and get to ask them some questions..but now just pages and pages of nothing but ico pumpers and spammers and noobs asking the same questions over and over again.

Honestly I don't think the main alt board is really even moderated now, and I don't blame them, it moves to fast and nobody there even tried to adhere to the rules.

The real members left in 2014 itself. Mods can't do anything if people don't report stuff. And very few people use the "Report to Moderator" button. Because every time they do, they ask themselves, what is in for them,they realize it is nothing and don't even bother to use that button anymore(this is for most people who DO NOT care about this forum).

About the altcoin board, do you seriously expect one moderator to handle the worse board on bitcointalk? Come on, man. People literally have given up reporting anything on that board. It is that bad.

[mu_enrico]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board
<...>

Really? And you actually just got what? 17 merits despite being a "legendary?"
Don't get me wrong, I just wanna say my point related to the merit airdrop.

[cryptohunter]

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board
<...>

Really? And you actually just got what? 17 merits despite being a "legendary?"
Don't get me wrong, I just wanna say my point related to the merit airdrop.

Let's be serious now 17 since the merit was introduced what about the previous years. Also I don't think it is worth giving merit to a legend since he is already at the top level. I'm sure many others see it the same way.

The idea has merit and you can still post on the junior boards.

Perhaps we can bring it down to 50 merit.

I see things getting worse so I don't see we have any option but to introduce something like this.

I see no actual valid reason to not introduce it.

There has been no good rebuttal so far.

People claiming there can be workarounds is fine but they require more hassle, time and money in most cases this will cause a reduction in the things we all want to see reduced.

Imagine if reporting to a mod is the only way forward. It is just not feasible to have such a manual system for such volume.

The noob jail was removed because it was manual and of course too much work. Still it was something we all had to go through.

The 50 merit is not as bad as a noob jail because you will have many good posters in there still building their 50 merit and the quality will be far higher on the entire board because bot spammers and puppet accounts will have less and less reason to exist.

[pugman]

Really? And you actually just got what? 17 merits despite being a "legendary?"
Don't get me wrong, I just wanna say my point related to the merit airdrop.

Ranks don't matter anymore in bitcointalk, other than for signature campaigns. A few users don't merit legendary ranks as they think that is a waste of their sMerits, they would rather spend that on lower ranked members. Also just because one user is "legendary" doesn't make him a good poster.

I see things getting worse so I don't see we have any option but to introduce something like this.

I see no actual valid reason to not introduce it.

There has been no good rebuttal so far.

How could you possibly not see it? This is a terrible idea. Some users come out here to ask legitimate things and not all of them are good posters at start. People have to stop expecting nullius-like post quality from newbies. And I am a fucking hypocrite. This option SHOULD NOT be implemented. I am sure there are other ways to stop people from spamming shit. Why don't you start off with reporting 100s of posts per day?

[cryptohunter]

Really? And you actually just got what? 17 merits despite being a "legendary?"
Don't get me wrong, I just wanna say my point related to the merit airdrop.

Ranks don't matter anymore in bitcointalk, other than for signature campaigns. A few users don't merit legendary ranks as they think that is a waste of their sMerits, they would rather spend that on lower ranked members. Also just because one user is "legendary" doesn't make him a good poster.

I see things getting worse so I don't see we have any option but to introduce something like this.

I see no actual valid reason to not introduce it.

There has been no good rebuttal so far.

How could you possibly not see it? This is a terrible idea. Some users come out here to ask legitimate things and not all of them are good posters at start. People have to stop expecting nullius-like post quality from newbies. And I am a fucking hypocrite. This option SHOULD NOT be implemented. I am sure there are other ways to stop people from spamming shit. Why don't you start off with reporting 100s of posts per day?

I do not follow this logic... that is not to say I am correct and that you are wrong. I am always happy to discuss and learn and change my opinion.

They can still ask these questions on the junior boards. Those even attempting to join in and contribute to legitimate and worthy discussions can be given merit. I would find going there browsing through a selection of good threads, then meriting those making real effort to help or even joining in conversations of worth and interest far more rewarding than reporting 100 spammers, ico bots, post pasting bots and then the mods have to confirm and delete and take action. This is a wasteful and unpleasant process and it is also a very centralised bottlenecked process at the mod level if doing it this way. It is also a very negative thing to report person compared to giving praise and merit.

You are not to expect highly detailed knowledge of conceptual design and coding from anyone on this board including legends of course only a willing and helpful attitude to contribute and converse with others.

I am not really complaining at the obvious tech brain drain and dilution since the days of hardcore bitcoiners - that was always going to happen. Let's be honest what percentage of the board actually would have the capacity to understand many of these designs at a deep math level. I don't think it's essential most need to understand at more than a very basic level. However the board is now nothing to do with the tech or about the aim of creating decentralised trustless networks... it is simply becoming a marketing board for icos through various posting techniques that make the board almost worthless to anyone other that to hammer the search function for specific details you may want to look up from years ago.

Having a sensible vetting period that is semi automated is the obvious choice. This will be a decentralised vetting process since those with the most merit to give will be free to peruse the junior boards and all be mods in a way.

[mu_enrico]

<...>
I do not follow this logic...
<...>

Fella, your logic is based on two false assumptions:
1. 100+ merit -> good poster
2. 100- merit -> bad poster

The first assumption is false. I already showed you the reason, that's because of merit airdrop.
The second assumption is false. That's because of Nullius-like or Anunymint-like members.

[cryptohunter]

<...>
I do not follow this logic...
<...>

Fella, your logic is based on two false assumptions:
1. 100+ merit -> good poster
2. 100- merit -> bad poster

The first assumption is false. I already showed you the reason, that's because of merit airdrop.
The second assumption is false. That's because of Nullius-like or Anunymint-like members.

Let's discuss ...

it is to be a decentralised decision of what makes a good or bad poster
my method would leave it to all those that already have sufficient merit to decide upon what is good and what is bad.
the board would naturally through a decentralised process decide who and how quickly should be able to start threads on the main board.

bad would not qualify or at least be very delayed at reaching the main board.

it is not only a matter of good and bad it is also a matter of real poster vs bot

also this is only thread starting on the main board ... although posting at all even in thread could have a 25 merit threshold.


I don't get your point about anonymint ? he was an exception to the rule and was banned due to some disagreement with the mods although obviously a high merit worthy member (imho). I don't think he would have any issue starting a new account and accumulating his merit threshold in a very short amount of time if this ever became an obstacle for him.

I'm not sure how we can argue leaving things as they are now is a better option.

[bitmover]

The forum main purpose is not fighting spammers.
This is a place where newbies are welcome and they can find a community to help them, answer their questions and help them to discover bitcoin.

I started posting here when I needed  to clear a doubt about btc . I needed to create a topic for that. then I discovered how nice his place was and became a member.

Shitposting is a problem, but the forum is still working. Your solution would take out an important functionality from the forum.

[cryptohunter]

The forum main purpose is not fighting spammers.
This is a place where newbies are welcome and they can find a community to help them, answer their questions and help them to discover bitcoin.

I started posting here when I needed  to clear a doubt about btc . I needed to create a topic for that. then I discovered how nice his place was and became a member.

Shitposting is a problem, but the forum is still working. Your solution would take out an important functionality from the forum.

Why could you not post on the junior board?
What reduction in functionality would you experience based on this specific personal example?

[TheUltraElite]

The forum main purpose is not fighting spammers.

After the shitposting attitude that people put up the only way the mods can control it is to trash their posts. We get so many redundant threads everywhere where members are posting nonsense in order to get paid.

This is a place where newbies are welcome and they can find a community to help them, answer their questions and help them to discover bitcoin.

That was (and still is) the actual idea behind a forum discussion

Shitposting is a problem, but the forum is still working.

Shitposting is not a problem its a cancer to this forum metastasized by the scumbags in the forum who love to get paid for writing rubbish.

Your solution would take out an important functionality from the forum.

I agree with your point because what the OP says - will actually incite more merit trading.

[tranthidung]

I guess what you meant is topic, not thread, isn't it?

100 merit+ to start a thread on the main alt or btc board

This is the way shit projects operate its campaigns to pump their ANN topics with help from shit-posters, spammers.

the boards simply moves too fast with many many duplicate threads and most are just pump my ico threads anyway by armies of sockpuppet accounts with zero merit

I think the best way and most effective way that Theymos can do (it might be the final solution for BTT forum to clean up shitty members) is "Prohibiting Junior members and below to join any bounty, campaign in the forum".
Only Member rank and higher ones can wear signature codes and join campaigns.

mods need demerit powers really for obvious spammers who have purchased high level accounts but never post anything of worth and just use them to spam for different icos