That's how you set up a campaign, well done LoyceV

[Steamtyme]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4675126.msg42182515#msg42182515

So there's a lot of talk about how removing SIG campaigns would save the forum.

Looking at the rules and set up for this campaign I'd say this is the direction we should go. Great job setting up this campaign and the rules around it.

Lots of bright spots to name a few:

• Earned merit requires to be accepted.
• No minimum number of posts, and a lower maximum
• Easy to understand rules addressing spam
• And the bounty, which should scare enough people to keep them inline.

[LoyceV]

Thanks, I guess

Easy to understand rules addressing spam

Lol. I've already deleted about 10-15 posts from people who don't read anything

Earned merit requires to be accepted.

This actually makes my task a lot easier. Without it, in an earlier campaign, I've had dozens of Member-spammers apply, and checking their posts takes a lot of time. With the Merit requirement, I can reject them and delete their application in seconds.

So there's a lot of talk about how removing SIG campaigns would save the forum.

There's also a lot of talk about bounty managers who don't do their job, and since they don't get punished, they get away with it.

[vphasitha01]

Now "LoyceV" is taking signature campaigns into a another dimension. I really like the way you approch by introducing the concept of "earned merit" (not Airdrop Merits). I think you're giving perfect example for how should bounty manager behaved as a legendary (by it means) member.

The another thing I would like to suggest is better to check wether the applicant has been involved in some kind of Merit abuse scenarios previously before your approval(sometimes members will get even 50 Merits for just a redundent post in ANN threads) We need to stop the spammers and well as the Merit abusers.

I hope this will become a really successfull campaign. (may be next time for me )

[seoincorporation]

Thanks, I guess

Easy to understand rules addressing spam

Lol. I've already deleted about 10-15 posts from people who don't read anything

Earned merit requires to be accepted.

This actually makes my task a lot easier. Without it, in an earlier campaign, I've had dozens of Member-spammers apply, and checking their posts takes a lot of time. With the Merit requirement, I can reject them and delete their application in seconds.

So there's a lot of talk about how removing SIG campaigns would save the forum.

There's also a lot of talk about bounty managers who don't do their job, and since they don't get punished, they get away with it.

Tsss!!! Good work!! I've seen how some merit farmers are just begging and your elegance while rejecting them!!
jajaja... Nice work, a great example on how signatures actually can mean a significant change to the forum if well-runned.
Best of lucks.

[LoyceV]

The another thing I would like to suggest is better to check wether the applicant has been involved in some kind of Merit abuse scenarios previously before your approval

When I say "earned merit" I really mean "earned merit". That indeed requires manual checking. That's why I ask for a link to the full merit history.

Example:

Bitcointalk Username:  Green547
Bitcointalk Rank:  Full Member
Full Merit history: http://loycevsbasement.privatedns.org/Merit/history/1188895.html
Number of Posts: 322
Bitcoin Address:  1MK4Pkf7LhxNsgNxwHXFZtHj6jvW15qCpD

You have received suspiciously large amounts of Merit for posts that aren't worth it. I don't count that as "earned" Merit. Ending up on exactly enough Merit to become a Full Member an hour before applying doesn't help your case. Rejected.

I'm pretty sure this reputation thread was created based on my post.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Without it, in an earlier campaign, I've had dozens of Member-spammers apply, and checking their posts takes a lot of time. With the Merit requirement, I can reject them and delete their application in seconds.

As I suspected, that won't keep them from applying anyway (lol).  Hell, people keep applying for campaigns after the campaign has obviously ended, and I'm puzzled as to what goes on in these people's heads.

I applaud LoyceV for making this campaign a very strict one, and not just in the merit requirement, which effectively excludes most garbage posters.  I particularly like the rule of not posting in spam mega threads, because it makes sense since no one reads anything there and advertising would be pretty ineffective.  One thing I would question is how you go about judging what threads those are--yes, I know one when I see it, but others might not.  It's very subjective, and I bet if you start rejecting posts that you're going to get a lot of complaints.

More campaigns should be this tough, because this is the best way to combat spam.  I think only the best posters should be rewarded with the chance to earn money here.  It's gotten way too easy, and we're all seeing the result of that.  Props, LoyceV.

[LoyceV]

I particularly like the rule of not posting in spam mega threads

To be fair, I got this idea from:

6. Posts in spam megathreads (based on my opinion

One thing I would question is how you go about judging what threads those are--yes, I know one when I see it, but others might not.  It's very subjective, and I bet if you start rejecting posts that you're going to get a lot of complaints.

It's subjective indeed, but easily solved: the campaign manager has a final say in it.

More campaigns should be this tough, because this is the best way to combat spam.  I think only the best posters should be rewarded with the chance to earn money here.  It's gotten way too easy, and we're all seeing the result of that.  Props, LoyceV.

Thanks! I learned a lot from my giveaway campaigns. I also learned hardly anybody ever reads the rules

Being tough is one thing, but it requires a high paying campaign to make it less work. This requires a high advertising budget. If it's too low, good posters will leave the moment they find a better deal. If it's high, the manager only has to select good posters once, and they'll stay for a long time.
This campaign isn't the highest, but not bad either. I hope I've partially solved it by paying monthly instead of weekly.

[Heisenberg_Hunter]

No minimum number of posts, and a lower maximum

The fixed post count which must be fulfilled within the week is one of the major problems in the generation of spams. DarkStar_ follows a similar rule in his campaign that btc will be paid only for quality posts and not for fixed volume of spam which the user generates during his stay in the campaign. Hope all the campaigns in the future follow these set of rules.

Spams are most probably generated when the posters are forced to post 15-25 posts per week. Posts must be made only when required and when we feel like involving ourselves in the discussion. Commenting for almost all the topics you see or commenting just by reading the title leads to the insane amount of spam which is being faced in the community. Campaigns like these will pave the way for the betterment of the forum and banishing of the one-liners and shitposters. LoyceV is one of the great fighter against shitposters and plagiarists, hence I am sure that there won't be even a single low quality poster who would be accepted in this campaign.

P.S @LoyceV Why haven't you included in the rule that only segwit addresses would be accepted? Isn't it a pain for you(higher fees) to pay to legacy addresses? I literally hate legacy addresses nowadays

[LoyceV]

P.S @LoyceV Why haven't you included in the rule that only segwit addresses would be accepted? Isn't it a pain for you(higher fees) to pay to legacy addresses? I literally hate legacy addresses nowadays

I think Bitcoin stands for freedom, not restrictions. Therefore I accept any Bitcoin address.
Fees have been very low for most of this year. I expect to pay 1 sat/byte, and don't really care if the total comes to $0.03. If fees go up again, I might have to require native SegWit.

When it comes to "hating addresses", I dislike the SegWit starting with a 3. I'm okay with native addresses, I'm okay with real SegWit Bech32, but I don't like the "partial" solution of addresses that safe a bit on fee but not the maximum.

[pugman]

Does this really belong in meta? Loyce has set up a great campaign,yes. But one thing, do you really need to have the merit requirement? There are some rare users who have good post history but haven't received enough merits. Merit should only be a requirement for rank. Yes, you have to go through every user's history, but isn't that what makes a campaign manager a true campaign manager?

[The Cryptovator]

Yes he did a great job. Just I was thought I will make a thread about that to motivate others managers  but you already did it . Btw  there is listen for other managers. They should follow similar policy ( earn merit requirement) to help spam free forum. Of course there will be legit participant, may be it will take time but this is the best way.

[Steamtyme]

Does this really belong in meta?

I felt it was a good direction for campaigns within the forum, and felt Loyce deserved credit for the blueprints of this design.

Obviously Mods disagree, must have put to much emphasis on Loyce.

Lol. I've already deleted about 10-15 posts from people who don't read anything

Not surprised at all. For most it's just a race to not be last, in that they don't see it's not the generic requirements.

This actually makes my task a lot easier. Without it, in an earlier campaign, I've had dozens of Member-spammers apply, and checking their posts takes a lot of time. With the Merit requirement, I can reject them and delete their application in seconds.

It is nice to have an easy to go to way of trashing applications. Even without it glad to see there are a few managers out there checking post quality before accepting applications.

There's also a lot of talk about bounty managers who don't do their job, and since they don't get punished, they get away with it.

I don't follow bounties at all but I always thought that was for spamming other platforms. The only time I ever see anything about them is when someone whines about not having enough of something.... can't remember what it is, then I review their posts and see a bunch of bounty crap.

I applaud LoyceV for making this campaign a very strict one, and not just in the merit requirement, which effectively excludes most garbage posters.

It's definitely a way of finding exactly what you are looking for in advertisers. For me though it was most of the other rules that added some real teeth to the qualifications. I know a few other managers have been using merit as a requirement, but much like the system itself it needed a few specifics to back it up.

[LoyceV]

Does this really belong in meta?

Not really, but Reputation isn't the place either. I'm not sure where it should go, that's why I didn't report it.

But one thing, do you really need to have the merit requirement? There are some rare users who have good post history but haven't received enough merits. Merit should only be a requirement for rank. Yes, you have to go through every user's history, but isn't that what makes a campaign manager a true campaign manager?

The last time I did that, I closed the campaign for Members after 2 days:

From this post onwards, this campaign is closed for Member-accounts. I might reopen it later, once more mature accounts have joined. For now I see way too much farmed accounts join, those accounts only wake up to join a signature campaign.

Without the Merit system, I would simply not accept Members at all. With 95% spammers joining, it's just not worth the effort. Thanks to the Merit system, I can allow and reward some of the lower ranks who clearly deserve it.
But you're right, some rare users might be missed this way, but if their posts are good enough, Merit will find them eventually. And until then, they'll have other campaigns to choose from.

I don't follow bounties at all but I always thought that was for spamming other platforms.

Anytime you see a signature promoting an ICO, it's most likely a bounty campaign paying in "tokens" (created out of thin air).

[Thekool1s]

I believe we require more campaigns like these. Some people have gotten on top of the ladder before the merit system was implemented. This will separate the shit posters from quality posters. I want LoyceV to go 1 step further. Anyone who doesn't read his rules should get a red-tag immediately. Like people who haven't even earned a single merit and still apply for the campaign. This should help in clearing out some spammer accounts.

[LoyceV]

I want LoyceV to go 1 step further. Anyone who doesn't read his rules should get a red-tag immediately.

I won't do that. My red tags are reserved for people who really deserve it, I don't want my campaign threads to become some sort of Russian roulette.
This thread comes to mind.

[Thekool1s]

I want LoyceV to go 1 step further. Anyone who doesn't read his rules should get a red-tag immediately.

I won't do that. My red tags are reserved for people who really deserve it, I don't want my campaign threads to become some sort of Russian roulette.
This thread comes to mind.

Lol! xD I respect your opinion and see why you won't do it.

[pugman]

Not really, but Reputation isn't the place either. I'm not sure where it should go, that's why I didn't report it.

Service Discussion might be the right place.

The last time I did that, I closed the campaign for Members after 2 days:
<...>
Without the Merit system, I would simply not accept Members at all. With 95% spammers joining, it's just not worth the effort. Thanks to the Merit system, I can allow and reward some of the lower ranks who clearly deserve it.
But you're right, some rare users might be missed this way, but if their posts are good enough, Merit will find them eventually. And until then, they'll have other campaigns to choose from.

Wow. I do think you should check the post history a little bit, and then take necessary action. But I am no one to tell you how to manage your campaigns, you are doing good, so that should be suffice for now.

[audaciousbeing]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4675126.msg42182515#msg42182515

So there's a lot of talk about how removing SIG campaigns would save the forum.

Looking at the rules and set up for this campaign I'd say this is the direction we should go. Great job setting up this campaign and the rules around it.

Lots of bright spots to name a few:

• Earned merit requires to be accepted.
• No minimum number of posts, and a lower maximum
• Easy to understand rules addressing spam
• And the bounty, which should scare enough people to keep them inline.

Truth be told, he did a good job there. I saw his thread and deep down within, I knew anybody who would get in would surely be above average and for the qualification alone is raising the bar that anyone who qualifies would surely deliver and was more surprised that after about two days of launching the campaign, page 2 is yet to be filled. I think he needs to be commended not only to meet the merit requirement but also to have been earned which is something to be encouraged. But would appreciate if he can reduce the cut-off mark a little.

[LoyceV]

But would appreciate if he can reduce the cut-off mark a little.

I realize I set the bar high from the start. My reasoning behind it is that I can always reduce it, if needed.
With 9 out of 13 spots filled in just 3 days, I don't think I'll need to lower the bar.

page 2 is yet to be filled

Thanks to the delete button