Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures

[rmines]

I'm also a PD user so I feel somehow that you are also indirectly talking to me 
What do you consider spamming? Do you for instance think I am a spammer, if you have a look at my prior posts? PD also pays only out for constructive posts.

[1715569750]

1715569750

[1715569750]

1715569750

[1715569750]

1715569750

[1715569750]

1715569750

[1715569750]

1715569750

[apsvinet]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam.
Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it.
Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts.
It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name.

[nimda]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam.
Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it.
Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts.
It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name.

Somehow I think the group of people who don't spam tends to correlate with the group that wouldn't run up against the new signature limits.

[tysat]

I'm also a PD user so I feel somehow that you are also indirectly talking to me 
What do you consider spamming? Do you for instance think I am a spammer, if you have a look at my prior posts? PD also pays only out for constructive posts.

I really doubt PD is looking at every post of every person... actually I'm sure they're not, as that would be a full time job and they could just post themselves instead.  Paid signatures that pay per post encourage spam.

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam.
Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it.
Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts.
It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name.

How does changing signatures damage the community?  If the only reason your posting here is to get money, then you really don't belong here.

[Maged]

The whole forum seems completely unmoderated - this is very especially evident when going to the speculation section.

Believe it or not, but this is intentional. If it seems like the forum is moderated, then we're doing our job wrong.

I also don't really like that my eMail address is shown to the moderator that reads the report. Don't get why that is needed.

That's mainly a holdover from the original SMF reporting system, which only sent out reports by email. The only reason we keep it around is that some of us use it to be notified immediately if certain high-priority keywords are used in a report.

[freedomno1]

That's mainly a holdover from the original SMF reporting system, which only sent out reports by email. The only reason we keep it around is that some of us use it to be notified immediately if certain high-priority keywords are used in a report.

I have to admit that I must be a bit conditioned to American feeds because the first word that came to mind was Terrorism
(More likely here Scammers Ponzis Keyloggers/Viruses and the sort)

[BawsyBoss]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

[apsvinet]

I'm also a PD user so I feel somehow that you are also indirectly talking to me 
What do you consider spamming? Do you for instance think I am a spammer, if you have a look at my prior posts? PD also pays only out for constructive posts.

I really doubt PD is looking at every post of every person... actually I'm sure they're not, as that would be a full time job and they could just post themselves instead.  Paid signatures that pay per post encourage spam.

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam.
Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it.
Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts.
It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name.

How does changing signatures damage the community?  If the only reason your posting here is to get money, then you really don't belong here.

I nowhere imply that it's the sole reason I'm using the forum, and I know a lot of other people don't that are advertisers don't either.
But knowing there's a slight reward for contributing increases the incentive of making good posts.
Spammers will exist with or without these signatures, for the simple fact that they're not getting paid anyways.
Nothing changes, spammers didn't get paid before signature changes, and they won't get paid afterwards. The only thing that changes is that the non spammers won't get paid either, which -will- lead to less good posts being made.

It somehow feels like you might as well be telling your employees at work "We're removing all salaries because we've a few people here that slack and don't work during the day. I know this will affect the ones that actually are working and contributing, but then again, if you're only here to make money, perhaps you should look for another job." Rather than "We're going to fire the people at our company who we have found are in fact not working during the days".

That's a comparison of changing the signatures to banning spammers.

[nimda]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad.

[BawsyBoss]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad.

But it also promotes spam. It's either one or the other.

[nimda]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad.

But it also promotes spam. It's either one or the other.

My point was you can't expect advertisers to pay on the basis of activity, because it has no relation to impressions. I can post twice a month and gain 28 activity. I can post 200 times a month and gain 28 activity. The advertiser would obviously prefer the latter, and short of a ruling from theymos, the latter is what will get paid for.

[BadBear]

I'm also a PD user so I feel somehow that you are also indirectly talking to me 
What do you consider spamming? Do you for instance think I am a spammer, if you have a look at my prior posts? PD also pays only out for constructive posts.

I really doubt PD is looking at every post of every person... actually I'm sure they're not, as that would be a full time job and they could just post themselves instead.  Paid signatures that pay per post encourage spam.

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam.
Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it.
Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts.
It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name.

How does changing signatures damage the community?  If the only reason your posting here is to get money, then you really don't belong here.

I nowhere imply that it's the sole reason I'm using the forum, and I know a lot of other people don't that are advertisers don't either.
But knowing there's a slight reward for contributing increases the incentive of making good posts.
Spammers will exist with or without these signatures, for the simple fact that they're not getting paid anyways.
Nothing changes, spammers didn't get paid before signature changes, and they won't get paid afterwards. The only thing that changes is that the non spammers won't get paid either, which -will- lead to less good posts being made.

It somehow feels like you might as well be telling your employees at work "We're removing all salaries because we've a few people here that slack and don't work during the day. I know this will affect the ones that actually are working and contributing, but then again, if you're only here to make money, perhaps you should look for another job." Rather than "We're going to fire the people at our company who we have found are in fact not working during the days".

That's a comparison of changing the signatures to banning spammers.

What a terrible analogy.

And you can't tell me stunna is checking every post, he pays for up to 8k posts a month, unlimited participants. But hey he says no spam so it's okay.

[DeboraMeeks]

Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Then newbies will be less effective advertisers, which would hopefully significantly reduce the incentive for low-content posts. And when people become capable of effectively advertising through their signatures, they'll have invested a lot of time into their accounts, and they won't risk being banned by spamming.

Can this be stickied somewhere please?

[freedomno1]

Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Then newbies will be less effective advertisers, which would hopefully significantly reduce the incentive for low-content posts. And when people become capable of effectively advertising through their signatures, they'll have invested a lot of time into their accounts, and they won't risk being banned by spamming.

Can this be stickied somewhere please?

Ponders Reads the Text under Signature
Images are not allowed. As your member rank increases, you can use more types of styling in your signature, and your signature can be longer. See the stickies in Meta for more info.
Max 2000; characters remaining: 1600

Looks at the Stickies in Meta
Goes this wasn't stickied *Facepalm*

+1 to what he said sticky it 

[Stunna]

Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Then newbies will be less effective advertisers, which would hopefully significantly reduce the incentive for low-content posts. And when people become capable of effectively advertising through their signatures, they'll have invested a lot of time into their accounts, and they won't risk being banned by spamming.

Can this be stickied somewhere please?

I think that's a fair change, the vast majority of the spam is definitely from Jr member/member accounts. I restricted my promotion to 50+ activity for the last two rounds but it doesn't take very long to get 50. I did make some attempt to disqualify spammers but it was pretty much near impossible to thoroughly look into individual users. What would kill spam completely is probably basing the payments off activity which I'll look into doing if I continue this promotion. If you'd like me to stop doing this entirely I'd be totally willing to cancel it, there are already many competitors though.

[hilariousandco]

Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Then newbies will be less effective advertisers, which would hopefully significantly reduce the incentive for low-content posts. And when people become capable of effectively advertising through their signatures, they'll have invested a lot of time into their accounts, and they won't risk being banned by spamming.

Can this be stickied somewhere please?

I think that's a fair change, the vast majority of the spam is definitely from Jr member/member accounts. I restricted my promotion to 50+ activity for the last two rounds but it doesn't take very long to get 50. I did make some attempt to disqualify spammers but it was pretty much near impossible to thoroughly look into individual users. What would kill spam completely is probably basing the payments off activity which I'll look into doing if I continue this promotion. If you'd like me to stop doing this entirely I'd be totally willing to cancel it, there are already many competitors though.

Basing it off activity wont really work for you or users. The advertisers who have offered deals based on activity before have quickly been exploited and shut up shop. The Ritz Grand Casino deal did this by paying people upfront and more for the higher activity you had. People signed up and made little to no posts and some users were buying (or trying to buy) higher activity accounts just to claim the payment (one guy was actually banned for hassling users via PM to buy their accounts). If you paid per activity earned that month all people need to do is post twice in each two week period then they've got their full 28 activity for that month.

As I've said numerous times before, a simple solution would be to just crack down on spammers and treat them how you would any other spammers with or without a signature deal. The community can police the deals themselves. Just report spammers and abusers to either the mods or sig providers and they'll be dealt with appropriately.

[guybrushthreepwood]

Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Then newbies will be less effective advertisers, which would hopefully significantly reduce the incentive for low-content posts. And when people become capable of effectively advertising through their signatures, they'll have invested a lot of time into their accounts, and they won't risk being banned by spamming.

Can this be stickied somewhere please?

I think that's a fair change, the vast majority of the spam is definitely from Jr member/member accounts. I restricted my promotion to 50+ activity for the last two rounds but it doesn't take very long to get 50. I did make some attempt to disqualify spammers but it was pretty much near impossible to thoroughly look into individual users. What would kill spam completely is probably basing the payments off activity which I'll look into doing if I continue this promotion. If you'd like me to stop doing this entirely I'd be totally willing to cancel it, there are already many competitors though.

Basing it off activity wont really work for you or users.

It'll work for me if they pay a bitcoin per activity point lol. I don't think there's much spam coming from Primedice people now after the 50 activity min was required. A lot moved to that bit777 deal as he didn't have any min requirement but they've closed that deal for the time being, but i think making a minimum activty to participate is a good idea.

[BawsyBoss]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad.

But it also promotes spam. It's either one or the other.

My point was you can't expect advertisers to pay on the basis of activity, because it has no relation to impressions. I can post twice a month and gain 28 activity. I can post 200 times a month and gain 28 activity. The advertiser would obviously prefer the latter, and short of a ruling from theymos, the latter is what will get paid for.

Are you sure about that? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=291387.msg5436004#msg5436004
It is good to see that campaign owners can see that spam IS happening and that it is quite a problem here. Props to Stunna for even considering it.

[phazon307]

Do you not realize that this is one of the things that drive the bitcoin force. If nobody can get revenue from bitcoins bitcoin dies. Here is a simple solution instead of worrying about meaningless posts why not go to a different post and find something that interests you there. Here is an even better solution your in control of your own eyes so if you don't like seeing meaningless posts some where very simple tell your eyes not to view it.

[hilariousandco]

Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.

The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.

This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity.

While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad.

But it also promotes spam. It's either one or the other.

My point was you can't expect advertisers to pay on the basis of activity, because it has no relation to impressions. I can post twice a month and gain 28 activity. I can post 200 times a month and gain 28 activity. The advertiser would obviously prefer the latter, and short of a ruling from theymos, the latter is what will get paid for.

Are you sure about that? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=291387.msg5436004#msg5436004
It is good to see that campaign owners can see that spam IS happening and that it is quite a problem here. Props to Stunna for even considering it.

You haven't seen what Stunna has offered yet as he hasn't finalised the new payments, but if it goes by activity it's probably not gonna be worth it to either him or us depending on how much he actually pays. He can only really either pay a little for not a lot or a lot for very little, and I can't imagine there being much of a middle ground or one that is fair or worth it to both parties, but it'll be interesting to see what he comes up with. Same for all the other deals too.