Have we left "Bitcoin Discussion" board for spammers, forever??

[Alone055]

It really breaks my heart when I visit 'Bitcoin Discussion' board and see the amount of spam there. And believe me, I'm not saying this only to show that I care for the forum, though I do, but I really mean what I'm saying right now and it is really saddening to see this, honestly.

The amount of spam and spammers are increasing all over the forum, but it seems like that board has become their ultimate destination to spit their shit and increase their activities or meet their post thresholds for their campaigns or whatever their reason is behind this. The situation hasn't been this bad before maybe, but now, you cannot find a single thread/topic that hasn't turned into a SMT (Spam Mega Thread), and it takes only a few hours for that to happen. That is how much spam they generate in that board.

I know that almost every single person knows all the things that I just said, but what compelled me to start this discussion is that I wanted to ask everyone that why have we left that board just for them? I know they are way more in quantity than us, but that doesn't justify leaving them all alone, so that they do whatever they want and we won't even touch that board at all.

The forum is named "Bitcointalk" which technically means "Talking about Bitcoin" or something like that. And the place to do that (Bitcoin Discussion board) is covered totally with useless discussions that we don't even want to see. I know that we can't just get them out of there, but at least we can discuss our own things, separately, in that board. That is what Moderated Threads are all about.

I just wonder how nice it would be to have some nice and qualitative Bitcoin discussions with the people that I see and read in Meta or other sections of the forum. What if all of them come together, discussing something regarding Bitcoin? A topic, totally free of spammers, with only quality posters. We can achieve that by creating Moderated Threads in Bitcoin Discussion board where we have the power to delete unsubstantial posts and only leave the ones that contribute something to the discussion.

We should not leave that board only to them. It deserves way more attention from the ones who care for the forum than what it is getting right now.

[1714782014]

1714782014

[1714782014]

1714782014

[1714782014]

1714782014

[1714782014]

1714782014

[LFC_Bitcoin]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

[Alone055]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

The quality is dropped because we have stopped trying to get our hands in there anymore. Starting useful and constructive discussions in moderated mode can still show up some quality discussions in that board but only if we try.
And, of course, not every single person, wearing a paid signature, is a spammer. I'm wearing one too, and I can totally speak out about me not being a spammer.

After reading this - I just decided to devote some of my time on the Bitcoin Discussion board. I hope soon I will end up reporting a bunches of trash.

Appreciate that! We need more people doing the same, and along with reporting, you should also think of initiating some discussions that can catch attention of some of the good posters and hopefully we will see some quality in that board again, soon. Just make the threads moderated to not let spammers get in.

[mdayonliner]

~

After reading this - I just decided to devote some of my time on the Bitcoin Discussion board. I hope soon I will end up reporting a bunches of trash.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I venture in to Bitcoin Discussion fairly regularly. I find that sorting by newly created topics (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=1.0;sort=first_post;desc) can help to find some actual discussion - it effectively filters out all the spam mega-threads.

The problem is every thread gets taken over eventually. I might get a couple of good back-and-forth discussion points going within a few hours, but within a day or two there will be a page or two of spam posts appearing between thoughtful posts. At this point I usually unwatch the thread and never return - I have no desire to filter through pages of trash to find the next original thought worth responding to.

I guess my point is that there is still some genuine discussion happening, it is just being drowned out by the crowd. I guess self-moderated topics might be the way to go? I might create a couple sometime.

[Joel_Jantsen]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

Well that means you're okay with the paid signature campaigns but just wanted them to be spam free. It's not as same as you saying they should be stopped completely. If you were any serious, you'd not be wearing a signature at all. That's a good first initiative.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

Well that means you're okay with the paid signature campaigns but just wanted them to be spam free. It's not as same as you saying they should be stopped completely. If you were any serious, you'd not be wearing a signature at all. That's a good first initiative.

The problem is not paid signatures in general. When the merit system was implemented, juniors were removed of clickable signatures. But they can still have (non-clickable) signatures, and many bounties pay them for posting crap with those. So the spam didn't decrease (much?).

Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely, and there have been other many good proposals that they will never be implemented or will take ages until they do.

[Joel_Jantsen]

The problem is not paid signatures in general. When the merit system was implemented, juniors were removed of clickable signatures. But they can still have (non-clickable) signatures, and many bounties pay them for posting crap with those. So the spam didn't decrease (much?).

It is, according to the guy I quoted above. We don't want to punish the entire community by letting them participate in signature campaigns just because some bounty whores are getting paid to spam with Junior Member accounts. Maybe we can ban signatures for junior members or find another workaround.

Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely, and there have been other many good proposals that they will never be implemented or will take ages until they do.

Most of those suggestions are honestly very biased and would only work in the favor of the high ranked accounts.

[Alone055]

The problem is every thread gets taken over eventually. I might get a couple of good back-and-forth discussion points going within a few hours, but within a day or two there will be a page or two of spam posts appearing between thoughtful posts.
...
....
I guess my point is that there is still some genuine discussion happening, it is just being drowned out by the crowd.

That's exactly what happens there. A day before, I visited that board and posted on a topic that was almost newly started and didn't have a lot of replies, and I thought it kind of deserves to post something on it and I did it, but what I found today is that topic has grown to 5 to 6 pages already, in a single day, and all you can find there are useless replies from extremely useless spammers. Now, who would open every single page of such a thread to see if there is a post worth reading?

I guess self-moderated topics might be the way to go? I might create a couple sometime.

That's what I suggested. Self-moderated threads can have a very big effect on the quality of that board. People starting useful discussions making the threads self-moderated to clean the incoming spam can give us some hope.

Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely,

I don't completely agree with that since I'm a Member, and I believe I deserve to wear a signature because I have earned my position. I was a Newbie when Merit system was introduced, and I reached this rank because, I think, I have been contributing something to every discussion that I have been a part of. Removing signatures for Jr. members can do the work because they cannot reach Member rank without earning Merits, and if someone can manage to earn at least 10 Merits, I believe they deserve to have the right to wear a signature.

[Silent26]

Honestly, I often visit Bitcoin Discussion before as there are still some good discussions in there "before" and I also used to make some topics there. Yeah there are already some spammers that time but it's not the same enormous spammers we were having right now and I also think so that Bitcoin Discussion has been fully invaded by shitposters. I used to spent most of my time reading discussions there that time but now you won't be able to find a good discussion, you won't even be able to find a unique topic that is not posted multiple times.

The main reason I can see why there are too many spammers posting there is to increase their posts counts and to reach their bounty posts quotas. I really want the idea to remove signatures from Jr. Member and Newbies as those two ranks are the ranks of members who usually posts in there. I'm sure that it will lessen spammers posting shits not only in Bitcoin Discussion but to some other boards/sections.
Don't worry, we can still recover that board. All we need is action from Admin, Mods and of course to us fellow members who cares to this Bitcoin Forum.

[TeQuiero]

Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely, and there have been other many good proposals that they will never be implemented or will take ages until they do.

Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

All you can see are bounty and restrict the bounty. But bounty is not the root of the problem. Assume that theymos will remove all bounties for member and lower ranks, what's then? Bitcoin Discussion will become a dead zone? I was expecting the OP could end up with some solution for this question

I don't completely agree with that since I'm a Member, and I believe I deserve to wear a signature because I have earned my position <...> if someone can manage to earn at least 10 Merits, I believe they deserve to have the right to wear a signature.

Though I agree with your bolded words but your first sentence makes me less respect you. Why don't you just ask against him: "Hey, what about remove all the bounties for full member and lower ranks?". LOL

[o_e_l_e_o]

Removing signatures for Jr. members can do the work because they cannot reach Member rank without earning Merits, and if someone can manage to earn at least 10 Merits, I believe they deserve to have the right to wear a signature.

It doesn't even need to be 10. If you set a 1 merit requirement to reach Junior Member, that would probably stop >95% of the spammers. I don't think that's an unreasonable requirement.

Or, how about this: You gain 5 characters of signature space for every earned merit.

[hilariousetc]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

A better solution would be to crack down on the ICOs campaigns that are paying them to post rubbish in there. I've also been saying for years that that board needs at least one dedicated mod. I've messaged theymos about this probably 3-5 times over the past month or two alone. I managed to get a list of the top reporters in there from him about two months or so ago, but no action has been taken so far to implement one. In fact, I even messaged him about it yesterday. The longer theymos doesn't act on these things the worse it gets. Assigning a mod probably takes a few clicks from him and the benefits would be self-evident with no further action required from him. You can even just promote an existing mod to there if there's an issue with adding new people (though we should probably do both).

Three things can be done to help this situation which don't require much effort from theymos:

Assign some dedicated mods to trash spam threads on sight and help clean up the place.

Punishments for campaigns that are consistently paying spammers to churn out junk in there.

Remove signatures from lower ranks completely and/or make a merit requirement to become a Junior. Ideally you wouldn't be able to have a signature until you've become a Member which requires ten merit. The forum is being over-populated with clueless kids who have little to no knowledge about bitcoin but are churning out nonsense just to get paid. This can't be acceptable. If you can't acquire ten merit then you shouldn't be able to earn here and these people should stick to claiming bounties until they can earn the merit.

Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely, and there have been other many good proposals that they will never be implemented or will take ages until they do.

Most of those suggestions are honestly very biased and would only work in the favor of the high ranked accounts.

I don't think they're biased; they're logical. Newbies and Juniors who can barely speak English and know little to nothing about bitcoin shouldn't be able to get paid to post here. This is the campaign's fault for not doing their job properly so we need to force them to do this and removing signatures from lower ranks is the only way to do this. They barely have a signature anyway and it's pretty much useless to pay them for it, but ICOs don't care. They pay people in tokens they've created for free so they might as well pay as many people as they can because they still get their name out there even if it is minimal. The ICOs and the spammers they pay have ruined this forum and that needs to change. Remove signatures from lower ranks so bots and the worst of the worst can't get paid for writing crap or copy and pasting. Either prove your worth here by getting ten merit or purchase a Copper Membership if you want to be able to earn.

Theymos has said that this forum isn't a welfare system for people but that's what it has sadly become. We need to find a compromise here and removing signatures from lower ranks and punishing ICOs that pay for rubbish are one of the only two ways I can think of that will tackle this effectively. This doesn't effect anybodies ability to post here - just earn, and that shouldn't be a right for everyone, especially those who aren't qualified to do so and also do it at the detriment of the forum.

[Theb]

Usually when I visit the Bitcoin Discussion Section, I don't come there to post in threads anymore but I am there to report members that are contributing to spam, my help might not be effective but if we band together the spam in that section will be wiped out clean in no time. But before the problem of spam in the section even starts I wish there was a some kind of screening process or a thread approval in the section first, before it gets shown in the section. By doing so we can filter out threads that are easy to answer or threads with misleading titles that are often answered by newbies right away. The moderators can easily reject them in the screening process and this leads to newbies only finding topics that can't be easily answered by generic crap.

[Silent26]

Punishments for campaigns that are consistently paying spammers to churn out junk in there.

I like this one. We can easily spot campaigns that are paying spammers for their project by just visiting Alt Section and I'm sure that we can catch a lot of campaign that were doing such activities. If this one were only applied, I think I'm hunting shit campaigns right now.

The main root of the problem comes from those shit Bounties and irresponsible bounty managers. Shitposters are not the only one we should blame and punished, those very irresponsible managers should receive enough consequences too because they are the one who were encouraging spam for the first place.

[mu_enrico]

I have tried to report spam posts on that board, but I found it difficult to draw the line between a genuine short post and a shit post. Moreover, rank cannot act as a determiner. Honestly, even a Legendary creates severe broken English posts with no value.

As a former shitposter when I first came to this forum, I directly went to bitcoin and altcoin boards and saw how people behave. And five minutes later... a brand new shitposter appear.

I think we don't have to worry if theymos implements:

<...>

• A newbie welcome message or link to a welcome thread upon sign-up explaining the basic rules and links to everything they need to know including the full forum rules, helpful guides and FAQs etc. No excuses for not knowing the rules then.
• More patrollers/mods who just handle sig spam or farmers.
• Enforce the sig campaign guidelines. If a campaign is spotted that is doing little to nothing and is abused en mass by spammers, farmers, bots and copy and pasters they are warned. If nothing changes then they are punished with such things as bans, threads trashed, signatures blacklisted site-wide etc.

OK in principle, would require thought/adjustment/implementation. Many of these things are more complex than they look at first glance.
<...>

But only God knows when these suggestions will be implemented. In the meantime, maybe more spambusters is the only feasible thing to do.

[Hexah]

Not only for Bitcoin Discussion but if we base it on statistics, Bitcoin Discussion is just below to Altcoin Discussion. Speculation and Economics section too is sort to be the spot where they hone their shitty posts to increase their post counts.

[Marcel666]

There is nothing that can be done, as freedom of speech is upheld, and every thread would end up having multiple, repetitive answers, which goes on and on.
But there are some quire useful information available  there, and I think it's best of an OP would lock his/her thread, once they are satisfied with the discussion, or their questions has been answered. This would limit the boards available for posting, and also the amount of spam.

[Pinkprint]

These days, there are so many threads complaining about the level of spam in most threads.
And frankly, it's becoming a repetitive topic, similar to the spam being complained about.

It's obvious, bounties, and multiple account users limit the amount of quality post as users have a post target.
If the more experienced users contribute more in these threads, it would go a long way in raising it from the mud.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

The problem is not paid signatures in general.
<snip>
Signatures up to junior member of even to member have to be removed completely, and there have been other many good proposals that they will never be implemented or will take ages until they do.

Agreed and agreed.  There are a lot of members here who advertise in their signatures and who aren't shitposters.  Chipmixer participants are a good example of that, and I really wish all campaigns had DarkStar_'s standards.  He only accepts Sr. Members and above, and in general the output of its members is above average. 

Unfortunately you see the exact opposite when you look at bounty participants.  They're mostly Jr. Members and they write one-line garbage.

All of this has been said many times before, and I'm not sure if it's even worth discussing anymore.  I'm sure Theymos is well aware of the problem and of the solution.  He's just choosing not to act.

I also agree with OP that it's a damn shame that what should be the best section of bitcointalk is actually the worst.  Anyone coming here genuinely wanting to discuss bitcoin issues will be sadly disappointed when they post in a thread there and their post never gets read or responded to.  It's a discussion forum after all, but it's morphed into a posting forum.

Most of those suggestions are honestly very biased and would only work in the favor of the high ranked accounts.

But it's not the high-ranked accounts that are doing the spamming.  It's very clearly people who come here just to spam and who create new accounts at will and who have no barriers preventing them from achieving Jr. Member rank.

[r1s2g3]

Actually , Bitcoin discussion board is just become some kind news release or speculate the price of the bitcoin. It is very hard to find any topic there that demands real discussion. I think the very first step should be trash all the discussion that are speculating price/ or asking will bitcoin rise or fall.
When we already have Wall observer thread, we do not need these topic there.
Threads that are posting link will require some effort whether they are just repeating whatever in site or really put some value by adding some content of its own. Any topic just repeating the things also need to be deleted.

[RustyBits]

I don't completely agree with that since I'm a Member, and I believe I deserve to wear a signature because I have earned my position. I was a Newbie when Merit system was introduced, and I reached this rank because, I think, I have been contributing something to every discussion that I have been a part of. Removing signatures for Jr. members can do the work because they cannot reach Member rank without earning Merits, and if someone can manage to earn at least 10 Merits, I believe they deserve to have the right to wear a signature.

Yes! I agree! I also joined the forum as a newbie -- looking for a place to learn more about cryptos and get some ideas from like minded users. I knew nothing about bounties or signature campaigns when I signed up and I didn't post much at all for several months after I signed up, because I was reading and learning - not talking about sh!t I had no clue about! As I read posts, I saw the user rankings and merit scores and so forth and did some research to see what the were and how they were achieved.  That was when I first found out that people could actually earn cryptos by participating in the boards.

I won't lie. I immediately wondered how much I could earn just by signing up with one of these "campaigns", but I also knew that I had very little technical knowledge or real life experience to share. So I knew that signature campaigns weren't for me (at that moment). But I wasn't prepared to swear off of them forever.

Fast forward several months and I've bumped up one rank to Jr. Member and hope to someday soon go up another notch to Member. I don't post just to rank up, but I do post if I think I have something constructive and contributory to say.  Like Alone055, I believe that I have earned the right to my signature, bland and unoriginal as it is, by following the rules that have been laid out for me by the current merit system.

Not all newbies are spammers and not all spammers are newbies.

[Ferrytale1]

Not all newbies are spammers and not all spammers are newbies.

Exactly, there are spammers who are at higher ranks, and I think they should get the benefit of the doubt as they are fairly new.

[athanz88]

Punishments for campaigns that are consistently paying spammers to churn out junk in there.

I like this idea and has already stated it couple times in my older posts, but do you have any idea on what kind of punishment will be made? And who will be the judge?

For the OP. All of your frustation is already felt by other members too, and some of member already make a move to make it better by persuading Theymos in a private and closed communication. There have been a talking about other suggestion too, but the key is on Theymos and he stated that acting as a CEO-like for this forum is hard and finding people/person to do the job to aid him is as hard as doing the job alone too, so we would not see the changes if that key problem is not solved yet. Either Theymos is not busy anymore with other works and can focus on this forum or he find a right person to help him.

If you want to ask people to create something there and make a change, i think it has a very low chance to be a successful attempt. It is like the good proportion to spammer are 1 : 1000. You can not win the fight.

I have read about "self moderated thread" in one of replies here, and i would like to say it is useless too. Five minutes into digging a snack and take a break from your PC for a while will leave you with couple of spams, and you can not check your thread everyday, so once again, spammer wins.

[Alone055]

Though I agree with your bolded words but your first sentence makes me less respect you. Why don't you just ask against him: "Hey, what about remove all the bounties for full member and lower ranks?". LOL

Though its a shame, but the amount of spam generated on the forum comes mostly from our ranks (Newbie, Jr. member, Member). Hence, I cannot suggest disabling signatures for any higher rank but nor I would lay my weapon down if someone tries to attack me only because I belong to a cast that is nasty as shit.

A better solution would be to crack down on the ICOs campaigns that are paying them to post rubbish in there.
...
....
Punishments for campaigns that are consistently paying spammers to churn out junk in there.

I too have said the same things in past, but just a bit differently. I said, that campaigns should be forced to either accept users above Jr. member rank, or only select the users that are at least mildly constructive. A campaign, if found accepting users that are extreme shitposters, should be punished by either locking down their thread or something like that.

Not only for Bitcoin Discussion but if we base it on statistics, Bitcoin Discussion is just below to Altcoin Discussion. Speculation and Economics section too is sort to be the spot where they hone their shitty posts to increase their post counts.

I agree that no board is less in terms of spam posts these days, but "Bitcoin Discussion" is the only board that comes to your mind when you hear the term "Bitcointalk", and it deserves to be clean, and if it cannot be cleaned, it should at least have some quality topics, in self-moderated mode where constructive posters can come and have a good discussion for the day.

These days, there are so many threads complaining about the level of spam in most threads.
And frankly, it's becoming a repetitive topic, similar to the spam being complained about.

How is this similar to the spam? 
Its not the same topic that is repeated, like how spammers do. Every person, who condemns the act of spamming tries to bring up something that needs to be done to tackle it, and as long as the spammers exist, these anti-spam posts would keep coming.

I have read about "self moderated thread" in one of replies here, and i would like to say it is useless too. Five minutes into digging a snack and take a break from your PC for a while will leave you with couple of spams, and you can not check your thread everyday, so once again, spammer wins.

I don't think it is useless as long as the creator of that topic takes this responsibility to keep the thread clean from spam and spammers, and that is what I want to see. Besides, I think every single person, who comes to the forum everyday with positive energy to have some good discussions and read some good posts would surely open up a thread in that section if the creator of that thread is someone who is known in the forum to be among the good ones here.

[3acaga]

Interesting topic and discussion, thanks to the author ...
Yes, I completely agree with you that this "Bitcoin Discussion" has become a spam theme.
But I want to ask the question to all the Full, Seniors, Legends - so why do you give a bad example yourself, and unsubscribe in these spam themes created mostly by beginners and younger members of the forum?
And I'll tell you what I think - you write everywhere about banning signatures for beginning forum participants, and you can not stop writing posts in spam because of your posts for signing.
PS, Look at yourself first, before criticizing others ...

[bitart]

...
That's what I suggested. Self-moderated threads can have a very big effect on the quality of that board. People starting useful discussions making the threads self-moderated to clean the incoming spam can give us some hope.
...

Self moderated topic won't be a solution in Bitcoin Discussion, as long as our beloved spammers will continue to work spam as busy as a bee...
If you start a self-moderated topic with a decent subject to discuss
- you will have less posts than a normal topic, because spammers won't work spam in vain, so
- your topic will not receive enough 'bumps' daily to be able to stay on the first page, so
- nobody will find it after a few hours <end of the story>

I've used to report in Bitcoin Discussion (managed to have over 500 good reports in just a few days), but it's like you want to fight the roaring fire in the woods with a water pistol...
You can put countless people's energy, time and effort to fight agains the spam in that (and every other) board, but what about cutting spam at the roots? It would require much less time, energy, and effort to just restrict them somehow.
If that could happen, those hard working members who just report spam day in and day out, would have time again to create constructive posts, instead of just pushing the report button...

 

[TheBeardedBaby]

I started an initiative some time ago to make only self-moderated threads there to fight the sig. spam. I even stated a thread and got some success in way of discussion.
[Discussion]How to decentralize the price of the bitcoin? Self-moderated.
I think if we follow this way of posting we may have some part of the section back to the real discussions.

[Joel_Jantsen]

But it's not the high-ranked accounts that are doing the spamming.  It's very clearly people who come here just to spam and who create new accounts at will and who have no barriers preventing them from achieving Jr. Member rank.

Yes, that's true but we can't say for sure that every junior member account comes here for just spamming. It would be unfair for the members who come here to contribute constructively. Although the fraction of such posters will be quite low, it would be biased if we let them suffer because of the other shit-posters.

[Alone055]

I started an initiative some time ago to make only self-moderated threads there to fight the sig. spam. I even stated a thread and got some success in way of discussion.
[Discussion]How to decentralize the price of the bitcoin? Self-moderated.
I think if we follow this way of posting we may have some part of the section back to the real discussions.

I must have missed your thread. That initiative is exactly what I suggested here as well. I, too, believe that we can still recover some boards if all of us start taking part in them and don't just sit and watch. I agree with everyone saying that the spammers are too many in quantity and they won't let us succeed in this, but that should not be a reason for us to not do anything for it. You can't win a fight if you don't even fight, no matter how hard it is.

we can't say for sure that every junior member account comes here for just spamming. It would be unfair for the members who come here to contribute constructively. Although the fraction of such posters will be quite low, it would be biased if we let them suffer because of the other shit-posters.

I believe a member, who comes here not for spamming and knows what constructiveness is, can easily earn 10 Merits and then become able to wear signatures and not suffer at all. There aren't really a lot of them to be honest, maybe 5% out of 100%, and we should not leave the remaining 95% untouched only because it might affect the 5% a little. That would be unfair to the community itself.
Removing signatures for lower ranks would only reduce spam, but theymos already said that he wouldn't do it.

[Zapo]

Yeah, bitcoin discussion is unreadable. Whenever I'm bored or want to know the news, I just go browse around Press and Serious discussion.

I took a screenshot of some of the newest/hottest bitcoin discussion threads on the first page and it's quite alarming to see the results. The results are quite alarming.

Most of the threads are either spam threads or just threads that have been made hundreds of times. I doubt anyone actually reads threads anymore, and instead just reads the title and makes a quick post for a couple stakes.

[Silent26]

I doubt anyone actually reads threads anymore, and instead just reads the title and makes a quick post for a couple stakes.

Yeph, that's actually how things work in Bitcoin Discussion now. Some are not even reading the topic's title and just posting nonsense or off-topic reply and some are just copying and pasting other members reply. Bitcoin Discussion already became a spam fest for spammers and we should not disregard this problem or else this "spam virus" will spread through other sections and boards here in the forum. I wish Meta section won't get infected (but actually spammers are now starting to make nonsense threads here in Meta).

[o_e_l_e_o]

I doubt anyone actually reads threads anymore, and instead just reads the title and makes a quick post for a couple stakes.

You just got me thinking, so I performed a quick and dirty snapshot audit and analysis:

I just copy-and-pasted the first page of a selection of boards, dumped them in to excel, summed all the replies and all the views, then divided total 1st page views by 1st page replies to get a ratio of views per reply. In other words, for each reply posted, how many views are there, per board.

The results are exactly as expected:

Development & Technical Discussion: 19.57
Technical Support: 21.11
Project Development: 56.53
Economics: 32.56
Meta: 18.69

Bitcoin Discussion: 3.81.
This is about 10% of the average ratio of the less spammy boards. I think this is proof that people aren't viewing threads on Bitcoin Discussion out of interest in the topic or replies, they are doing it to pad their post count.

[Alone055]

I doubt anyone actually reads threads anymore, and instead just reads the title and makes a quick post for a couple stakes.

Some read the title, and some only read the last few replies of that thread and starting posting according to them, without even reading the OP.
A spammer is just like a child who only does what others are doing, with no further thinking of whether it is right or wrong, or whether it should be done or not.

we should not disregard this problem or else this "spam virus" will spread through other sections and boards here in the forum.

It has. "Bitcoin Discussion" is not the only board that is flooded with spam every day, but it is one of the main boards of the forum and that is what takes my heart. Otherwise, there is more than enough spam in every single section of the forum that needs not be there.

I wish Meta section won't get infected (but actually spammers are now starting to make nonsense threads here in Meta).

They require a place to spill their shit, and they don't really find it here in Meta and that's the actual reason why we don't see a lot of spammers in our threads in this board. If someone starts a useless thread here, it gets reported if it does not belong here, but in Bitcoin Discussion section a spammer starts a topic which actually is a discussion but isn't constructive or is repeated several times already, so it would remain there and becomes the place for other spammers to fulfill their needs.

Bitcoin Discussion: 3.81.

That's insane!
I wonder what would be the results of the same analysis in Altcoin Discussion board knowing it is the most crowded board by replies/posts right now.

[lukeburchill]

What if someone posts repeated answers to repeated questions?
What if someone posts something he does not know the truth, and only based on Opinion?
Are they Spammers  ?

[o_e_l_e_o]

That's insane!
I wonder what would be the results of the same analysis in Altcoin Discussion board knowing it is the most crowded board by replies/posts right now.

Altcoin Discussion works out similarly to Bitcoin Discussion, at a ratio of 4.36.

Now, if you sort by new threads in Bitcoin Discussion (and therefore include no spam-megathreads in the analysis) the ratio increases from 3.81 to 6.51. If you do the opposite, and only include threads with >200 posts, the ratio drops to 3.40. Some of the individual spam threads are coming in with ratios below 3.

I think this correlates with what we all suspect - no one is going in to a spam thread with 10+ pages of replies, and reading what is written. Half the time they don't even read the OP. They just churn out a line or two that has almost certainly been said before, that no one else will ever read.

[LeGaulois]

Setting your new threads in self-moderated mode help a lot. You can be surprised. It should be a standard for users interested to participate in a normal discussion, but sadly the thread is drowned by others still. If we have 10 people making daily 10 new threads, we can make a revolution

Personally, I regret to never see some members posting there. :/

[cryptohunter]

the bitcoin main board is rather like a personal one on one with satoshi compared to the alt main board.

think yourselves fortunate if you have no need to venture there to find a sensible/informative/mildly interesting thread to read

decentralised moderation via a new version of noob jail using junior boards and merits is the only way forward

want to spend your time feeling negative about reporting bots, spammers, shills, and just noobs that have not read the rules or want to spend some time now and then rewarding new genuine members that want to learn themselves and willing to help other noobs learn about crypto.

seems an obvious way forward and nobody has really posed a reason not to go forward with it other than people can go to a lot of time trouble if they want to get around this .... only to be nuked if they are noticed acting in an undesirable way later on.

let's get on with it before we have nobody left posting anywhere except in meta complaining about how shit the main boards are now.

I have even gone back to using reddit lately that's how bad it really is here now on the main alt boards and even the btc main board is just the same crap regurgitated round and round

Of course some of the ann threads here are still the best for specific projects if you don't want to go slack or more annoying mediums

[khaled0111]

The problem is in the high number of replies.

Who is going to read more than 1k comments and the one writing the last comment what is he going to add to the thread!
Besides, sometimes you find threads on the first page and after wasting your time reading it you discover that it was written years ago and an idiot bump it by adding an unuseful reply.

[Welsh]

What if someone posts repeated answers to repeated questions?
What if someone posts something he does not know the truth, and only based on Opinion?
Are they Spammers  ?

Depends on the context really, and how much effort is put into the post. There's too many variables to paint everyone with the same brush, and it would need to be taken as a case by case basis. Duplicate questions aren't too bad, and some times invites healthy discussion.

[3acaga]

The problem is in the high number of replies.

Who is going to read more than 1k comments and the one writing the last comment what is he going to add to the thread!
Besides, sometimes you find threads on the first page and after wasting your time reading it you discover that it was written years ago and an idiot pop it up by adding a new reply.

A good comparison thanks ...
I want to ask a question - where are the moderators of this section, why they do not suspend the same topics?
Spam is very bad, but if the moderator for a couple of weeks will ban the same in the sense of the topic, believe it to stop.

[Zapo]

That's insane!
I wonder what would be the results of the same analysis in Altcoin Discussion board knowing it is the most crowded board by replies/posts right now.

Altcoin Discussion works out similarly to Bitcoin Discussion, at a ratio of 4.36.

Now, if you sort by new threads in Bitcoin Discussion (and therefore include no spam-megathreads in the analysis) the ratio increases from 3.81 to 6.51. If you do the opposite, and only include threads with >200 posts, the ratio drops to 3.40. Some of the individual spam threads are coming in with ratios below 3.

I think this correlates with what we all suspect - no one is going in to a spam thread with 10+ pages of replies, and reading what is written. Half the time they don't even read the OP. They just churn out a line or two that has almost certainly been said before, that no one else will ever read.

Great research bro! Quite alarming stats to say the least.

-Snip-

Some new threads with a low number of posts are still spam threads, because those sort of threads have been made multiple times.

Some example I see are like

Bitcoin won't die
Bitcoin's Future
Why is the Bitcoin price dropping?
What price will you sell your Bitcoin?

Scary to see...

[The Cryptovator]

~snip~

As your subject have we left ?. I don't think something is remain to left. Already many times discussed about how to prevent spam. So many ideas came out from potentials member's but theymos never replied them and no any action. You don't think that already left ? All the newbie Jr. free to ware signature , so where they go to reply ? Obviously on Bitcoin Discussion or Altcoin Discussion. Because this 2 board is easy to spaming. Many people's suggest to disable signature up to Jr. Members and required at least 1 merit for become Jr. Member's. Theymos don't think it would be help to prevent spam ?

[cabalism13]

Some new threads with a low number of posts are still spam threads, because those sort of threads have been made multiple times.

Simply because of their post counts. Almost 98% of these spam bastards are on a bounty campaign of some shitty tokens that they believe have a potential on making through the market.
Even the Mods doesn't bother anymore to delete topics on those boards. They'll just take their time deleting it if someone reports it.

[ni23457]

I became a user of this forum recently. And I'm really very surprised by the huge number of meaningless posts.

When I began to carefully consider the messages in my topics, I came to the conclusion that many people perceive communication in this forum as a business.

People register several accounts and try to improve their reputation by stupid but much posting.

When I was here and began to read it all, I was very surprised at the fact that there are so many idiots in such a serious forum. And everyone does not care. Everyone is accustomed to this.
But as it turned out, these people are not idiots. It's simply impossible to create clever useful posts when you just need to develop your account to make money.

It seems to me that the problem with all this is that you can have several accounts on this forum. You will never monitor the quality of your messages if you have dozens of accounts.

Please explain to me why this decision was made? (allow multi-accounting)

[khaled0111]

Some example I see are like

Bitcoin won't die
Bitcoin's Future
Why is the Bitcoin price dropping?
What price will you sell your Bitcoin?

Scary to see...

Also
How can I earn free BTC
How much do you earn
Is it too late to buy BTC
...

I think any one writing such posts must be banned.

[Alone055]

The problem is in the high number of replies.

No, the problem is in the starting of those discussions, or in the titles of them. Just read all the titles in that snap and you can have an idea that almost all of them, except for one or two, are useless discussions, no matter how many or less replies they have got until now. Those threads with less replies but with useless titles or starting posts are going to reach the same position very soon.

I want to ask a question - where are the moderators of this section, why they do not suspend the same topics?

Even the Mods doesn't bother anymore to delete topics on those boards.

I think they do, but spammers beat them by 10-100. They delete 10 posts, and meanwhile, there are literally 100 or more replies posted. They would absolutely get helpless in such situations. We need more mods for every section that is extremely congested, like Bitcoin Discussion or Altcoin Discussion and some more.

there are so many idiots in such a serious forum. And everyone does not care. Everyone is accustomed to this.

It's not true that no one cares about all this, nor the fact that everyone is accustomed to this is right. It burns us like hell to see all this happening, but all we can do is to suggest things to prevent this from happening, and that is what we do. It is the decision of theymos (he's the Administrator, if you don't know) to implement something, and no one can really force him to do that unless he thinks/decides that something is right to be done.

It seems to me that the problem with all this is that you can have several accounts on this forum. You will never monitor the quality of your messages if you have dozens of accounts.

Please explain to me why this decision was made? (allow multi-accounting)

Although it has become a custom to have multiple accounts to earn money now a days, but having more than one account is not actually a bad thing at the first place, as long as they are not being used negatively. I would not blame someone to be bad only for having two accounts unless I find them using any one of them in something that is bad for the forum.

[ni23457]

It seems to me that the problem with all this is that you can have several accounts on this forum. You will never monitor the quality of your messages if you have dozens of accounts.

Please explain to me why this decision was made? (allow multi-accounting)

Although it has become a custom to have multiple accounts to earn money now a days, but having more than one account is not actually a bad thing at the first place, as long as they are not being used negatively. I would not blame someone to be bad only for having two accounts unless I find them using any one of them in something that is bad for the forum.

I understand that when a person has a site, business, service, he can have separate accounts for this. But at registration you can add a radio button (An individual, A service) and then all service profiles will have a distinctive sign.
If you do not have services, companies, and you just communicate on this forum, then why do you need a dozen of accounts? I can not find any explanation other than to do business on this account farm. Of course, there may be other reasons, but I think this is 1% of cases.

[Alone055]

If you do not have services, companies, and you just communicate on this forum, then why do you need a dozen of accounts? I can not find any explanation other than to do business on this account farm. Of course, there may be other reasons, but I think this is 1% of cases.

Misuse of resources is what some humans do which they shouldn't. Now, just because it is not prohibited to have multiple accounts, it doesn't mean a person should start farming them for negative purposes and have a gigantic list of usernames and passwords saved in a text file on their computers or noted down on papers and kept in a safe like money. There are no official rules against having multiple accounts because people might as well need one more account for, as you said, another reason for which they cannot use their existing account for some reason. In such cases, you should create another account, but that is not what people do - and that is the reason why having multiple accounts is discouraged, though allowed.

[3acaga]

Many accounts are not welcome on our forum, but the rules are not forbidden - I understand correctly?
Then the solution to the problem with spam on the forum can be decided only by linking the account -and here arises the question of how you can bind an account so that a person does not create 2 and 3 accounts.
The one who will solve this problem will immediately solve the problem of the forum with spam. And believe me that immediately reduce the number of registered people for 70 percent on the forum.

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

[JanpriX]

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

Not sure if you're really serious here. Do you really think it is necessary to introduce KYC here, in this forum, to reduce the amount of accounts spamming threads? Oh boy, oh boy, this, in my belief will never happen and will not solve much. Don't get me wrong. I feel you and I understand that you are trying come up with something to help the forum but this is just impossible.

[LTU_btc]

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

Not sure if you're really serious here. Do you really think it is necessary to introduce KYC here, in this forum, to reduce the amount of accounts spamming threads? Oh boy, oh boy, this, in my belief will never happen and will not solve much. Don't get me wrong. I feel you and I understand that you are trying come up with something to help the forum but this is just impossible.

I'll just add quote about KYC on Bitcointalk :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3097811 :

I'll get right on that, just as soon as hell freezes over.

[Lesbian Cow]

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

Not sure if you're really serious here. Do you really think it is necessary to introduce KYC here, in this forum, to reduce the amount of accounts spamming threads? Oh boy, oh boy, this, in my belief will never happen and will not solve much. Don't get me wrong. I feel you and I understand that you are trying come up with something to help the forum but this is just impossible.

I'll just add quote about KYC on Bitcointalk :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3097811 :

I'll get right on that, just as soon as hell freezes over.

Introduce KYC, what a terrible idea.

That said, I do miss bitcoin discussion and the speculation sections.  Both are now pretty useless for information or meaningful discussion. 

[finaleshot2016]

Add altcoin discussion.

Now, they're both a spamming thread. While vising those threads, you can see a lot of Jr. Members and newbie accounts. Obviously, some of them are just alternative accounts to abuse the bounty campaigns.

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

Not sure if you're really serious here. Do you really think it is necessary to introduce KYC here, in this forum, to reduce the amount of accounts spamming threads? Oh boy, oh boy, this, in my belief will never happen and will not solve much. Don't get me wrong. I feel you and I understand that you are trying come up with something to help the forum but this is just impossible.

I'll just add quote about KYC on Bitcointalk :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3097811 :

I'll get right on that, just as soon as hell freezes over.

Introduce KYC, what a terrible idea.

That said, I do miss bitcoin discussion and the speculation sections.  Both are now pretty useless for information or meaningful discussion. 

You should also ask satoshi and theymos to do the KYC before us to do the same. 
Some of us working here anonymously and it's a good system to protect the identities of individuals. If you really wanted to implement KYC here, highers should do it first.

[Direwolve735]

It really breaks my heart when I visit 'Bitcoin Discussion' board and see the amount of spam there.

I'm disappointed with the amount of spam on the forum. Participants forget about the purpose for which this site was created and mercilessly use it in their own self-serving petty goals. I've only been at the forum for a year, but I remember that there weren`t so many talentless posts before. And 'Bitcoin Discussion' was one of the most interesting branches, which was written by those who are really enjoy crypto-currencies and strive to understand their essence.

The forum is named "Bitcointalk" which technically means "Talking about Bitcoin" or something like that. And the place to do that (Bitcoin Discussion board) is covered totally with useless discussions that we don't even want to see. I know that we can't just get them out of there, but at least we can discuss our own things, separately, in that board. That is what Moderated Threads are all about.

Despite the fact that there isn`t less spam in 'Altcoin Discussion' and 'Economy', the most insulting is what 'Bitcoin Discussion' turned into. I click on this section, read the names of the topics and I feel sad. Despite this, I sometimes try to write something what I consider to be useful there, because I don`t want to give up and remain the main topic of Bitcointalk forum to the torment of spammers. I understand that many feel the same as I do. And many people no longer see the point in fighting with so much spam in 'Bitcoin Discussion' thread. But we need to remember that for the sake of these discussions the forum was created. And a conscious community must protect it.

If we create a separate topic in which only constructive and useful posts can be written, that will be moderate properly, then yes, we`ll protect ourselves from spam and it`ll be more pleasant for us to communicate with, those who share our attitude to qualified comments. However, this doesn`t eradicate the real problem, and 'Bitcoin Discussion' will be completely absorbed by the spammers. I believe that our task is to try to restore the high level of 'Bitcoin Discussion'. This isn`t easy, I know, and this requires the efforts of many responsible users, but we must stand up for a goal of creating our community. Many of us are indebted to Bitcointalk. It gathered real crypto-enthusiasts, who are ready to share their knowledge and thoughts with each other. And our duty is not allow to destroy this forum, not let it become a platform for easy money, for useless and insulting "work."

[Jet Cash]

I've just visited the board, and I found a thread by a Hero that looked as if it might have had some potential, but the juniors have started to reply to it. What a shame it wasn't posted in serious discussion.

I was going to award another post with some merit, but the guy had made a full quote of a previous post for his reply, and he could have snipped out the relevant bit, so I didn't give him any merit. When will they learn to respect the readers of these threads.

[TheUltraElite]

Depends on the context really, and how much effort is put into the post. There's too many variables to paint everyone with the same brush, and it would need to be taken as a case by case basis. Duplicate questions aren't too bad, and some times invites healthy discussion.

I have tried my best to often start healthy discussions. Interested people can take a look at the posts that I often make in Bitcoin Discussion and Trading Discussion. I try to foster in a sense of goodwill among the people about crypto and make sure to give them advice on trading as well.

I pick up points that need to be discussed and talked about like we would have in case we were sitting in a park talking about investment ideas and methods but as well all knows shitposters tend to clog this area of the forum.For this reason I probably post only once or twice in a thread and by the time I return to the forum the following day the thread has already become a cesspool of garbage.  

How many of you have actually tried posting meaning content in these sections even after shitposting became widespread and/or the thread becomes a SMT? Or would you not participate there to talk to others even if a genuine discussion starts?

[TheBeardedBaby]

I've just visited the board, and I found a thread by a Hero that looked as if it might have had some potential, but the juniors have started to reply to it. What a shame it wasn't posted in serious discussion.

I was going to award another post with some merit, but the guy had made a full quote of a previous post for his reply, and he could have snipped out the relevant bit, so I didn't give him any merit. When will they learn to respect the readers of these threads.

This is why I prefer to start self-moderated threads, so the discussions are not spoiled by the newbies.

[lukeburchill]

Does this mean that you consider each newbie to have low posting quality/spammer? better replace newbies with "spammers" (so the discussions are not spoiled by the spammers)

[Alone055]

P.S. My opinion is that it is necessary to introduce the KYC, with the provision of documents and selfi with a passport.
Once this is done, immediately 20% less will become accounts, trust me.

Not a good idea. It would take forever for that to get implemented considering no one would agree for it.
A little tip for you: Putting a P.S at the end of every post doesn't really make it constructive. People only do that when it is needed, but your post history tells that you have made that to be your signature note. Concentrate on the quality of what you write, without adding anything extra to make it look better. And, you are clearly here for bounty hunting, which I could see in your post history, so maybe you should avoid trying to be concerned about the forum.

When will they learn to respect the readers of these threads.

When fire would no longer be hot, and ice would burn you if you touch it.
They don't even respect the place that fills their pockets. They eat and shit in the same plate, kind of.

How many of you have actually tried posting meaning content in these sections even after shitposting became widespread and/or the thread becomes a SMT? Or would you not participate there to talk to others even if a genuine discussion starts?

I'm regularly visiting the board only to see if there is something that I can read, and all I get is disappointment. I think yesterday, I saw a thread started by JC, discussing about the effects of different things on the price of Bitcoin in coming time, and I really enjoyed reading some of the posts in that thread, although I couldn't post anything there for not being so knowledgeable about some of the terms used in there. But what I saw that could have been better was that there were spammers involved in that discussion, and I just thought that maybe if the thread was self-moderated, we would not have to see those replies.

Does this mean that you consider each newbie to have low posting quality/spammer? better replace newbies with "spammers" (so the discussions are not spoiled by the spammers)

I never said that every newbie is a spammer, although I say this every time that the amount of spam we see comes mostly from lower ranked accounts, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any constructive or good posters in those ranks, but it is very rare to find them now a days.

[o_e_l_e_o]

How many of you have actually tried posting meaning content in these sections even after shitposting became widespread and/or the thread becomes a SMT? Or would you not participate there to talk to others even if a genuine discussion starts?

My time is valuable - especially my free time, which is when I am a able to browse Bitcointalk. I refuse to waste hours of that time searching through pages and pages of spam for the one or two comments that include an original or well-articulated though. As I mentioned before, finding threads early can sometimes lead to a good discussion over a couple of posts, but as soon as the spammers take over, I usually give up and remove the topic from my watchlist.

[bitart]

How many of you have actually tried posting meaning content in these sections even after shitposting became widespread and/or the thread becomes a SMT? Or would you not participate there to talk to others even if a genuine discussion starts?

My time is valuable - especially my free time, which is when I am a able to browse Bitcointalk. I refuse to waste hours of that time searching through pages and pages of spam for the one or two comments that include an original or well-articulated though. As I mentioned before, finding threads early can sometimes lead to a good discussion over a couple of posts, but as soon as the spammers take over, I usually give up and remove the topic from my watchlist.

This is the same for me... New topics contains valuable information on the first page but after there's no use to read all the oneliner comments, there's nothing they add, they just fill the empty space on the page...
My watchlist is also shrinking day by day...

[Welsh]

My time is valuable - especially my free time, which is when I am a able to browse Bitcointalk. I refuse to waste hours of that time searching through pages and pages of spam for the one or two comments that include an original or well-articulated though. As I mentioned before, finding threads early can sometimes lead to a good discussion over a couple of posts, but as soon as the spammers take over, I usually give up and remove the topic from my watchlist.

Unfortunately, its not going to get better without people reporting it. It doesn't mean that we are relying on you to report alone. More people in general need to be reporting. I'm a patroller, and I don't seem to get that many reports in the Bitcoin Discussion section. Maybe, there's not that many newbie spammers there, but I would think they are a big portion of it.

[bitart]

My time is valuable - especially my free time, which is when I am a able to browse Bitcointalk. I refuse to waste hours of that time searching through pages and pages of spam for the one or two comments that include an original or well-articulated though. As I mentioned before, finding threads early can sometimes lead to a good discussion over a couple of posts, but as soon as the spammers take over, I usually give up and remove the topic from my watchlist.

Unfortunately, its not going to get better without people reporting it. It doesn't mean that we are relying on you to report alone. More people in general need to be reporting. I'm a patroller, and I don't seem to get that many reports in the Bitcoin Discussion section. Maybe, there's not that many newbie spammers there, but I would think they are a big portion of it.

Unfortunately, reporting is not developed enough yet to be efficient.
It lacks one little but really important feature:
To check if a post has already been reported and it's waiting for the mods to decide.
If the forum could get this feature, we ( ) could check much more posts, because there would be no parallel work for the reporters.
There's no need to report a post 2-3-5-10 times by different members, because a decent mod can act based on the post itself, even if the reportes is not describing the problem properly...

[Steamtyme]

^^

I can't say for sure but as long as the report was filed with enough information, worst case scenario it would go down as unhandled if it were a duplicate. I'm sure someone can shed some light on that. I do agree this feature would be nice as it would trim the log that Mods need to look through.

This did make me wonder though if say a post or thread had been reported 3 times and when the first one is handled do the other 2 reports stay in the log? Seeing as the posts are linked, I would think this could be a small tweak that might reduce the reports Mods need to look through.


As for regaining "Bitcoin Discussion", If Theymos does ad a new Mod, there should a fresh start. All current topics could be locked, and then we begin fresh. Anyone who thinks their thread has legitimate value or conversation taking place,  could request it be reopened. Then at least moving forward you are not starting with a daunting cesspool to clean up, you have a clean slate to maintain.

Personally there I have shifted from reporting single posts, and am more reporting topics for "lock". Unless I come across a post while the topic is still having a legitimate conversation that is.

[bitart]

...
As for regaining "Bitcoin Discussion", If Theymos does ad a new Mod, there should a fresh start. All current topics could be locked, and then we begin fresh. Anyone who thinks their thread has legitimate value or conversation taking place,  could request it be reopened. Then at least moving forward you are not starting with a daunting cesspool to clean up, you have a clean slate to maintain.
...

I would suggest to continue to report posts after the above mentioned 'big lock' in the locked topics too, because this is the only way how we can make spammers lose activity and post count, which means they lose money and hopefully they will stop (except if they are a bots...)

[o_e_l_e_o]

Personally there I have shifted from reporting single posts, and am more reporting topics for "lock". Unless I come across a post while the topic is still having a legitimate conversation that is.

I obviously agree with Welsh's point that we need more people reporting spammers, but I don't think we should need to report entire topics. In Technical Discussion, Technical Support or even Meta, the vast majority of threads are less than 3-4 pages. Do we really need reports to say that a 60 page thread entitled "most bitcoin holders now is frustrated!" needs locked?

There should be a dedicated mod or two that can monitor these threads and lock them when they've run their course.

[Steamtyme]

I would suggest to continue to report posts after the above mentioned 'big lock' in the locked topics too, because this is the only way how we can make spammers lose activity and post count, which means they lose money and hopefully they will stop (except if they are a bots...)

Not a bad idea, should something like "The Big Lock" happen. Although with the Merit system in place the loss of posts counting towards activity would have a minimal effect. With posts that are more than a week old, unfortunately they will have already been paid. The benefit of something like that is anyone who went back to read those topics might have a nice clean read, they would probably also go from 20 pages to 2.

I obviously agree with Welsh's point that we need more people reporting spammers, but I don't think we should need to report entire topics. *Snip*

There should be a dedicated mod or two that can monitor these threads and lock them when they've run their course.

I agree that we shouldn't need to, but the writing is literally on the wall....well board. There are tons of topics and threads that just continue to grow in length while at the same time declining in quality.

What I recently learned about the report log is that it's not only the local board Mod who can act on some reports. So if say in this instance hilariousandco is unable to keep up with this board and the numerous others they are moderator for. My now reported topics can be locked by whoever gets to it first.

I like the idea of a couple dedicated Mods for this.

[Welsh]

I can't say for sure but as long as the report was filed with enough information, worst case scenario it would go down as unhandled if it were a duplicate. I'm sure someone can shed some light on that. I do agree this feature would be nice as it would trim the log that Mods need to look through.

This did make me wonder though if say a post or thread had been reported 3 times and when the first one is handled do the other 2 reports stay in the log? Seeing as the posts are linked, I would think this could be a small tweak that might reduce the reports Mods need to look through.

Generally, duplicate reports aren't too bad to deal with. Sometimes when reporting a topic which needs to be moved to a different section is can take a bit more time, but with reporting spam it doesn't really matter. When the spam post is deleted all the reports are automatically dealt with, and marked as good.

As for your last point. I don't think that's what happens. I can't test it right now, and my memory fails me. But, if this did happen we might be rewarding a good report when in fact it was wrong. Two of them might of reported the topic to be moved, and be correct, But, the other one could be saying something like "Vulgar language" or "scam" which would be wrong.

[Steamtyme]

^^
You're right about that Welsh. That was an oversight, if that feature were implemented, I would think the first report would be marked as good , and the other 2 may remain as unhandled. This would eliminate false positives for a "good" report.

In the end people shouldn't acre to much about the difference between a good/unhandled report. Apart from the potential badges that may come, reporting should always be seen as a service to the community.

[pugman]

We haven't lost bitcoin discussion, not yet.

I see a lot of good posters(my chipmixer alts obviously, no one else) and franky1, anonymint posting there.

I would love posting there, but here's the thing, I don't want to fuck my brain up. We could have some strict moderation there, but that's not gonna happen. So cool...just let spammers shit post, let the good posters leave one by one...and yeah..wait for satoshi to hit the nuke button that destroys the stupid thing that's called bitcoin, and let the true bitcoin aka Bitcoin cash take the lead,rename the forum to rogerverisgreatsatoshisucks.org ..

</sarcasm>

[d5000]

Some weeks ago, I got the impression the spam problem in "Bitcoin Discussion" had improved. Now it seems to have been worsened again, so I would fully support some changes to improve the situation.

I read some good ideas in this thread. I would like to categorize and collect them, and add also some own ideas:

Easy actions which can be followed by every poster:
- Start more self-moderated threads.
- Report spam!

Feature requests:
- Make the character limit of signature space, for Junior Members, depend on the received merit points. An idea to not overly punish "honest" Juniors: give them automatically a minimal space, enough to post a Bitcoin address or a simple link without any advertisement slogan.
- (own idea): Signature space "on probation" for Juniors/Newbies. Juniors who are legitimately reported for spam can lose their signature space until they rank up.
- (own idea, I have already suggested it several times): Allow users to ignore entire threads, so megathreads can be "hidden".
- (own idea) Allow to reatroactively change threads to self-moderated, if they're "taken over" by spammers.

Staff/Rule-change requests:
- Enforce signature campaign quality rules by Staff - e.g. delete threads of campaigns with abusive behavior.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I think part of the problem with reporting posts and getting them deleted is that it isn't really a punishment. A spammer can easily churn out a one line shitpost in under a minute. Even if 50% of their posts are getting deleted, they can still max out their bounty campaign easily enough.

How would people feel about some form of punishment? If you had 10 posts deleted in a week (for example), you are either banned or lose your signature for a week, with escalating punishments for repeat offenders.

Knowing there is a punishment might serve to get more people reporting, as well as serving as education for the spammers who are currently having their posts deleted and retaliating simply by posting more.

[vphasitha01]

I read some good ideas in this thread. I would like to categorize and collect them, and add also some own ideas:

Easy actions which can be followed by every poster:
- Start more self-moderated threads.
- Report spam!

- Lock the threads if you get the answers without allowing spammers to spam fest in your thread.

Feature requests:
- Make the character limit of signature space, for Junior Members, depend on the received merit points. An idea to not overly punish "honest" Juniors: give them automatically a minimal space, enough to post a Bitcoin address or a simple link without any advertisement slogan.
- (own idea): Signature space "on probation" for Juniors/Newbies. Juniors who are legitimately reported for spam can lose their signature space until they rank up.
- (own idea, I have already suggested it several times): Allow users to ignore entire threads, so megathreads can be "hidden".
- (own idea) Allow to reatroactively change threads to self-moderated, if they're "taken over" by spammers.

- (hilariousetc idea) Require one Merit to rank up Jr. Member

Staff/Rule-change requests:
- Enforce signature campaign quality rules by Staff - e.g. delete threads of campaigns with abusive behavior.

- Require "earned merits" for participate signature campaigns as already done by @Zapo and @LoyceV

[KR$N]

I think part of the problem with reporting posts and getting them deleted is that it isn't really a punishment. A spammer can easily churn out a one line shitpost in under a minute. Even if 50% of their posts are getting deleted, they can still max out their bounty campaign easily enough.

Agree with this! If we're to try fighting against shitposting and spammers - there must be a REAL punishment for villains action. Merit is good and everything, but the fact is it doesn't help in this particular case due to no mechanism of lowering it as punishment. It serves its role in highlighting quality posts most of the time, but does no good in preventing or eliminating the shittiest ones.
IMO, there should be a 'bad' bMerit either as a separate stat, or interchangeable with merit. Interchangeable is the hard thing though, the control at the beginning would be in high merit accounts hands, which, unfortunately, seems as a bad option given the merit abuse going on since its inception, as well as the fact that nothing prevents them in using it in a self-serving scenarios. Separate stat, for example red 'Shit Post" button near every post , appears to be much more reliable and decentralized in concept as well. Provide all the bitcointalk users with button charges depending on rank(i.e. 1 daily charge for newbies, 3 for Jr.Member, 10 for Member, then 50, 200, etc...), limit the amount of charges available for use by single user on a single post by 1(this could be rank dependent as well, but not necessary, as the more flat it is among users, the more decentralized the whole concept is) and  all you have to do is add "Shit Post" counter rules automatically applied for users. Rules could be something like 20 charges on a single post - user gets warned and asked to modify/delete the post, while at 30 post is auto deleted and user gets 2-3 days ban from that particular subboard, 120 total charges on  all your posts across the forum in last 7 days - you get banned for 1 week. 300 in a month...?  Month ban is provided for free! This way the more important/popular/high-level the discussion is, the higher the risks are for the shitposting villain, while newbies can still post trashy comments/questions in their own boards, where the daily charges limit would make it very unlikely to be banned for minor stupidity(1 daily charge among most participants would lead to users awarding only the most retarded posts with their precious charge).
This change would lead to a more self-regulated forum, freeing existing moderators time for more relevant issues, giving individual users a non-abusable moderating role and cleanse the forums of most filth.  

[darklus123]

Bitcoin Discussion Board  -  ( A city without a police authority). Ask theymos why there is still no one handling that area.

but for me the  Economics board and speculation board are much worse.

I will be sighting a little example to why this 2 boards are much worse than bitcoin discussion board.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=44206;sa=showPosts

This user posted x4 on economic section  within just 35 seconds.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=121472;sa=showPosts

This user posted x4 on economic section on (september 5)  within just 35 seconds.

[SaeedKhan996]

Agree, Maybe increasing the mods there would help, The mods usually deletes lots of comments of people, So i guess the Bitcoin discussion board should have more strict rules, Same asked questions, useless questions and other posts should be frequently removed.
Anyway, everyone is enjoying it there tbh, The more useless posts, the more posts people get.

[d5000]

How would people feel about some form of punishment? If you had 10 posts deleted in a week (for example), you are either banned or lose your signature for a week, with escalating punishments for repeat offenders.

I would be against automatic bannings. There are lots of reasons why a post can be deleted. I got deleted, for example, some posts because I discussed with a member declared persona non grata in this forum (some may know who he is ). Some may want to get posts deleted because they wrote personal information in posts, etc.

What could be done instead is to give moderators an automatic "hint": if (e.g.) 10 posts of a single user were deleted, a checkbox could appear which would ban the user (or delete his signature), but the final decision belongs to the mod.

@vphasitha01: Good additions, thanks!

[o_e_l_e_o]

What could be done instead is to give moderators an automatic "hint": if (e.g.) 10 posts of a single user were deleted, a checkbox could appear which would ban the user (or delete his signature), but the final decision belongs to the mod.

That's a nice modification. I had figured 10 (or maybe more) posts would be a good minimum - everyone has had posts delete for a variety of reasons, but it would be fairly unlikely that you would have 10 deleted in a short space of time unless you were a serial spammer - but I agree there might still be some false positives.

I do think there needs to be some form of punishment though. Deleting a hundred posts makes no difference when three hundred more spring up in their place.

[Jet Cash]

I think part of the problem with reporting posts and getting them deleted is that it isn't really a punishment. A spammer can easily churn out a one line shitpost in under a minute. Even if 50% of their posts are getting deleted, they can still max out their bounty campaign easily enough.

One easy solution would be to remove any merits associated with a deleted post. I'm not sure what the "knock-on" effect of that would be though. What would happen if the postder had awarded the sMerits associated with the deleted post?

[hilariousetc]

My time is valuable - especially my free time, which is when I am a able to browse Bitcointalk. I refuse to waste hours of that time searching through pages and pages of spam for the one or two comments that include an original or well-articulated though. As I mentioned before, finding threads early can sometimes lead to a good discussion over a couple of posts, but as soon as the spammers take over, I usually give up and remove the topic from my watchlist.

Unfortunately, its not going to get better without people reporting it. It doesn't mean that we are relying on you to report alone. More people in general need to be reporting. I'm a patroller, and I don't seem to get that many reports in the Bitcoin Discussion section. Maybe, there's not that many newbie spammers there, but I would think they are a big portion of it.

The forum has got so bad that probably 90% of posts in Bitcoin Discussion threads are spam or unsubstantial so reporting is futile and it would be a full time job trying to report all the posts that actually need to be removed. Ain't nobody got time for that. Without changes to what is actually allowed to go on here then nothing will change. A handful of users will still keep reporting for whatever reason but it's like picking one turd out of a sea of shit. Signatures from lower ranks need to be removed and badly run ICO campaigns need to face repercussions for shitting up the forum.

[vphasitha01]

I think part of the problem with reporting posts and getting them deleted is that it isn't really a punishment. A spammer can easily churn out a one line shitpost in under a minute. Even if 50% of their posts are getting deleted, they can still max out their bounty campaign easily enough.

One easy solution would be to remove any merits associated with a deleted post. I'm not sure what the "knock-on" effect of that would be though. What would happen if the postder had awarded the sMerits associated with the deleted post?

Another question is what would happen if the user deleted their own merited post to hide the merit abuse scenario^[1], but not the mods? so I don't think removing any merits associated with a deleted post would be a viable option by considering those two factors of your and mine even though we liked to see that removal of merits.

[1] - User can award merits for their alt and then delete their merited post from their alt.

[o_e_l_e_o]

One easy solution would be to remove any merits associated with a deleted post. I'm not sure what the "knock-on" effect of that would be though. What would happen if the postder had awarded the sMerits associated with the deleted post?

I'm not sure that would make much difference, to be honest. The vast majority of shitposts do not receive, and will never receive, merit, and I don't think they are intended to. Most trash bounty campaigns seem quite happy to use hoards of Junior Members for their spamming. Some sort of signature removal/ban punishment for either the users being reported or the ICOs paying them is needed.

[Alone055]

wait for satoshi to hit the nuke button that destroys the stupid thing that's called bitcoin, and let the true bitcoin aka Bitcoin cash take the lead,rename the forum to rogerverisgreatsatoshisucks.org ..

</sarcasm>

So true!
I actually opened that link to see if there is actually something in it. So stupid!  

Allow users to ignore entire threads, so megathreads can be "hidden".

Doesn't a thread get hidden if you ignore the person who has started it? If not, that is how it should be. If you ignore the user that has started a topic, the entire topic should be hidden for you because you don't want to see that guy and his posts anymore. It would make no sense if the thread still shows up even if you have the creator on ignore. Let me know if someone have tried this. I didn't, yet.

I like your ideas, by the way.

How would people feel about some form of punishment? If you had 10 posts deleted in a week (for example), you are either banned or lose your signature for a week, with escalating punishments for repeat offenders.

A ban might not be appropriate, but closing the signature space for a week or two for a lot of your posts getting deleted in a short period of time sounds like a good idea to me. People should keep reporting, and the mods should keep deleting and the automation will keep closing the signature spaces thus reducing the bounty spammers. But again, I don't get tired saying this: We need more mods!

Rules could be something like 20 charges on a single post - user gets warned and asked to modify/delete the post, while at 30 post is auto deleted and user gets 2-3 days ban from that particular subboard, 120 total charges on  all your posts across the forum in last 7 days - you get banned for 1 week....

It has already been thought over, and not implemented because such a thing can be used negatively by the spammers as well. Now you can't only let genuine users use this feature. So, what if a spammer teams up with some other spammers and plans to get me banned for a week, because I have done something that harmed him, by charging one of my posts? How would you counter such problems?

for me the  Economics board and speculation board are much worse.

No board is better, when counted for spam, but Bitcoin Discussion is one of the most important boards (or used to be) of the forum, and that is the reason why we are discussing that. Otherwise, pick up any board and you will find hundreds or such spamming routines going on every day in each one of them.

One easy solution would be to remove any merits associated with a deleted post. I'm not sure what the "knock-on" effect of that would be though. What would happen if the postder had awarded the sMerits associated with the deleted post?

Another question is what would happen if the user deleted their own merited post to hide the merit abuse scenario^[1], but not the mods?

[1] - User can award merits for their alt and then delete their merited post from their alt.

A deleted post is a deleted post, no matter if it has been deleted by a mod or the user himself. So the merits associated to that post would get removed if the post is removed, meaning no one can delete the posts only to hide the abuse if the merits would also vanish along with the post. It would make no sense to merit your alt and delete the post if the merits are being removed too with that. But I think this has already been discussed before, and wasn't approved, either by the community or by theymos, I don't really remember that.

[d5000]

That's a nice modification. I had figured 10 (or maybe more) posts would be a good minimum - everyone has had posts delete for a variety of reasons, but it would be fairly unlikely that you would have 10 deleted in a short space of time unless you were a serial spammer - but I agree there might still be some false positives.

I do think there needs to be some form of punishment though. Deleting a hundred posts makes no difference when three hundred more spring up in their place.

I mean to have read that there is a punishment - mods are regularly deleting/banning lots of "spam accounts", above all, bots. But it seems to require manual action, which means a lot of work. So a technical solution indicating "serial spammers" would be certainly nice. (I'm only speculating; I don't know SMF in detail. I once had a small Drupal forum and there were no such "helpers" at that time, but surely there are extensions for that task.)

Doesn't a thread get hidden if you ignore the person who has started it?

I just tried that with a typical megathread on the Speculation forum - and no, it didn't work, the thread continues to appear. The idea is good though - because if a spammer you have on your ignore list creates several threads, they would be all hidden by default.

[KR$N]

Rules could be something like 20 charges on a single post - user gets warned and asked to modify/delete the post, while at 30 post is auto deleted and user gets 2-3 days ban from that particular subboard, 120 total charges on  all your posts across the forum in last 7 days - you get banned for 1 week....

It has already been thought over, and not implemented because such a thing can be used negatively by the spammers as well. Now you can't only let genuine users use this feature. So, what if a spammer teams up with some other spammers and plans to get me banned for a week, because I have done something that harmed him, by charging one of my posts? How would you counter such problems?

For a guaranteed week ban the spammer would need to get >100 accounts to make it happen. Due to the fact that moderators would get much more free time after such change, they can spend this time on genuine users appealing such cases of abuse. 100+ users downvoting a decent post could be either a botnet/multiaccounting or a well organized spammers group violating the rules\ideas of this forum. It's good for the forum and  its users to detect and get rid of such things, so if anybody tries to do this to you, you simply appeal to the moderators. Moderators can always investigate the case. Punishment for premeditated abuse of such feature and the number of accounts at risk in a collusion case should prevent any attempt of abuse. If the user or group is risking a ban on 100+ accounts just to ban you for  1 week - it's heavily unfavorable to even try.
Other option is  doing it a "+/-" kind of stat, where decent users can upvote your posts in this type of scenario, but that would be much more abusable actually.
I, personally, don't think it has been thought over, since shitposts everywhere are still a major problem. The reputation system of some kind is used in most decent boards nowadays, it is proven to be more efficient for huge boards.

[Initscri]

The quality of posting in the main section of the forum has dropped dramatically since I joined. Nothing’s going to change unless paid signatures are stopped though (and yes I’m aware that I’m wearing one but I don’t post like the spammers present there).

Well that means you're okay with the paid signature campaigns but just wanted them to be spam free. It's not as same as you saying they should be stopped completely. If you were any serious, you'd not be wearing a signature at all. That's a good first initiative.

I think merit requirements for signatures are a step in the right direction. It forces users to actually create posts which are valid. This would have to be maintained w/ strict rules regarding merit, and strict rules against merit abuse.

Having been on this forum for more than 5 years, I will admit I have seen a drastic decrease in post quality. Thinking back, bounties weren't really a huge thing, and I think with their increase, and signature campaigns, it was only going to get worse without a further mod presence.

While I think that signature campaigns are affecting this, I don't believe they should be prohibited. But I do believe a "minimum merit" rule should go into effect. IE, signature campaigns can only add members who have a minimum amount of merit per rank (as some campaigns have effectively put into place).

The only other thing I can say is to not let the spam make you avoid that category. Stay in the category, post high quality posts within the category, and report all posts you can.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

It really breaks my heart when I visit 'Bitcoin Discussion' board and see the amount of spam there. And believe me, I'm not saying this only to show that I care for the forum, though I do, but I really mean what I'm saying right now and it is really saddening to see this, honestly.

As a newcomer to bitcointalk the first thread I visited was the BITCOIN THREAD. back then I read/enjoyed every post and commented on those I found more interesting but after weeks of joining the community, the period i spent on forum dropped drastically. I felt most posts are been reposted continuously because i will comment on a particular post this week and next will come across another new post with the same heading/content. So felt it wasn't worth my time and decided to stop logging in.

Point that I'm trying to make is that I agree with you when you said,

We should not leave that board only to them. It deserves way more attention from the ones who care for the forum than what it is getting right now.

Because that thread, is the selling point {first thread} all newbie surf through when they register on platform. The impression they get on that thread matters alot and will determine the future of this forum. Truly, it shouldn't be left to die in spam, something should be done like restricting newbies and jnr members from commenting on thread but can access thread to get vital informations. so the spam level can be reduce to its minimum.

[Alone055]

something should be done like restricting newbies and jnr members from commenting on thread but can access thread to get vital informations. so the spam level can be reduce to its minimum.

Restricting them completely from posting won't be a necessity if their signature spaces are restricted. That would reduce the spam itself without even having to restrict them from posting, because most of these spammers are bounty participants and their primary purpose is to reach the minimum/maximum post thresholds that their campaigns offer so that they don't stay behind in getting payments. And maybe, there are some low rank members who can post constructive things and deserve attention from higher rank members. Such members won't be able to show themselves if they won't be able to post just because of some other users who used to post crap all the time.

[Ludji]

I think merit requirements for signatures are a step in the right direction. It forces users to actually create posts which are valid. This would have to be maintained w/ strict rules regarding merit, and strict rules against merit abuse.

Having been on this forum for more than 5 years, I will admit I have seen a drastic decrease in post quality. Thinking back, bounties weren't really a huge thing, and I think with their increase, and signature campaigns, it was only going to get worse without a further mod presence.

While I think that signature campaigns are affecting this, I don't believe they should be prohibited. But I do believe a "minimum merit" rule should go into effect. IE, signature campaigns can only add members who have a minimum amount of merit per rank (as some campaigns have effectively put into place).

The only other thing I can say is to not let the spam make you avoid that category. Stay in the category, post high quality posts within the category, and report all posts you can.

These are great suggestions I definitely agree with. Minimum merit would make the job a lot harder for alt farmers while forcing the rest of the spammers to probably quit, or get their shit straight(small chance). The only thing I would disagree with is continuing to post in the category, it's pretty pointless to any sane individual. Posting just to get dumpster with spam is not worth the time. People who post quality stuff expect quality discussion in return since they spend a lot of time writing those posts, so when they get broken English non-sense replies I can only imagine the frustration. As cowardly as it seems, I think users should migrate to areas where the shitposting is on a smaller scale and report bad posts there since the results are more likely to be seen.

Along with this, I'd like to suggest a limit for new accounts on how much can they post at the beginning in terms of frequency and the minimum characters per message allowed. I feel it would boost the quality of posts globally across the board. Once you are a certain rank, you are allowed to post more often and fewer characters if you want to(although we see that users of a higher rank usually write longer posts which are higher quality).

[Initscri]

I think merit requirements for signatures are a step in the right direction. It forces users to actually create posts which are valid. This would have to be maintained w/ strict rules regarding merit, and strict rules against merit abuse.

Having been on this forum for more than 5 years, I will admit I have seen a drastic decrease in post quality. Thinking back, bounties weren't really a huge thing, and I think with their increase, and signature campaigns, it was only going to get worse without a further mod presence.

While I think that signature campaigns are affecting this, I don't believe they should be prohibited. But I do believe a "minimum merit" rule should go into effect. IE, signature campaigns can only add members who have a minimum amount of merit per rank (as some campaigns have effectively put into place).

The only other thing I can say is to not let the spam make you avoid that category. Stay in the category, post high quality posts within the category, and report all posts you can.

These are great suggestions I definitely agree with. Minimum merit would make the job a lot harder for alt farmers while forcing the rest of the spammers to probably quit, or get their shit straight(small chance). The only thing I would disagree with is continuing to post in the category, it's pretty pointless to any sane individual. Posting just to get dumpster with spam is not worth the time. People who post quality stuff expect quality discussion in return since they spend a lot of time writing those posts, so when they get broken English non-sense replies I can only imagine the frustration. As cowardly as it seems, I think users should migrate to areas where the shitposting is on a smaller scale and report bad posts there since the results are more likely to be seen.

Along with this, I'd like to suggest a limit for new accounts on how much can they post at the beginning in terms of frequency and the minimum characters per message allowed. I feel it would boost the quality of posts globally across the board. Once you are a certain rank, you are allowed to post more often and fewer characters if you want to(although we see that users of a higher rank usually write longer posts which are higher quality).

I understand where your concern is coming from. I just feel like it's only going to get worse if legitimate members don't hang out there & continue to report posts.

Look at this as an example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5015332.0
People are only going to start posting threads (which should be in Bitcoin Discussion) in other categories in order to avoid the spam. It's only going to lead to mis-categorization of posts if people avoid that category.

Just my $0.02

[Ludji]

I understand where your concern is coming from. I just feel like it's only going to get worse if legitimate members don't hang out there & continue to report posts.

Look at this as an example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5015332.0
People are only going to start posting threads (which should be in Bitcoin Discussion) in other categories in order to avoid the spam. It's only going to lead to mis-categorization of posts if people avoid that category.

Just my $0.02

I totally agree with you, don't get me wrong, but I'm talking about the current situation. I feel mods are severely understaffed in comparison to the amount of "bounty hunters"(low-life shitposters). Until there are enough mods to deal with those spammers, BTC Discussion is most probably dead. The forum as a whole has been handled in a bad way, which looks bad for a forum this size. Honestly, there are a lot of better ways this whole board can be handled if someone would just put in the effort. A change from the ground up is needed, otherwise, it would just be a temporary patch-up.

[kewlc3s]

Remove signatures from lower ranks completely and/or make a merit requirement to become a Junior. Ideally you wouldn't be able to have a signature until you've become a Member which requires ten merit. The forum is being over-populated with clueless kids who have little to no knowledge about bitcoin but are churning out nonsense just to get paid. This can't be acceptable. If you can't acquire ten merit then you shouldn't be able to earn here and these people should stick to claiming bounties until they can earn the merit.

It is implement almost like you proposed, bravo!

Just let´s see if something going to change in next few weeks. I believe forum will receive 10-12% less posts in 2 weeks time.

[hilariousetc]

Remove signatures from lower ranks completely and/or make a merit requirement to become a Junior. Ideally you wouldn't be able to have a signature until you've become a Member which requires ten merit. The forum is being over-populated with clueless kids who have little to no knowledge about bitcoin but are churning out nonsense just to get paid. This can't be acceptable. If you can't acquire ten merit then you shouldn't be able to earn here and these people should stick to claiming bounties until they can earn the merit.

It is implement almost like you proposed, bravo!

Just let´s see if something going to change in next few weeks. I believe forum will receive 10-12% less posts in 2 weeks time.

Not quite. It's like the diet/lite version/extreme compromise of what I wanted, but I guess I'll have to take it for now. If we removed signatures from Juniors completely and only Members and above can have them once they've earned the required merit then that really would make a difference. I've seen dozens of shitposting newbies get a merit since yesterday just for merely agreeing the new change is a good thing. Most of them are probably lying and are crying with rage behind their computer screens but know that screaming and complaining about it is futile so they just agree, especially when they see others have been merited for saying so. You can get a solitary merit here by fluke or accident (or buying/trading it with someone), but let's see them try get ten of those to get a signature. A half decent poster will have no issue in getting that at all but a shitposter is screwed. A farmer with dozens to hundreds of accounts even more so. I can only hope more of my suggestions are implemented in the future including removing signatures from Juniors because one merit still won't make much of a difference to the overall quality of the board in the grand scheme of things. We need to go after the ICO campaigns next that are paying for the spam in the first place.

[Alone055]

Just let´s see if something going to change in next few weeks. I believe forum will receive 10-12% less posts in 2 weeks time.

LoyceV's analysis show that there has been a 23.3% decrement in total posts within 24 hours after the new changes. And that number decreased to 18.6% within the next 24 hours, making it 18.6% for 48 hours. The thing is, that number should be increasing, but instead, its decreasing. The changes have worked, I agree, but for those changes to work more, people need to be careful when handing out Merits to Newbies to promote them to Jr. member. That is the reason why the posts are increasing again, because of the useless promotions shitposters are getting from generous sMerit holders.

I've seen dozens of shitposting newbies get a merit since yesterday just for merely agreeing the new change is a good thing. Most of them are probably lying and are crying with rage behind their computer screens but know that screaming and complaining about it is futile so they just agree, especially when they see others have been merited for saying so.

And I'm totally surprised to see how some people are Meriting their posts by saying, "The effort deserves appreciation" or "It is at least better than other posts from shitposters" without even having a look at their post histories which would clear every doubt in your mind about what they are here for. You can't just promote a user who has done nothing else than hunting bounties until now but has just posted something that is only a decent post, and by decent I mean it is not a totally useless post. People should at least do it once they find someone constantly trying to improve themselves, but not only on the bases of a single post.

[mdayonliner]

~

Enjoy your Full member rank  
For the first time I gave out 3 merit (my last bit again) in one transaction I guess   By the way - you deserved it.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I repeated my views/replies analysis that I had performed previously in this thread. Essentially I took the first few pages in various boards, and divided the total views by the total replies. Boards such as Meta and Technical Discussion were coming out with a ratio roughly 20 views per reply. Bitcoin Discussion came out with a ratio of only 3.81, proving that people aren't reading the topics in Bitcoin Discussion, and are just using the board to reach posting requirements for their signatures.

Repeating that analysis today, the ratio for Bitcoin Discussion is up at 9.12. This is a big jump, and I'm sure some of it is a margin of error, but it's still proof that the new merit requirement has made some difference. However, it's obviously not enough, with the ratio still being less than half of the less spammy boards. I would echo statements made elsewhere that I think an increased requirement to 10 merits to have a signature would make a much more significant impact.

[Alone055]

~

Enjoy your Full member rank  
For the first time I gave out 3 merit (my last bit again) in one transaction I guess   By the way - you deserved it.

Thank You. I appreciated it.

[Impulseboy]

I frequent the Bitcoin Discussion board and you are right, the posts are actually the same ones more often. Do you think that maybe there should also be some sort of rule that prevents users from reposting the same topics over and over? I am not sure how it will work of course but I was thinking how in WordPress you can filter and set some banned words to prevent spammers from commenting. Or perhaps a moderated new topic and/or comments? It will surely take a lot of work but maybe it will alleviate the spam in the discussion board.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I frequent the Bitcoin Discussion board and you are right, the posts are actually the same ones more often. Do you think that maybe there should also be some sort of rule that prevents users from reposting the same topics over and over? I am not sure how it will work of course but I was thinking how in WordPress you can filter and set some banned words to prevent spammers from commenting. Or perhaps a moderated new topic and/or comments? It will surely take a lot of work but maybe it will alleviate the spam in the discussion board.

If you see a duplicate topic, hit the report button and in the comment box include a link to the already existing topic. I do this regularly and the duplicates are almost always removed, it just sometimes takes several hours for a moderator to get round to it because hey, they have lives too.

[KingScorpio]

this forum loses 11% visitors per months,

so be paitient, as soon as the world doesnt care about bitcoin anymore you will be rid of the spammers as well

[Impulseboy]

If you see a duplicate topic, hit the report button and in the comment box include a link to the already existing topic. I do this regularly and the duplicates are almost always removed, it just sometimes takes several hours for a moderator to get round to it because hey, they have lives too.

Oh, okay. Thanks I will. I see a lot of them in the Bitcoin Discussion board. Although I am not sure if the post itself is a duplicate, a lot of the titles I see have been posted before (sometimes I just do not click anymore when I see a title I have already seen before). To be honest it is not just in the Bitcoin Discussion board, even in the Off-topic and Altcoins and Economics discussion board, I think.

[Alone055]

~

The new changes have undoubtedly made a difference for the forum, but as you said, and many others have been saying, a requirement of more than 5 Merits to make the signatures available would have made the difference much more bigger than this. But, as they say, something is better than nothing.

you can filter and set some banned words to prevent spammers from commenting.

Filtered words won't prevent spammers from spamming, since they can always use different words if they come to know what words are being filtered. And it is not possible to stop this by filters since the words they use to spam are the words other users also use to post, so it won't just stop the spammers from posting but it would not allow others to use the same words as well. That solution won't work in this case.

Or perhaps a moderated new topic and/or comments? It will surely take a lot of work but maybe it will alleviate the spam in the discussion board.

That is what I suggested here, if you read the OP, you would have known. I asked people to create self-moderated threads in Bitcoin Discussion board to keep the spirit alive, and don't just let the spammers take over the board. A self-moderated thread can do good since the creator can easily remove useless comments and keep the discussion clean all the time.

[TheBeardedBaby]

this forum loses 11% visitors per months,

so be paitient, as soon as the world doesnt care about bitcoin anymore you will be rid of the spammers as well

It's more like those 11% are the shiposters that were here only to promote the scammy ICOs for some shitcoins.
Don't worry so much about the bitcoin popularity, its doing grate at the moment.

[Impulseboy]

That is what I suggested here, if you read the OP, you would have known. I asked people to create self-moderated threads in Bitcoin Discussion board to keep the spirit alive, and don't just let the spammers take over the board. A self-moderated thread can do good since the creator can easily remove useless comments and keep the discussion clean all the time.

I did, however, I have to ask what do you mean by self-moderated thread though? Do you mean like the other suggested, that if a user saw a post that seemed spam or of low quality, to report it right away? If that is the case then I agree. I think that it could help the moderators have an easier job since the users are helping, is that right?

[Alone055]

what do you mean by self-moderated thread though? Do you mean like the other suggested, that if a user saw a post that seemed spam or of low quality, to report it right away?

No. A self-moderated thread means that the creator of that thread is himself the moderator of it, meaning he doesn't need to report anything to a forum moderator, but instead, he can delete them himself and keep the discussion clean.

this forum loses 11% visitors per months,

so be paitient, as soon as the world doesnt care about bitcoin anymore you will be rid of the spammers as well

I don't know what you are talking about, since the population of this forum as well as Bitcoin users database are increasing rapidly. A percentage subtracted does not count when a percentage added is bigger than it.

[Impulseboy]

No. A self-moderated thread means that the creator of that thread is himself the moderator of it, meaning he doesn't need to report anything to a forum moderator, but instead, he can delete them himself and keep the discussion clean.

Oh, I see. Thanks. I think that could work, although for threads that gets multiple replies easily, it could be challenging to go through it one by one. But I could see how this is going to at least solve the problem with the spamming. It is like cleaning up your house one room at a time.

[hilariousetc]

I hope theymos will implement some new mods soon. Bitcoin Discussion is only going to get worse the longer it doesn't have a couple of dedicated caretakers looking after the place.

this forum loses 11% visitors per months,

so be paitient, as soon as the world doesnt care about bitcoin anymore you will be rid of the spammers as well

The world could lose interest in bitcoin but some form of crypto will likely always be around and if there's ICOs that will still pay them then people will still come here in droves. The vast majority of people who sign up to this forum couldn't' care less about bitcoin or what it stands for, but they just want to earn tokens to cash out into their local fiat. As long as people can earn here then the forum will do ok for traffic.

[Alone055]

I hope theymos will implement some new mods soon. Bitcoin Discussion is only going to get worse the longer it doesn't have a couple of dedicated caretakers looking after the place.

He should have already done it along with the selection of Merit Sources he announced recently with the new changes. I know it is not as easy to choose a mod as it is to choose a Merit Source, but today or tomorrow, it needs to be done. The forum in current situation needs patrolling more than Merit distribution which is also for the betterment of the community. Bitcoin Discussion and Beginners & Help would definitely require more care right now or they will go even deeper in this shit.

[hilariousetc]

I hope theymos will implement some new mods soon. Bitcoin Discussion is only going to get worse the longer it doesn't have a couple of dedicated caretakers looking after the place.

He should have already done it along with the selection of Merit Sources he announced recently with the new changes. I know it is not as easy to choose a mod as it is to choose a Merit Source, but today or tomorrow, it needs to be done. The forum in current situation needs patrolling more than Merit distribution which is also for the betterment of the community. Bitcoin Discussion and Beginners & Help would definitely require more care right now or they will go even deeper in this shit.

It should have been done a long time ago, but why isn't it as easy as choosing a merit source? I'd argue it's probably easier. Theymos has all the stats of all the reporters in each separate sub board and there's already quite a few very high reporters to choose from including some very long-standing and pretty trusted users. I've suggested a couple in the past that I'm sure would make a huge difference, but leaving that sub without one only makes it worse and others are even starting to lose hope in reporting: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5039285.0

[Alone055]

It should have been done a long time ago, but why isn't it as easy as choosing a merit source?

I said that because I think that being a moderator is quite a bigger responsibility than being a Merit Source, since a Merit Source is only responsible to choose the posts that he thinks are of quality, but a mod has to decide if a person or a post needs to remain or to go. But of course as you said, theymos has all the stats and there are already a lot of trusted users who are ready to dedicate their time to this cause. So it should not be difficult for him to choose some hard working mods around here.
The reporters would absolutely lose hope if there is no manual patrolling going on in boards like Bitcoin Discussion or Altcoin Discussion etc. where if you report one post, meanwhile, 10 more posts are submitted.