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

[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.

[1714033090]

1714033090

[1714033090]

1714033090

[1714033090]

1714033090

[1714033090]

1714033090

[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.