Community opinion on Signature campaign spreadsheets

[yahoo62278]

The question is pretty simple with a couple added voting options in case users want to add a little fun. Whatever your vote is(even if you chose 1 of the 2 fun options), please back up your opinion with reasons as to why 1 way or the other.

This poll has been created due to Stake.com Signature campaign. I believe that since the website is using the bitcointalk platform to advertise their website, that all information regarding the campaign should be made public. This will help the reporters to keep an eye on participants applying for and being accepted into signature campaigns.

I'm not gonna make a super huge thread about the topic. The question is posted and your opinions are needed.


***EDIT***

It appears Stake has added a spreadsheet for all to see within the last hour. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=1373140560

Here is the sheet in case anyone is interested.

I would still like to hear and read community opinions on this matter. Remember, please back up your vote. This is a question about all campaigns, not just the 1 mentioned.

[HCP]

I don't understand why it would need to be public?

If you see spam, regardless of whether or not there is a sig attached... simply click the "report to moderator" link and report the post. I don't understand why having access to a spreadsheet would make any difference?

Is it because the self-styled "forum police" want to be able to find all the users of any given campaign easily so they can go and check their post quality? Personally, unless I actually see shitposting/spamming in the boards/threads that I am looking at because I actually want to be reading that board/thread, I don't care.

[yahoo62278]

I don't understand why it would need to be public?

If you see spam, regardless of whether or not there is a sig attached... simply click the "report to moderator" link and report the post. I don't understand why having access to a spreadsheet would make any difference?

Is it because the self-styled "forum police" want to be able to find all the users of any given campaign easily so they can go and check their post quality? Personally, unless I actually see shitposting/spamming in the boards/threads that I am looking at because I actually want to be reading that board/thread, I don't care.

Excellent response and proof that this poll is a good idea. Opinions are gonna vary. Keep the responses coming guys. It's not forum policy that spreadsheets be public, but depending on community response it might be an "unofficial rule" or it might not.

[harizen]

Doesn't matter for me if it's public or private but in the first place, why spreadsheets should be in private? There are some cases in the past wherein some generous people here caught multiple accounts owned by a same person joining and abusing various campaigns and that work were made quiet easy because of those public spreadsheets as reference. That's a big help to the manager itself.

The sheet is a simple list of all the participants, their posting stats per week ,payments etc. How come that info should be private? What's the risks of having a public spreadsheet? What's are those things that must be hidden? Can someone enlightened us here or those managers itself that choose to hide it?

[coinlocket$]

In a crypto world where everything is verificable on the chain, I don't see the reason to keep the spreadsheet related to bitcoin signature private.

A public spreadsheet it's only a plus for the community, an easy faster way to find abusers/spammers.

[yahoo62278]

In a crypto world where everything is public on the chain, I don't see the reason to keep the spreadsheet related to bitcoin signature private.

A public spreadsheet it's only a plus for the community, a easy faster way to find abusers/spammers.

Yes and no, HCP was correct when he said, "If you see spam, regardless of whether or not there is a sig attached... simply click the "report to moderator" link and report the post." The bigger thing I think having a public spreadsheet is for keeping an eye on the manager.

[The Cryptovator]

Voted on Yes,

Explanation:
Since signature campaign directly promoting on forum the spreadsheet should be public. There is two reason from my side,
1. Reporters could directly report if any managers encourage spam, no need to visit all over forum.
2. Others users will able to see that managers accepting right person and transparency of campaign management.

[LTU_btc]

I don't think that really matters. For transparency it's good to have public spreadsheets. It helps to find abusers and spammers easier. But I see nothing wrong when company decide not to have public spreadsheet. There is no rule which would force to keep this information in public. If campaign is managed professionally, people who don't participate in campaign won't find nothing useful and interesting in these documents. For example, I'm not interested see post count, payments and Bitcoin addresses of Chipmixer campaign participants.

[Patatas]

Went with the "Who Cares" option. I kinda disagreed with this earlier considering the Stake's campaign sheet was not public and the campaign was managed through telegram but actually, it doesn't really matter the sheet is public or private as long as the campaign isn't promoting spam on the forum. I wouldn't want to know how much a member got paid last week for his signature campaign. The quality of the campaign is evident from its posters anyway.

[coinlocket$]

In a crypto world where everything is public on the chain, I don't see the reason to keep the spreadsheet related to bitcoin signature private.

A public spreadsheet it's only a plus for the community, a easy faster way to find abusers/spammers.

Yes and no, HCP was correct when he said, "If you see spam, regardless of whether or not there is a sig attached... simply click the "report to moderator" link and report the post." The bigger thing I think having a public spreadsheet is for keeping an eye on the manager.

I'm not sure about it. What do you mean? Do you mean look if a manager is bad on managing or if a manager let cheaters on campaigns?

I think the main reason to get the public spreadsheet is to spot cheaters.

The second reason is to verify if a manager is good or not (looking for cheaters/spammer/whatever on the spreadsheet) but we are all humans and everyone can't control everything, keep also in mind on the 99% of campaigns we will have abusers on them and they are pretty easy to find if the spreadsheet is open.

Edit, for example, your spreadsheets are open and I've probably already found one RING of high-rank members on your signature campaigns.
(if you want I will post the RING 2morrow now it's late here)

(forgot to say I voted YES)

[Quickseller]

I am not a fan of regulating companies in telling them how to run their business. They can run it as they see fit, and if they wish to make their private information public they can, and if they don't they shouldn't be forced to.

[shasan]

The spreadsheet must be public so that anyone can trace who has been accepted and who have not been. Also from the spreadsheet, there is a possible chance to detect scammer for joining the signature campaign with alter accounts.

[hacker1001101001]

I vote NO

I think it is not that important to make the signature campaign spreadsheet public as the campaign totally depends on the campaign manager, the project they are promoting and the participants of the Campaign which makes it of no use to others basically.

I would like to list some of the advantages of keeping the signature campaign spreadsheet private.

1. Avoids duplicate spamming of any type in the campaign.
2. Reduces the scam attempts of non participants towards the campaign.
3. Rewards or the funds distributed remains totally private, which is advantageous to some projects and participants too.
4. Non participants could be avoided to engage in the working as they can spread FUDS.
5. Total control remains in the hand of the manager towards the accepting of participants to distribution of rewards and that's what a manager is appointed for.
6. Some of the issue about the camping can be solved without making a bubble out of it.

[joniboini]

2. Reduces the scam attempts of non participants towards the campaign.

Can you elaborate more? How can somebody, using the information from the signature spreadsheet, do a scam attacks?

What's the risks of having a public spreadsheet? What's are those things that must be hidden? Can someone enlightened us here or those managers itself that choose to hide it?

The public can judge whether the manager is really capable of counting post/judging quality post or not. For example, I know one or two campaign managers who don't give a damn for post quality because they keep counting the stake of sig spammer. But hey, if they're fine with paying spammer, what can we do.

[nutildah]

It appears Stake has added a spreadsheet for all to see within the last hour. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=1373140560

What's weird is this spreadsheet doesn't include all the participants. Or if it does, that means some people are wearing their signature and avatar for no reason:

I'm a coinomi user since 2017 and got no problem with that, so far. My biggest fund there was around $5k and didn't worry about hacking issue since I have a passphrase. But your story is different from mine since you imported your passphrase from exodus wallet and maybe someone had spotted this since you really have decent amount.

I'm not a techy person so I can't say anything, I just feel sorry for your money that seems no getting back.
And if there will further update what coinomi has to say please keep us posted here.

You probably didn't read my post very well. Coinomi's wallet simply takes your passphrase and spell checks it with a remote server!

Sort of since it's lengthy, lol. Well I really thought that it's exodus the importing that triggered everything, pardon me on that. So earlier, had checked those links in the OP since honestly I'm in coinomi's side ( sorry again ) but upon reading all those links I found out these are all true ( especially those reddit posts ). Maybe I trusted it too much and ain't aware those "backdoors".

I'm having my thoughts right now which wallets are safe since even a hardware wallet can be tampered upon shipping.

Bounty managers do not _have_ to make the spreadsheet public, but it provides a degree of transparency and credibility if they do. All problems that arise from doing so can be resolved on the forum, also in public.

[vit05]

This spreadsheet is for the first campaign and was always public. They have 2 campaign and the second doesn´t have a public spreadsheet here in the forum. The first one was closed.

Stake.com Signature Campaign - Up to 0.035 BTC a week
Stake.com - A signature campaign for everyone! Earn up to 0.1 BTC weekly

And I believe that not only the forum but also the Manager, benefit from the transparency of these campaigns. There are some users who like to search for possible scams or double accounts and this can help the manager. In addition, you can avoid various misunderstandings. Since most campaigns make spreadsheet public, leaving it closed gives the impression that there is something to hide.

[Quickseller]

It appears Stake has added a spreadsheet for all to see within the last hour. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OGQBpBWDy_2N6flWRmeQ3oJbxSvDXD_rpkbPNMVHo7Q/edit#gid=1373140560

What's weird is this spreadsheet doesn't include all the participants. Or if it does, that means some people are wearing their signature and avatar for no reason:

This is probably because they are asking potential participants to wear the signature to even apply, and do not appear to be accepting everyone:

Leave a comment below with the following

• Bitcointalk Name
• Rank
• Stake Name
• Wear signature & avatar

If accepted I will message you asking for your Telegram name

[hacker1001101001]

2. Reduces the scam attempts of non participants towards the campaign.

Can you elaborate more? How can somebody, using the information from the signature spreadsheet, do a scam attacks?

There is too much of abuse in altcoin bounty section by using duplicate entries even in the signature campaign. If a person is registered in a campaign with X name, some spammer could try applying again with the same name and a campaign manager can easily overlook this type of multiple entries. And at the same time if a spreadsheet is private, it would reduce this abuse as the participants are hidden (as per I see). Many participants already abuse bounty campaigns with multiple entries even today.

[squatz1]

This is probably because they are asking potential participants to wear the signature to even apply, and do not appear to be accepting everyone

I always thought this was scammy practice, as a lot of campaigns do it and then only respond to someone on if they've been accepted  weeks later. Wasting the time of the people who were trying to join, and other campaign managers for not having a larger talent pool.

[Quickseller]

This is probably because they are asking potential participants to wear the signature to even apply, and do not appear to be accepting everyone

I always thought this was scammy practice, as a lot of campaigns do it and then only respond to someone on if they've been accepted  weeks later. Wasting the time of the people who were trying to join, and other campaign managers for not having a larger talent pool.

I was unable to create an account on their website so when I applied, I asked if they could pay directly to my BTC address (I haven’t gotten a response). I am not going to wear their signature while I wait to hear back.

I would encourage signature advertisers to refuse to wear a signature while an application is being considered. That practice essentially is giving free advertising, especially to those who are ultimately not accepted into the campaign.