Petition: disable "Banned from displaying..." signature and leave it blank

[SuperPandaBear]

If someone had a 1+ year of straight good posting history to get a pass, why not just leave the signature blocked with a blank space? I would say it's not too motivating to post while people bully you around and make witty remarks about you being a fraud because you did something wrong 5 years ago. Way to disincentive good posters from posting for the duration of the ban. They will probably leave until the ban is gone not because they don't want to post but because you are carrying that sign which can be used by people to attack you instead of addressing the post (typical in discussions in which someone doesn't agree with you and just use something else that isn't part of the point, like a grammar mistake or physical defect etc...). Just leave it blank IMO... otherwise as I said, I predict the people that get a pass aren't going to bother with participating on the forum.

Edit: I didn't realize that the signature is not shown on every post, so there's nothing to discuss here anymore. I still believe people should be given second chances, specially when the mistakes were made ages ago and currently some of the banned people were better posters than people currently being on highly respected campaigns such as chipmixer.

[1714899394]

1714899394

[1714899394]

1714899394

[1714899394]

1714899394

[1714899394]

1714899394

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

They just have to learn how to ignore does type of replies or make use of the ignore button if they noticed same reply from a particular user and they feel offended by those comments. You can't stop people from acting childish, Irrespective of whether you're wearing a signature, not wearing one or wearing the sig banned message, if trolls or whatever they call themselves wants to attack you they'll.

The sig banned message is passing a loud message to who ever sees it (on their profile). You commit plagiarism, you get punished so I don't support the idea of removing it.

[SuperPandaBear]

They just have to learn how to ignore does type of replies or make use of the ignore button if they noticed same reply from a particular user and they feel offended by those comments. You can't stop people from acting childish, Irrespective of whether you're wearing a signature, not wearing one or wearing the sig banned message, if trolls or whatever they call themselves wants to attack you they'll.

The sig banned message is passing a loud message to who ever sees it. You commit plagiarism, you get punished so I don't support the idea of removing it.

Then we will not know who really wants to keep posting without getting paid and who doesn't, since the lack of motivation to post while wearing that signature is understandable. So you can't have mods stating how people became inactive due not getting paid. This would be the case if you had a neutral (blank) signature.

[Quickseller]

The message is only displayed when directly viewing the profile and is not under every message they post.

It remains that plagiarism is very unethical (in addition to being harmful to the forum), and is not unlike stealing when the person believes no one is watching.

I see the message as a warning to anyone who will potentially consider paying for advertising in the future that the person may not be someone who will be the most effective advertiser. I also do not believe this warning to be inappropriate.

I think for the most part, someone who is banned from wearing a signature is probably not going to be posting very much anyway, and mostly were here solely for the signature money.

[SuperPandaBear]

I see the message as a warning to anyone who will potentially consider paying for advertising in the future that the person may not be someone who will be the most effective advertiser.

They were good advertisers up until someone digged posts from 5 years ago to report them. Now im afraid a year from now when the ban is gone, no one is going to hire them because of that instead of giving them a fair chance.

[Quickseller]

I see the message as a warning to anyone who will potentially consider paying for advertising in the future that the person may not be someone who will be the most effective advertiser.

They were good advertisers up until someone digged posts from 5 years ago to report them. Now im afraid a year from now when the ban is gone, no one is going to hire them because of that instead of giving them a fair chance.

Like I said, what they did is very similar to stealing money (from advertisers) when they believe no one was looking.

I am not sure this is something I would want associated with my business. It is also an added risk because these people have shown themselves willing to try to obtain money under false pretenses.

[SuperPandaBear]

I see the message as a warning to anyone who will potentially consider paying for advertising in the future that the person may not be someone who will be the most effective advertiser.

They were good advertisers up until someone digged posts from 5 years ago to report them. Now im afraid a year from now when the ban is gone, no one is going to hire them because of that instead of giving them a fair chance.

Like I said, what they did is very similar to stealing money (from advertisers) when they believe no one was looking.

I am not sure this is something I would want associated with my business. It is also an added risk because these people have shown themselves willing to try to obtain money under false pretenses.

Many of the reported posts weren't even part of a sig campaign. Just accounts trying to rank activity.

The main point here is, they were doing a good job. If everyone had your mentality ("let's not hire this guy ever again because he did something wrong in the past, even if he was doing a good job now"), everyone that did something wrong in the past would remain unemployable, the end result being a collapsing society thus one would be forced to steal since you have to eat.

[Steamtyme]

People here may need to steal to eat, but it's not the forums duty to provide for them.

To your original point if anyone is offended by what someone says on the forum because they carry the label of their crimes they can do a couple of things:

• Grow thicker skin
• Use the ignore button
• Leave
• Go back in time and not fuck it up

I doubt any of these people will remain unemployable, for one simple fact. If they don't have negative feedback someone will employ them. If they are a decent poster someone will employ them, hell we see shitposters get paid everyday. It doesn't matter why the post got picked up, it matters that they exist. So if they really want to be a part of the community they just need to keep showing up, accept their punishment and move on.

[Quickseller]

The main point here is, they were doing a good job. If everyone had your mentality ("let's not hire this guy ever again because he did something wrong in the past, even if he was doing a good job now"), everyone that did something wrong in the past would remain unemployable, the end result being a collapsing society thus one would be forced to steal since you have to eat.

Signature advertising should not be someone's job. If this is someone's primary source of income, they are not someone we particularly want here.

I am not saying someone should absolutely, under no circumstances ever get hired to advertise on their signature again if they are caught plagiarizing. I am saying potential advertisers (employers) should be warned as to their history so they can take this information into consideration.

There are a decent amount of circumstances in which I would *not* personally hire someone who previously plagiarized, especially if they tried to cover it up after they were caught.

[SuperPandaBear]

I obviously don't mean that someone should me making a living in here. My point was in general a society: If you don't give second chances, you are ostracizing them into stealing to survive.

[Steamtyme]

How is this not a second chance? Just because there is still a punishment involved and some people may not want to deal with them in the future, the leniency isn't gone from their situation.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

The sig banned message is passing a loud message to who ever sees it. You commit plagiarism, you get punished so I don't support the idea of removing it.

I wasn't even aware of this until I read OP's post.  I have signatures blocked, so I don't see any of them and I figured that when members got a signature ban, their sig field would just be blank.  Interesting that Theymos decided to put a message there instead--and I agree with you, it does send a loud & clear message about plagiarism.  Obviously either don't read the rules or don't think they're going to get caught copy/pasting, so maybe this is exactly what we need.

And as far as the hurt feelings resulting from the 'scarlet letter' sig-banned members have to wear, I don't have much sympathy for them.  They're lucky they're still able to post instead of getting a permaban. 

In addition, I haven't heard any teasing or taunting yet and somehow I don't think it's really going to be an issue.  The vast majority of members here are just shitposting and wouldn't even bother to say anything negative about someone's sig message.  And I mean, come on.  This forum is freakin' brutal enough as it is.  If you don't have a thick skin, this isn't the forum for you.

[Quickseller]

I obviously don't mean that someone should me making a living in here. My point was in general a society: If you don't give second chances, you are ostracizing them into stealing to survive.

I don’t think the ban message being displayed is preventing anyone from getting a second chance.

[suchmoon]

I totally agree with the OP. Those signature bans are not working out, stupid idea, let's go back to permabans - lets bitching that way.

[r1s2g3]

The sig banned message is passing a loud message to who ever sees it. You commit plagiarism, you get punished so I don't support the idea of removing it.

I wasn't even aware of this until I read OP's post.  I have signatures blocked, so I don't see any of them and I figured that when members got a signature ban, their sig field would just be blank.  Interesting that Theymos decided to put a message there instead--and I agree with you, it does send a loud & clear message about plagiarism.  Obviously either don't read the rules or don't think they're going to get caught copy/pasting, so maybe this is exactly what we need.

Their sig field is blank only when they will post and on all of their previous post. This message is only displayed when you click to view profile. The message will be loud and clear when you make this ban message as their sig. message on all the post they posted till now.

[TheHas]

They were good advertisers up until someone digged posts from 5 years ago to report them. Now im afraid a year from now when the ban is gone, no one is going to hire them because of that instead of giving them a fair chance.

This whole mentality around 'we were good advertisers' is just wrong.

No care about adding value to the forum, no care about actually engaging on blockchain or any topic - just 'we were good advertisers'. As if bitcointalk should be a spam platform.

If you have a signature, that's a bonus. Your ability to 'advertise' is not the primary purpose of this forum.

The fact that you think being able to advertise actually counts as an argument speaks volumes of your attitude to this forum, and probably your respect and knowledge for cryptocurrency more broadly.

[SuperPandaBear]

They were good advertisers up until someone digged posts from 5 years ago to report them. Now im afraid a year from now when the ban is gone, no one is going to hire them because of that instead of giving them a fair chance.

This whole mentality around 'we were good advertisers' is just wrong.

No care about adding value to the forum, no care about actually engaging on blockchain or any topic - just 'we were good advertisers'. As if bitcointalk should be a spam platform.

If you have a signature, that's a bonus. Your ability to 'advertise' is not the primary purpose of this forum.

The fact that you think being able to advertise actually counts as an argument speaks volumes of your attitude to this forum, and probably your respect and knowledge for cryptocurrency more broadly.

By good advertisers I mean good posters in general, not "good salesmen". Some of the banned people with 5+ years of experience had a better knowledge of Bitcoin than you do so calm down.

[SaltySpitoon]

By good advertisers I mean good posters in general, not "good salesmen". Some of the banned people with 5+ years of experience had a better knowledge of Bitcoin than you do so calm down.

I'm going to call you on that one. I have yet to see a single plagiarism case where a casual poster of the forum came here, accidentally plagiarized, and was punished. If people have plagiarized, it was because they came here with the intention to spam. I have zero sympathy for those so called "good posters" that got caught and had signature bans. If you are sufficiently talented to hide your spam in a way that never rouses any suspicion, I have no qualms with you, but I still wouldn't call you a good poster.

Just to be clear, I'm claiming that 100% of people that plagiarize did so to boost their post count intentionally with the intention of escaping detection. That means that they did not value their post enough to read a topic, come up with a somewhat insightful response, and reply. Rather they found a relevant post somewhere else and responded with no thought put in to furthering a discussion.

[TheHas]

By good advertisers I mean good posters in general, not "good salesmen". Some of the banned people with 5+ years of experience had a better knowledge of Bitcoin than you do so calm down.

If they are good posters, then they can keep posting. A ban on your sig does nothing to stop that.

You're specifically arguing that you/they will be 'unemployable' because of being caught plagarizing - so my point stands. If transparency on an earlier ban makes you unable to get into sig campaigns well that's probably a good thing. There should be disincentives.

Reading back on your posts in this thread, the entire language and expectation you have around how you should be able to make money off signatures, being a good advertiser, needing to be employable and so on is entirely indicative of the problem with spam in this forum.

If these people are good posters first, and have a sig blog as a secondary point, then they will keep posting regardless of any sig bans.

[HCP]

The message is only displayed when directly viewing the profile and is not under every message they post.

This ---^

It basically invalidates the entire argument of this thread. It isn't like the user has this posted under every single one of their posts...

... because you are carrying that sign which can be used by people to attack you instead of addressing the post (typical in discussions in which someone doesn't agree with you and just use something else that isn't part of the point, like a grammar mistake or physical defect etc...).

As for the whole "they'll be taunted in arguments intellectual debates" thing... oh, puhleeeeezzzz... "you got sigbanned so your argument is invalid" is about as effective as "you're a sigspammer so your argument is invalid"  

If someone has to stoop to that level... it's going to be fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain who is actually winning that debate

Just to be clear, I'm claiming that 100% of people that plagiarize did so to boost their post count intentionally with the intention of escaping detection. That means that they did not value their post enough to read a topic, come up with a somewhat insightful response, and reply. Rather they found a relevant post somewhere else and responded with no thought put in to furthering a discussion.

I think you're giving too much credit to some of these users... insofar that I doubt that they believed or knew that they needed to escape detection of anything. Most of them haven't read the rules until they got banned and linked to the rules in their "I didn't break any rules Ban Appeal" threads.