Prejudice against signature campaigns

[UserU]

Just like what Pharmacist mentioned above, it's not about hating the SC posters, but the majority from tend to give a bad name because their posting requirements tend to be too "restricted" to the rules. I believe if the advertisers tone down on them, we might see less shitposters.

I've joined one myself but thankfully there's no need to avoid posting in X Y Z, starting with 100 characters and so forth. I would rather avoid joining a high-paying sig campaign if it requires me to degrade my post qualities.

[1714056254]

1714056254

[Findingnemo]

Most of HQ posters in bitcointalk wearing a paid signature at the moment so it's not about the signature participants might be only towards the spammers who take advantage of their campaign to make money without giving any effort while making posts. Spamming is against the rule so if you see anyone spamming you can report them it doesn't matter then wearing signature or not.

[1miau]

I understand that some people with signature campaigns do not provide anything to a discussion and they just write silly unintelligent idiotic things that doesn't improve the discussion at all.

There is a very effective solution for signature spammers, report them to their campaign managers or to mods with help of "Report to moderator" button. The first choice is certainly better, because each decent campaign manager will remove such a user, and maybe even add them to black list.

It's worth a try and good managers will care of course but the large majority of shitpost spam is still caused by altcoin signatures where the bounty is often managed in-house by the shitcoin devs or lazy bounty managers and normally, they don't care what their participants are posting as long as it brings attention to their shitcoin. (cryptotalk seems to be the only exception here as campaign with low requirements while paying in BTC.)

After all we can say the situation is quite comfortable right now compared to 2017 / 2018.

[Upgrade00]

After all we can say the situation is quite comfortable right now compared to 2017 / 2018.

The rise in the altcoin market during that period attracted lots of ICOs and this led to lots of campaigns being run on the forum, and with requirements as low as jr member (which could then be achieved with no merits), it was a spam fest on most of the boards. The prolonged bear market of 2018/2019 filtered out lots of fake projects and with the enhanced newbie restrictions it reduced the level of spam on the forum.

[bitserve]

I see nothing wrong with hating campaigns if they're uncontrolled. Without a firm hand they unquestionably do make the forum worse. Many posters are such mindless hookers that if a campaign paid them to post 100 pictures of items inserted in their sphincter a day several thousand would sign up in an instant.

The ones I don't get are those who automatically ignore every single person with a signature. That must make this forum an extremely sparse read.

^ This.

Was thinking about saying something extra... but no. That is it all there is to say.

[The Cryptovator]

There is no reason to heat a user if he is a quality poster either that user doing any signature campaign or not. There is small difference between signature spammer and good signature participants. Signature spammers just posting for get pay, but a good signature participants getting paid for their post. For example, even chipmixer a high pay rate campaign but every week some users even do not make half post of maximum limit. Of course some users make so many post even they are in any campaign or not. So you can't call them signature spammer as well.

Usually people hate signature spammer who just make meaningless post for just be eligible to get payment. And obviously our hate will not make any difference for them so hating them will not change forum as well. Lots of topics have been created about signature campaign, but nothing changed. If users not change their behaviour then no one can help them.

[jokers10]

Since I don't always wear a signature (I may not have had one for months), I'd say it looks like a kind of experiment on the topic. And I see no difference in discussions with other forum users. Not a single time it depended on the signature as I remember. So may be the reason is different, as most people say here? If there are the ones who build their attitude just on signatures, may be it is their problem? And if it is a common problem for someone, I guess signature is not a real reason.

[stadus]

I can understand why some are hating members with signature, and in their mind we are spammers because there are a lot of spammers who are in signature campaign until now, but, there's a positive improvement because we have a campaign managers that are fighting spams and they will not hire spammers in their campaign, so everyone will try to improve their post quality just to be qualified in a campaign.

Actually, if all the managers are doing well in the selection process, the spammers will be reduce and sad to say especially in the bounty section, there's no screening of accounts before they can participate in signature campaign, they just fill the spreadsheet and they are in, and they will start spamming, if they'll hire a reputable manager, maybe we will see a positive changes.

[UserU]

Since I don't always wear a signature (I may not have had one for months), I'd say it looks like a kind of experiment on the topic. And I see no difference in discussions with other forum users. Not a single time it depended on the signature as I remember. So may be the reason is different, as most people say here? If there are the ones who build their attitude just on signatures, may be it is their problem? And if it is a common problem for someone, I guess signature is not a real reason.

Well, it comes to a point that people post because its free money, as long as R&Rs are met. For instance, a 9-5 person might not be able to freely post so a 25/ week quota might be a challenge. Hence the whole repetition to avoid wasting too much time going through discussions.

If we take away the signature campaigns, would there be a reason to post those things?

[tbct_mt2]

If you joined the forum to discuss with the others, to ask for advice from the others, to help the others, why signatures affect how you post?

Signatures from shitposters are annoying, I agree but there is an option to disable signature. Let's do it if you don't want to see signature (and avatars, too).

How to do this?
Profile ---> Look and Layout Prefereces ---> Don't show users' signatures; Don't show users' avatars.
You can choose one of two options or both.

What to do if you still have interests to see signatures, to discover new interesting, and likely good companies, that can change the world, let's allow signature displays but if you see any shitposters, click on Ignore them.

The topic is a good one to read: The end of an era for me: Leaving Signature Campaign

[BITCOIN4X]

I don't hate any members who are in sig campaigns.  I hate spam, period.  And yes, it drives me nuts that pretty much all of these shitposters are in bounties or campaigns, because they're getting paid to dilute whatever good posts there are on this forum.
~snip

There is a very effective solution for signature spammers, report them to their campaign managers or to mods with help of "Report to moderator" button. The first choice is certainly better, because each decent campaign manager will remove such a user, and maybe even add them to black list.

The Pharmacists have given the right reasons where many signature is haters or anti-spam, junk and low-quality posts. Most of it comes from the bounty altcoin. But to prevent forums from looking bad and dirty, Lucius has provided the right solution. Keeping the forum good is the right thing to do.

[Debonaire217]

 I understand that some people with signature campaigns do not provide anything to a discussion and they just write silly unintelligent idiotic things that doesn't improve the discussion at all.

 However its also mean to assume people who have signature campaigns all are idiots. There are people who write here for writing sake and there is an option of making money for something you will do anyway and those people just take advantage of that. Hell there are some who are signature campaign participatents and still don't fill the max quote for it and make less money than they could maximum make.

 So all in all just because someone has a signature campaign doesn't mean they are idiots, doesn't mean they are not neither but just because you see someone with a signature doesn't mean anything, they are literally the same people with the ones who do not have signature campaign as well.

 Stop the hate against people who have signature campaigns.

You have a point there as well, there are many people here that just post to reach their target number of post because of signature campaigns, though, we cannot holistically classify them all as posting nonsense reply or nonsense topic at all. It still depends on what kind of person they are, passionate or just want the money.

[okae]

signature campaigns are "forcing" to his users to post arround 15-25 post per week, this is like "incentiving" someone to spam this forum, obviously they want them to post with a high quality, but this in most of the cases, will not happend... maybe an easy solutions is to force signature campaign managers to pay to his users for a max of 5-10 post per week, maybe with this measure, those post will have a better quality.

Anyway dont be wrong guys, there is lot of users who dont wear a signature campaign with a very low quality posts and "nobody" care about it... sometimes it is not necessary to write a novel to be able to express yourself in a coherent way ....



edited*

[mersal]

Signature campaigns are "forcing" to his users to post arround 15-25 post per week, this is like "incentiving" someone to spam this forum, obviously they want them to post with a high quality, but this in most of the cases, will not happend... maybe an easy solutions is to force signature campaign managers to pay to his users for a max of 5-10 post per week, maybe with this measure, those post will have a better quality.

Anyway dont be wrong guys, there is lot of users who dont wear a signature campaign with a very low quality posts and "nobody" care about it...

Yes, I had seen many old users who is just trolling around the forum but it seems nobody cares which also should be considered as spam and there should be no partiality over reporting the spams either they wear signature or not.

Managers also should enforce the users to post high quality content to keep the forum spam free by warning them like improve post quality near their name if they still doing the same then they should be removed them from campaign.

[UserU]

Managers also should enforce the users to post high quality content to keep the forum spam free by warning them like improve post quality near their name if they still doing the same then they should be removed them from campaign.

Actually I've seen a few enfording this, with yahoo's Cryptotalk campaign being an example.

[DdmrDdmr]

I’ve grown to not see signatures at all, with a few exceptions. Not because there is any active feature on my profile that blocks them, but rather more, my reading habits skip them without giving them a second thought.

I may occasionally click on a link in a signature inadvertently and wonder for a split second how I ended-up there, but other than that, I become aware of signatures only when the same campaign extends one post(er) after another, turning the heterogeneous signature layout on screen into an homogeneous layout.

What’s really more of a pondered visual element, after a while, is the poster’s name, which can easily, in an almost automated reaction, cause me to slow down my reading and focus on the content of his post, or switch to fast diagonal reading.

[Welsh]

Stop the hate against people who have signature campaigns.

Ah, this isn't prejudice against those who partipate in signature campaigns. TMAN hates everyone equally on this forum, and we love them for it.

Seriously though, I actually love some of the "personal" signatures we see. There were a lot more a few years ago, but they usually point out useful information or decent start ups.

I’ve grown to not see signatures at all, with a few exceptions. Not because there is any active feature on my profile that blocks them, but rather more, my reading habits skip them without giving them a second thought.

Everyone does this without even realizing they're doing it. I call it my internal ad block. For example, where this is most noticeable is advertisements on TV. You could be engrossed in your favorite tv show one second, and not hear a horn going off next to your ear. The next moment when the advertisements come on you could earn a pin drop from outside. If you're British advert breaks have turned into put on the tea breaks.

signature campaigns are "forcing" to his users to post arround 15-25 post per week, this is like "incentiving" someone to spam this forum, obviously they want them to post with a high quality, but this in most of the cases, will not happend... maybe an easy solutions is to force signature campaign managers to pay to his users for a max of 5-10 post per week, maybe with this measure, those post will have a better quality.

Some campaigns are now imposing no minimum which takes the pressure off of users, and with a few exceptions there's generally more quality posts being put out.