Limit signature campaigns

[The-One-Above-All]

Let's recap so far.

1. Initial GOOD suggestion - Let's remove SIGs.

2.  Bitcoin earning sig wearers shout  = Yes let's remove sigs BUT NOT OUR sigs (because we control the bitcoin paying sigs)

3. Yes let's remove everyone elses sigs but NOT OUR SIGS that's a great Idea.

4. Yes let's also make campaign managers be more strict

5. Great idea yes, only those that earn the most merits and don't have red trust can be on the sig campaigns let's make sure campaign managers be really strict. SO OUR PLACES ARE SAFE

6. Yes that is a brilliant IDEA we remove the accountability of sig campaign manager (who just says you need x earned merits per month and a clean trust sheet so don't have to justify their choices any further than that) and decentralize accountability to OURSELVES who govern merit and trust(abuse) but have no other ACCOUNTABILITY except TO OURSELVES and we won't be rocking that boat right??

7. EXCELLENT let's get on with it.


hahaha

NO NO NO NO

Remove ALL sigs FROM everyone. Let's boil this forum down to the REAL ENTHUSIASTS. The value of the forum is very LOW when 99% of it is incentivized for profit motivated posting. The value of the forum is HIGH when 100% of it is post out of enthusiasm for pushing forward bitcoin and creating a decentralized trustless end to end arena for finance and services et al

You come to the board and hit up alts or bitcoin sections (the main reasons to come here to locate new and interesting decentralized trustless projects) and you can not find anything other than a few semi interesting threads and even then the tiny % of valuable points made in each thread is just repeated in a slightly different format or drown out by low value spam and garbage. So you EFFORT TO REWARD RATIO of finding value is TERRIBLE and you don't visit and don't contribute as much.

The ALT board even just back PRE 2017 was very interesting. You would have lots of high value smart posters discussing lots of new and interesting designs, with a few average folks asking questions and trying to learn what they could.

Now they all left because the number of garbage threads started and filled with more garbage was so great and so fast that the interesting threads were on page 4 before you had time to have another look.

ALL OF THE CORRUPTION AND FIGHTING HERE is down to financial reward and self serving scumbags wanting to cream off the to sig spots and retain them. They do NOT want competition. You don't have to look hard to see this is correct do you. Fortunejack, chipmixer, everywhere oh look all DT and merit sources and their pals.

The shared goal should be bitcoin adoption and the support of new genuinely interesting projects. IT IS NOT it is simply about earning money here now. This board is targeted by organised groups of people to just milk and milk and milk the board and care nothing for the long term damage by choking off those that are intimidated by the amount of low level noise and scams pushed on them by groups of semi convincing scoundrels.

If you are to have campaign managers that are getting PAID then the accountability should lay with them ALONE. Not be able to fob off the responsibility for THEIR choice to corrupt DT's who AMAZINGLY are the ones that HAVE TAKEN UP ALL THE HIGHLY PAID BTC PAYING SIG SPOTS. Choosing themselves pretty much.

Any campaign manager that can not clearly demonstrate the applicant is NOT producing posts of a quality that match or surpass others on the campaign and have NOT scammed anyone then THAT CAMPAIGN MANAGER SHOULD BE REMOVED. If the person refused applied before one that was accepted.

If a campaign manager allows ANY proven scammer who is guilty of clear observable financially motivated wrong doing on to their project (JUST BECAUSE THEIR FRIENDS ON DT REFUSE TO GIVE THEM RED TRUST)  then THAT CAMPAIGN MANAGER SHOULD BE REMOVED and shamed.

Either remove all sigs = BEST OPTION

or

Remove the incentive to game and manipulate the broken systems of control so there is less injustice and less fighting = 2ND BEST OPTION.


We suggest removing all sigs/avatars etc for 6 months and from META board forever.  Then see how the board looks. You want to fuck off to a board full of sig spamming bots and low value garbage then go to another board. You want to contribute here for free but have invested in bitcoin or another project and want to help build your community here with others ready to make an investment then stay here.

Meta should be sig free right now. Let's only have REAL enthusiasts posting their "ideas" in here. Of course allowing sig spamming self serving scum whispering in theymos's ear and getting paid their sig spam bucks at the same time is not a good idea. Their prime GOAL is milking the board for self enrichment so their advice benefits THEM. Enthusiasts want the entire movement to succeed so their advice benefits THE ENTIRE MOVEMENT. It is not rocket science.

LOL how predictable was that from these guys

Yeah but don't ban our bitcoin based sigs
Yeah but make sure all sigs go through our campaign manager pals hands
Make it really strict on our terms that we control. LOL
scum bags.

Ban ALL sigs watch the weasels leave after a few months. Leaving behind the REAL enthusiasts. We may even get back all the brilliant people that don't post any longer.

If you HAVE to KEEP sigs to make sure the board generates a LOT OF MONEY then only allow sigs in the alt coins board and just write that place off for good then. It is has now diluted itself to total and utter trash. So just allow sigs to be placed there.

Actually the altcoins situation is a direct example of what happened to this board. The GOOD alt projects with some real talented developers are almost dead and gone and there is juts a mass of slowly dying dirt with not enough support behind any to sustain its existence.  You can't located them under the sea of shit alts from devs shoveling out tons of projects en mass. Dilution death. Same with this board. Too many people posting too much crap that is not needed just to get their post quota.

[1714113345]

1714113345

[1714113345]

1714113345

[1714113345]

1714113345

[1714113345]

1714113345

[1714113345]

1714113345

[actmyname]

Let's recap so far.

1. Initial GOOD suggestion - Let's remove SIGs.

A temporary signature removal will give us valuable data. Hence why I suggested a month. I have no issue with extending that amount of time to forever.

2.  Bitcoin earning sig wearers shout  = Yes let's remove sigs BUT NOT OUR sigs (because we control the bitcoin paying sigs)

It is no secret that users who are getting paid in worthless tokens would have even less incentive to post better quality replies. That's just how it is.

I have reported scores of users and the top offenders mostly in altcoin campaigns. Some are in low-paying BTC campaigns as well.

[philipma1957]

I mean it's no secret that people shitpost for sig campaigns. I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.

This is a forum where people are free to share their opinion whether it is consider a spam or shitpost or not and who the hell wants to stop posting if they know that they are earning thru it?? Its like "You don't like to have Gold". Who doesn't want money . They will do anything just for money

Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason

I think the negative trust of the sellers is good enough to say that these persons are not trustworthy therefore, they must avoid them at all costs.

At this moment I don't see any solution to this spam problem rather than removing the signature campaign itself but for sure, the number of posts will decrease if that happen.

90 day signature ban for the entire forum.

See what good it does or what harm it does.

No signature is fine with me.

In fact I will self end my non paid endorsement of the Avalon a841 and simplemining.net as of aug 9th.

Keep it simple.

I removed my non paid endorsements of avalon 841 and simplemining.net


my post total is more then 30,687

no matter what is decided about this I won't add a signature back for 90 days.
I left my opinion up about the need for alt coins.

[pugman]

Because if there's more spam,  it means more signatures, and that means it appears almost everywhere==bigger reach, and who would care about the content of the text so long as the name gets spread all across the internet?

BCT could be monetized much further, but it has not. theymos didn't exactly have to roll out the merit system but he did. Users would still stay on the platform even if you saw banner ads because guess what: the altcoin sections are already so brutally filled with nothingness that it wouldn't change a thing. They'll just run in, post their garbage and then leave. For the majority of forum members, as long as there's money to be had, they will take it. Why do you think those ad programme sites are so popular (PTC)? There's an incentive involved and users don't care. Same thing with faucets, we should all know how ad-infested and seizure laden they are.

For sure, the forum could use various means and methods when it comes monetization, but since theymos doesn't want money the forum probably won't be utilized to its full monetary potential, which is good and bad in their own ways. When money is involved, more people are eventually involved, and the originality of discussion reduces significantly as the clock ticks, and the place intended for discussion turns into a virtual brothel full of hookers and drunk cunts. Sounds about right, innit?

As for your say of banning signatures, stop altcoin campaigns instead of stopping all of the campaigns. I mean, most of the spam is because of fucking altcoins and horrendous shits. Keep only the bitcoin paying signature campaigns and see the difference. Make signature campaigns be available only for Full-members and above.

[Ranly123]

I mean it's no secret that people shitpost for sig campaigns. I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.

Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason

I mean, if you can buy higher ranked accounts, well that kinda defeats the point of having ranking systems now doesn't it?

Sorry, I'm gonna keep this brief. I know there's been plenty of talking on this issue already.

What? Stopping after getting paid for just $5? So what's the point of having a signature campaign? Also it's up to the owner of such account to sell or not since it's their own property. We know that selling account is prohibited but those high ranking people here that want to quit on signature campaign tend to sell their accounts for a reason that they are not using it.

[tranthidung]

What? Stopping after getting paid for just $5? So what's the point of having a signature campaign? Also it's up to the owner of such account to sell or not since it's their own property. We know that selling account is prohibited but those high ranking people here that want to quit on signature campaign tend to sell their accounts for a reason that they are not using it.

Now, let's make a forensic analysis to have clearer overview.
Being a forum user is easy, but being a constructive and helpful one is difficult, at the start, for all of us.
Being a signature hunter is so easy, but it should not be an original reason to be here. Since 2018, if someone originally started just to do signature hunting, they were wrong, and don't have chance to do this.
Without contribution, without merit, then they will be a Newbie, forever, and will have not chance to hunt for signatures. They can buy accounts, but the fact is they will not be able to get slots in good campaigns with bought accounts (rejected by managers, or get caught with negative tags).

The higher quality of posts users can make, and keep continuously posting, the higher probability they will have slots in good campaigns.
More contributions, less or without shitposts, higher extra income from signature, that never should be only reason to be here.

[libert19]

..for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.

Pretty bad solution, nonetheless, imagine this gets implemented.

Mods will have to take care of hundreds of signature campaigns, it's thousands participants, many thousands of posts they make at daily basis, and campaign rates of these campaigns.

Also add to that those ICO campaigns where you are getting paid in their (shit) tokens, mods will limiting them at $5 calculating their ICO value and when it reaches market it would be like 5 cents (I being generous with this amount lol).

Point is, this won't solve anything and will make things extra complicated.

[Natalim]

Being a forum user is easy, but being a constructive and helpful one is difficult, at the start, for all of us.

I don't find it difficult because I do contribute the best I can, but I can't please everyone, some would see that I'm not contributing and that is based on their judgement, we can't control them. This forum is so big, it serves different members from different countries, some are fluent in english while some are not, and take note, majority of the managers are fluent in English and they also accept an English posters.

I don't really put a pressure to myself just to live the standard of being a forum contributor that anyone think because I find myself unique and I should have a freedom to post on whatever I like as long as it does not violate the forum rules.

Signature campaign isn't a job, it's just an extra privilege that we enjoy being an active forum member and we don't dictate if we can work for it, it's the manager that are making the rules and implementing it.

[tranthidung]

I don't find it difficult because I do contribute the best I can

In my opinion, it is always difficult at beginnings. New users have their difficulties to find out details on forum structures, rules (read but not thoroughly understand rules, I believe). However, if they have good attitude, to read and reread forum structures, rules patiently, then they will have acceptable level of understandings on those ones. They might have more comfortable experience during their time spent in the forum. It will be a really significant start points for them.
Without understandings on forum rules, forum structures, they neither do start their journey nor can contribute anything in the forum; just a kind of time-wasting.

[pooya87]

these limitations you are proposing will actually make things a lot worse.
for example if someone was earning $10 and you limit it to $5 then they will create 2 accounts and now they have to spam twice as much. if you ban account buys it will just migrate to somewhere else and because of that ban (less supply) the price of such accounts shoot up so there will be more incentive to do account sells and more people would start doing it (farming accounts and selling them). the result is more spam, more merit abuse,...

It would happen before introduction of merit system. But now for random spammer it's almost impossible to build forum account from, or he have to put lot of efforts into it. Same goes with account sellers, I doubt that they have so many accounts farmed. It's questionable, how many of these account sellers in the marketplace really holds accounts that they're selling. I suppose that most of these sellers are just scammers.

it can create incentive and when there is incentive they will find a way. it may even create a bigger merit selling market alongside the account selling market! both of which already exist on a smaller scale.

~

not letting campaigns paying in altcoins to operate is not only absurd but also it is like erasing the problem instead of solving it. because the problem is not the campaign's payment method, it is in the manager/owner paying people for their spam.
and opposite example is Yobit campaign which was paying in bitcoin and was responsible for a large amount of spam.

[tranthidung]

But the badges won't give you any direct advantage to earn money in this forum, except good recognition from other member.
Additionally, actively reporting posts doesn't prove you can make good posts which needed to join signature campaign, so i don't see any serious problem from badge.

Badges, if released, will have no financial benefits for users who got them, I believe.

Did it occur to you that then people will focus on reporting?
Some will create accounts for making 1-5 posts that are reported, yay.
Many will report posts that maybe don't need to be reported.
It'll just create another problem imho.

Without financial benefits, I don't think people will abuse to get badges.

not letting campaigns paying in altcoins to operate is not only absurd but also it is like erasing the problem instead of solving it. because the problem is not the campaign's payment method, it is in the manager/owner paying people for their spam.
and opposite example is Yobit campaign which was paying in bitcoin and was responsible for a large amount of spam.

It is just a secondary solution, not a preventive one, but it will have good impacts on spamming, because most of altcoins campaigns/ bounties encourage spam, and managed by inexperienced managers and companies run them don't care about post quality of their supporters. Most of campaigns paid in bitcoin managed by experienced managers, so at beginnings companies run them don't encourage spam; they care about their companies' reputation and probability to get benefits from their campaigns, because they have to pay for those ones. Such spam campaign like Yobit is so scarce, as I know.

Or this extra requirement

I also believe signature campaigns should have a rule that every participant should earn a certain amount of merit each period. If they don't they get removed, and someone else gets put in their place. This would mean you'll only be hiring those that are actively earning merit rather than have done in the past which means it would prevent them from getting complacent.

Reporter badges are definitely going to encourage certain types of users to report, generally those that like to stick out within a community, and I think that's fine. You'll find a lot of organizations offering achievements, and badges to encourage students to learn. For example, a number of language courses do it, as well as when we were all back in school as a kid we had a system where they would put stars on your report card if you done well etc. It does work even in adulthood.

I think that badge is a new tool to motivate users, like merit system.

Requirements for badges should be kept in secret. Users just keep doing their daily stuffs, posting, reporting; then someday they will hit figures of total reporting posts (or good total reporting posts), at which their badges appear. Same approach as work allocation on forum staffs and their payments (staffs don't know what other staffs allocated to work, and how much others get paid) - As I remember, @Welsh said about this.

From given stats, I think badges can be rewarded as:

• >=500 good reports
• >= 1000 good reports
• >=2000 good reports
• >= 5000 good reports

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

I don't find it difficult because I do contribute the best I can, but I can't please everyone,

Just have to support you on this, the only reason people find it difficult is because they joined the forum with the wrong mindset. Ask yourself what makes a good forum user. It isn't rocket science to be one as all the attributes are quite easy to possess, some times you just have to fake it until it becomes a part of you. We have those that are working underground (spam hunters) but someone might review their account and place them below others just because they aren't getting merit like others as that is what most forum users now use to judge who is or isn't a quality forum user.  It isn't that difficult to be useful to the forum.

[Natalim]

I don't find it difficult because I do contribute the best I can, but I can't please everyone,

Just have to support you on this, the only reason people find it difficult is because they joined the forum with the wrong mindset. Ask yourself what makes a good forum user. It isn't rocket science to be one as all the attributes are quite easy to possess, some times you just have to fake it until it becomes a part of you. We have those that are working underground (spam hunters) but someone might review their account and place them below others just because they aren't getting merit like others as that is what most forum users now use to judge who is or isn't a quality forum user.  It isn't that difficult to be useful to the forum.

Exactly, everyone is different, it's like you are working in a company (signature campaign) that has a lot of employees, of course among the employees, there are best, average, and poor employees in terms of performance, and it's the campaign managers job to decide which to promote or to retain in a company.

Being just an ordinary member is different from being a campaign because if you are in a campaign, you have to follow the rules of the campaign and at the same time you need to follow the forum rules which sometimes put more pressure on your compared if you are a member without a campaign.

[hd49728]

@Natalim. That is why good companies hire professional, experienced, trusted managers to manage and promote their projects. It is better for companies in cost-effectiveness aspect. Good managers with their strict rules to choose participants among applicants will make sure average quality of participants is high, or at least above average (compare to other campaigns managed by bad managers.)

[Natalim]

@Natalim. That is why good companies hire professional, experienced, trusted managers to manage and promote their projects. It is better for companies in cost-effectiveness aspect. Good managers with their strict rules to choose participants among applicants will make sure average quality of participants is high, or at least above average (compare to other campaigns managed by bad managers.)

BTC paying signature campaign that are seen in services are mostly manage by well experienced managers and I think majority of the spams are coming from the bounty campaign (signature campaign) as most managers just accept sign up without reviewing the post quality of the applicants, just simply filling out the form, and you are part of the campaign.

[philipma1957]

We could simply stop all signature campaigns as a test. Maybe 30 60 90 days

Measure traffic on forum and make decisions on that.

I have not done a paid signature in three years.
I still post a lot.
So why do we think people will end posting. Traffic will lesson.

Other suggestions. Make Oct signature free month. Just October.

The forum will survive that.

I picked October because it would give people time to get ready.

If the forum can’t survive one month of no signatures it is fundamentally a flawed forum.

[actmyname]

We could simply stop all signature campaigns as a test. Maybe 30 60 90 days

Measure traffic on forum and make decisions on that.

I have not done a paid signature in three years.
I still post a lot.
So why do we think people will end posting. Traffic will lesson.

The forum attracted individuals pre-campaigns. What kind of users do we want on this platform? Spammers that are just here to make a quick buck (literally)? Or, do we want real discussion?

If we don't want real discussion then why have the Serious discussion & Ivory Tower boards at all?
If we don't want real discussion then why implement the merit system?
If we don't want real discussion then why put limitations on signatures?

It could be an advertising haven but it's not.

[philipma1957]

We could simply stop all signature campaigns as a test. Maybe 30 60 90 days

Measure traffic on forum and make decisions on that.

I have not done a paid signature in three years.
I still post a lot.
So why do we think people will end posting. Traffic will lesson.

The forum attracted individuals pre-campaigns. What kind of users do we want on this platform? Spammers that are just here to make a quick buck (literally)? Or, do we want real discussion?

If we don't want real discussion then why have the Serious discussion & Ivory Tower boards at all?
If we don't want real discussion then why implement the merit system?
If we don't want real discussion then why put limitations on signatures?

It could be an advertising haven but it's not.

To me I got here in 2012

 I did signature for 18 months from  some time in 2014 to 2015  most of the funds I rolled into my difficulty give away threads back in the early years..

 I stopped doing them {paid signature} because I decided they were not worthwhile to do from a moral level.

I did promote :

simplemining.net for free
sidehack for free .........still promote him via a giveaway raffle.
avalon 841 for free

after reading this thread and mentioning in some other threads prior to this about a temporary end to all signatures.

I have stopped promoting the avalon a841 and simplemining.net via avatar and signature.
I still have the usb stick give away for sidehack.

To me a 1 month holiday in October every year seems good.

Or pick November

or pick December.   I say those months as they are close to ongoing yet would give some time for adjustment.

How hard is it to shut the options down for a month.  Maybe it is too hard to do that (I doubt that)

Now even if done it does not stop a spam post with a link  I have reported many of them.

We may find  that spam posts with links go up 10 fold for the signature ban month.  
Thus we say okay lets  go back to signatures as it is the lessor of 2 evils.
As it is quite possible that paid signatures reduce the spam posts with an outside link.

[actmyname]

How hard is it to shut the options down for a month.  Maybe it is too hard to do that (I doubt that)

Now even if done it does not stop a spam post with a link  I have reported many of them.

We may find  that spam posts with links go up 10 fold for the signature ban month. 
Thus we say okay lets  go back to signatures as it is the lessor of 2 evils.
As it is quite possible that paid signatures reduce the spam posts with an outside link.

Your theory makes some sense if we're talking about throwaway accounts. However, since a lot of members want to keep their "rank privileges" I'm not so sure that they'll resort to link spam, especially if it results in a ban.

Spam is one thing but link spam is another. The latter should be more bannable and that would disincentivize users from going too crazily on the off-period. Especially if they have a chance of returning to signature campaigns.

I still say it's worth a shot, that we should try the experiment. Even a week or two would be fine. After all, with no incentive to post, we won't get horrible replies to useless threads.

[drwhobox]

Why would Theymos think of disabling signature when it's one of the reasons that makes this forum more popular? That's operating at a loss IMO.

I heard they keep saying that the forum has enough money and without traffic from the spammers the forum will be better off. Personally I think forum will lose most of it's traffic and people will move on to something else. Only the true bitcoin lovers will stay here.