Sig campaign mangers - now help advertising for scammers - TO PROTECT THE BOARD.

[The-One-Above-All]

I know what. Instead of NOT helping promote SCAMS at all,  and pushing to have them banned from advertising ?

We will cash in whilst promoting scams and their projects but make sure only those we class as spammers don't promote them, so we protect the board (and get paid)??
Yeah, so if the posts are good and the members promoting the scams are not immediately recognizable as scoundrels, then the newbies are more likely to get scammed haha BRILLIANT.
Scams must only be promoted by the " good posters".

Hahahaha

I've heard it all now. It keeps getting BETTER.

So rather than just ban any skank that promotes scams, we will cash in, pretending to only help promote scams via posters we consider not to be spamming.

This argument is BOGUS and again demonstrates how fucked this board is now.

SUCHMOON has previously given scam tags to people for advertising POSSIBLE SCAMS and says that is HOW IT SHOULD BE.

Now though, if it is a DT that may have some juicy sig campaign btc dust for her in future, there seems no need to worry about those promoting and advertising scams at all. OH REALLY??
So she must believe now that if you make good posts you can promote scams. Just don't spam at the same time?

Hahahah

Hhampuz quick back to livecoin. I mean as the argument goes " would you rather live coin gets some irresponsible campaign manager or just let hhampuz get paid to make sure the evil "spammers" don't get to advertise them or though he may well allow proven scammers and the financially dangerous to advertise the " scams".

Proven SCAMS don't get promoted RIGHT? anyone promoting them get SCAM TAGS??  why don't we run with that one?  

Can someone explain this to us all again?

So ++

1. if DT says you are promoting a possible scam you get a scam tag
2. if  a campaign manager says you are an okay poster you can promote scams that are paying them ? and dt don't do shit because they may need to get on those campaigns managed by said campaign manager
3. If you mention this truth you may get a scam tag


Just more twilight zone morality in action.


Suchmoon what happened to promoting " possible scams and scammers" makes you immediately game for a scam tag? or has that changed now?

Now you are spamming a sig are you worried sticking to this could void your 7 bucks a pop posting in future if you fall out with campaign managers? is this a conflict of interests?

Get promoting scams guys, just get a campaign manager that controls DT's income to manage your scam and you are golden.

When are we getting the twilight zone music auto load in when you come to meta?

Should campaign managers that willingly assists the promotion of proven scammers or scams be given

a/ more merits
b/ more trust
c/ a shiny new badge
d/a warning and then a scam tag if they do it again.
 

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Although we're advice not to feed the trolls but here's what i have to say concerning this issue. Is yobit a shady exchanges, probably yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Definitely not as we have no proof yet so we can't conclude. From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform. Now until that is proven otherwise we can judge Cryptotalk based on the reputable of yobit.

Concerning @Yahoo's association with the project through management, this has been debated on and it's better that way than the previous of leaving any campaigns requiring high number of post which will definitely result to spamming to operate unmoderated.

[The-One-Above-All]

Although we're advice not to feed the trolls but here's what i have to say concerning this issue. Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Maybe, maybe not. We have no proof yet so we can't conclude. From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform. Now until that is proven otherwise we can judge Cryptotalk based on the reputable of yobit.

Concerning @Yahoo's association with the project through management, this has been debated on and it's better that way than the previous of leaving any campaigns requiring high number of post which will definitely result to spamming to operate unmoderated.

NOW we require hard proof before action? what is this waiting for proof now? I thought waiting for proof was CRAZY because the damage will be done after they have scammed.


Can we get some sensible approach to this. You know the SAME approach that all members and all projects receive,  so it is not blatant double standards.

Please NO trolling trolling here. Besides no member would be taking any food from your meager bowl.

It has been debated on ? by who ? where is the debate?

We had heard they were keen to work with YOBIT themselves anyway previously?? directly...  so it is fortunate it went to them isn't it.

Of course though if you are confident it is not yobit then we are happy to see a NEW standard of waiting for irrefutable proof. Let's make sure all members receive the same treatment.

Exchanges are some of the most dangerous places for newbies and even experienced members. If anything they should have extra scrutiny. Any projects related at all to a rogue exchange needs to be flagged up with a lemons flag at a minimum. Or is that just for whistle blowers?

[MFahad]

NOW we require hard proof before action? what is this waiting for proof now? I thought waiting for proof was CRAZY because the damage will be done after they have scammed.

Who will be scammed by this campaign ? when anyone on the forum click on the signature, it will take them to https://cryptotalk.org which is a forum and no one is getting scam by visiting or signup that forum.

We had heard they were keen to work with YOBIT themselves anyway previously?? directly...  so it is fortunate it went to them isn't it.

So what ? Its a win win situation for everyone...  If you had a business and money then you would hire the best manager , isn't ?  

Exchanges are some of the most dangerous places for newbies and even experienced members. If anything they should have extra scrutiny. Any projects related at all to a rogue exchange needs to be flagged up with a lemons flag at a minimum. Or is that just for whistle blowers?

Again no one is promoting Yobit in their signatures. Unless you see a link of yobit, its just useless to keep pressing on this point.

[The-One-Above-All]

NOW we require hard proof before action? what is this waiting for proof now? I thought waiting for proof was CRAZY because the damage will be done after they have scammed.

Who will be scammed by this campaign ? when anyone on the forum click on the signature, it will take them to https://cryptotalk.org which is a forum and no one is getting scam by visiting or signup that forum.

We had heard they were keen to work with YOBIT themselves anyway previously?? directly...  so it is fortunate it went to them isn't it.

So what ? Its a win win situation for everyone...  If you had a business and money then you would hire the best manager , isn't ?  

Exchanges are some of the most dangerous places for newbies and even experienced members. If anything they should have extra scrutiny. Any projects related at all to a rogue exchange needs to be flagged up with a lemons flag at a minimum. Or is that just for whistle blowers?

Again no one is promoting Yobit in their signatures. Unless you see a link of yobit, its just useless to keep pressing on this point.

Your points may seem reasonable to you. However, for those that are capable of slightly deeper thought and are not likely influenced by being paid for being short sighted or wearing rose tinted spectacles.

1. consider scammers could certainly use a forum of their own for plenty of things that certainly could put the members and visitors at great risk, now or in the future. Undeniable
2. Win win? you may wish to rethink that or re read my point. Working directly for and assisting the advertising of a scam is never going to be win win. Well perhaps for the scammer and campaign manger. Undeniable
3. Your 3rd point has some small value, in that if DT's are claiming it is sensible or plausible or improbable this is not yobit but rather some unsuspecting 3rd party using yobits services??? and no action can be taken UNTIL after this has been PROVEN. Then all other members and projects must be treated in the same way. PROOF of scamming first before action. That is NOT how they operate.

If any of those points need clarification then please ask.

Again clear double standards... IF they are getting paid YOU NEED PROOF of scam or connection to scammer. IF they are NOT getting paid you need ZERO proof and will get a scam tag for promoting a POSSIBLE scam.

There is no other way to see it.

Yobit needs to bring online all coins that have working wallets else it is a scam site. There is no excuse for having wallets offline that have had working wallets for years and devs asking them to upgrade, these are NOT small projects in many cases. This is disgraceful. If they do that then to me they will not be a scam site and should be allowed to advertise as any other project here.

There are worse scamming sites for sure.


This bullshit we have to save the board from spamming so now we can work with and be paid by scams is bogus. Undeniable.

This is more of a gripe about double standards than picking out yobit or this other new " unrelated" forum. 

Yobit could still improve their performance and bring all wallets back online that have active devs and working wallets? get on with it or be banned from this forum. No more ripping traders off by capturing their coins is a nose diving market you have created yourselves.

[actmyname]

I would much rather have theymos ban all signatures than have signature campaigns continue.
I would much rather have theymos ban YoBit signatures than have the campaign continue.
I would much rather have yahoo manage YoBit than have the campaign managed by someone who will allow spam to proliferate.
I would much rather allow spam to proliferate than... no, I wouldn't have spam proliferate.The main problem I have right now is the number of "why is yahoo managing the campaign" threads. It's starting to border on spam, now.

[akhjob]

As of now there is no scam accusation on Cryptotalk. If they break the promise by not giving incentives for the posts made in their forum, then the DT members will start tagging the promoters for promoting scams. As of now, there is no scam regarding Cryptotalk.

OP, you could follow these tips to improve your posts
1. Be Short and Precise.
2. Be Relevant to the Topic.
3. Avoid Unnecessary Repetition.
4. Encourage feedback.
5. Don't overwrite.

You might think that this is off topic and possibly will report to moderator but I think it's more relevant to you. Normally I would skip your long ranting posts, but I had some free time today to go through your posts.

For giving out these tips, Am I a great writer? No. But I believe I'm not in anyone ignore list.

There is still hope

[The-One-Above-All]

I would much rather have theymos ban all signatures than have signature campaigns continue.
I would much rather have theymos ban YoBit signatures than have the campaign continue.
I would much rather have yahoo manage YoBit than have the campaign managed by someone who will allow spam to proliferate.
I would much rather allow spam to proliferate than... no, I wouldn't have spam proliferate.The main problem I have right now is the number of "why is yahoo managing the campaign" threads. It's starting to border on spam, now.

Wrong

There can be NO promoting of scams or scammers.

There is ONLY one way to operate as I have just said. You need to decide if something meets the transparent clear threshold of scamming or scammer, then red trust ANYONE that promotes it or advertises it. Those can be removed once they understand or come to learn the error of their ways. Sig bans are suitable for those that wish to continue advertising after they have been told.

As if SPAM even comes close to SCAM in terms of endangering members here.

This we must worry about spam to the point of helping to advertise SCAM FOR PAY is totally bogus.

IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT

1. yobit is a scam
or
2  Yobit is cryptotalk

that is a different matter.

If you believe though that either are true or highly PROBABLE then you should be red trusting any person promoting them or advertising them.

THIS bogus crap we must help fight SPAM whilst helping promote SCAMS is laughable.

DOUBLE STANDARDS

ELSE

Any other scams must be treated in the same way. yahoo or hhampuz must manage them (because apparently they are the "best" people for the job although they just rely mostly on the gamed and manipulated metrics that the broken systems of control fart out) and people pushing scams will not get red trust or have any action taken against them IF THEY DO NOT SPAM.

Haha sorry that repeating THIS TRUTH is more upsetting to you at this point that scams being advertised by your buddies. Please stop the spam of truth whilst people profit from assisting the advertising of scams. In the name of PROTECTION.

Stopping PURE SPAMMERS AND SHITPOSTERS advertising it does NOTHING to protect the members from getting SCAMMED. Actually one could possibly say that if you restricted advertising of scams to "the most trusted" "the most merited" then you would be ensuring greater success of the scams because people would have MORE faith in those promoting the said scams LOL

Quick protect us more.

As previously stated if we are going to WAIT for PROOF cryptotalk is yobit that is different. Then this must be the standard for all new POSSIBLE or PROBABLE scams.
If you are referring (as you did ) to yobit directly)then our point is clear and undeniable.

@assjob

ssshhhh first go out into the real forum and achieve something. Don't waste time trying assist those that are in no need of your help. The one on topic point you made, was already answered and covered. WAIT FOR PROOF with ALL possible scams or scammers OR  NOT.

Of course you may say well a scammer can scam on one project and then start a new project where he has not yet scammed and it must be allowed to proceed without warning? We don't think that should be the case, but again this is a different debate.

Let's establish a standard for ALL projects and ALL members. Not keep swapping the standards depending on if certain people are receiving payment or not.

[marlboroza]

Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes

Why do you think yobit is shady exchange?

From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform.

From the look of things, it seems cryptotalk is yobit's forum. Do you think your opinion is right and my is wrong, and I think you are receiving money from something you just called shady and you think you are not receiving money from them, even thought you are?

It is all part of marketing, everyone talks about yobit, when you see cryptotalk, you think of yobit, when 400 users joined signature campaign they joined yobit, when users at cryptotalk get their payed-to-post rewards, where they will receive them? When CH started this thread, she didn't mention yobit, yahoo or cryptotalk - you came to this conclusion by yourself, and you started "yobit this, cryptotalk that, yahoo this". Mission accomplished, as I said, it is all part of marketing.


Tell me, why would this cryptotalk promoter complain about yobit in cryptotalk-signature-campaign thread:

I just want to tell my fellow Signature participants that withdrawing with XRP in the yobit exchange is somewhat congested, I don't know why. so, for the meanwhile, you can choose other altcoins if you don't like withdrawing using bitcoin, cause my XRP withdraw is delayed for 1 hour now.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5188047.msg52627975#msg52627975


To be honest, reading some posts in signature thread, I am under impression that cryptotalk participants believe this is yobit's campaign for forum, not forum's campaign with payment trough yobit:

does anyone know when this signature campaign will end? or how many btc will be distributed to the participants of this yobit bounty?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5188047.msg52602570#msg52602570

Only Yobit knows and come to think the number of participants at the moment will picture out on how big is their budget for this one but i wont say it that it would last for long.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5188047.msg52603395#msg52603395

I believe this campaign is an opportunity for both Yobit to improve its reputation and establish itself as a more serious exchange, [...]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5188047.msg52614520#msg52614520

Who will be scammed by this campaign ? when anyone on the forum click on the signature, it will take them to https://cryptotalk.org which is a forum and no one is getting scam by visiting or signup that forum.

[...]

Again no one is promoting Yobit in their signatures. Unless you see a link of yobit, its just useless to keep pressing on this point.

Well, yes, you get it right, no one promotes exchange in signature  

[Welsh]

Although we're advice not to feed the trolls but here's what i have to say concerning this issue. Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Maybe, maybe not. We have no proof yet so we can't conclude. From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform. Now until that is proven otherwise we can judge Cryptotalk based on the reputable of yobit.

Concerning @Yahoo's association with the project through management, this has been debated on and it's better that way than the previous of leaving any campaigns requiring high number of post which will definitely result to spamming to operate unmoderated.

Like others said there's no active scam accusation against Yobit. They have made bad decisions in past advertising campaigns on this forum, and have paid the price. However, they have made the step in the right direction, and those that are claiming "Yobit does what it wants" obviously isn't true if they've resorted to using a campaign manager, and a reputable at that. It was obvious that they tried to save as much money as possible, and thought they could brute force their way into Bitcointalk. Which obviously didn't work out for them, and in return they had their signature banned from the forum.

Even if you were to judge Cryptotalk based on the existing reputation of Yobit. It hasn't been confirmed that they have scammed anyone, and the only real criticism you can say about them is regarding the whole Yobit spam, but they're at least making steps in the right direction. I haven't used Yobit, because I don't really have a need for an exchange, and I don't deal in altcoins. However, if I ever did I'd probably remember them just from the shenanigans that have happened. Would I like them to make a little more effort, and place more restrictions on who can enter into their campaign? Yes, probably. However, at the moment I haven't seen too many spammers on the Yobit signature campaign, and for those that are will hopefully be removed shortly by Yahoo. Despite their history on the forum, everyone knows about them, and with an effective strategy for the existing campaign every new comer into Bitcoin will likely hear about them. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the go to option in the future just because of the amount of exposure they seem to be able to get.

[The-One-Above-All]

Although we're advice not to feed the trolls but here's what i have to say concerning this issue. Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Maybe, maybe not. We have no proof yet so we can't conclude. From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform. Now until that is proven otherwise we can judge Cryptotalk based on the reputable of yobit.

Concerning @Yahoo's association with the project through management, this has been debated on and it's better that way than the previous of leaving any campaigns requiring high number of post which will definitely result to spamming to operate unmoderated.

Like others said there's no active scam accusation against Yobit. They have made bad decisions in past advertising campaigns on this forum, and have paid the price. However, they have made the step in the right direction, and those that are claiming "Yobit does what it wants" obviously isn't true if they've resorted to using a campaign manager, and a reputable at that. It was obvious that they tried to save as much money as possible, and thought they could brute force their way into Bitcointalk. Which obviously didn't work out for them, and in return they had their signature banned from the forum.

Even if you were to judge Cryptotalk based on the existing reputation of Yobit. It hasn't been confirmed that they have scammed anyone, and the only real criticism you can say about them is regarding the whole Yobit spam, but they're at least making steps in the right direction. I haven't used Yobit, because I don't really have a need for an exchange, and I don't deal in altcoins. However, if I ever did I'd probably remember them just from the shenanigans that have happened. Would I like them to make a little more effort, and place more restrictions on who can enter into their campaign? Yes, probably. However, at the moment I haven't seen too many spammers on the Yobit signature campaign, and for those that are will hopefully be removed shortly by Yahoo. Despite their history on the forum, everyone knows about them, and with an effective strategy for the existing campaign every new comer into Bitcoin will likely hear about them. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the go to option in the future just because of the amount of exposure they seem to be able to get.

What???

Yobit HAS for years taken wallets down of fully functioning coins, for years ignored developers requests to put them back online, deliberately not updated to new forks. I mean if you turn markets withdrawals off the markets panic and immediately dump leaving your coins there trapped. WTF are you talking about NOT proven they scammed anyone. You can not do this to traders. This is completely out of control. This is not tiny projects either. SYS coin was not even updated it was a top 50 project at the time and they did not update leaving peoples coins trapped there on the old chain and unable to be withdrawn or swapped. Same for several projects.  This is perhaps not a deception ie scam (we think there is sensible expectation exchanges do not do this as commmon practice.). It is more like PURE THEFT.

This is likely more dangerous than 99% of the 2 bit scammers DT run around trying to pretend to stop.

" I have not used yobit and do not use alt coins" ... which section do you moderate??

Please stick to commenting on the things you have experience with. Or you are publishing misleading information.

Yobit are not exit scamming yet or denying btc withdrawals etc but they can not be allowed to switch wallets off for years on end and leave them off for no good reason. Imagine your bank just said sorry no withdrawals now, you can switch you balances to another bank and withdraw but you only get 10% on the dollar if you do this. LOL totally not a a scam.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform.

From the look of things, it seems cryptotalk is yobit's forum. Do you think your opinion is right and my is wrong, and I think you are receiving money from something you just called shady and you think you are not receiving money from them, even thought you are?

Not trying to defend any project here, just airing my views. We both have different opinions and since there isn't any concrete evidence to back any of us up, we might both be right or wrong. I'm not getting paid by either yobit or cryptotalk so don't understand where you assumption is coming from but well, if you think because when you mention cryptotalk, discussion about yobit pops up and since everything concerning the signature campaign has to do with yobit then they most be connected, I can't argue with you that's your reasoning.

But understand this, exchanges offering their platform for IEO gets the same benefits yobit is currently recieving, that doesn't make the exchange the owners of the IEO projects. I understand it to be an indirect marketing strategy. Everything about an IEO takes place on an exchange and promotes that host exchange just as currently everything about cryptotalk signature campaign promote yobit but technically that doesn't make Cryptotalk = yobit just as IEO project aren't owned by the host exchanges. Correct me rightly if you feel I'm wrong, some of us are willing to learn.

[actmyname]

I would much rather have theymos ban all signatures than have signature campaigns continue.
I would much rather have theymos ban YoBit signatures than have the campaign continue.
I would much rather have yahoo manage YoBit than have the campaign managed by someone who will allow spam to proliferate.
I would much rather allow spam to proliferate than... no, I wouldn't have spam proliferate.The main problem I have right now is the number of "why is yahoo managing the campaign" threads. It's starting to border on spam, now.

Wrong

There can be NO promoting of scams or scammers.

There is ONLY one way to operate as I have just said. You need to decide if something meets the transparent clear threshold of scamming or scammer, then red trust ANYONE that promotes it or advertises it. Those can be removed once they understand or come to learn the error of their ways. Sig bans are suitable for those that wish to continue advertising after they have been told.

I don't like YoBit and I don't like this campaign. In fact, I detest it. The 'solution' of using a campaign manager is merely a fragment of what I would have wanted - the eradication of the campaign.

There is a question to be asked, though... Is CryptoTalk a scam?

Once you have your answer, consider this: this may be a proxy for YoBit to shill their site in the future, that is, a way of bypassing the previous signature ban on the YoBit site directly.

Then finally: if you were to red tag YoBit participants, should you also tag CryptoTalk participants based on this speculation?

[fudster]

I would much rather have theymos ban all signatures than have signature campaigns continue.
I would much rather have theymos ban YoBit signatures than have the campaign continue.
I would much rather have yahoo manage YoBit than have the campaign managed by someone who will allow spam to proliferate.
I would much rather allow spam to proliferate than... no, I wouldn't have spam proliferate.The main problem I have right now is the number of "why is yahoo managing the campaign" threads. It's starting to border on spam, now.

Wrong

There can be NO promoting of scams or scammers.

There is ONLY one way to operate as I have just said. You need to decide if something meets the transparent clear threshold of scamming or scammer, then red trust ANYONE that promotes it or advertises it. Those can be removed once they understand or come to learn the error of their ways. Sig bans are suitable for those that wish to continue advertising after they have been told.

I don't like YoBit and I don't like this campaign. In fact, I detest it. The 'solution' of using a campaign manager is merely a fragment of what I would have wanted - the eradication of the campaign.

There is a question to be asked, though... Is CryptoTalk a scam?

Once you have your answer, consider this: this may be a proxy for YoBit to shill their site in the future, that is, a way of bypassing the previous signature ban on the YoBit site directly.

Then finally: if you were to red tag YoBit participants, should you also tag CryptoTalk participants based on this speculation?

People in this forumboard is partying everyday, the signature campaigns makes it alive and running. The opportunity of this board is limitless. If it dies signature advertisers will look for new traffic sources and they will move on to other crypto forums like cryptotalk.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Maybe, maybe not. We have no proof yet so we can't conclude.

Like others said there's no active scam accusation against Yobit. They have made bad decisions in past advertising campaigns on this forum, and have paid the price.

I was very careful with my choice of words as i used the word shady which to my understanding means dishonest, untrustworthy etc. Can an exchange be shady and not be a scam?, Probably yes to some extent e.g mercatox exchange could be considered one of those. We have different references and accusation threads that point towards yobit exchange been shady. It's not in my power to declare them scam besides since the forum doesn't moderate scams guess there's no point debating on this issue.

Mostly what the forum is after is moderating the rate at which spam is been produced on the forum which signature campaign is a major contributor to. The involvement of a manager has minimize that problem to some extent guess that's why the adminstrators of the forum haven't taken action.

[Welsh]

I'm not going to get into a debate over Yobit here as you rightly said I'm not that informed about the taking down of wallets. I know there's been a lot of complaints about support over the years, and that its pretty much non existent. However, this signature campaign is related to their forum, and as long as they're paying their campaign members then there can't be too many complaints. If they were advertising their exchange I can imagine there would be far more users knocking at the door with their pitchforks, and I would hope there wasn't too many users willing to advertise their exchange, because of the recent history. Maybe, once they've proven, and resolved some of the complaints against them in a few years they'll be looked at favorably, but at the moment they are very much branded as the "shady" exchange. This kind of makes one believe that they aren't outright a scam, but possibly have bad support when things do go wrong. Again, I'm not too familiar with the situation, but that's my outsider sort of view with reading information here, and there  since I haven't really been actively keeping up with the whole drama revolving around Yobit, and its exchange.

Despite the many complaints that exist on this forum there seems to be a lot of users claiming to have positive experiences including some reputable users. So, without actually using the exchange its hard to make a decision on whether their exchange is outright a scam, because they currently have a lot of users, and one hell of a trade volume. Surely, if they were outright a scam no one would want to use them.

I have a similar sort of viewpoint to Hilarious' post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134204.msg52624469#msg52624469

I have not used yobit and do not use alt coins" ... which section do you moderate??

Just because I know forum policy, doesn't mean I am invested in Altcoins. There's a key difference in being able to delete spam, move topics, and being invested in altcoins. Am I interested in altcoins? A few pique my interest, but more to see where they go technologically rather than being invested in them.

Mostly what the forum is after is moderating the rate at which spam is been produced on the forum which signature campaign is a major contributor to. The involvement of a manager has minimize that problem to some extent guess that's why the adminstrators of the forum haven't taken action.

This campaign is being watched by a lot of users including the admins. If it becomes a problem then you can bet your buck that another ban will be coming their way.

People in this forumboard is partying everyday, the signature campaigns makes it alive and running. The opportunity of this board is limitless. If it dies signature advertisers will look for new traffic sources and they will move on to other crypto forums like cryptotalk.

Signature campaigns definitely don't keep this forum alive, and some might argue are slowly killing the forum. I think there's a way to get them to work without damaging the forum, but that would require a lot of restrictions.

[The-One-Above-All]

@actmyname

It is our personal opinion that any member/org/corp found to be scamming should also have a warning placed on any future project from them regardless of whether it is "currently " scamming or not. That would seem only prudent.

Either way, this should be set in stone and made into a part of the transparent rules that all members/projects are measured against. No room for saying well they will pay us so lets wait for proof or hmmm they are competition to our sponsors lets not wait for proof this time. NO that is bogus.

You can't just keep switching and changing... oh we need to wait for PROOF... no we can't wait for proof because it is too late...

I say the only way is to wait for PROOF, but yes for some by then it will be too late.  However, you need to consider, shooting early on a hunch, could result in many innocent people taken out . I would personally see the greedy and high risk gamblers burned before innocent people for something they have not done nor intended to do.

In life people who want to believe they can get 500% returns with no risk need to wake up, if you are going to send your magic internets money to people, do some deep personal research, or don't cry when it does a vanishing act.


@welch

I do not think if you are scamming 1% or 5% or 0.1% of your client base you can rely on volume or the good reports from those you are not currently scamming to protect you from a warning sign here. If you are running a large scheme you only need to thieve from 1% to make yourself very wealthy. If there is evidence you have scammed even one person and do not make it right you are a scammer and need a warning.

If your bank suspended your account forever with your money there and said you can switch your balance another bank to withdraw but only at 10c on the dollar rate. We think you may class this as stealing or scamming. I don't think you will be saying look at all the other happy customers and look how big that bank is... they must be sort of okay else more would be freaking out. People only mostly care about themselves really. If they are okay fuck the poor guy that got scammed that;s their tough shit.

There is no reason to take wallets offline that are working and refuse to put them back online after years of being asked nicely by the dev team. Those wallets are functioning fine for everyone else.

Yobit is certainly worthy of a warning tag, there is in our opinion no way one can justify sending people to their services without warning they could have their coins detained for no reason for years and perhaps for good.

To be honest it is not yobit per say that is the issue or their forum. It is the double standards. Some people are given scam tags by DT members for advertising projects that DT members may perhaps turn into a scam.

The double standards here is MAIN ISSUE. It seems that you need no proof of scam for projects that are not paying campaign managers or DT members are promoting them. Suddenly you need undeniable proof if they are being paid. This is wrong. There needs to be a set standard for ALL members and ALL projects regardless of whether certain people here can squeeze some money out of it.

Transparent rules ensuring equal treatment of all members/projects.

Sure yobit are not THE WORST and they could fix their shit. They need to get on with it, but it will not save those that have dumped out at huge losses when they need not have done if yobit had not just taken the wallets off line or turned off withdrawals.

POLONIEX are also guilty of doing this on a bit of smaller scale. I hope those get busted for this too. However, they seem to have opened the coins for withdrawal NOW that they are worth 1% of what they were when they turned it off. That coin had a fully functioning wallet and bitrex was running theirs fine. That is a scum bag move. This is not a couple of weeks, this is a year or more.

Anyway just get up some transparent rules and stick to them. No swapping around.

This already gives plenty of ammo for others here who will start claiming "proof or double standards". Also the can of worms ...can a project that scammed start a new project without that project having a warning. This is why the environment here will always be suboptimal. People simply do not like to see double standards enforced on them.

Best to draw a line in the sand and that is that with financially dangerous members or projects. Zero tolerance. Sadly since many DT members are scammers or scammer supporters that line will not be drawn by them. (not all, but even those that just want to stay out of it are too weak for DT positions, you need people that will do the right thing however unpopular you will become)


This will be our last post here on the yobit/CT thing since they are not a prime concern to us and can't spend too much time on that. We are primarily interested in pushing for transparent fair standards that is it. They are not the worst here and therefore unfair to use them too much to highlight the need for fair consistent action. Unless people believe they see reasons to disagree with our points.


 

[fudster]

Double standards is the main issue. Lets bann all the double standards people.

Signature campaigns definitely don't keep this forum alive, and some might argue are slowly killing the forum. I think there's a way to get them to work without damaging the forum, but that would require a lot of restrictions.

Of course not. The fact that this is forum is full of information, its going to be busy even without signatures. But that wouldn't be business wise.

[legendster]

I don't like YoBit and I don't like this campaign. In fact, I detest it. The 'solution' of using a campaign manager is merely a fragment of what I would have wanted - the eradication of the campaign.

There is a question to be asked, though... Is CryptoTalk a scam?

Once you have your answer, consider this: this may be a proxy for YoBit to shill their site in the future, that is, a way of bypassing the previous signature ban on the YoBit site directly.

Then finally: if you were to red tag YoBit participants, should you also tag CryptoTalk participants based on this speculation?

Okay I respect your position on this and I would I like my voice to be heard. I know, it does not matter much but still.

Yobit, so far according to my knowledge has not scammed any user. It has listed shit projects, it has shilled its investbox without much mettle to it, but none of it actually accounts as something that is worthy of being tagged as a scam.

On top of that, everyone that has a functioning brain knows this that Yobit is promoting its own forum and in turn its own exchange through this campaign. We all get it. But what I don't understand is why a blanket tag to everyone, especially for people that are responsibly participating in this campaign 'the right thing to do'?

Please keep in mind, that you are someone I respect because you have a clear stance on things and are logical when you draw your conclusions. So please help me see things the way you see it.

[Welsh]

@welch

I do not think if you are scamming 1% or 5% or 0.1% of your client base you can rely on volume or the good reports from those you are not currently scamming to protect you from a warning sign here. If you are running a large scheme you only need to thieve from 1% to make yourself very wealthy. If there is evidence you have scammed even one person and do not make it right you are a scammer and need a warning.

I definitely agree with some of your points, however like Hilarious states within his message these complaints could be the user at fault rather than Yobit. I'm not trying to defend Yobit whatsoever, but I am trying to consider all angles on the limited knowledge I have. We don't know if the error of these wallets was because of something the user did rather than Yobit actually seizing the coins. Users run to the forums, and claim they scammed them when it could possibly be them at fault. For example, breaking rules or whatever. That's just an example. Again, I'm not going to claim that I'm knowledgeable in this drama with Yobit as I've been to busy recently to actually look into it. However, from the posts that I have seen there's been mixed feedback, and those that are claiming Yobit to be at fault haven't provided any evidence to make me believe that.  Of course, if you'd like to enlighten me about any solid evidence that these claims are true then I'd definitely take a look.