Suggestion: allow on-forum altcoin giveaways for established altcoins

[Chlotide]

...The stance towards ICOs was terribly wrong, and everyone knows it. It led to the following: A handful of scammers getting rich, a handful of intelligent scammers getting rich, a fair number of people profiting from the pumping in these scams, and an enormous amount of people being financially harmed. Good stance indeed.

True ! That is why nobody here (luckily) will allow altcoin giveaways, ICO advertising and so on ... because even currently ok crypto can fail in awful ways and why should anyone here be (sort of) held responsible for that ?

If I have to post my casino username to get Bitcoin, it's the same type of no-value post as if I have to do the same to get Litecoin.
I understand very well that the bans were not issued for the spam part, but for taking part in an altcoin giveaway. I am just making a point.

In bitcoin we trust. In the others not so much. Would you bet your parent's house on any altcoin from coinmarketcap ? I wouldn't...

So "allow on-forum altcoin giveaways for established altcoins" ... no thank you !

Even cryptotalk (yobit forum) pays users in btc, not some weird new crypto from their investbox or ETH or their own coin(s) for that matter. That sure says something ))

[TECSHARE]

I think a good way to solve this issue with maximal positive effect is to either establish some kind of protocol that must be followed, or perhaps some kind of script to automate things. This would enable giveaways while also keeping it from shitting up the forum with useless posts.

[actmyname]

Here's my solution. Allow everything, but create a special subsection for Altcoin promotional giveaways and here's where the forum benefits. Require every giveaway thread to donate 1 million sats to the forum.

The spam is limited to that board. The forum gets some money. It's win-win.

People lose money to scammers, win-win indeed. It is time to stop embracing innocent and naive individuals being financially harmed (and in extreme cases ruined) because of own petty greed.

I wonder where the lapse in logic happened where we are both banning altcoins due to spam and scams and where we have already created a board exclusively for scams (investor-based games).

Not that the forum really cares about scams... but best watch out if you post twice in a row!

[Vod]

I think a good way to solve this issue with maximal positive effect is to either establish some kind of protocol that must be followed, or perhaps some kind of script to automate things. This would enable giveaways while also keeping it from shitting up the forum with useless posts.

That's exactly what I'm doing!  Club members can receive a monthly giveaway of promising alt coins.  

Not that the forum really cares about scams... but best watch out if you post twice in a row!

 

[snipie]

I support this and I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed if an altcoin is listed in many major exchanges.
I see members afraid about scamcoins... since when the forum is monitoring scams? Flags are here to do the job and warn people.

[alani123]

I don't like this idea to be perfectly honest.
I'd much rather see giveaways take place in third party platforms in order to avoid overloading the forum with simple and mindless address posts.

A third party website could verify bitcointalk account level by scraping an alphanumerical code the user was requested to put in his profile once.
The giveaway itself IMO would surely be worth a thread in bitcointalk, but NOT for promotion or to be facilitated in the forum. Just to have actual discussion on issues, assistance etc.
Address posting is just needless bumps and unfair to bounty managers that have build platforms and tracking methods keeping the forum spam-free.

If 'established' altcoins wanted to promote a giveaway, I maybe the forum should make a concession and allow them to buy ads. Hell, if it's just giveaways, why not allow every coin to buy an ad? The mere fact that it costs something to buy it will probably deter the worst ones.

[LoyceV]

This topic reminded me to bump this thread.

Another topic reminded me to bump this thread.

[Pmalek]

Another topic reminded me to bump this thread.

Then remove your old bump.

Like I said in the other thread, you aren't allowed to offer an altcoin giveaway. Just wrap it differently. Bounties are allowed. Create a bounty thread. To participate in the bounty, I have to follow you on Twitter and make a re-tweet saying "LTC to the moon". After that, I write the usual authentification post or bounty report in your thread (because that's allowed), and I get the bounty. No rules were broken in the process. 

[NotATether]

It might have already been said, but there is inherently going to be a bias problem in determining which coins are established.

For example, I think everybody can agree that Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Ethereum are both established. But what about e.g. Solana which has market cap #3?

What about something like Bcash? [this will probably bring a strong no but then it's going to tarnish this forum's purpose as a "free-speech crypto discussion place"].

[Pmalek]

<Snip>

You are allowed to have bounties with unlisted scam tokens that will never amount to anything and no one cares. We call that scams not being moderated and staff not meddling in other people's business. But if you give away a coin that is listed and is trading (no matter what people might think of it), you get yourself banned because that apparently makes sense. You either have freedom of choice or you don't. If you allow people to get scammed on Bitcointalk and allow me to create and distribute the Pmalek token through bounties, why prevent me from giving people ETH or LTC or X? Freedom of choice is also allowing me to make my own mistakes and receive any altcoin I want to. Freedom of choice entails teaching me not to accept that altcoin and explaining the reasons why. 

The incentivized posting rule doesn't make sense.
This crap can be found in tens of thousands of posts in thousands of pages in the bounties sub. Same thing with the reports for social media bounties. But that's ok.

PROOF OF REGISTRATION
Forum Username: X
Forum Profile Link : X
Telegram Username: X
Participated Campaigns: X
ETH Wallet Address:  X

BTC giveaways where you only post your bitcoin address don't generate spam. ETH giveaways where you post an ETH address generates spam and is incentivized posting because of science apparently. 

[LoyceV]

Then remove your old bump.

What old bump?  

Like I said in the other thread, you aren't allowed to offer an altcoin giveaway. Just wrap it differently. Bounties are allowed. Create a bounty thread. To participate in the bounty, I have to follow you on Twitter and make a re-tweet saying "LTC to the moon". After that, I write the usual authentification post or bounty report in your thread (because that's allowed), and I get the bounty. No rules were broken in the process.

That sounds like it's going to be allowed. Nope, it's not allowed. But you can ask for 50 pushups + proof

I think everybody can agree that Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Ethereum are both established. But what about e.g. Solana which has market cap #3?

It's #9 on CMC, and I've never used it. But I can find ways to exchange it into Bitcoin without KYC, so I'd say that's okay.

What about something like Bcash? [this will probably bring a strong no but then it's going to tarnish this forum's purpose as a "free-speech crypto discussion place"].

Let me put it this way: if someone wants to give me BCH, I'm not saying no. I even offer a Forkcoin service for getting rid of it!

This crap can be found in tens of thousands of posts in thousands of pages in the bounties sub.

Tens of thousands? That's cute:

I did a count in my posts archive. Facebook is mentioned 19.8 million times, Twitter 30.9 million times. This probably includes double counting the links, but even without that it's still staggering number considering the forum only has 60 million posts in total and I haven't included posts that were deleted in the first 10 years.

[PrimeNumber7]

It might have already been said, but there is inherently going to be a bias problem in determining which coins are established.

For example, I think everybody can agree that Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Ethereum are both established. But what about e.g. Solana which has market cap #3?

What about something like Bcash? [this will probably bring a strong no but then it's going to tarnish this forum's purpose as a "free-speech crypto discussion place"].

I think this point is one reason why exceptions will not be made to the rule referenced in the OP.

To somewhat piggyback on your point, establishing exceptions may make some view that the forum sees a particular (group of) altcoins as more legitimate (less of a scam), than others. Even if there would be no legal basis to this, there may be a moral/ethical basis, regardless of any disclosures made.

If there was a "neutral" criteria, there would be the potential for some to claim that the criteria is designed to include/exclude certain altcoins. Any neutral criteria would also likely require the reliance on third parties to make judgments, which leads to its own set of issues.