[LIST] ANN threads that are using bumping services

[holydarkness]

[...]

1. The "sup fellas group" (this sounds so amusing Maybe instead of my usual "Heads-up" I'll use "Sup fellas" from now on )

I prefer this one, LOL.

[...]
2. Then I took another quick clean-sweep over the previous mentioned topics: the group found by Rikafip on March 3rd and the similar group, found by holydarkness, on March 4th. Fortunately, the lattest group is inactive and no new spam appeared since my previous intervention.
[...]

What do you think about this thread [ANN][PX][PRESALE] ProtocolX Decentralized Trading Protocol on BSC [METAVERSE]⚡⚡? Their thread started to get infested by the bumping accounts on the list referred above as well as several bumping accounts tagged by lovesmayfamilis, such as:

--sorted in order of the oldest to newest post on their thread--
Z1_FINANCIAL - tagged by rikafip on the aforementioned list
LaCucina - on my additional list that completes rikafip's list
Predict Vision - Rikafip's
i8v8i - tagged by lovesmayfamilis
LunaFox - lovesmayfamilis'
SAWACrypto - mine
SDKmaster - lovesmayfamilis'
METASENSE - new one, untagged¹
TmHsHel - lovesmayfamilis'

However, it might be wise to mention that Protox.App deviates from the group's pattern as they never posted on other's thread.

As the likelihoodness of the group to do bumping for free --and that thread is certainly being bumped-- if we assume Protox.App is not part of the group, then they're either hired those shillers or --I rather doubted this theory-- those posts are made deliberately to throw off their scent.<sup>2


1</sup>[ANN] ✨✨✨ METASENS ✨✨✨ Build the universal amusement park another with similar characteristics of bumping group that apparently missed from our initial sweep, their thread is no longer active, though
² I think I need to start tagging those bumping accounts for my future reference and convenience on tracking which account already reviewed and which account is new


Edit: [in reply to Welsh's post below] Noted, will report these accounts from this point forward whenever I stumbled upon them. I see that you've cleaned those posts on ProtocolX's thread, that was fast.

[1714310141]

1714310141

[1714310141]

1714310141

[1714310141]

1714310141

[1714310141]

1714310141

[Welsh]

² I think I need to start tagging those bumping accounts for my future reference and convenience on tracking which account already reviewed and which account is new

It would be better if you were to report them, maybe we can start getting to the bottom of this. I'm currently compiling a list of users that I suspect are merit abusing, trying to avoid getting nuked. Since, when they have some merit patrollers can't nuke them, and that effectively reduces the chances of them getting banned. However, like I said I'll be collecting a list of usernames, and then pinging that to the higher ups, once I have a substantial enough list.

Although, the merit abuse is only a hunch at the moment, I haven't got anything solid to back that up. It's just weird that this group of users all have one or two merit, and they're from other users which have barely earned anything. It could potentially be a filtering down effect here. Also, I've noticed some also purchase Copper membership, probably in an attempt to appear more legit too.

Relictum was already cleaned by someone, as when I bookmarked it it had 35 pages, but when I started to clean it I saw it has only 13 pages and most of the remaining posts are made by OP. I had to report only 4 posts here.

Yeah, I went through that thread. Obviously, it's easy to miss a few posts when dealing with a large amount. I do have a sort of routine where I go back, and double check after handling the reports in my report queue. I've probably already deleted several pages worth on Decent too. A long way to go, but I think we could potentially sort this one out in a month rather than 20+ years .

[GazetaBitcoin]

Sup fellas (big lol again)

As I stated above, I started cleaning DECENT topic with much enthusiasm. The topic was not full of spam, nor used bumping services, therefore it was harder to clean it than I expected. Most of the reported posts were made by frustrated users, probably because they bought high and the coin dumped. So far I made 1237 reports, all but 1 handled already. This means that I reduced the topic with 61-62 pages. However, the topic is reduced now with 199 pages and this was possible only due to Welsh, which worked in par with me, and deleted 137 pages on his own. Thank you Welsh for the big help! We can say that's Decent enough (pun intended ).

I parsed all posts made from most recent until page 299 (which contains posts from June 2017) and my intention was go keep parsing until the date of Jan 1st, 2017, being afraid to have my reports flagged as bad, for reporting posts too old, if I would have gone beyond that date.

However, something happened and for the moment I will stop here, as I need some information from Welsh.

The problem is that 11 out of my last 13 reports were flagged as bad although, in my opinion, they should be deleted.



The posts in question are the following:

- post made by vincentcm: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19866553#msg19866553
- post made by SwapStick: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19866612#msg19866612
- post made by vincentcm: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19866719#msg19866719
- post made by nathalie20: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19866749#msg19866749
- post made by SwapStick: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19868122#msg19868122
- post made by Hunterwolfie: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19868179#msg19868179
- post made by Marvell1: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19868350#msg19868350
- post made by Hunterwolfie: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19870134#msg19870134
- post made by Number 1: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19870311#msg19870311
- post made by nathalie20: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19871774#msg19871774
- post made by whorehay https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1162392.msg19872044#msg19872044

As you can see, all are similar to previous reports I made from this topic; most of them contain swearing or zero value; and all previous similar reports were flagged as Good. As a consequence, I am thinking (1) this is either a mistake from the mod which handled these reports; or, (2) another mod and not you handled them and considered them too old and flagged them all as bad, which was my main fear, as I wrote above, but this was for posts older than Jan 1st 2017 and, as you can see these are from Jun 2017.

@Welsh if you agree, I can dig more inside this topic, even earlier than the date of Jan 1st, 2017, but I am afraid that I can have my reports marked as bad if I keep making them. I mean, in case my reports will come to you, I believe you'll mark them as good, but maybe they will arrive in another mod's hand? (I'm saying that thinking that these bad reports where flagged as bad not by you, but by another mod; even so, do you have any idea why they were flagged as bad?) However, in case we can make an agreement, thus just you will take care of this thread, I am more than willing to dig also through the posts made earlier than Jun 9th, 2017, and also earlier than Jan 1st, 2017. Please let me know.

The posts made until Jan 1st, 2017, reach page 232 of the topic, thus I could still parse 67 pages more. However, I need to know how to proceed, as I don't want to end up having my next ~1000 reports flagged as bad (I calculated 20 posts per page multiplied by 67 pages of posts made between June 9th, 2017 and Jan 1st, 2017 and the result is 1340 posts; however, not all of them need to be reported, this being why I estimated that I'll probably made 1000 more reports from these pages).

In case another mod handled these reports as bad not by mistake, but because he considered the posts too old, I think that best approach would be here -- if possible -- to send a note to your mod colleagues and tell them to leave all the reports from this thread to be handled by you. At least, you know what is happening with this thread and why these reports appear, for such old posts. And it's happening because we discussed to clean this monster topic as well. I am more than willing to clean it entirely, but also I would not want to have 1000 bad reports in a row...

Until I'll receive a reply from you I'll make a double-check through the thread, from its most recent page to page 299.

What do you think about this thread [ANN][PX][PRESALE] ProtocolX Decentralized Trading Protocol on BSC [METAVERSE]⚡⚡? Their thread started to get infested by the bumping accounts on the list referred above as well as several bumping accounts tagged by lovesmayfamilis

I'll keep it under watch, but when I opened it first time it was clean I opened it when you mentioned it. And now, days later, it's still clean.

[holydarkness]

What do you think about this thread [ANN][PX][PRESALE] ProtocolX Decentralized Trading Protocol on BSC [METAVERSE]⚡⚡? Their thread started to get infested by the bumping accounts on the list referred above as well as several bumping accounts tagged by lovesmayfamilis

I'll keep it under watch, but when I opened it first time it was clean I opened it when you mentioned it. And now, days later, it's still clean.

Yeah, AFAIK, Welsh took a very quick action on that issue, soon after I posted my suspicion --maybe within minutes, if not seconds-- he wiped them clean by himself.

P.s.: what's the address for checking that report status?

[GazetaBitcoin]

what's the address for checking that report status?

If you click on "Report to moderator" button, you reach this page:



Within this page you have to click on "Your report history" button. The next displayed page is the page where you can see the status of your reports, as it follows:
- all reports made within past 30 days (if they are less than 5000)
- only last 5000 reports, in case you made more than 5000 reports within past 30 days (5000 reports displayed is the maximum displayed limit, so if you make 5000 reports in only 1 day, you will not see the reports you made yesterday -- as example).

However, you will not see that button ("Your report history") unless you have made already 300 good reports. It's like a perk, if you want, which unlocks you this feature after reaching 300 good reports.

[Welsh]

As you can see, all are similar to previous reports I made from this topic; most of them contain swearing or zero value; and all previous similar reports were flagged as Good. As a consequence, I am thinking (1) this is either a mistake from the mod which handled these reports; or, (2) another mod and not you handled them and considered them too old and flagged them all as bad, which was my main fear, as I wrote above, but this was for posts older than Jan 1st 2017 and, as you can see these are from Jun 2017.

@Welsh if you agree, I can dig more inside this topic, even earlier than the date of Jan 1st, 2017, but I am afraid that I can have my reports marked as bad if I keep making them. I mean, in case my reports will come to you, I believe you'll mark them as good, but maybe they will arrive in another mod's hand? (I'm saying that thinking that these bad reports where flagged as bad not by you, but by another mod; even so, do you have any idea why they were flagged as bad?) However, in case we can make an agreement, thus just you will take care of this thread, I am more than willing to dig also through the posts made earlier than Jun 9th, 2017, and also earlier than Jan 1st, 2017. Please let me know.

Yeah, it wasn't me that handled those reports. Going forward, you can always report a thread as being artificially bumped or something along those lines. We're all pretty well aware of Decent, and pretty much all of these threads now, so combing through them, and reporting each post probably isn't necessary. I'll be periodically checking most of these, and cleaning them up as time goes on. As you can imagine, older content might be seen as lower prioriity than current spam, and hence why some moderators might disagree with reporting old content.

That's probably a better workflow going forward, since that doesn't spam the rest of the moderators report queues, and when reporting just the thread, whoever sees that report can go through the thread, delete what they think is necessary, and then mark the report as handled.

I prefer to handle spam if it's spam, especially if the thread is still active. I do think questions need to be potentially asked what's the best way of handling a  thread which has effectively been deleted e.g decent, however I don't feel comfortable just trash canning it since there's a lot of history in that thread which could be of use to someone. I'm thinking potentially archival, and maybe that'll prevent the constant conversations going on currently.

However, to be clear on your question; I think reporting just the original thread, indicating bumping services or accounts have been artificially bumping it would be better, to prevent clogging up other moderators report queues. Then, the moderator handling that report, can either decide to leave it to someone who's willing to go through the thread, and sort it out or they can go through it themselves, and then mark it as handled once completed. At least this way, we're still cleaning up some threads, and also making moderators aware that there's a problematic thread, but it also doesn't clog up other moderators queues that might want to attend to more urgent reports.

Although, I can't really comment on why the moderator might have marked those bad (I haven't always handled your reports in the past, and others have, and marked them good), I do believe some of them were borderline. Some were potentially raising up legitimate concerns, despite the use of profanity. So, a moderator could have seen them as on topic enough. I know I've marked a few of yours bad in the past for reporting content which is basically half on topic, and half sort of abusing each other, but I just lent towards it being on topic enough. Although, some of those posts you've mentioned to me are low quality, and/or off topic, and I would have likely removed at least some of them.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Sup fellas

Yeah, it wasn't me that handled those reports.

I was sure about that But thanks for confirming me.

Going forward, you can always report a thread as being artificially bumped or something along those lines. We're all pretty well aware of Decent, and pretty much all of these threads now, so combing through them, and reporting each post probably isn't necessary.

With all due respect, Welsh and, you probably sensed by now that I respect you a lot for your intense work you do on the forum, what you said above is just politically correct, but you know that, in practice, nobody (probably excepting you) takes care of a full thread if only one post is reported (no matter if that post contains a comment similar to "please take a look at the entire topic"). Many of us saw that this kind of action leads to no results -- take Rikafip for example, but not just him. However, in this case, your suggestion was taken and, as a consequence, this very thread was created. The result was the following: all the spam remained intact until I intervened and reported all the zero-value posts, from each topic mentioned inside Rikafip's topic.

Excepting this example there are many others from the past; sometimes other users opened threads in Meta related to this problem; and all said that whenever they reported a single post with a comment to be taken care of the entire thread, that post was flagged as good, but the remaining topic was left intact. This discussion also touched, in those topics, the subject of reporting only one post of a reporter which has all his posts being spam, and report only one post of such user with a comment similar to "please review entire user's posting activity".

It simply does not work. I know that your approach is best though (logically thinking); it would be great if it would have the impact you say; but, sadly, probably excepting you, none (or very few) of your mod colleagues share the same vision. If they see a report for a post and that post is spam, they delete it and do not look at an entire thread, although the comment associated with that report indicates that the entire thread to be reviewed...

However, I will cease here from making further reports from Decent thread, although I had prepared already a few more hundred reports. I will look for other topics which need to be cleaned.

I'll be periodically checking most of these, and cleaning them up as time goes on. As you can imagine, older content might be seen as lower prioriity than current spam, and hence why some moderators might disagree with reporting old content.

I totally understand what you mean about prioritizing chores in this case. It's normal to focus first on topics where spam is active. But this does not mean to (as we say in Romania) hide the trash under the carpet. Meaning to flag as bad some reports only because they are made on older topics. Such post should never be considered as bad. In this case, I think that logical approach would be to leave unhandled for a while the reports made for older topics; take care first of the ones where spam is active; then return to what was previously left as unhandled.

Another option would be to have a clear statement (probably in Meta) saying something similar to the following: "reports made for posts older than XXX date will automatically be considered bad, no matter they are made for posts which really deserve to be reported". In this manner, all reporters would have a clear guideline and they would know what to report and what not.

But flagging some reports as bad although they are supposed to be good, only because some mod is too busy to take care of them may be felt as a deception by the ones which are active reporters and this should raise an alarm, as these people are too few anyway.



After the long wall of text from above, let me share with you some of the most weird / funny posts I ever seen, both being from Decent topic.

I did not receive a letter to the post office.I can not go into the old office

Here's my situation, I have to go to prison for 30 days on June 30th. So I'm going to miss the beginning of the launch. Will I still have access to my coins a month later?

Also, I hear that Rikers Island is pretty tough, and people say that I look like a young Brad Pitt. I have blond hair, blue eyes, so I have a feeling that I'm going to be assaulted. And I don't know if I'm going to be able to sit down properly after I get out. I'm going to be pretty sore, for a while. I can't go on the computer.

So how long after launch can we claim our coins?

I updated also the list with the topics where spam is still active. I also deleted a few topics, where last activity was in January-February.

{ANN} Income Finance 20% Reflection rewards paid in BUSD! - spam active
[ANN] My Crypto City (MYCTY) Mobile game using Solana infrastructure spam active

🚀 [ANN] Stabila Public Chain (STB) | Decentralize the financial system. 🚀 - spam active topic active
🚀 WINZ.IO 🚀 $150,000 WINTER BONANZA QUEST ❄️ UP TO 300 FREE SPINS BONUS 🎁 - OP active topic active
✅ Paradice.in | 🍀 Provably Fair 🎲 | Rain☔| 30 sec Faucet | 1% House Edge 💰| - OP active topic active
[MASS] Decentralized HARD DRIVE mining cryptocurrency | PoC | Low Energy cost - topic barely active
TimeCoinProtocol - decentralized sharing economy protocol - OP active
[ANN] Work Quest - Global End to End Jobs Marketplace Powered on Smart Contract - spam active OP active
[ANN] EDC Blockchain - global platform with its own cryptocurrency - OP active a few times per week
[ANN] Gentlemen's Baby Club [GBC] NFT CLUB #ETH #blockchain - topic OP barely active last spam was on Feb 9th
[ANN] V SYSTEMS - Blockchain Database and App Platform by Sunny King [SPoS/Mint] - OP active rarely
[CRP]Self-funded and Released Utopia P2P ecosystem and Crypton privacy coin - OP active once per month
[ANN] Minereum - 🔥 🚀 Minereum World Metaverse Land Pre-Sale LIVE! 🚀 - topic inactive since Jan 23rd + project cancelled


And this is the status for the "sup fellas group". It seems that half of them got tired of spamming.

[ANN]✨✨✨ Nexum (NEXM) ✨✨✨ Unbanking Shipping - spam active
[ANN]✨✨✨ Predict Vision ✨✨✨ Decentralized A.I - spam active
[ANN]✨✨✨ CLIME Finance✨✨✨ The Climate Ecosystem - spam active
[ANN]✨✨✨ Z1 FINANCIAL ✨✨✨ Investment Opportunity for Real Estate Investors - OP / topic inactive since March 10th
[ANN]✨✨✨ YachtX Coin ✨✨✨ The high-end exclusive yacht life currency - OP / topic inactive since March 8th
[ANN]✨✨✨ $GOGE ✨✨✨ DogeGaySon - OP / topic inactive since March 1st

[Rikafip]

Sup fellas (this should really be the mandatory thing to write here lol)

The posts in question are the following:

Looking at the posts, I can understand why some of those reports are marked bad. Don't get me wrong, they are mostly not very constructive posts and I have nothing against posts like that getting deleted, but they don't look like a regular bumping spam either but just a bunch of people arguing and complaining. From my experience, posts like that often end up as unhandled

To be honest, I prefer mods handling cases like this, rather than leaving reports like that as unhandled which is extremely annoying, at least for me. I mean, if its bad then its bad, as unhandled post that is older than 2 weeks is euphemism for "soft bad" but I guess mods sometime don't wanna ruin people's reporting percentage which could cause people being reluctant to report posts. At least that's how I see leaving posts unhandled indefinitely.

However, to be clear on your question; I think reporting just the original thread, indicating bumping services or accounts have been artificially bumping it would be better, to prevent clogging up other moderators report queues. Then, the moderator handling that report, can either decide to leave it to someone who's willing to go through the thread, and sort it out or they can go through it themselves, and then mark it as handled once completed.

While that sounds good on paper, would it actually work? I mean, do moderators work like that or this is just your suggestion how this could be sorted in the future? Iirc, I tried something like that year or two ago, with no success so I just gave up on that approach.

[holydarkness]

Well... first thing first: sup fellas, LOL.

[...]

Been wondering, how important is the comments made on each report and/or how big is it on helping to make your work easier? Is a blank comment as useful as the one with some description?

[Rikafip]

Been wondering, how important is the comments made on each report and/or how big is it on helping to make your work easier? Is a blank comment as useful as the one with some description?

Well of course that some description helps, I don't remember ever leaving the comment blank (at least not intentionally) instead letting moderator to figure out what's wrong with the reported post. Thing that helps us with that is that forum "remembers" the comments that we use so it's not like you have to enter the description from scratch, at least not when you are mass reporting thread bumping posts as when you click on the comment space, you get descriptions you used offered.

What you might consider using is suchmoon's [HACK] One-click mod report, not for the faint of heart that makes reporting faster, even though many of the active spambusters are still doing it standard way.

[Welsh]

While that sounds good on paper, would it actually work? I mean, do moderators work like that or this is just your suggestion how this could be sorted in the future? Iirc, I tried something like that year or two ago, with no success so I just gave up on that approach.

I can only speak for myself. If I cant act on a report, I usually leave it in the queue. For example, if it's for plagiarism, but involves a higher ranked account that I can't nuke, but it was reported within a section I moderate, I usually leave them in anticipation that a staff with the appropriate permissions looks into it further. While, this example is a little different to what we have here, I would expect that a similar process might happen.

I can't for definite tell you the best way, personally I think indvidual reports can be good at times, especially when a thread isn't covered from top to bottom in spam, however when most of the thread is spam, or it's overwhelmingly congested with spam, I think reporting the original thread could be best, indicating that there's several posts that need to be removed or maybe not the original thread itself, but a spam comment in that thread. Users do this for bumps, instead of reporting every bump individually, they report the most recent one that needs to be removed, and indicate that several others have been made. I think a workflow similar to that might be beneficial, otherwise the moderator reviewing the report might think your expecting action to be taken on the original thread itself, which wouldn't be the case.  

Personally, for me I don't see too many problems with the suggestion, although I'd willing to listen to anyone who has any ideas on the best workflow. I think the amount of reports we've recieved the last few months is rather unprecedented, and isn't something that usually happens, and since this thread has mostly been exhausted, I don't think we'll be seeing it too often in the future either. So, the issues really only start to seep in when we have exceptional cases like this, otherwise reporting as you normally would is probably fine.

Not sure if that makes sense to you guys at all. However, I think when there's a thread covered in spam, and I mean top to bottom, and it would result in hundreds of reports, I think potentially reporting just a few, and indicating there's more could be the best idea to prevent spamming other moderators report queues, that might want to be dealing with more urgent matters.

This is kind of the reason I'd like to see the report page with the ability to filter, so that things like this would not affect those that don't want to see it. Also, would be useful for local sections.

Been wondering, how important is the comments made on each report and/or how big is it on helping to make your work easier? Is a blank comment as useful as the one with some description?

Most users include some sort of comment, however if you report is pretty much self explanatory, or is pretty obvious to identify then you probably don't need to go into much complexity. Most users use a copy, and paste approach, and just use the same comments.

However, for more complex cases then adding a bit of an explanation will increase the chances of the report being handled correctly.

What you might consider using is suchmoon's [HACK] One-click mod report, not for the faint of heart that makes reporting faster, even though many of the active spambusters are still doing it standard way.

If users are interested in having buttons which correspond with every guideline on the unofficial guidelines with mprep, then let me know as I've whipped something very rough up. However, it's rather messy, and probably more likely to give you annoyance, and information overload than be useful.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Sup fellas (this should really be the mandatory thing to write here lol)

Sup Rikafip! I totally agree

Looking at the posts, I can understand why some of those reports are marked bad. Don't get me wrong, they are mostly not very constructive posts and I have nothing against posts like that getting deleted, but they don't look like a regular bumping spam either but just a bunch of people arguing and complaining. From my experience, posts like that often end up as unhandled.

Yes, that's true, Decent topic did not use bumping threads, as I mentioned in my previous post. However, there were thousands of zero-value posts (otherwise I could not have 1200+ posts reported and deleted and Welsh more than 2000), most being useless "pyramidal quotes" or various fights between some users saying Decent is scam and others saying it's great. Some were also swearing. I reported all those posts, until those from June 2017 and they were deleted. So all had same pattern. This is why I think that, mostly, the mod which flagged those as bad was thinking differently than Welsh regarding spam or not constructive posts or he considered them as being too old for bothering to moderate them...

Furthermore, if you actually read the topic, not just those examples posted by me, you'll see those posts (given by me as examples but also most of the other ones as well) as being even less constructive. For example, to understand better what I am saying, look at all posts made by user holmes70. This guy is delusional and I believe he lost a ton of money with Decent. If you read the remaining of his posts, you'll see that all of them are made in Decent thread and you will notice also how often he changes his mind, calling Decent great a few times, calling it scam other times and so on. And insulting also the other users of the respective thread. I reported about 100+ posts of this user and they were deleted and Welsh deleted also 200+ posts made by holmes70. I saw a post inside the topic saying he had more than 700 posts and all made there. And, a post made by holmes70 himself is proving me that, indeed, he is delusional because he lost a lot of money:

You will not be able to make any profit with $ 30.
If you invest $ 200,000 like me, you deserve to criticize this team.

Iirc, I tried something like that year or two ago, with no success so I just gave up on that approach.

Do you mean you tried to start a discussion about clearing things out regarding what posts can be reported (and have a chance to be deleted) based on the year when they were made? Sorry, I did not understand exactly what you meant here.


Sup holydarkness,

Been wondering, how important is the comments made on each report and/or how big is it on helping to make your work easier? Is a blank comment as useful as the one with some description?

As both Rikafip and Welsh said, leaving a proper comment when making a report is very important. Otherwise it would look like a guessing game between you and the mod. And, excepting posts which are crystal clear for everybody that they have zero-value (but even those need a proper comment), you may want to report other posts as well, some for very complex reasons, such as plagiarism. In all these cases you should indicate why you make the respective report. Some posts may actually be constructive, but off-topic. If you'd report such posts, mods would not know your reason.

And, exactly as Rikafip suggested, you can see most of your previous comments only by clicking on the comment field when making a report. In this manner you do not actually have to stay and write manually, each time, your comment. Just left-click once with the mouse on the comment field, then select (also with the mouse) the appropriate comment, from the list of your previous comments.

Besides, reading post #187 of this thread may give you some useful suggestions

[Rikafip]

Yes, that's true, Decent topic did not use bumping threads, as I mentioned in my previous post. However, there were thousands of zero-value posts (otherwise I could not have 1200+ posts reported and deleted and Welsh more than 2000), most being useless "pyramidal quotes" or various fights between some users saying Decent is scam and others saying it's great.

From what I remember, only the last few pages of DECENT thread were basically 100% spam done by one of those bumping services. That is, at the moment I identified the same group of accounts working across six different threads.The rest was indeed the mix of shitposts, rants and the occasional constructive posts.

Some were also swearing. I reported all those posts, until those from June 2017 and they were deleted. So all had same pattern. This is why I think that, mostly, the mod which flagged those as bad was thinking differently than Welsh regarding spam or not constructive posts or he considered them as being too old for bothering to moderate them...

Yeah that's a common "issue", that while some mod might delete the post you reported, some might mark it as bad or even leave it unhandled. It happened to me more than once and it's not an issue if it's just about a single post, but it can become an issue like in your case when you are not sure anymore whether to continue reporting posts in that thread or not.

Furthermore, if you actually read the topic, not just those examples posted by me, you'll see those posts (given by me as examples but also most of the other ones as well) as being even less constructive. For example, to understand better what I am saying, look at all posts made by user holmes70. This guy is delusional and I believe he lost a ton of money with Decent. If you read the remaining of his posts, you'll see that all of them are made in Decent thread and you will notice also how often he changes his mind, calling Decent great a few times, calling it scam other times and so on.

You basically described 99% of the altcoin board threads, it's a total clusterfuck there. That whole section needs either big revamp or just to be locked.

Do you mean you tried to start a discussion about clearing things out regarding what posts can be reported (and have a chance to be deleted) based on the year when they were made? Sorry, I did not understand exactly what you meant here.

No, I referred to @Welsh suggestion about reporting only the first post and then mods clearing the rest of the thread. And I tried that in the past, I reported just the original post on the thread saying that it mainly consists of bumping spam as I hoped that might be enough for mods to take a look and just clear the thread without me reporting each post separately. Nothing happened of course, report remained unhandled.

[GazetaBitcoin]

From what I remember, only the last few pages of DECENT thread were basically 100% spam done by one of those bumping services. That is, at the moment I identified the same group of accounts working across six different threadsThe rest was indeed the mix of shitposts, rants and the occasional constructive posts.

Oh, right. That spam was deleted before I started to clean the topic, probably this is why I did not see it.

You basically described 99% of the altcoin board threads, it's a total clusterfuck there. That whole section needs either big revamp or just to be locked.

Clusterfuck? Looooooooooool! That's a great word, describing perfectly the situation.

No, I referred to @Welsh suggestion about reporting only the first post and then mods clearing the rest of the thread. And I tried that in the past, I reported just the original post on the thread saying that it mainly consists of bumping spam as I hoped that might be enough for mods to take a look and just clear the thread without me reporting each post separately. Nothing happened of course, report remained unhandled.

Oh, I see now... Yes, this is true.

But what I was saying in my previous post was if it would be a good move to start a topic in Meta and ask this question bluntly: what are the oldest posts that can be reported and not be automatically left unhandled or marked as bad? Is there a timeframe? Like -- all posts made until June 30th 2017 are accepted to be moderated. Or -- all posts until Dec 31st, 2017 are accepted to be moderated. Do not report older posts as they will be ignored or marked as bad.

Thus, having this information, all reporters would know how far they can go in the past. And there would be an official statement for that. As it is now, some mods would moderate reports for old posts and some won't -- remember the discussion from posts #273 and #274 of this thread.

[Welsh]

The Decent thread definitely had a lot of spam in it, however it wasn't really related to this thread in terms of bumping services. It was mostly low quality posts, for example "decent is great because it has this feature", or "This is interesting!" posts. So, while it wasn't bumping spam that we've come across in the other threads here, it still needed cleaning up a bit.

I do think there was quite a few alt accounts mixed in the thread, that did generate conversations, since they tended to either talk the same, talk about the same topic over, and over or they simply just kept a never ending conversation up, which basically had no substance behind it. So, I do have my suspicions on a few users.

But what I was saying in my previous post was if it would be a good move to start a topic in Meta and ask this question bluntly: what are the oldest posts that can be reported and not be automatically left unhandled or marked as bad? Is there a timeframe? Like -- all posts made until June 30th 2017 are accepted to be moderated. Or -- all posts until Dec 31st, 2017 are accepted to be moderated. Do not report older posts as they will be ignored or marked as bad.

Thus, having this information, all reporters would know how far they can go in the past. And there would be an official statement for that. As it is now, some mods would moderate reports for old posts and some won't -- remember the discussion from posts #273 and #274 of this thread.

Yeah, the answer would likely go down to at the discretion of the moderator. There's no hard rules about moderating older posts. Some moderators might see it as beneficial, some might see it as necessary, and others might think it effects the workflow on moderators on more recent issues, so therefore think it's unnecessary.

While, I can sort of understand the latter to an extent, I tend remove spam whenever possible. I basically never factor in the time it was posted, and when I was reporting regular I don't think I ran into this issue either unless it wasn't all that big of a problem, and I forgot about it. It could be another reason the reports were handled bad, like I suggested a few of them could have been seen as borderline, and its down to interpretation then. Although, for me I think a few of them should have definitely been removed.

No, I referred to @Welsh suggestion about reporting only the first post and then mods clearing the rest of the thread. And I tried that in the past, I reported just the original post on the thread saying that it mainly consists of bumping spam as I hoped that might be enough for mods to take a look and just clear the thread without me reporting each post separately. Nothing happened of course, report remained unhandled.

For me, I wouldn't handle them any different. I'd either comb through them right then, and there or I would put it on my todo list, and comb through it later. I guess some moderators might prefer to be directed to the spam one by one. I guess this is down to the reporter, at worst as long as your report is accurate it should be left as unhandled, in the worst case scenario, however some moderator willing to delve deeper should pick up that unhandled report, and turn it into a good one, as I said as long as it's accurate. Actually, I think this is a decent example of when the unhandled status, is the best option. Since, the report might be accurate somewhat, however it's not specific enough for the moderator viewing it, so they leave it as a soft bad.

If you report the original thread, and it sits unhandled, I at the very least should be able to see it within the sections that I'm a moderator or if the thread owner is a newbie.

[Rikafip]

It's been kinda quiet on the thread bumping scene lately, but looks like I stumbled upon another case, coming from the thread that is known to many, OWNR Wallet! Buy, exchange and store crypto. Order Visa prepaid card. They even had signature campaign going on for some time but I guess they thought that way of promotion is too expensive so they turned to something far cheaper, but way less effective. I can somewhat understand shitcoins going for this "marketing technique" as creators of those are completely clueless about how things work around here, but didn't expect that from wallet that's been on bitcointalk since 2019.

Sock puppet accounts appeared somewhere around February 5th (page 30 on their thread) writing those classic one-liners and asking redundant questions. Their shillers are not only writing in their thread, but are promoting OWNR in others too, as seen in the examples below:

https://ownrwallet.com/ is the only crypto walet which has 5 licences all over the world and opearte fully legally with @bitfinex order books under the hood. Trade on Bitfinex with OWNR without a KYC
https://twitter.com/ownrwallet/status/1508791719793512451

https://ownrwallet.com/ is the only crypto walet which has 5 licences all over the world and opearte fully legally with @bitfinex order books under the hood. Trade on Bitfinex with OWNR without a KYC
https://twitter.com/ownrwallet/status/1506640483510112264

If you are annoyed by KYC then https://ownrwallet.com/ is your chance to escape! The new release under the corner witch will allow trading within the app using Bitfinex API.
https://twitter.com/ownrwallet/status/1508791719793512451

No matter where you live you can order a pre-paid VISA card within https://ownrwallet.com/ wallet and spend you crypto everywhere you go! Wallet is non custodial. Only you control your assets
OWNR wallet

https://twitter.com/ownrwallet/status/1505932643459862533

[Welsh]

It's been kinda quiet on the thread bumping scene lately, but looks like I stumbled upon another case, coming from the thread that is known to many, OWNR Wallet! Buy, exchange and store crypto. Order Visa prepaid card. They even had signature campaign going on for some time but I guess they thought that way of promotion is too expensive so they turned to something far cheaper, but way less effective. I can somewhat understand shitcoins going for this "marketing technique" as creators of those are completely clueless about how things work around here, but didn't expect that from wallet that's been on bitcointalk since 2019.

Yeah, we've mostly caught up with the problematic threads, now its just old, and mostly redundant threads. Reporting in actively posted in threads is always more beneifical, but the bumping changes that theymos made has pretty much prevented these types of threads being viewed by the majority of the forum, since a lot will only check the first few most recent pages.

I'm actually going through the entire sections of announcements, and just removing spam as I go along, as well as cleaning up threads which don't fit. I'm also sorting out a userscript to see if I can sort of spot things a little easier than before. Although, still haven't worked out the best way of implementing it.

[GazetaBitcoin]

Sup fellas

ILCOIN was second biggest topic I ever cleand [...] What amazed me though was that this ANN thread was started by a member with reputation here, btcltcdigger. He is a Hero member and I really wonder why he allowed that spam inside his topic... What is even more interesting is that he never involved in his own thread. He just posted the ANN and that was all. Perhaps, if he sees this post, he may come with an explanation.

btcltcdigger was likely the announcement manager, and wasn't involved with the project itself.

I believe that too. However, I think that a topic starter has responsibility for what happens inside his topic. At least, this is what I think about my topics. As the situation is now, the following questions pop in a natural manner: did btcltcdigger know that his topic will be used for bumping services?; if so, was he paid too, to allow the spam?; why didn't he do anything to defend his reputation (e.g.: clean the topic or state somewhere that he is not involved anyhow in that spam nor he was paid for initiating a topic for pure spam)?

It's been a while since my last post here... In this time I bumped accidentally into another topic initiated by btcltcdigger, this being the reason for quoting the above-mentioned posts. The topic in question is [ANN][ICO] ⚡ ZEEX ⚡ ⚡ CRYPTO TO PRODUCT ⚡ NO FIAT, NO FEES ⚡ and it was also full of spam. After reporting 1764 posts from it, it still has 48 pages remaining. OP is again btcltcdigger and he allowed again all the spammers paid for bumping services to act free inside his topic.

If at first time I was just wondering how that was even possible, considering this user's reputation, seeing that it happened twice already raises more question marks. Is btcltcdigger accepting payments for initiating such topics? Is he creating these topics being aware of their "evolution"? I don't know if he uses any notification bot, but I see that he never replied here, after the earlier posts. Maybe he will do it now. However, I, on my side, intend to check all his topics... I am curious to see if I will find other similar ones. I am not sure yet if the user needs any tagging for performing these activities but, however, having (at least) 2 topics created by him for the sole purpose of spam is, certainly, not good.

[Rikafip]

Sup @GazetaBitcoin (and other fellas)

I've been reluctant so far to tag OPs of the threads that are using bumping services as I wasn't 100% sure that they were part of it. The only time (iirc) when I tagged them if they were doing the same thing as the other bumping  accounts, like it happened recently with that bumping group that consisted of Copper Members.

What I sometime do though is that I try to communicate in their thread and explain them how bad and pointless what they are doing actually is, like I did in Ownr Ann group recently and from what I can see they stopped with that so I guess it worked.

[Welsh]

If at first time I was just wondering how that was even possible, considering this user's reputation, seeing that it happened twice already raises more question marks. Is btcltcdigger accepting payments for initiating such topics? Is he creating these topics being aware of their "evolution"? I don't know if he uses any notification bot, but I see that he never replied here, after the earlier posts. Maybe he will do it now. However, I, on my side, intend to check all his topics... I am curious to see if I will find other similar ones. I am not sure yet if the user needs any tagging for performing these activities but, however, having (at least) 2 topics created by him for the sole purpose of spam is, certainly, not good.

I don't know. It probably warrants taking a look into it further. Although, bumping bots are quite common, I do believe even Howey coin has been subject to these types of bumping bots, I'm not entirely sure why that is, and why they've done that, but I do believe I've seen it, and I don't mean the sarcastic remarks about it, but rather the exact same pattern of bumping groups.

It definitely isn't good, but I like to operate on a innocent until proven guilty, and while it doesn't look great correlation doesn't equal causation. If anyone wants to take a further look into it, and can find any other supporting information, it might save a lot of spam in the future.

I've been reluctant so far to tag OPs of the threads that are using bumping services as I wasn't 100% sure that they were part of it. The only time (iirc) when I tagged them if they were doing the same thing as the other bumping  accounts, like it happened recently with that bumping group that consisted of Copper Members.

Yeah, seems like the Copper Membership was a ploy to prevent getting spotted as quickly, since not all staff can ban them. Obviously, they can remove the posts, but banning them is the real preventive measure. Obviously, these bumping groups are usually within the hundreds of accounts, so banning isn't the absolute solution, but it definitely slows them down more than just deleting their posts.