Unified Proof of Authentication Post thread

[julerz12]

I wanted to create a unified thread that will serve as a place for bounty hunters wanting to join the bounty campaigns under my management (and possibly other managers as well) to post their Proof of authentication posts.

The reasons why I would want to implement this:

1. Lessen the redundant PoA posts across the bounty campaigns threads.
Proof of authentication posts is required on a bounty campaign so we (as bounty managers) know the authenticity of the application and would also know that the application is not from someone who uses someone else's account details to participate in a certain bounty campaign, kinda like a cross-reference between the Google form registration, what we see on the spreadsheet and the actual details of the account.
While this is necessary, PoA posts become redundant especially when a bounty hunter decides to participate in not one but three or more bounty campaigns under one same bounty manager's management. Sometimes even on the same day/week.

Using this thread, bounty hunters would only need to post their PoA once, copy the link to it and submit it on registration forms. Then, they can just edit it and add details to it every time they join another bounty campaign.

2. Completely lock a running/active bounty campaign thread to be free of redundant/spam posts.
Since I already require the weekly reports to be submitted via REPORT FORM (Google Forms, see examples here and here), the bounty campaign threads under my management only currently serve as a place where the bounty campaign information can be found and a place to post PoA (at least that's what I wanted to happen), I wanted these threads to be lock entirely; But, since I still need and require the bounty hunters to post PoA on those threads ^[1], I can't completely lock it.

Now that those threads are still open, many bounty hunters still post their weekly reports on them neglecting simple instructions (same examples above).

Implementing this thread means I can now completely lock the active bounty campaign thread while still being able to verify the bounty hunter's participation in that certain bounty campaign.

Question, which board is the best place to create such a thread without raising any eyebrows?

I wanted to just use my alt-coin service thread but since it would be flooded with PoA, and with that thread being outside of the bounty section, it might raise some concerns.
Maybe on the altcoin bounty section then?

Is this a good idea? no? thoughts?

P.S. I'm not sure if this has been discussed here before, tried searching, but nothing pops out.

[1714566512]

1714566512

[1714566512]

1714566512

[1714566512]

1714566512

[Welsh]

The problem with this, is it isn't a requirement, and you'll be hard pressed to get people to conform. So, while the idea may help a little bit, ultimately not everyone is going to follow suit. The only way I see the issue in the bounty section is being implemented on the moderation policy side, which I don't think will happen. theymos will be aware of the issues over in that section though, and I'm sure they've been brainstorming, but ultimately whatever gets implemented will require some sort of restriction which could potentially be harmful to that community. Whether or not that's worth it is ultimately up to theymos.

I'm fairly supportive of the idea of not allowing these types of posts on the forum, and require it done off site, though we could potentially be shooting ourselves in the foot there. I don't know exactly the best solution, but what you're proposing likely isn't going to be followed by the vast majority, and I guess some will have valid concerns about centralisation, especially if it's self moderated, which you would likely have to do.

I'll give you credit to thinking of solutions though, especially since it seems you've moved off site for proof of authentication type reports.

Maybe on the altcoin bounty section then?

Yeah.

[LoyceV]

Proof of authentication posts is required on a bounty campaign so we (as bounty managers) know the authenticity of the application

That's not necessary, the Eth/whatever address they post can easily be added to the user's profile, which you can scrape, so there's no need to post anything.
Or, let them fill out everything in a Google Form, and give them a confirmation code (say 9035998262876336, random for each user of course) to post in their profile to confirm they own the account.

kinda like a cross-reference between the Google form registration, what we see on the spreadsheet and the actual details of the account.

I checked your topics, and it's mainly Newbies spamming the useless "authentication" posts. If you use an external spreadsheet, what does their Bitcointalk username even matter?

Now that those threads are still open, many bounty hunters still post their weekly reports on them neglecting simple instructions (same examples above).

Make them self-moderated and delete the spam.

For what it's worth: I appreciate what you're trying to do.

[Igebotz]

2. Completely lock a running/active bounty campaign thread to be free of redundant/spam posts.
I wanted these threads to be lock entirely; But, since I still need and require the bounty hunters to post PoA on those threads ^[1], I can't completely lock it.

Now that those threads are still open, many bounty hunters still post their weekly reports on them neglecting simple instructions (same examples above).

Two simple solution

1. Making your bounty thread self-moderated allows you to delete any weekly reports made by shit hunters who don't read the rules.

2. Locking the thread after filling out the spreadsheets, or giving the application a time limit and locking it after the time elapsed, since you've already created a Google form for weekly report submission.

At the very least, these could solve the problems; creating another thread and moving the hunters to another board will not. Tbh

My little piece of cake.

[nakamura12]

2. Completely lock a running/active bounty campaign thread to be free of redundant/spam posts.
I wanted these threads to be lock entirely; But, since I still need and require the bounty hunters to post PoA on those threads ^[1], I can't completely lock it.

Now that those threads are still open, many bounty hunters still post their weekly reports on them neglecting simple instructions (same examples above).

Two simple solution

1. Making your bounty thread self-moderated allows you to delete any weekly reports made by shit hunters who don't read the rules.

2. Locking the thread after filling out the spreadsheets, or giving the application a time limit and locking it after the time elapsed, since you've already created a Google form for weekly report submission.

At the very least, these could solve the problems; creating another thread and moving the hunters to another board will not. Tbh

My little piece of cake.

Moderated thread will surely help to get rid of those weekly reports. Why not create a google form for receiving the weekly reports and you will only check the spreadsheet of their reports so that the thread will have less weekly reports and I think the hunters wouldn't mind rather than using the same thread for weekly reports and poa.

[tranthidung]

Users posting "joined" type posts when not required or allowed will be BANNED.

You are free to manage your bounty and Proof of Authentication posts or weekly report posts. In my opinion, you can require bounty hunters to make their first and only one proof of authentication post for their application in your bounty. For weekly report post, I think such one is very annoying and unnecessary.

Anyone posting info from their bounty application (usernames, addresses, etc.) or anything alongside the lines of "joined X", "looking forward to getting X", "thanks for the opportunity", "filled out form", "signed up for X", "applied", "following / liked / retweeted X" when such data is not required by the bounty / airdrop / giveaway / whatever (e.g. the bounty takes entries on a different website) or the requirement is against the forum's rules (e.g. when a giveaway requires users to post entries for low effort tasks) risk having their account banned. These are extremely low quality posts that generate massive amounts of spam, drowning out any legitimate discussion these threads may posses.

[julerz12]

I'm fairly supportive of the idea of not allowing these types of posts on the forum, and require it done off site, though we could potentially be shooting ourselves in the foot there. I don't know exactly the best solution, but what you're proposing likely isn't going to be followed by the vast majority, and I guess some will have valid concerns about centralisation, especially if it's self moderated, which you would likely have to do.

I thought so too. Though I initially planned on having the thread for PoA not centralized to avoid similar concerns.

I'll give you credit to thinking of solutions though, especially since it seems you've moved off site for proof of authentication type reports.

Thanks. Yes, been doing that since the first quarter of this year and most bounty hunters already got the hang of it.

That's not necessary, the Eth/whatever address they post can easily be added to the user's profile, which you can scrape, so there's no need to post anything.
Or, let them fill out everything in a Google Form, and give them a confirmation code (say 9035998262876336, random for each user of course) to post in their profile to confirm they own the account.

Thanks, I haven't really thought of this. I guess I have to learn how to scrape those data from this forum. Hopefully Mr google will show me the way.

1. Making your bounty thread self-moderated allows you to delete any weekly reports made by shit hunters who don't read the rules.

Yes. I think most people would agree that self-moderating the bounty thread will solve this problem. I will surely try it in the future bounty campaign threads under my management and see how it goes.

I'll lock this thread now since I think there isn't much to discuss (especially when the last two posts above have already begun to derail out of the current topic  ).
Thanks guys.