(AndySt) The next abuser of stake campaign?

[Solosanz]

User : AndySt

This user is interesting about his posting behavior, almost of his posts were edited in the next day, I'm surprised no one noticed this because he have doing this for a year and a half. It's not suspicious if he only edited some words or even add more explanation from his current post, but he's quoting a post without wrote anything or giving a mark "Yes". What's the reason he doing this? it's for abusing the campaign rules of must active for 5 days or want to hide from LoyceV and TryNinja for archiving unedited posts? I think he's high likely want to abuse the campaign rules since most of his posts created per week are around 25-28 and spread for 5 days.

He quoted the post that he think he can comment about it, but since he doesn't have enough time, he quoted the post and edited it tomorrow when he have free time. I think this is behind of his behavior.

RULES
♦️ Must make at least 25 quality posts per week
♦️ You must be an active forum user in daily basis (or at least 5 days a week)

The stake campaign spreadsheet

And for those that (I honestly have no idea why) want to know about the campaign members, here is the list.. but, as I said, no new members are shown in that list until they get their first payment.

Here I will show it based on his latest 10 weeks:
June/13 = He posted on date June 13, 12, 10, 9, 8 (32 posts, spread for 5 days)
June/6 = He posted on date June 6,5, May 31 (25 posts, spread for 3 days)
May/30 = He posted on May 30, 29, 27, 26, 25 (26 posts, spread for 5 days)
May/23 = He posted on May 23, 22, 20, 19, 18 (27 posts, spread for 5 days)
May/16 = He posted on May 16, 15, 13, 12, 11 (29 posts, spread for 5 days)
May/09 = He posted on May 9, 8, 6, 5, 4 (28 posts, spread for 5 days)
May/02 = He posted on May 2, 1, April 30, 29, 28, 27 (28 posts, spread for 6 days)
April/25 = He posted on April 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20 (27 posts,  spread for 6 days)
April/18 = He posted on April 18, 17, 15, 14, 13 (27 posts, spread for 5 days)
April/11 = He posted on April 11, 10, 8, 7, 6 (27 posts, spread for 5 days)

This mean in 10 weeks, only 2 weeks he spread one more day, the rest is hit the minimum requirement while the June/6 he failed to met it (perhaps he already communicate with Caroll)

Here is the example where he quoted a post without add anything

More example with such post can be viewed here:
https://ninjastic.space/post/60232037
https://ninjastic.space/post/60232059
https://ninjastic.space/post/60232095
https://ninjastic.space/post/60232121
https://ninjastic.space/post/60238769

Here is the example where he quoted a post and only mark it with "Yes"

More example with such post can be viewed here:
https://ninjastic.space/post/58613461
https://ninjastic.space/post/58603807
https://ninjastic.space/post/58573425
https://ninjastic.space/post/58573461
https://ninjastic.space/post/58603849

Obviously I will PM Caroll about this thread and look how his response about this.

[YOSHIE]

You can report to the campaign manager or you can also report being marked as spam, if the edited posts don't add anything.

If you have reported it as spam, it is not marked properly, you can quote @AndySt's post here, which you think is a spam post, I will help to report it manually.
maybe other members here can help, if the post is really zero or low value.
The rules explain:

1. No zero or low value, pointless or uninteresting posts or threads. [1][e]

2. No off-topic posts.

3. No trolling.

[Solosanz]

You can report to the campaign manager or you can also report being marked as spam, if the edited posts don't add anything.

No, what I mean is

The user firstly quoted a post without wrote anything or replied with "Yes" only, in the next day he edited it and express his own opinion about the quoted post.

Example:
Unedited post

Re: Premier League Prediction Thread 2021/2022
posted by AndySt on 2021-12-02 23:31:48 UTC
58603807
Gambling discussion

Quote from: Wawa2013 on Today at 10:56:48 PM
A very good decision made by the management of Man United by making Carrick as interim coach. Since Carrick was in control, Man United has continued to show positive results so far. Will it be better after Rangnick takes over, because in terms of quality and experience Rangnick is much better. At least for the time being Man United supporters can be happy with Man United's performance which is getting better after being left by Solskjaer. Ralf Rangnick has finally received a work permit from the British government, so when Man United face Crystal Palace this will be Rangnick's debut as Man United manager. After the excellent results shown by Carrick, will put pressure on Rangnick to be able to continue the positive results obtained by Man United. It's really interesting to see Rangnick's debut, Man United should be able to beat Crystal Palace easily, if we look at Crystal Palace's recent bad performance with two consecutive defeats.

Yes

Edited post

A very good decision made by the management of Man United by making Carrick as interim coach. Since Carrick was in control, Man United has continued to show positive results so far. Will it be better after Rangnick takes over, because in terms of quality and experience Rangnick is much better. At least for the time being Man United supporters can be happy with Man United's performance which is getting better after being left by Solskjaer. Ralf Rangnick has finally received a work permit from the British government, so when Man United face Crystal Palace this will be Rangnick's debut as Man United manager. After the excellent results shown by Carrick, will put pressure on Rangnick to be able to continue the positive results obtained by Man United. It's really interesting to see Rangnick's debut, Man United should be able to beat Crystal Palace easily, if we look at Crystal Palace's recent bad performance with two consecutive defeats.

Well, Carrick still remains at the club and will continue to work in the coaching staff of Manchester United already as an assistant to Rangnik. In any case, the decision has already been made and the contract with the Rangnik has already been signed and obtaining a work permit was no longer such an essential detail. Given Manchester United's not the greatest stability in the results, I would personally be wary of claiming an easy victory over Crystal Palace in the upcoming match. Another question is that Manchester United should continue to gain points to improve their standings and where else but in matches with such opponents it is worth doing.

I hope you will understand my point, the thing is all of his post has been edited and no one on gambling discussion noticed that.

[Rikafip]

I think he's high likely want to abuse the campaign rules since most of his posts created per week are around 25-28 and spread for 5 days.

Yeah that's probably the reason he is doing this, and its not the first one who did something like this in order to meet signature campaign rules. What I am more surprised it that no one reported these type of posts where he would quote someone and wrote only "yes" and sometimes not even that. 

[lovesmayfamilis]

I think he's high likely want to abuse the campaign rules since most of his posts created per week are around 25-28 and spread for 5 days.

Yeah that's probably the reason he is doing this, and its not the first one who did something like this in order to meet signature campaign rules. What I am more surprised it that no one reported these type of posts where he would quote someone and wrote only "yes" and sometimes not even that. 

Yes, you are right, I remembered a similar story.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5395403.0

I'm starting to think it's the same alternative account. And the OP found it too.

Probably this behavior is becoming popular, but as we understand from the past history, managers do not approve of this. Not quite decent from AndySt.

[Rikafip]

Yes, you are right, I remembered a similar story.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5395403.0

Ah yes, that's the case I was referring to as I remembered I saw similar case before.

I'm starting to think it's the same alternative account. And the OP found it too.

Hm I am not so sure about it, as chaser15 has a long history of activity in Phillipines local thread, while AndySt never wrote there and the only local board he was active was the Russian. The only similarity that I can see  is that they were both of part of the Stake campaign when caught doing this.

[Pandu Geddon]

Such behavior is demonstrated in booking tickets for seats at the cinema. before he makes a post, he marks the place he wants to comment.
I don't know if that would violate forum rules. but after that, he edited the post although sometimes he edited it the next day.
if you want to report spam, maybe an unedited post. but for an edited post, I don't think it will prove anything. the manager may also consider the OP for the behavior @AndySt is showing.

I think you should also contact @AndySt. this can be a warning or a lesson to him about his behavior.

[_BlackStar]

I don't know what made @AndySt have this habit, but of course this might have something to do with his inconsistent free time on the forum. I don't know why someone would force themselves to stay active posting and receive payments from certain campaigns if they don't have enough time to be active as expected. This will only raise questions and other unforeseen problems, but of course @AndySt has reasons for doing so.

Yes, you are right, I remembered a similar story.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5395403.0

I'm starting to think it's the same alternative account. And the OP found it too.

Probably this behavior is becoming popular, but as we understand from the past history, managers do not approve of this. Not quite decent from AndySt.

Now I think @AndySt will have the same consequences as in one of the other cases a while back. The important thing is this will be a good lesson for him and the others.

Thank you for your report @Solosanz. The team checked things out & could confirm your report.
Chaser15 was kicked from the campaign permanently.

[yahoo62278]

Such behavior is demonstrated in booking tickets for seats at the cinema. before he makes a post, he marks the place he wants to comment.
I don't know if that would violate forum rules. but after that, he edited the post although sometimes he edited it the next day.
if you want to report spam, maybe an unedited post. but for an edited post, I don't think it will prove anything. the manager may also consider the OP for the behavior @AndySt is showing.

I think you should also contact @AndySt. this can be a warning or a lesson to him about his behavior.

If you do it once in a while maybe because you're out with your family and had a few minutes to browse the forum and you see something you want to comment on when you get back home might be ok. Doing it all the time kinda makes me feel like it would be due to the owner being a part of a large farm. They go 1 word comment on a bunch of posts and fill in the blanks later.

Good catch here OP. I would like to hear a response from Andyst

[examplens]

The Stake has a new campaign thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5400828.0

I have already mentioned that some of rules stimulate forum spamming
AndySt seems to have gladly accepted that rule

EXTRA BONUS
♦️ Every week we will be picking the 4 best quality posters to win $35 each.
♦️ You have to reach the minimum campaign requirements.
♦️ Only Gambling section posts will will count for this bonus.
♦️ The more you post, the higher your chances.

[Coyster]

I have already mentioned that some of rules stimulate forum spamming
AndySt seems to have gladly accepted that rule

In my opinion, i think we have to leave the campaign out of it all, it is the misdemeanor of the user, the campaign is just running their business in the best way they can by including some bonuses for more posts, they have not implored their parricipants to spam, and i am pretty sure there are participants on the campaign who post as much as they can without doing something that this very user was caught doing. Chipmixer pays for up to 50 posts per week, but it does not bring any spam whatsoever to the forum. People are responsible for their actions and not the campaign they are on.

Having said that, the last case that was similar to this one was handled shrewdly by Carollzinha who is the manager of the campaign, which goes to show that they do not tolerate spam or behaviours such as this.

[LTU_btc]

I remember that I saw such cases few times, but I'm not sure that it was AndySt. But I think it was sentence or two, rather than just word "Yes". I even replied to one of such posts and later I noticed that this post was edited. So, my quote looked strange when minds in edited post were far from original one.
It's strange behaviour and it would be interesting to hear position from @AndySt. It wouldn't be something very bad if he wouldn't wear paid signature. In this way of posting advertisers don't get results what they wanted.

I don't know why someone would force themselves to stay active posting and receive payments from certain campaigns if they don't have enough time to be active as expected.

You really don't know answer? It's money, what is big factor to force yourself to post, even if you don't have time for it.

[CLS63]

The saddest thing here is that he is pushing himself this hard for a campaign that is paying per post. For example, if he makes one less post then he would lose 2-3 dollars the most. I would grant him right if he was in a campaign like Roobet. Because you can't get any payment there if you make 19 posts instead of 20. By the way, has there been anyone who checked out the Stake.com campaign spreadsheet? The same people are getting the best posters prize every week. Don't you think it is odd?

[Carollzinha]

The same people are getting the best posters prize every week. Don't you think it is odd?

It would be odd if we would have lots of people doing high quality posts.
I am not saying that all the others (those not getting the prize) are spammers or low quality posts but we have a 4 guys team working weekly just to rate everyone posts. We have since people with 0 knowledge about gambling & sportbook (literally 0 as he joined it less than 2 weeks ago) but we also have people thats inside this world for over 7 years. Everyone rate every campaign member posts, every week, and link what they believe was the best post of them for that week.. after that we pick the average from these 4 rating to select those with the highest scores to win the prize. Same happens with those with the lowest rating.. once they reach a 5.5 average, I do talk to them myself but if they quality wont change in a week or two, we are replacing that person, as simple as that. But thats not the topic here & I would be glad to reply to any of your doubts in our campaign thread.


About the report made by Solosanz, we have someone checking it and you can have no doubt that no matter if AndySt provides good posts quality to the forum or not, rules are rules and no matter who you are or how good your posts are.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Yeah that's probably the reason he is doing this, and its not the first one who did something like this in order to meet signature campaign rules. What I am more surprised it that no one reported these type of posts where he would quote someone and wrote only "yes" and sometimes not even that. 

I'm sure it's not the first time, given that there are so many members registered who participate in campaigns and bounties (and who are lazy and/or unethical).  I thought I'd seen it all, but honestly I don't recall seeing anyone else pull this particular brand of crapola before.

I hadn't noticed the user in question doing what he did because I think he posts mainly in the gambling section (correct me if I'm wrong; I'm too lazy to check), which I stay away from unless I'm doing post reviews for people.

Good eyes on this one, OP, and you did the right thing by calling attention to AndySt and his tactics.

[_BlackStar]

I hadn't noticed the user in question doing what he did because I think he posts mainly in the gambling section (correct me if I'm wrong; I'm too lazy to check), which I stay away from unless I'm doing post reviews for people.

I'm even pretty sure he's still at it on June 13 based on a post archive where he just cites a number of posts without adding anything and comes back to edit them after a few hours or maybe a different day. I think this kind of behavior is not tolerated as right behavior in the campaign, he wants payment but not doing things the right way.

The campaign manager is responsible for checking this kind of behavior, and I think he will do it more strictly now for all his participants.

[Igebotz]

I hadn't noticed the user in question doing what he did because I think he posts mainly in the gambling section (correct me if I'm wrong; I'm too lazy to check), which I stay away from unless I'm doing post reviews for people.

I'm even pretty sure he's still at it on June 13 based on a post archive where he just cites a number of posts without adding anything and comes back to edit them after a few hours or maybe a different day. I think this kind of behavior is not tolerated as right behavior in the campaign, he wants payment but not doing things the right way.

The campaign manager is responsible for checking this kind of behavior, and I think he will do it more strictly now for all his participants.

Due to the high demand for posts from that board by most signature campaigns, there have been so many shitposters on the gambling board recently that I wish every thread OP made it self-moderated just like JollyGood did here⚽ English Premier League Season: 2021/2022 There is no room for 1xbit spammers, shitposters, or trolls; only quality discussion.

I've compiled a list of 20+ gambling board shitposters who add nothing to the discussion; I've reported the majority of these posts, but I don't think it's enough! Will a negative neutral tag with a strong message suffice?

Edit

[yahoo62278]

I hadn't noticed the user in question doing what he did because I think he posts mainly in the gambling section (correct me if I'm wrong; I'm too lazy to check), which I stay away from unless I'm doing post reviews for people.

I'm even pretty sure he's still at it on June 13 based on a post archive where he just cites a number of posts without adding anything and comes back to edit them after a few hours or maybe a different day. I think this kind of behavior is not tolerated as right behavior in the campaign, he wants payment but not doing things the right way.

The campaign manager is responsible for checking this kind of behavior, and I think he will do it more strictly now for all his participants.

Due to the high demand for posts from that board by most signature campaigns, there have been so many shitposters on the gambling board recently that I wish every thread OP made it self-moderated just like JollyGood did here⚽ English Premier League Season: 2021/2022 There is no room for 1xbit spammers, shitposters, or trolls; only quality discussion.

I've compiled a list of 20+ gambling board shitposters who add nothing to the discussion; I've reported the majority of these posts, but I don't think it's enough! Will a negative tag with a strong message suffice?

I would be ok with it , but I'm not sure you would be setting the right precedent by tagging the user in question. I think a logical solution might be to make a rule in campaigns(this would depend on if the manager wanted extra work) no edited posts are eligible for pay.

That rule IMO fixes the problem.

[Igebotz]

Due to the high demand for posts from that board by most signature campaigns, there have been so many shitposters on the gambling board recently that I wish every thread OP made it self-moderated just like JollyGood did here⚽ English Premier League Season: 2021/2022 There is no room for 1xbit spammers, shitposters, or trolls; only quality discussion.

I've compiled a list of 20+ gambling board shitposters who add nothing to the discussion; I've reported the majority of these posts, but I don't think it's enough! Will a negative tag with a strong message suffice?

I would be ok with it , but I'm not sure you would be setting the right precedent by tagging the user in question. I think a logical solution might be to make a rule in campaigns(this would depend on if the manager wanted extra work) no edited posts are eligible for pay.

That rule IMO fixes the problem.

I'm not sure "No editing" would solve the problem because many innocent users who only edited their posts for grammar or quoting errors would still be subject to this rule; one can't tell the goat from the sheep.

I'll post the list for future reference for managers who find it useful. ^{I just edited my post for grammar error.}

[_BlackStar]

I've compiled a list of 20+ gambling board shitposters who add nothing to the discussion; I've reported the majority of these posts, but I don't think it's enough! Will a negative tag with a strong message suffice?

I don't think negative tag solve the problem and maybe it's not the best way to give it to spammers given the trust system isn't meant to tag spammers. If that's possible, then we should have flagged thousands of spammers on this forum as in bitcoin discussions as well as altcoin discussions. It might be appropriate to tag it as neutral which could serve as a warning to certain managers to be more careful about hiring them, but it's best to report a user's post for deletion and let a moderator judge it.

For other considerations, I agree that each topic should be moderated by the OP to discourage spammers. But since not many OPs do, I think we still have a chance to contribute to the forum by reporting the spam post to a moderator.

By the way, I'm no longer reporting posts on gambling boards so far as it seems the mod doesn't think it's worth deleting even though I'm sure it's spam. There are 100+ of my reports on the gambling board that were not dealt with to this day, so maybe that's the reason I don't do it anymore.