[List]Gambling Board Spammers; Concerns, Solutions & Suggestions

[Rikafip]

You miss the joke Rik.  

I like to think that I am good at that, but I guess I failed this time. Gg  

If you are to blame anyone, then it should be the users who spam and not the CM or the campaigns, and mind you that most campaigns only require about 10 posts to be made in the gambling board per week and that is not too much for users with understanding of what they are writing.

True, 10 posts in gambling board is nothing for a genuine user due nature of discussions there, but problem is that there are not enough genuine gambling board users on the forum and that forces managers to enforce rules like writing certain amount of posts in gambling board. Its sellers market and shitposters are taking advantage of that.

And imo i do not think users are 'forced' to post there, they applied for the campaigns themselves even after seeing its rules requires gambling posts, so that simply means they are accepting to make the required posts there, and should do it constructively.

When majority of campaigns have that requirement, what do you think it will happen? Average signature participant will of course adjust his posting behavior to meet the demands. Rest assured if we get some well paid campaign that asks people to write in lets say off topic (or any other board for that matter) you would suddenly get bunch of members writing there.

[JollyGood]

Do you remember the poster that wrote in my Premier League thread about predicting the score for a game that had already taken place a day earlier? Or the one you caught out because he was posting nonsense names about the teams and players (making them up as he went along) all for the sake of increasing post count?

For me it is a no-nonsense issue because self-moderated threads in high spam boards help keep those threads cleaner than those that have zero moderation and are a haven for signature spammers.

It's not up to campaign manager all the time I think. Sometimes, project representative also mention some rules and among them, I have always seen they have a high number of post requirements in gambling sector. Personally, I don’t like to force users to post on any section but projects requires a minimum number. Campaign manager can recommend to lower it which I did too but sometimes, you can't follow your own. You have to hear the project owner.

There is nothing wrong with the number of posts requirement; I can write top 20+ top quality gambling posts weekly without issue; even if the managers reduce it to 2 gambling posts per week, a shitposter without game knowledge will still shitpost; a self-moderated thread will help the managers, moderators, and make discussion easier. Even worse is word spinning, copy and pasting from bogus sources in the same thread.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

* Is there a way the admin can turn thread to a self- moderated thread and hand it over to another OP who is ready to moderate the thread? I will volunteer.

I highly doubt this would be possible, to add to what other members here have said, if this feature is implemented, I think it can be easily abused, imagine a scenario where I create a thread and hand it over to USER A to manage, and USER A has in time past had conflicts/misunderstanding with USER B and USER C.
USER B and C found my thread, had something meaningful to contribute, they posted their comments, USER A found their comments but because he/she is still holding grudges against USER B and C, he/she decided to delete their posts as a payback.

I will suggest you just keep reporting and allow the moderators to do their job.

Will a neutral tag with a bold message to these users be sufficient to send a signal to sig managers? Too harsh?

Its good enough, But I will still suggest that you leave this to campaign managers to decide who gets a tag and who doesn't, we all have different  perspectives, levels of understanding/judgements of what a spam post really is, a post you consider as spam might not be considered as same by a campaign manager, so I will honestly suggest you leave the tagging for campaign managers, they are the judge, they go through all the posts before deciding which gets paid for and which doesn't, in a case where a user is an addicted spam poster, the campaign manager knows and is his or her responsibility to tag such account.
So tagging a user for low quality posts, I personally think is the responsibility of the manager of the campaign that user is participating in.

[Falconer]

I admit that there are a number of signature spammers paid for bitcoin or altcoin who post spam there without good knowledge. Some of them are 100% active there just to avoid post deletion as reported, and this led me to ask one of the moderators how to go about it.

I know there are spammers everywhere and it's not just on gambling discussion boards. However maybe some less knowledgeable people have spam posts there for the purpose of fulfilling campaign requirements, of course that's the case but I also know about there is spam on other boards which are for the same purpose.

Managers will of course be responsible for checking the quality of posts from campaign participants, but the active contribution of users to reporting posts also makes the forum better. I remember how actmyname reported a number of my posts to the moderators, it was an unforgettable experience to this day and I regret it. It might be good to expect the maintainers to lower the number of mandatory posts about gambling, this will help reduce the gambling boards a lot from spam posts.

[Smartvirus]

I don't buy the idea of having to create a new gambling thread for each season. It doesn't really change much of the outcome as, the game remains the game and users that frequent the gambling boards knows better to check out the last page to be updated or current on the on going discussions. A new season coming with a new thread doesn't change that. It only means, more threads to be archived or trashed and nothing changes with the threads title except for what season it is.

There are a lot of spams in the gambling board, haven't been there myself and where it gets really bad as I see it is, where some users gets to make 90-100% of there posts on the gambling board. That shit ain't cool to me but somehow, it's tolerated and so, the spams thrive. It's something to look into, so as to promote the learning values of the forum and not let th fun part cast a shadow on the part that requires users to share ideas on ways to develop and better understand the crypto space.

[Pmalek]

I don't buy the idea of having to create a new gambling thread for each season. It doesn't really change much of the outcome as, the game remains the game and users that frequent the gambling boards knows better to check out the last page to be updated or current on the on going discussions. A new season coming with a new thread doesn't change that.

The idea shouldn't be about creating new threads just because a new season has started. The idea is to create those threads as self-moderated so that spam and low-value content can be easily deleted by the thread starter. I agree with you that a new thread doesn't mean that the posts in it are good. They can all be awful. The new Champions League thread, for example, is self-moderated. To be fair, the old one was as well.

I like to post in the Serie A thread because I am interested in calcio. It qualifies as a spam megathread. I wouldn't mind someone creating a new one and making it self-moderated if it would get rid of some of the posts where people are just reporting the goal scorers in a match and the team position in the standings.

[Rikafip]

I don't buy the idea of having to create a new gambling thread for each season. It doesn't really change much of the outcome as, the game remains the game and users that frequent the gambling boards knows better to check out the last page to be updated or current on the on going discussions. A new season coming with a new thread doesn't change that. It only means, more threads to be archived or trashed and nothing changes with the threads title except for what season it is.

As someone who is active on another forum where for each season we get a new thread, I think that is a better solution than having everything in one huge topic, like its the case with NBA thread for example. To me it somehow looks cleaner and more organized than having last 7-8 season in one thread, like its the case with NBA topic where I used to be active.

There are a lot of spams in the gambling board, haven't been there myself and where it gets really bad as I see it is, where some users gets to make 90-100% of there posts on the gambling board. That shit ain't cool to me but somehow, it's toleratd and so, the spams thrive.

It's not problem at all if you write 100% of your posts in gambling board (or any other board for that matter) as long as you are genuine poster and know what you are talking about. Someone can write only 5 out of 25 weekly posts in gambling board and still produce useless spam and its up to managers to weed out the shitposters.

I wouldn't mind someone creating a new one and making it self-moderated if it would get rid of some of the posts where people are just reporting the goal scorers in a match and the team position in the standings.

I hated those when I was active in gambling board and I think if more people report those, shitposters would post them less. I wonder if managers automatically disqualify such posts as that could be another way to combat those.

[_BlackStar]

I know there are spammers everywhere and it's not just on gambling discussion boards. However maybe some less knowledgeable people have spam posts there for the purpose of fulfilling campaign requirements, of course that's the case but I also know about there is spam on other boards which are for the same purpose.

The 10 post requirement on the gambling board wouldn't be too much in my opinion ^{[for those who can afford it],} but I would definitely agree if the manager would reduce the requirement to 5 posts. It would definitely be better to prevent spam.

I wouldn't mind someone creating a new one and making it self-moderated if it would get rid of some of the posts where people are just reporting the goal scorers in a match and the team position in the standings.

This is sure to be the most terrifying moderation for any football fan. They will definitely lose a place to talk about the team, the players and the condition of the team and the situation of the game. LOL

[Igebotz]

Do you remember the poster that wrote in my Premier League thread about predicting the score for a game that had already taken place a day earlier?

Yeah I do remember the scenario and if I'm not wrong the user was Dbc23
 

Or the one you caught out because he was posting nonsense names about the teams and players (making them up as he went along) all for the sake of increasing post count

We had a lot of drama on the thread last season, and if you know the game, you can tell who doesn't from the moment they start talking; sometimes they misspelled players' names, but mispelling a club's name is unacceptable! I can't remember his name, but I'm sure he's just another spammer.

I wouldn't mind someone creating a new one and making it self-moderated if it would get rid of some of the posts where people are just reporting the goal scorers in a match and the team position in the standings.

I hated those when I was active in gambling board and I think if more people report those, shitposters would post them less. I wonder if managers automatically disqualify such posts as that could be another way to combat those.

Some of the managers are also unfamiliar with the game, making it difficult to moderate participants. We do our best to help.

[Ryker1]

I know there are spammers everywhere and it's not just on gambling discussion boards. However maybe some less knowledgeable people have spam posts there for the purpose of fulfilling campaign requirements, of course that's the case but I also know about there is spam on other boards which are for the same purpose.

The 10 post requirement on the gambling board wouldn't be too much in my opinion ^{[for those who can afford it],} but I would definitely agree if the manager would reduce the requirement to 5 posts. It would definitely be better to prevent spam.
^[snip]

Well this is not good for the company that they promote if you will lower the requirement post -- they should always be visible on that two sections ^{[the gambling and gambling discussion board]}, 10 post requirement a week is very reasonable if you will spread it in the whole week, 2 posts a day in gambling board and it should be 14 posts in a week which is you will achieve the quota of your post ^{[I think that is not a problem]} and it will NOT create spam.
My advice is, dont interact with the topic that you dont know, for example --football, boxing, and basketball which is a very common topics there.
However, I think theymos should add moderators there since all signature campaigns now are related to gambling, what do you think?
If the participants know that their posts keep deleted and did not get paid after the week, they will surely make effort in the next post.

[Pmalek]

10 post requirement a week is very reasonable if you will spread it in the whole week

Many signature campaigns require only 5 posts in the gambling boards, so chances are you won't have to write 10.

My advice is, dont interact with the topic that you dont know, for example --football, boxing, and basketball which is a very common topics there.

If the campaign requirements are 10 or more posts in gambling boards, that's exactly what you get. People posting in discussions they don't understand or are interested in just to meet their quota. That's why it's better to lower the demands to 5 posts, and in that way there isn't pressure on the participants to write in the gambling boards more than what they normally would.   

However, I think theymos should add moderators there since all signature campaigns now are related to gambling, what do you think?

The gambling boards have active moderators in Cyrus and hilariousandco, so those subs are covered. But it's not easy to win the battle over spammers. 

[Findingnemo]

Personally I don't like to post in self moderated threads because of some users are abusing their power by deleting the comments nothing but simply they don't agree with so self moderation is kind of biased in my opinion. But yes the problem is real because we can see lots and lots of posts created for no real other than to meet the posting requirements so we may have to tighten the rules against spam probably adding more moderators can be the right solution but I don't know theymos have any idea of doing it.

[Welsh]

But yes the problem is real because we can see lots and lots of posts created for no real other than to meet the posting requirements so we may have to tighten the rules against spam probably adding more moderators can be the right solution but I don't know theymos have any idea of doing it.

It comes full circle. In the past some users have suggested holding the campaign managers more responsible for those that they're effectively employing. If they're spamming because of their signature campaign, I'd probably agree that signature campaign managers should also be at fault here. After all, if you're caught hiring a bumping service you'll be banned along with the bumpers themselves.

The managers either need to be more strict on who they hire or they need to remove those that are constantly spamming. SO while, new moderators would probably be something to consider, it's far more likely that there's a low amount of reporting going on. Whether that's because users have given up or because they just don't report. The community isn't required to report, but without that reporting, there wouldn't be any moderator candidates in the first place. So, like I said it works kind of in full circle, where we need reporters, to establish suitable moderators, we need campaign managers to become a little more strict, which will turn prevent the spam in the first place.

Currently, if there isn't a lot of reporters, then we're relying on the campaign managers themselves to kick out the dead wood.

[Findingnemo]

But yes the problem is real because we can see lots and lots of posts created for no real other than to meet the posting requirements so we may have to tighten the rules against spam probably adding more moderators can be the right solution but I don't know theymos have any idea of doing it.

It comes full circle. In the past some users have suggested holding the campaign managers more responsible for those that they're effectively employing. If they're spamming because of their signature campaign, I'd probably agree that signature campaign managers should also be at fault here. After all, if you're caught hiring a bumping service you'll be banned along with the bumpers themselves.

The managers either need to be more strict on who they hire or they need to remove those that are constantly spamming. SO while, new moderators would probably be something to consider, it's far more likely that there's a low amount of reporting going on. Whether that's because users have given up or because they just don't report. The community isn't required to report, but without that reporting, there wouldn't be any moderator candidates in the first place. So, like I said it works kind of in full circle, where we need reporters, to establish suitable moderators, we need campaign managers to become a little more strict, which will turn prevent the spam in the first place.

Currently, if there isn't a lot of reporters, then we're relying on the campaign managers themselves to kick out the dead wood.

Actually I also wanted to mention about the managers work, yes they have to keep an eye on the campaign participants and their posting behavior just like how much importance they are giving while accepting it also have to be on the campaign as well. Reporters may got tired of all these stuffs and gave up which maybe one of the reasons why there isn't not much reports as we had seen in the past.

I do report posts but not a whole bunch at the same time even I wanted to because seriously its time consuming and also I don't want to judge anyone because I feel I am not really that perfect but yes it has to be an effort from the community if we really want the healthy discussions anymore here.

#USE REPORT TO MODERATOR

[Pmalek]

Personally I don't like to post in self moderated threads because of some users are abusing their power by deleting the comments nothing but simply they don't agree with so self moderation is kind of biased in my opinion.

It depends on who the user who does the moderating is. If it's someone with an agenda who only wants to share his views and doesn't care about yours unless you agree with them, then yes, they will most probably delete your post. But you won't find that with any trusted and normal Bitcointalk user. People who do that should be ignored. Let them talk to themselves. Even the worst offenders have the right to defend themselves or share their side of the story...

[Welsh]

Generally, those that open self moderated threads are those that want to protect against spam themselves or off topic replies. I rarely see users doing it for ill intent these days.

I do report posts but not a whole bunch at the same time even I wanted to because seriously its time consuming and also I don't want to judge anyone because I feel I am not really that perfect but yes it has to be an effort from the community if we really want the healthy discussions anymore here.

That's fair enough, largely reporting is a thankless job, and it's time consuming. However, every staff user appreciates even if we don't give you a personal message saying so. Reporters are our bread, and butter. Without you, we'd be much less effective at what we do. Plus, the forum would be in a lot worse condition if it wasn't for the community working towards a better goal.

[1miau]

First point:
Huge respect to igehhh for bringing up this topic of shitposting, how to improve the posting quality on the forum and discourage shitposting.
An active community is very important to keep shitposters in check and we need more active contribution of quality posters to discourage shitposter activity.

I’m also in favor of your suggestion about self-moderated threads. Shitposters missing their weekly post counts for campaigns and losing pay due to their deleted shitposts are a very good thing. 

Will a neutral tag with a bold message to these users be sufficient to send a signal to sig managers? Too harsh?

A neutral feedback is a very good idea to bring awareness to the issue of shitposting.
It is also a heads-up to the account owner himself and maybe the owner is putting more effort into his posts.
I have done this a few times in the past and as far as I know some high DT members as well (like actmyname or The Pharmacist).
It’s a very useful function of neutral trust to bring awareness to something, where negative trust would be inappropriate.
When the account has improved his post quality and come clean, the neutral feedback could be removed. And we should communicate actively that neutral feedbacks for shitposting can be removed if the posting quality from the account has improved for a reliable duration and no other incident has happened.
Such an approach could reduce shitposting a lot.

Some of the managers are also unfamiliar with the game, making it difficult to moderate participants. We do our best to help.

I agree to igehhh’s approach here because just relying on campaign managers to sort out low quality posters for any sort of gambling discussion is a very hard job because even a very good campaign managers has limits concerning judgement if an Serie A or Primera Division post is a quailty or spam post. Even a very good campaign manager can’t have a good judgement for every section on the forum.


And igehhh seems to be very knowledgeable about the things he’s talking about, he seems to be very knowledgeable how to detect gambling shitposts, so his feedback is highly valuable and he can maintain a good and reliable list.
I would suggest for high quality signature campaign managers to use igehhh’s list from his OP and when there’s an open position in a campaign, the accounts mentioned on igehhh’s list come last. Or at least, when a campaign applicant is mentioned in igehhhh’s list, this should be a factor to make it much more unlikely for hat account to join the campaign.
High quality signature campaign managers should use igehhh’s list like current Merit scores for an account as an important point to decide, which accounts are best (or worst) suited to fill the open spots.

When there’s a good and frequently maintained list of spammers, it can be beneficial for signature campaign managers to use such list as reference when deciding which acconts are going to join a campaign. 

[LTU_btc]

Spam in gambling board is quite big issue, thanks for raising it. There is already many good thoughts were said, I just want to add my two cents Satoshi:
Self-moderated topics isn't bad idea, but not solution. If OP really moderate, that's good, but in some cases it can be difficult for him to do it. For example, EPL or Champions league topics - just in single matchday it can get 5+ pages of posts. It's not that easy to check all these posts and it requires OP to be very active on forum. If you will make self-moderated topic and will do nothing, that's pointless. And as already said, self moderated topics isn't solution because not everyone likes it, some avoid to post afraid that their post will get deleted. And it's also possible that OP of such topic will abuse his power by deleting not shitposts, but posts or poster that he simply don't like.
Reporting posts isn't solution at all. In most cases it's simply not bad enough to get deleted. It's just generic shit posted by people who have no idea or much interest about subject and post just to reach Gambling posts quota. But these who have deeper interest in sport, they're getting facepalm while reading such posts.
Some threads simply can't be spammy. For example, some now active topics like ''Does bitcoin dump have any impact on gamblers ?'' or ''How to Effectively Maximize Profits from Online Crypto Casinos''. Personally, I would lock such topic after they will reach 2nd page.
I like quality of discussions in topics of paid prediction pools. Usually they have local rule that only people who paid are allowed to post and we have really healthy discussion there.

[JollyGood]

I think the name sounds familiar 

The way you asked what he was playing was funny but the other one was also funny because they were out of their depth posting just for the sake of increasing post count. The misspelling of the name (that I will not mention here) was also another issue in itself (...ahem ... KDB) but I will not give them prominence by naming them.

Hopefully this season 2022/23 is going to be a little better in the thread but having said that the header currently shows:
359 posts by 98 users with 1 merit deleted. therefore I feel I am contributing in my own way by deleting the spammers and low quality posts.

In my opinion, having self-moderated threads in high spam boards does make sense.

Do you remember the poster that wrote in my Premier League thread about predicting the score for a game that had already taken place a day earlier?

Yeah I do remember the scenario and if I'm not wrong the user was Dbc23
 

Or the one you caught out because he was posting nonsense names about the teams and players (making them up as he went along) all for the sake of increasing post count

We had a lot of drama on the thread last season, and if you know the game, you can tell who doesn't from the moment they start talking; sometimes they misspelled players' names, but mispelling a club's name is unacceptable! I can't remember his name, but I'm sure he's just another spammer.

[_BlackStar]

Hopefully this season 2022/23 is going to be a little better in the thread but having said that the header currently shows:
359 posts by 98 users with 1 merit deleted. therefore I feel I am contributing in my own way by deleting the spammers and low quality posts.

In my opinion, having self-moderated threads in high spam boards does make sense.

I know you did this long before the OP made his suggestion because the chances of spam for such a thread are very high. So self-moderation thread for discussion like that makes a lot of sense if the OP really wants to contribute as one of the spam hunters on this forum. If the OP was very actively moderating his thread ^{[as you did]} then I'm sure spammers would probably stay away from threads like that just to be safe from post deletion.

I can imagine spam would be much less if bitcoin discussion boards, gambling discussion boards, and altcoin boards implemented self-moderation threads. But that's only done by people who really care about the quality of posts.