I would like to talk about a local board but I am not sure.

[AB de Royse777]

As a campaign manager local boards are as important as international boards of the forum. For the last three hours, I was browsing a local board to find some prominent members from the board to offer them a spot in one of my campaign. I would like to invite them in private but I discovered an unfortunate fate for some of the prominent members on that board.

I don't speak the language but these days we have Google translator plus being in the community for the long time enabled me to understand (not very correctly but at least to some extend) what to get from a topic or the posts from members, no matter what language they write.

I don't think these prominent members have any negative intentions, they are doing their best for their local board but in the international section it seems they are not welcome. They are left in a corner as it's (general boards) not their zone.

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed. It looks more to me that the main board users simply misunderstand the culture and think they are not suitable for the community so they like to mark them red. It also give a sense that these main board members have some personal dislike towards the boards (or better to say this group of the local users)

In a campaign accepting a red trusted member does not look good (maximum one red feedback I can ignore but having more than one looks too bad) but some of these members really deserve a good reward for their contribution to the community especially in their local boards.

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

If anyone (people who can make a difference when you enter in a discussion) wants to know the local board name then feel free to PM me.

Cheers,

[examplens]

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed. It looks more to me that the main board users simply misunderstand the culture and think they are not suitable for the community so they like to mark them red. It also give a sense that these main board members have some personal dislike towards the boards (or better to say this group of the local users)

Well, obviously they should move from the local board at least occasionally. Limiting it to a certain part of the forum, most often due to a language barrier, also limits the ability of such a member to influence or make a significant contribution to the forum. I don't know which specific local board you're talking about, but it's quite possible that the members you have in mind don't even know that they have the possibility to complain about negative feedback in the global part of the Forum.

I believe that opening an additional local topic for applying in the campaign would definitely help, at least written in English.

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

I guess you know best that we still have a lot of DT members who still don't have a clear line on what are justified situations for a negative tag.

[Learn Bitcoin]

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed. It looks more to me that the main board users simply misunderstand the culture and think they are not suitable for the community so they like to mark them red. It also give a sense that these main board members have some personal dislike towards the boards (or better to say this group of the local users)

I don't know which local board you are talking about. But I don't think people hate those who are more into local boards. Thirty percent of my posts are on my local thread. But I didn't get any hate just because of that. If someone hates others just because he doesn't understand someone's local culture or doesn't understand their culture, it's his problem.

Regarding the Red Tag, I wasn't going to ask who the person is. But I should know who the person is and who the one who left the tag is. I want to see the tag reference and evaluate it.

We also have some members from our local thread who are more into local boards and did not post in the global section for a while. But since they are not in a signature campaign, it's not a problem for them.

[avp2306]

As long as it benefit to the company/project you are working it then its fine to work with those people who have great contribution on their local since in the first place you are working to increase the visibility of the site you are promoted and not just hiring forum users which post on global boards.

There's also nothing wrong about accepting users who got red trust, as long as they got that due to misunderstandings or expressing their personal belief then I don't see any problem with this.

[yahoo62278]

I don't necessarily think neg tagged members are bad for a campaign. The way the trust system is now, and the way half don't know how to use it, will show a manager that they need to look at the reason for the tags before deciding to keep them out if a campaign.

For example, OgNasty has like -8 from my view but he is in the top 10 most recognized names on the forum. Some of his tags stem from disagreements and others are there for other reasons, but overall he is still a respected person on the forum.

We have 100 rotating spots on DT1 and then we have all the users on those users trust lists on DT2. There is going to be a red tag on everyone at some point IMO, so just check the feedback and let companies know that in your opinion a person is good for their brand.

Just my opinion.

[Poker Player]

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed.

...

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

Do you mean like JG is one who left negative feedback? Because if we're not talking about scamming I don't think I'm the one leaving generalized negative feedback to the members of a board but maybe you are referring to me as well. There are not many candidates you can refer to, maybe efialtis could be the third one but I don't think so.

My opinion. Explain the circumstances of the case. Say the board and who you are referring to, that's what this section is for. If the discussion gets heated and makes you uncomfortable, you can lock the thread and that's it. If I am one of those you are referring to, I am open to change the feedback.

[hugeblack]

In a campaign accepting a red trusted member does not look good (maximum one red feedback I can ignore but having more than one looks too bad) but some of these members really deserve a good reward for their contribution to the community especially in their local boards.

It differs according to the boards, If they show trust, it is better not to accept them, or at least ask them to create a topic here, and then leave the option for other DT members. The reason for this is that most of the views and clicks on signature campaigns do not come from active members who visit the forum daily, but rather from beginners who create an account to solve their problem and rarely participate in discussions.

If I joined a new forum and stopped at a person's reply and below that reply Warning: Trade with extreme caution! I will definitely not click on signature and take a negative idea about the signature campaign.

[yahoo62278]

If I joined a new forum and stopped at a person's reply and below that reply Warning: Trade with extreme caution! I will definitely not click on signature and take a negative idea about the signature campaign.

You only see that warning if a flag is made against a user and it has the proper support. You do not see it on just a regular negative trust.

[nutildah]

Your statement is fairly vague but three different local boards immediately come to mind that fit the description, maybe even up to six.

If a forum user is not willing to change their behavior to accept "international standards" on the forum then they should be willing to understand there's going to be consequences for that when they interact with the broader community.

DT of course isn't perfect, but red trust doesn't have to be only for those who scammed, its for when "you think that trading with this person is high-risk." I don't know what board you're talking about in particular but if its one where the "culture" thinks being dishonest is OK then there's likely gonna be some problems between them and DT.

[jokers10]

As yahoo62278 said, the reason of a red tag is always important, some marks are more important and some less. There are several reputable members with red tags and it is important to figure out who and why left a concrete tag. Sometimes we can just ignore this tag, sometimes if we see that someone is leaving many irrelevant reviews we can even distrust him in a trust list.

Well, obviously they should move from the local board at least occasionally. Limiting it to a certain part of the forum, most often due to a language barrier, also limits the ability of such a member to influence or make a significant contribution to the forum. I don't know which specific local board you're talking about, but it's quite possible that the members you have in mind don't even know that they have the possibility to complain about negative feedback in the global part of the Forum.
...

If you stay in a rather big local board, for instance like Russian, you will know mostly all important things from English sections because they will be translated within a reasonable time. You'll hardly miss anything really substantial. So it is okay to not to move outside a local board if there's everything you need.

[348Judah]

There's nothing bad in making a desirability for accepting post from local boards or even members from any local board as long as they are active and could deliver upto task as required by the campaign you manage, in same view some other campaign kicked against accepting a local board post, but as a campaign manager, i will like you to look deep into this very well so that you don't prioritize a particular locale board than the other by being specific on the local board you want to accept members from, also i want to remind you incase you may not know that not all locale have their translation on the google and those having may not be as accurate as expected.

[jokers10]

There's nothing bad in making a desirability for accepting post from local boards or even members from any local board as long as they are active and could deliver upto task as required by the campaign you manage, in same view some other campaign kicked against accepting a local board post, but as a campaign manager, i will like you to look deep into this very well so that you don't prioritize a particular locale board than the other by being specific on the local board you want to accept members from, also i want to remind you incase you may not know that not all locale have their translation on the google and those having may not be as accurate as expected.

If you are a campaign manager it is usually enough for you what you can get with an online translation service. It is not to talk to people in that language but to have a general view on what conversation is about. If there are some mistakes it will still have enough sense.

But main topic, as I understand, is about what to do with a red tags of some users from local boards who stay inside there and don't try to resolve a problem of red tags. Is it really a problem and what if a problem is not in them but in some kind of misunderstanding? But, well, not knowing the exact case we can talk just in general words.

[FatFork]

Well, obviously, members who confine themselves to participating solely in local board activities might not receive much recognition on the forum. However, I wouldn't go as far as to say that they are unwelcome. At least, that's not the vibe I got from this place. Besides, even with all those cultural differences and language barriers, nowadays people have got plenty of tools and stuff to help bridge those gaps and make understanding and communication easier.

However, that doesn't give these members a free pass to disregard the basic etiquette of good community practice or violate forum rules. Regardless of their origin or activities, there are certain standards of behavior that apply to everyone. It's like a common code of conduct that we all should abide by, right? Now, I'm not sure what negative tags specifically we're referring to, but I haven't noticed a practice of labeling members negatively solely based on cultural diversity or misunderstandings. I could be mistaken, but I haven't come across any instances of this behavior from any DT members. So, it would probably help here if we knew which specific cases we are talking about.

[DaveF]

I also think a lot of it comes from culture differences. What is acceptable in one location may or may not be acceptable everywhere. Heck, I'm from New York and even now and then I have to edit what I typed before posting since I know the toothless inbred rednecks who get offended at everything people in the middle of the US who don't like people on the coasts may take offense at things I say.

And, this is what I have been ranting about for years. The feedback system is broken, so things that people post as negative possibly should have been more neutral but it's what we have so we have to work with it.

-Dave

[dkbit98]

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed. It looks more to me that the main board users simply misunderstand the culture and think they are not suitable for the community so they like to mark them red. It also give a sense that these main board members have some personal dislike towards the boards (or better to say this group of the local users)

I don't consider negative feedback seriously until I read the feedback and see what other side had to say, with reason why they received negative review.
There are some members who are abusing trust feedback so not all negative feedback is equal for me.
However, it doesn't look good for any campaign if they are hiring spammers, so I would need to review specific members individually.

In a campaign accepting a red trusted member does not look good (maximum one red feedback I can ignore but having more than one looks too bad) but some of these members really deserve a good reward for their contribution to the community especially in their local boards.

Don't you already have red trust yourself?
Many campaign managers usually don't accept members with negative trust feedback, but there are some exceptions.

[JollyGood]

As long as it benefit to the company/project you are working it then its fine to work with those people who have great contribution on their local since in the first place you are working to increase the visibility of the site you are promoted and not just hiring forum users which post on global boards.

There's also nothing wrong about accepting users who got red trust, as long as they got that due to misunderstandings or expressing their personal belief then I don't see any problem with this.

Having neutral or negative trust should not automatically mean the candidate should be overlooked for participation in any bounty or signature campaign. All those matters should be at the discretion of the campaign manager.

I don't necessarily think neg tagged members are bad for a campaign. The way the trust system is now, and the way half don't know how to use it, will show a manager that they need to look at the reason for the tags before deciding to keep them out if a campaign.

You can say that again, many (mostly new) members probably do not know how to use the trust system properly and I agree with you as I mentioned above, a negative or neutral tag should not really be the ultimate reason for a campaign manager to refuse a member participation in a campaign.

I mean "not welcome" in a sense that they have negative feedback on their feedback page and the feedbacks were not for any reason such as they scammed.

...

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

Do you mean like JG is one who left negative feedback?

Surely not me 

If a forum user is not willing to change their behavior to accept "international standards" on the forum then they should be willing to understand there's going to be consequences for that when they interact with the broader community.

DT of course isn't perfect, but red trust doesn't have to be only for those who scammed, its for when "you think that trading with this person is high-risk." I don't know what board you're talking about in particular but if its one where the "culture" thinks being dishonest is OK then there's likely gonna be some problems between them and DT.

That is true. If a member conducts within a local board in accordance with local traditions which could be deemed appropriate/normal/acceptable it does not mean those patterns will be deemed appropriate/normal/acceptable in the global boards but having said that we are clutching at straws because the OP has not even made the issue fully known therefore almost impossible to comment upon.

[_BlackStar]

In a campaign accepting a red trusted member does not look good (maximum one red feedback I can ignore but having more than one looks too bad) but some of these members really deserve a good reward for their contribution to the community especially in their local boards.

You can accept any member who has negative tag on their profile in campaign you manage if you want to do so on case by case basis, obviously this point is up to you as the manager. This means you should review negative feedback first and be sure you want to place it.

You can view and review the signature campaign guidelines, it might be useful to you in managing your campaign. Even though it's just a guideline, but I think you can still consider something based on your own decisions, even accept one or more user recently woke up from a long period of inactivity, change email and password in your campaign.

One of the most interesting quotes is:

Consider not accepting users with negative feedback. It never looks good when users have negative feedback and 99% of the time the feedback is there for a good reason, but if you want to take this on a case by case basis then that's down to you.

[UmerIdrees]

As a campaign manager local boards are as important as international boards of the forum. For the last three hours, I was browsing a local board to find some prominent members from the board to offer them a spot in one of my campaign. I would like to invite them in private but I discovered an unfortunate fate for some of the prominent members on that board.

Some projects may require that their services are offered and advertised in a particular country or region and here is when the local board can come into play. Also as a manager, you can convince the companies that their product/service will be advertised in local regions which can give more opportunities to the project growth and so on.

Another thing to note is that local board members are more loyal to the forum and even if they are tagged, they stick to their original accounts. Some of them may be even better than those clean accounts, so when it comes to the selection of members it is solely on the campaign manager to select the people whom he thinks are the best for the project.

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

If anyone (people who can make a difference when you enter in a discussion) wants to know the local board name then feel free to PM me.

Cheers,

You do not need to go into these details as this will open-ended discussion with no end to it. Better accept the members whom you think are best and no one can challenge you as to why you selected any particular member/s.

[rby]

This is a critical situation. Even if my voice is not as loud as many other reputable members, I will try to lend my voice here.

I have outlined some issues below to consider;

1. If negative tags from more than 1 DT member is overlooked, there will be a time in the forum where negative tag would not be considered again. In as much as you can make some quality posts, to hell with the negative tags. Even if it sounds funny, it will soon happen, especially now that number of campaigns have exceeded the number of good posters.

2. Some negative tags are retaliatory, such as the one carried by Poker player, yourself,  BitcoinGirl.Club, JollyGood,  etc. Such tags can easily be overlooked by a campaign manager but seems like the ones you are talking about in Op is about ethics. Measuring a local ethics to that of international, I think the later takes precedence.

3. You noted that you don't understand the language of that local board in question, and online translators can give you some connected ideas but it may fail at some points. How then were you able to know their culture. Or did you speak with the victims privately and they explained their culture to you.

I could tell you the board name and also could tell you the members who left feedback (maybe from not understanding their culture) but situation is like that if I tell the names then others may think I am trying to get some attention to awaken some old bitter experience and maybe is trying to take some personal revenge. I don't want anyone to have such thinking in mind.

4. I'll conclude this way;
With your reputation in the forum, you can be the right third party to solicit for the victims. Pm the persons who left the tags, and they may consider to turn it neutral to enable you hire them. But if the tag giver is someone you cannot visit their pm, you may decide to bring up the matter here and the community will see to it.

[robelneo]

In a campaign accepting a red trusted member does not look good (maximum one red feedback I can ignore but having more than one looks too bad) but some of these members really deserve a good reward for their contribution to the community especially in their local boards.

Are they on campaigns or wearing signature, if not They deserve to be in a campaign, for a poster to have no incentives for posting and have tagged that is not scamming in nature but retaliatory but continue to have the desire and motivation to contribute, we can say that they have a genuine desire to contribute good content here in Bitcointalk.

just my thought...