Which campaign has the most spammers?

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Spamming is always an individual thing, it has nothing to do with which campaign a user is into. Yeah, I perfectly understand that some persons or users may want to, or try to make more number of  posts in one day, higher than the number of posts they can coherently put together without over working their brains, hence; spamming, all because of the condition of the campaign they are into, but this is them, they chose not to stick to their capabilities because of more pay.
Such attitude can't and shouldn't be generalized, for we all have our different strengths and capabilities, the fact you can't make five posts in a day without over stressing your brains and hence; spamming, does not mean every other person is the same, it's wrong to judge others based on our own strength, for strength differs.

If you find a user who is spamming, pick out the user and leave the campaign he or she is promoting out of it, as long as campaign is one that is recognized on this forum as reputable.

Besides, what is spam to you?

[1714558426]

1714558426

[1714558426]

1714558426

[1714558426]

1714558426

[1714558426]

1714558426

[Beparanf]

The title of the thread fully describes the essence of the issue.

I tried to apply to one campaign, but my attempts were unsuccessful. I decided that it was better to know where not to apply so as not to be in a party with spammers.

Stake.com has the highest chance to be spammed since they have higher post quota while they have bonus system that rewards users with most post(most of the time).

I encounter some of the participants post in the gambling discussion thread that doesn’t have make sense even though it contains wall of post. Their wall of post is very terrible to read in a discussion thread not only because it’s too long but also there’s no value on it which is not the worth reading it. I’m not generalizing Stake campaign but this is base on what I observe on the gambling discussion board.

[AB de Royse777]

You are insulting a lot of us @LoyceV LOL

Check the most active posters. Currently, the top 5-24 is completely filled with only Stake signatures:
~snip~
Stake doesn't care who they hire, as long as they post a lot (of BS). Their spam was called out 5 years ago, and it's still going.

They actually do. If they wouldn't then you wouldn't see me, yahoo, ognasty and some others in their campaign.

For a large campaign like Stake it's not always easy. I still have not calculated how many members are wearing Stake signature but I can easily assume it's more than 50. Their weekly budget can easily be over $5k. With this budget they have mix of good and bad posters., mix of highly reputed members and average members. Problem with high rep members that they will not chase a certain weekly target, you can not force them to fill up the weekly target even with a very high weekly payment but the average members don't mind to chase the weekly target. So Stake is just balancing between number of posts, cost per week and individual reputation.

The cost per posts is the most priority for Stake manager (at least I got the impression when I had a discussion with her) which is why many times you find a lot of spammers but overall I think the campaign is doing fairly well. You will always see in every conversation members have Stake signature. For the point of view from the project owner, it's a great outcome.

[Lucius]

~snip~
you missed two cheap campaigns that are probably the closest to the title of most spammers at the moment.

Exactly, that's why the poll makes no sense and aims at something completely different from the question it asks. In addition WO should be some campaign or OP means Wall Observer where signatures are not displayed anyway

My vote definitely goes to YoShitBit (regardless of the fact that it ended a long time ago) - those who remember well know what it looked like.

[Rikafip]

You will always see in every conversation members have Stake signature. For the point of view from the project owner, it's a great outcome.

You will indeed see them all over the place unless you use ignore option (which is very underused option imho) and I believe many do for many of their members.

For the point of view from the project owner, it's a great outcome.

I guess they are satisfied with the results since they are running campaign for so long. Or maybe they just have allocated amount and don't really care.

[BabyBandit]

You can register to this campaign, I see not many spammers join this campaign, even though this campaign is very good

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5415550.0 by NotATether

Thank you for the recommendation.


Regarding what campaign has the most spammers.. no campaign at all! It is individuals that spams or not spam not campaigns.
Blame the individual not the campaign. This is silly.

[Carollzinha]

For a large campaign like Stake it's not always easy.

Trust me, definitely its not

I still have not calculated how many members are wearing Stake signature but I can easily assume it's more than 50.

Hero/Legendary Campaign: 99 members for now (as one of the members accepted in the previous week is still to join)
Sr Members Campaign: 25 members

Their weekly budget can easily be over $5k.

Around that 




Well, now let me point some things that I see some people are misinterpreting in our campaign

• We do not incentive or support spam of any kind. Every post with less than 150 characters, with an interval of less than 5 minutes (between each post) or has no quality is not paid.
• AI usage is forbidden in our campaign (and I really wish all the campaign managers would do the same).
• We are a team of 7 paying attention to everyone's post and 5 of them are responsible for rating all of them. We know most all the campaigns are focused in old & experienced gamblers but we cant forget that the new generation also uses Bitcointalk to learn about the gambling & cryptos world.. and thats why our team has people like Adrian, with over 8 years of experience, but we also have Tiiks, with less than 6 months inside of it. For us, everyone matters
• The best poster rewards are not given for those with the highest total of posts, as someone mentioned, it is given for the top 2 (based in their final rating) + 2 more members that reached a final rating of at least 7.5. Here you can see our Rating Sheet
• I dont really trust in the current Merit System, tbh. I have seen shitty posters with over 5k merits and I have also seen good posters that barely could reach Sr Member so no, dont ask me to use it as basis to accept or maintain members in the campaign because I wont.

When you are talking about a brand that runs 2 campaigns, with a total of 124 members, referring to its members, in general, as spammer is just stupid. I also know many of our members are on top 50 in quantity of posts but a lot of them have a rating of 7.5+ for their quality so definitely not what I would simply call "spam".. but I also have to agree that, going further, some of the top 100 are under that rating so we will be working on it by the next week.


Last but not least, I am always open to read your suggestions. This is the first time I am running a campaign (and I like to believe the I am doing well, otherwise the campaign would not be on for so many years) & we always have something to learn.


Have a good one guys.

[LoyceV]

You are insulting a lot of us @LoyceV LOL

I'm okay with that.

Check the most active posters. Currently, the top 5-24 is completely filled with only Stake signatures:
~snip~
Stake doesn't care who they hire, as long as they post a lot (of BS). Their spam was called out 5 years ago, and it's still going.

They actually do. If they wouldn't then you wouldn't see me, yahoo, ognasty and some others in their campaign.

I'm not impressed. Money talks.

For a large campaign like Stake it's not always easy.

So? Nobody said it should be easy, it's a paying job. And if the one doing it can't handle it, he should be replaced.

Their weekly budget can easily be over $5k. With this budget they have mix of good and bad posters.

This is the dumbest thing I've read today. Hiring spammers is a choice, and if anything, it's caused by paying too little money for too many posts.

mix of highly reputed members and average members. Problem with high rep members that they will not chase a certain weekly target, you can not force them to fill up the weekly target even with a very high weekly payment but the average members don't mind to chase the weekly target. So Stake is just balancing between number of posts, cost per week and individual reputation.

That's a long way to describe "spamming".

The cost per posts is the most priority for Stake manager (at least I got the impression when I had a discussion with her) which is why many times you find a lot of spammers but overall I think the campaign is doing fairly well.

You seem to be heavily biased by the fact that they pay you. I'd expect much higher standards from you as a campaign manager.

You will always see in every conversation members have Stake signature.

No I don't. I usually Ignore them, if someone creates thousands of posts without earning Merit (and yes, you're an exception to that), it's safe to assume their posts aren't worth reading.

For the point of view from the project owner, it's a great outcome.

Of course. Spammers don't care as long as they earn from it. It's a win-win for them, but bad for the quality of the forum.

For a large campaign like Stake it's not always easy.

Trust me, definitely its not

If running a spam-free campaign is too difficult for you, you shouldn't be managing a campaign at all:

Signature campaigns should be a way to reward users for quality contributions and only those that do should be paid, but at the moment it has become a way for many campaign operators to lazily and cheaply advertise their business by paying greedy users to spam whatever unsubstantial rubbish they can be bothered putting the minimal amount of effort in to and this will no longer be tolerated.
~
As a signature campaign operator you will ultimately be held responsible for the quality of posts of users bearing your signature advertisement and you will need to monitor your users closely or it will be quickly abused.
~
Running a campaign is not an easy task and it requires someone actively monitoring participants daily ~ If you cannot commit to doing this or do not have someone within your company who can do the job to an acceptable standard then you should either hire someone to do so or close your campaign and look at alternative ways of advertising.

If those rules would be enforced, you'd be banned.

We do not incentive or support spam of any kind. Every post with less than 150 characters, with an interval of less than 5 minutes (between each post) or has no quality is not paid.

Spoken like a true spammer. Good posts can be long or short, spam posts can easily reach the exact target required. Good users don't care about waiting 5 minutes between posts. Spammers can easily jump through those hoops. Long spam posts are even worse than short spam posts, because it takes more time to read and realize it's useless.

We are a team of 7 paying attention to everyone's post and 5 of them are responsible for rating all of them.

This is truely amazing! Those 7 people must be the worst at their job, considering Stake has been paying for useless posts from many spammers for many years!

I dont really trust in the current Merit System

It's not perfect, but it's a good indication. Thousands of posts without earning Merit means nobody cares about those posts.

When you are talking about a brand that runs 2 campaigns, with a total of 124 members, referring to its members, in general, as spammer is just stupid. I also know many of our members are on top 50 in quantity of posts

Lol. If you take any number (>50) of users and rank them in order of quality, there will always be exactly 50 of them in the top 50.

but a lot of them have a rating of 7.5+ for their quality so definitely not what I would simply call "spam".

Who makes those ratings? Stake?

Running a low-spam campaign is not difficult. But it is a lot of work. It requires reading every post and not just checking the length and time in between.

[Carollzinha]

~snip~

You should first take care of these Chat GPT guys that you have been paying for months. There is no point in being a good poster if you are not the one behind the posts you do.


As I said in my previous post, I am all open for suggestions.

[LoyceV]

You should first take care of these Chat GPT guys that you have been paying for months.

What are you talking about? I'm not paying chat spammers.

[Apocollapse]

• I dont really trust in the current Merit System, tbh. I have seen shitty posters with over 5k merits and I have also seen good posters that barely could reach Sr Member so no, dont ask me to use it as basis to accept or maintain members in the campaign because I wont.

Which users you're talking about? I'm really familiar with all the 5K merits users and I don't see they're spammers, that's why I ask you to enlighten what the real spammer is.

You should first take care of these Chat GPT guys that you have been paying for months. There is no point in being a good poster if you are not the one behind the posts you do.

Isn't that you?

This is truely amazing! Those 7 people must be the worst at their job, considering Stake has been paying for useless posts from many spammers for many years!

Have you opened their rating spreadsheet? the users who get high rating are wall of text posters, in order to become best posters in Stake, all you need is to create 2-4 paragraphs posts, even though there's no point of the post. Without those 7 people, everyone can know who post long lol.

• The best poster rewards are not given for those with the highest total of posts, as someone mentioned, it is given for the top 2 (based in their final rating) + 2 more members that reached a final rating of at least 7.5. Here you can see our Rating Sheet

[ABCbits]

Signature campaigns should be a way to reward users for quality contributions and only those that do should be paid, but at the moment it has become a way for many campaign operators to lazily and cheaply advertise their business by paying greedy users to spam whatever unsubstantial rubbish they can be bothered putting the minimal amount of effort in to and this will no longer be tolerated.
~
As a signature campaign operator you will ultimately be held responsible for the quality of posts of users bearing your signature advertisement and you will need to monitor your users closely or it will be quickly abused.
~
Running a campaign is not an easy task and it requires someone actively monitoring participants daily ~ If you cannot commit to doing this or do not have someone within your company who can do the job to an acceptable standard then you should either hire someone to do so or close your campaign and look at alternative ways of advertising.

If those rules would be enforced, you'd be banned.

That rule already enforced though, although it seems only YoBit signature campaign deemed to violate that rule.

[LoyceV]

That rule already enforced though, although it seems only YoBit signature campaign deemed to violate that rule.

If I remember correctly, I've seen hilariousandco complain about the lack of enforcement. So it's really up to upper management to take action.

[FatFork]

• The best poster rewards are not given for those with the highest total of posts, as someone mentioned, it is given for the top 2 (based in their final rating) + 2 more members that reached a final rating of at least 7.5. Here you can see our Rating Sheet

To be honest, I think your rating system is complete bullshit. I wasn't going to call out any specific member, but since you made your rating sheet public, let's address the elephant in the room:



This is your top poster? Months in a row, according to your own data. Impressive...

But even more fascinating is the uncanny similarity in scores from your entire team. It's almost like they all share the same brain... Real people don't have hive-mind opinions, especially on subjective matters like this. Your system reeks of manipulation, not genuine evaluation.

[KingsDen]

I tried to apply to one campaign, but my attempts were unsuccessful. I decided that it was better to know where not to apply so as not to be in a party with spammers.

I have these to say;

• Spam is an individual based crime and not a campaign based crime  
• Although some campaign rules can indirectly instigate spamming  
• Stake has been called out as a spam campaign, but I have these to say about stake  

a. Stake minimum post to be paid is 25 posts which is ok. It is the bonus arrangement that makes her campaign participants wants to make upto 100 posts to have maximum pay.
b. Before now we could call stake campaign participants spammers but now they are no more. It seems that the manager made a certain rule that makes these guys post long wall of texts. I mean upto 80% of them write longer texts than myself. We all know that quality of post in this forum is largely measured by the length of post.

• Spamming doesn't necessarily mean making upto 100 posts per week. Someone could make 100 posts without spamming while someone making 20 posts will spam  
• If anyone makes upto 100 posts without bursting (giving upto 5 mins wait time), and these posts are highly connected, I would not call that spamming
• It should be called spamming when it is irrelevant or unsolicited  
• I do not see stake participants as spammers just like the then 1xbit. But if I were the manager, in order to erase the stake name in the mind of bitcointalk users whenever spam is mentioned. I'll simply rearrange the campaign to pay participants $100 if they make upto 50 posts, and maybe $125 if they can go 70 posts. The result will be same and the campaign will still dominate the gambling section.

As I said in my previous post, I am all open for suggestions.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Campaign managers have their assessment of the quality of posts that they will count or not count. If the quality of the post does not meet the standards of the campaign manager, it will not be counted. some managers exclude some boards that don't count. as well as the quality of participants' posts.
several other members have shown how many managers select new participants. maybe you can get better if you start to adapt. although each manager has their methods and standards.
Maybe the tags on your account can also be taken into consideration by the campaign manager when they want to see how you really are.

Hmm.  Above is a bunch of generic statements, most of which are only tangentially related to the topic at hand.  This is what I'd call a shitpost dressed up with so many words in an attempt to make it look like something substantial.  I've got avatars and signatures on ignore (OH, the irony!) so I don't know if Awaklara is in a campaign or not--and I haven't peeked at his profile--but if he is in one, I'd not be shocked if there weren't other members doing the same thing in it.  Just a guess, though.

<snip>

Here's more of the same thing.

To be honest, I think your rating system is complete bullshit.
<snippy>
But even more fascinating is the uncanny similarity in scores from your entire team. It's almost like they all share the same brain... Real people don't have hive-mind opinions, especially on subjective matters like this. Your system reeks of manipulation, not genuine evaluation.

Your post made me giggle with glee.  Let the flamethrower loose, m'boy.

A signature can be a very good first indication whether or not a post is worth reading. If it's Stake, chances are the only thing I do is click Ignore. It's very rare to see one that's worth my time.

I'm going to be bold and blow myself my own horn by suggesting that the rare avatar displaying a certain cycling club membership is almost always a guarantee that a post made by a member with said avatar is well worth one's time.  It's not just about the orgies in the windowless house of Fox, I'll have you know. 

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I tried to apply to one campaign, but my attempts were unsuccessful. I decided that it was better to know where not to apply so as not to be in a party with spammers.

I have these to say;

• Spam is an individual based crime and not a campaign based crime  
• Although some campaign rules can indirectly instigate spamming  
• Stake has been called out as a spam campaign, but I have these to say about stake  

a. Stake minimum post to be paid is 25 posts which is ok. It is the bonus arrangement that makes her campaign participants wants to make upto 100 posts to have maximum pay.
b. Before now we could call stake campaign participants spammers but now they are no more. It seems that the manager made a certain rule that makes these guys post long wall of texts. I mean upto 80% of them write longer texts than myself. We all know that quality of post in this forum is largely measured by the length of post.

• Spamming doesn't necessarily mean making upto 100 posts per week. Someone could make 100 posts without spamming while someone making 20 posts will spam  
• If anyone makes upto 100 posts without bursting (giving upto 5 mins wait time), and these posts are highly connected, I would not call that spamming
• It should be called spamming when it is irrelevant or unsolicited  
• I do not see stake participants as spammers just like the then 1xbit. But if I were the manager, in order to erase the stake name in the mind of bitcointalk users whenever spam is mentioned. I'll simply rearrange the campaign to pay participants $100 if they make upto 50 posts, and maybe $125 if they can go 70 posts. The result will be same and the campaign will still dominate the gambling section.

As I said in my previous post, I am all open for suggestions.

@kingsden, you have spoken really well and I honestly think your suggestion is very OK, I personally who is currently a participant in stake signature know for sure that the majority of Stake signature participants are not spammers, some users on this forum just hate the fact that the majority of most active users in this forum are all wearing stake signature, and as such, they automatically conclude that users participating in stake signature campaign are all spammers.

Well, I have nothing much to say here that is not already said, but then, I just want to as well support your suggestion, having a fixed number of posts from 50 to 70 posts for max pay would be nice, even though it is understood that participants aren't forced to reach max pay, but then, we all know how desperate most people are for money and more money, it's difficult to find someone who would willingly decide to earn cents when the opportunity to earn in real dollars is also made available to him or her.

[Igebotz]

Criticism is allowed, but when you start bashing them and telling them how to do the job the way you would have done it, it is inappropriate. Everyone will not behave/work the same way you did.

I'm active on the gambling board, but I don't see many stake signatures because I mainly post on self-moderated and paid pool threads; yet, the few stake participants I've seen are good posters. As with any other campaign, there are a few good ones and a few shit/average ones.

Spoken like a true spammer. Good posts can be long or short, spam posts can easily reach the exact target required. Good users don't care about waiting 5 minutes between posts. Spammers can easily jump through those hoops. Long spam posts are even worse than short spam posts, because it takes more time to read and realize it's useless.

Swaziland You were not paying for short posts either (you plainly stated in your rules that you would pay for short, high-quality posts, but you did not). It is simple to define what is what, but difficult to put into action.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1XGGC1z7KiyWnqmfuwiRyUEL-7Fn9YGT-GCVyXDML2TM/htmlview

[LoyceV]

We all know that quality of post in this forum is largely measured by the length of post.

Speak for yourself.

in order to erase the stake name in the mind of bitcointalk users whenever spam is mentioned

Ask yourself why CM campaign participants in general were considered to be good posters, and Stake campaign participants are considered to be spammers. It's a direct result of choices made by the campaign manager.

I'm going to be bold and blow myself my own horn by suggesting that the rare avatar displaying a certain cycling club membership is almost always a guarantee that a post made by a member with said avatar is well worth one's time.

It's literally the only campaign on the forum that doesn't pay the members to post.

[SamReomo]

~Snip~

@Fivestar4everMVP I think whatever you said is very true and that's the main reason why people consider members of the Stake campaign as spammers. I have personally read posts of many of the members of that campaign and I didn't see any spammers myself. In fact I think some of the best members at gambling board are part of that campaign.

The strange thing I noticed about the users who were part of Stake campaign is that they make very long posts and make so many posts on daily basis. I believe that those members are way more dedicated to share their opinions in those threads and that's why they give proper time to make such long posts. It's not an easy task to write that long posts and only the ones who are highly dedicated would give proper time to write such long and detailed posts.

I think you're also right that if Stake's maximum posts should be limited to 50-70 or I believe 60-80 then that would be much better for the users and for the campaign as well. Most of the participants try their best to earn as much money as they possibly can from Stake's campaign and that's the reason why they make so many posts to earn as much as the campaign allows them to earn. And, I believe nothing is wrong in that approach because if someone is putting more effort and longer hours then that person deserves to get paid for doing that.