Reee: Which campaign has the most spammers?

[borovichok]

I used the same AI detection website to test one of your most recent posts, and it came up 100% AI generated. Do you still believe the report, or are you using AI to post?

If I run your complete post history through the same system, I'll get more. These tools are imperfect and cannot be used.

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector/e5dc28b08011e3873a9da1980615e942

I'm not saying that these scanners are 100% accurate, try testing a few more websites on your reported posts, which as I mentioned already, looked AI-written, does mine look like it was written by an AI? Probably not, you can also ask other members. You believe that I want to prove my point but I actually don't. I'd rather be proven wrong and that your posts are actually human written, because it would suck seeing someone lose their spot in their signature campaign and/or in the forum.

All of the tools work in the same way and produce similar outcomes; they are simply different names for the same software. I've seen that every well-written post with proper punctuation is automatically rated "Fake" by these softwares. It's insane to have your reputation tarnished because of what some random websites say.

It's my words against a high-ranked profile, thus they don't matter. But I'd rather lose my campaign spot than admit what I didn't do. This is how I was raised.

[Poker Player]

In the case of the members of the Stake campaign, I would say that they excel in what I call pseudo quality. It is very typical to see in the Gambling Section responses by them on page for example 47 of a thread in which they drop three long paragraphs that have something to do with what they are quoting but in reality are pure verbiage that passes just enough in most cases so that a moderator does not delete their post if it is reported and the manager pays them for the post. There are honorable exceptions within that campaign, but I think it's mostly the payment system they have that incentivizes that.

[SatoPrincess]

I believe if the CM adopts a weekly post quota of 20-30 posts, the post quality will be much better than it is now.

If you keep the same payrate per post and lower the weekly quota, you won't magically increase post quality as same shitposters will stay in the campaign an the only thing that will change is amount of shitposts.

Though it may not increase post quality but I think it will definitely reduce the amount of shitposts generated in order to meet the maximum quota. If they are not getting paid for additional posts, I doubt any of those guys will be posting so much. The less posts they have to make, the more thought they will put into their posts. That’s if the campaign will prioritize quality over quantity.

[m2017]

A campaign that works according to the principles of "quantity instead of quality" and has been doing so for a very long time definitely shows that it does not matter what its participants write, but how many posts they make every week/month.

Why change something that already works well. I suspect that it is beneficial for Stake to have as much spam on the forum as possible and this allows them to promote their services quite well.

This can be understood by the measures of influence that (if) will be taken in relation to their spamming participants.

I sincerely doubt that anyone from their team reads all those posts, much less checks them with AI detectors, because in that case they would have to reject at least 50% of the posts as uncountable, which means that the spammers would look for their business elsewhere.

On the one hand, it will be more difficult for spammers to get a job if almost all signature campaign managers demand (and voice) strict compliance with conditions, which will force them to improve the quality of posts or stop spam (activity). On the other hand, there will always be projects with low morale for which spam will show better results.

However, I hope that the Stake team will listen to some of the advice and change some things in their campaign.

Here it would be good to hear the opinion of the Stake team.

[Mahdirakib]

I think the second suggestion will be effective to reduce the number of spammers from Stake campaign. They have to increase the pay rate for each post, which will attract the qualitative posters to apply in the campaign. Most of the participants of Stake sig campaign are just making long posts without including any valuable context in it.

I was confused with this post of a Stake sig campaign participant. The user had quoted the replies from a different topic and made his post on my thread. It could be a mistake by the user, but I was surprised that the moderators haven't taken any action on that post yet. I had reported it by describing the reason properly in comments section.

[examplens]

I'm not sure how this AI detector works ( this tools can mislead) , but how did you evaluate my postings using common sense and the ones I responded to as being on topics and decide they were written by AI? If you pay attention to my posts, you will see that all of my responses are on topics. I don't just post; I make sure to quote, and all of my quotes are always on topics, which AI can't do.

Your posts failed on three different AI detector tools https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg63769426#msg63769426

I'm not sure how this AI detector works ( this tools can mislead) , but how did you evaluate my postings using common sense and the ones I responded to as being on topics and decide they were written by AI? If you pay attention to my posts, you will see that all of my responses are on topics. I don't just post; I make sure to quote, and all of my quotes are always on topics, which AI can't do.

If you ask the question correctly, the AI will always write on-topic content. No one claims that some AI bot leaves posts for you. As long as you are transferring content generated with AI tools.

Honestly, these posts that were deleted by the moderators are absolute nonsense. It's even worse if you actually wrote something like that believing that it has any value. No matter how this "case" of yours ends, I advise you to think carefully about everything and accept the suggestions you get here. Judging by your answers in this thread, it is obvious that you can be constructive and direct in your communication and there is really no need to litter the forum with spam.

[nutildah]

I used the same AI detection website to test one of your most recent posts, and it came up 100% AI generated. Do you still believe the report, or are you using AI to post?

If I run your complete post history through the same system, I'll get more. These tools are imperfect and cannot be used.

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector/e5dc28b08011e3873a9da1980615e942

We're not anticipating thousands or millions of dollars worth of rewards when gambling on other games, which is why our chances are considerably better. Moreover, most gambling games have very specific outcomes (see roulette, dice, football betting, and so on), while the lottery is composed of numerous tickets with only a few actually winning anything of value. Add the low purchase cost and the large audience you mentioned, and your chances are statistically close to zero.

Personally, I'd rather use that money towards something else; these insignificant amounts we're discussing now can easily add up to reasonable amounts that could be used elsewhere.

You're being willfully obtuse in order to justify your AI shitposting habits. If you don't know what "willfully obtuse" means, run it through a translator, because it defines your entire attitude. You selectively used 1 AI detector while the minimum for reporting AI spam should be 2 strong positives from different detectors, which isn't the case with the post quoted above:

Hive: 0.0% likely to be AI generated
Copyleaks: Human Text

If you look at the results of the 9 posts I reported you will find all 3 of these AI detectors show a high degree of AI content in every post.

You should absolutely be canned from the Stake campaign, but I have a feeling you will not because, again, the standards for participation in your campaign are woefully weak, and it seems to have no quality control whatsoever.

[borovichok]

Honestly, these posts that were deleted by the moderators are absolute nonsense. It's even worse if you actually wrote something like that believing that it has any value. No matter how this "case" of yours ends, I advise you to think carefully about everything and accept the suggestions you get here. Judging by your answers in this thread, it is obvious that you can be constructive and direct in your communication and there is really no need to litter the forum with spam.

I appreciate your input; the next time I post, I will do my best to stay on topic and not give too many concepts in general. I always felt that providing additional details would help to raise the quality of discussion; I guess I was mistaken.

For example, suppose someone is discussing gambling depression.I try to share my honest thoughts on the first paragraph while also shedding additional light on the second paragraph about what gambling depression is, its harmful influence, and what happens to those that suffer from it. We learn every day, but I can honestly say that I never use any chatbots. I've been interacting on the meta and reputation boards without a chatbot, so why would I use it on something I'm passionate about ? (Gambling)

My problem could be with the grammarly keyboard I'm using; English is not my native language, so I use the grammarly keyboard to fix and improve my phrases after they've been written. It's possible that these AI detector sites picked up most of posts enhanced by Grammarly keyboards. I do not know. @powerGlove is this possible? I know you're a tech wizard.

[FatFork]

I used the same AI detection website to test one of your most recent posts, and it came up 100% AI generated. Do you still believe the report, or are you using AI to post?

That's cherry-picking.  That same post scores high probability of being entirely human with other AI detection algorithms like GPTzero, ContentatScale, or HiveModeration. That's why we use multiple detection tools to reduce the possibility of false positives.

On the other hand, a large number of your posts I checked came back positive with multiple detection tools, suggesting a high likelihood of AI-generated content. Another significant factor is that the vast majority of your posts in the Gambling section follow a uniform pattern – typically consisting of two paragraphs with near-perfect grammar.  People typically don't communicate in such a "robotic" way.

[Lucius]

Do not use that saipling tool because it is definitely one of the worst that exists, and in fact most of the text (posts) you check with it will be detected as AI content. If you don't use at least 3 different detection tools, there is no point in publishing results at all, but when every AI detector shows AI in someone's posts, then it most likely cannot be a mistake.

~snip~
My problem could be with the grammarly keyboard I'm using; English is not my native language, so I use the grammarly keyboard to fix and improve my phrases after they've been written. It's possible that these AI detector sites picked up most of posts enhanced by Grammarly keyboards. I do not know. @powerGlove is this possible? I know you're a tech wizard.

Shouldn't that tool only check for spelling mistakes? If you use it to get completely artificially constructed whole or parts of sentences, then AI detectors may detect them. Whatever you've been doing until now, I think you should change the way you create content on the forum - because English is not the native language of most forum members, but we try our best and with time most of us get better.

[decodx]

All of the tools work in the same way and produce similar outcomes; they are simply different names for the same software.

This is not true at all and you provided evidence yourself when you gave an example of a post flagged by only one AI detection tool. The others identified it as human-written content.

I've seen that every well-written post with proper punctuation is automatically rated "Fake" by these softwares.

That's not true either. You just made a well-written post with proper punctuation. None of the AI detection tools have flagged it as "fake".

It's insane to have your reputation tarnished because of what some random websites say.

Looks like you haven't checked your trust summary recently. Remember that post from last year? The one that earned you a lovely "shitposter" tag from Hueristic?

Here's a reminder in case you forgot:

Stick to a player that's outstanding and confident in scoring points. Every team do triggered winning and losing, we have potentials of winning, if they do not have this hope, they wouldn't have compete or contend for any solidable points in the league. Thrilling victory is achievable and everyone has the right to be able to place wager on games. We all have choices to make and our favorites in the game. @morvillz making an exception of choosing Wilson or Flacco over Brownings bases on the tactical date examined, but the same underrated Brownings is the favorite of most viewers in the system.

Still think spewing nonsense is a winning strategy?

My problem could be with the grammarly keyboard I'm using; English is not my native language, so I use the grammarly keyboard to fix and improve my phrases after they've been written. It's possible that these AI detector sites picked up most of posts enhanced by Grammarly keyboards. I do not know. @powerGlove is this possible? I know you're a tech wizard.

That's possible, but highly unlikely. These AI detection tools go far beyond basic grammar checks. They are analyzing things like: sentence structure, statistical patterns and predictability of word choices. Just like generative AI models, they work on probabilities.  The more "red flags" a post raises across these various metrics, the higher the likelihood it's AI-generated content.

[nutildah]

My postings are misinterpreted for AI-generated content since they are perhaps too brilliant to be written by humans. I guess.

LOL. You will go to such imaginative efforts to defend yourself here. Simply stunning, worthy of an AI-generated round of applause.

The only problem is your writing often sucks when you're not using AI. Here's an example of where you combined your own words and ChatGPT words together in the same post (ChatGPT is in bold):

1. Don't bet all your money on one bet.

I don`t place all my money on one bet. It is important to spread your bet as this is a crucial strategy in betting that helps to reduce risk and increase the likelihood of earning consistent returns. Spreading bets can help reduce the impact of losses, as winning some bets can offset losing others. It can also increase the chances of winning, as you have more opportunities to make correct predictions. Furthermore, not betting all your on one bet can make gambling more enjoyable and less stressful, as you are not relying on a single outcome to determine your success.

4. Don't bet every day.

I don’t gamble every day. Gambling involves risking money with uncertain outcomes. The more frequently you gamble, the higher the likelihood of financial losses accumulating over time. Gambling can be time-consuming, especially when done regularly. Spending too much time gambling can detract from other important aspects of life, such as work, relationships, and personal hobbies. Taking breaks from gambling ensures that you allocate your time more effectively and maintain a healthy balance in life.

So from the first sentence of your reply, we see that you go from not knowing how to appropriately space an apostrophe to flawless English. What are the odds that something like that would happen? Here's another:

I want to add voice to what you have noted. Finding a balance between enjoying the thrill of gambling and being responsible for one's actions is key to maintaining a healthy relationship with gambling. It's possible to derive enjoyment from the activity while also being mindful of its risks and limitations. By approaching gambling with a focus on enjoyment, acknowledging the role of luck, and practising responsible gambling habits, individuals can engage in the activity in a way that maximizes enjoyment while minimizing potential harm.

Gambling involves risking money on uncertain outcomes, making it inherently risky.  While gamblers can experience temporary wins or even streaks of success, as you noted, these outcomes are often short-lived. In the long run, the statistical advantage held by the house or operator tends to prevail, resulting in net losses for the majority of gamblers and even skilled players face an uphill battle against the inherent advantages of the house.

You want to "add voice to what they have noted"? Is that really an expression? No, its not, and its not something ChatGPT would ever say.

Just stop using ChatGPT to write your posts for you and they'll stop being deleted. Its really that simple.

[Learn Bitcoin]

-----

How about learning how to resize the images? I have wasted 30 seconds of my life scrolling through these images because they filld the whole page. This is not in the forum rules, but it's more about common sense.

These tools are imperfect and cannot be used.

Have you seen the thread Nutildah created, and how are people reporting those AI-generated posts? It was advised to the reporters not to rely on a single AI detection tool as it may gives false positive result. So, they use at least three tools to check if a content was generated by AI or not.

[yahoo62278]

-----

How about learning how to resize the images? I have wasted 30 seconds of my life scrolling through these images because they filld the whole page. This is not in the forum rules, but it's more about common sense.

These tools are imperfect and cannot be used.

Have you seen the thread Nutildah created, and how are people reporting those AI-generated posts? It was advised to the reporters not to rely on a single AI detection tool as it may gives false positive result. So, they use at least three tools to check if a content was generated by AI or not.

Everyone isn't a designer, nor do they want to learn. They want to post and get paid, nothing else. If they're running multiple accounts, then they have less time on their hands as well.

I've said it many times, how hard is it really to give your thoughts on a post? That's all posting is, sharing your thoughts or expertise on a subject. Why do users feel they have to cheat? I just don't get it.

[ineedhelpplease]

Just stop using ChatGPT to write your posts for you and they'll stop being deleted. Its really that simple.

I'm confused as to why AI spammers haven't at least started trying to hide their AI posts a little to make them sound more human. example; replacing "you" to "u" and not having proper grammar. This probably wouldn't entirely fool an AI detection test but at least they would look a little more realistically written by a human than AI.

[FatFork]

I've said it many times, how hard is it really to give your thoughts on a post? That's all posting is, sharing your thoughts or expertise on a subject. Why do users feel they have to cheat? I just don't get it.

Why spend hours contributing to constructive discussions when, with a little AI magic, you could churn out the same volume of posts in a fraction of the time? (That's rhetorical of course, but probably the logic of some of those shitty posters.)

Four experienced individuals grade stake participants

Its interesting how those "4 experienced individuals" rate users simiarly which makes me think that (at best) those 4 are doing a very shitty job and not actually reading posts, or more realistically that story about 4 different persons rating posts is just a bs.

Yep, basically the same as recent case with LUCKMCFLY. According to their rating sheet, he was their "best" poster for months in a row, consistently receiving top ratings from the whole team. This is pure sheep mentality at its finest, or just blatant manipulation.

[borovichok]

Shouldn't that tool only check for spelling mistakes? If you use it to get completely artificially constructed whole or parts of sentences, then AI detectors may detect them. Whatever you've been doing until now, I think you should change the way you create content on the forum - because English is not the native language of most forum members, but we try our best and with time most of us get better.

Original version

Grammarly and Quilbot are built with AI software so I feel that some posts enhance by this tools are captured by AI detectors. This tools helps turn my broken English and wrong use of the punctuation marks into extremely good English If you check my post history  posts without this tools are completely messed ( wrong wording and punctuation marks)

Post enhanced by grammarly/Quilbot

Grammarly and Quilbot are built with AI software, thus I believe that some writings modified with these tools are vetted by AI detectors. These tools assist me improve my broken English and incorrect use of punctuation marks. Check my post history; posts without these tools are severely messed up (wrong words and punctuation marks).

Routine: post here =>copy =>use grammarly/quilbot==>enhanced the grammar and punctuation marks==> post. Could be a bad practice but this seems to be the reason my posts get picked up by those detectors easily.

@nutildah your inputs and recommendations are duely noted. Thanks man. Appreciate everyone too. Better days ahead.

[Vod]

AI is easily identified when it makes a lot of circular posts that add nothing to the conversation other than common sense.

[logfiles]

I'm confused as to why AI spammers haven't at least started trying to hide their AI posts a little to make them sound more human. example; replacing "you" to "u" and not having proper grammar. This probably wouldn't entirely fool an AI detection test but at least they would look a little more realistically written by a human than AI.

If they are too lazy to just think about what they are going to type, then how do you expect them to go through all that trouble of replacing words. Now you have talked about it, how many users do you often see should short forms of words such as "u" or "bt"?

Seeing a user try to spin the text abbreviate normal words, which is unusual behavior here in the forum, is a number one red flag for me.

[nutildah]

I'm confused as to why AI spammers haven't at least started trying to hide their AI posts a little to make them sound more human. example; replacing "you" to "u" and not having proper grammar. This probably wouldn't entirely fool an AI detection test but at least they would look a little more realistically written by a human than AI.

Because that would require extra effort and the whole reason shitposters are using ChatGPT is to avoid having to commit any effort at all.