A legendary member who owns at least 9 more accounts is cheating sig campaigns

[Rikafip]

Despite being almost the highest merited account there, I got "marks" below posters who have been banned for displaying a signature due to spam.

Ah yes, I think I saw that spreadsheet with marks once.

What I found interesting is that each member was rated by (iirc) 4–5 different "reviewers," and "coincidentally," all of them were giving very similar ratings, almost as if it was just one person doing it.

If someone is curious...

I am quite certain that they won't have issues getting into campaigns once their sig ban is lifted, no matter the tags they receive.

[Satofan44]

I am quite certain that they won't have issues getting into campaigns once their sig ban is lifted, no matter the tags they receive.

Less complaining, more tagging. Even if you are not part of this DefaultTrust just tag them. Everyone here is blame because many of these accounts don't get many tags or often they get useless neutral tags. At least with the tags it is easier to keep track off them.

[PX-Z]

...

There's actually no forum rule against having multiple accounts. Even some moderators have alternate accounts and have joined different campaigns using them. The issue only comes in when those accounts join the same campaign, that's generally considered cheating, which makes it a violation of the campaign's own rules, thus they deserved negative tag.

I never ever thought it was valid to create an alt, raise it and join a campaign (even while your main account is also in a campaign). I knew owning an alt wasn't no crime; for some privacy protection policies, honest opinions etc, but earning from both at the same time is wild fr.

Don't you know that even selling account is discouraged it was a big business before, there was even a site for price estimator of an account for those selling it made by a mod. The idea was just stopped and fully discourage or even hunted when the forum were bombarded by higher ranks who just spam low quality posts, means sold accounts.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Don't you know that even selling account is discouraged it was a big business before, there was even a site for price estimator of an account for those selling it made by a mod. The idea was just stopped and fully discourage or even hunted when the forum were bombarded by higher ranks who just spam low quality posts, means sold accounts.

I think I read something about this a few years ago. We've come too far to fumble at this point, and not recognize a puppeteer when one is spotted.

WOWWW!   One member manages 10 accounts.
Check Altcoinstalks, We may find more, especially since admin may reveals alt accounts using IP addresses.

what would have been more interesting to learn is how they're able to post on so many accounts and still not run out of ideas... But you see, they don't need all of that. They're very good at a different level of text spinning and repetition. Just like someone said few pages ago, it's a full-time job for most of them.

Ah yes, I think I saw that spreadsheet with marks once.
What I found interesting is that each member was rated by (iirc) 4–5 different "reviewers," and "coincidentally," all of them were giving very similar ratings, almost as if it was just one person doing it.

Too much.. Not trying to defend anyone's Ass but every review is done properly. How I know this? We got a rating sheet and some people get kicked for very poor post quality. I don't know about the other allegations Btw.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

what would have been more interesting to learn is how they're able to post on so many accounts and still not run out of ideas... But you see, they don't need all of that. They're very good at a different level of text spinning and repetition. Just like someone said few pages ago, it's a full-time job for most of them.

There are some accounts, especially in the gambling section, that are dedicated to posting in mega threads, quoting the previous post, and writing a looong post that has something to do with what is being discussed but doesn't really contribute anything. I suppose it works as advertising for the casinos they are promoting, but they don't contribute anything to the forum.

You can see several accounts like that, quoting or even overquoting the latest posts in the thread, writing a long rubbish post that has something to do with what was said and then moving on to the next mega thread. The entire post history is the same.

[Satofan44]

what would have been more interesting to learn is how they're able to post on so many accounts and still not run out of ideas... But you see, they don't need all of that. They're very good at a different level of text spinning and repetition. Just like someone said few pages ago, it's a full-time job for most of them.

There are some accounts, especially in the gambling section, that are dedicated to posting in mega threads, quoting the previous post, and writing a looong post that has something to do with what is being discussed but doesn't really contribute anything. I suppose it works as advertising for the casinos they are promoting, but they don't contribute anything to the forum.

You can see several accounts like that, quoting or even overquoting the latest posts in the thread, writing a long rubbish post that has something to do with what was said and then moving on to the next mega thread. The entire post history is the same.

The issue is that most or all (?) current campaigns that are running are designed to maximize the number of users instead of maximizing the number of quality posts. The requirements are usually around 20-30 posts per week, which is ridiculously low. One day I did like 40 posts and that was without even trying. Therefore the environment is tailored for farming and actually minimizes competition. There is perhaps a mistaken idea that a low post number requirement increases quality, it does not.

If the number of user spots were more limited, the post requirements increased and payouts increased then there would be more competition for the slots. It is easy to follow the problem. If you have 100 users that may apply in campaigns and there are 100 slots, of course you won't be able to find high quality users. You will be forced to fill the slots with each user that comes. If you had 10 slots but 100 users, then the competition for the slots would be significant and you could fill them with the best 10% posters.

This would just be one of many changes that are needed to kick start a change of the environment here. Others are needed such as DT massively tagging these users and services if they employ them (Stake for example), and some de-ranking mechanism. With many changes slowly the number of high quality posters would increase and things could be adapted again to suit that new reality.

[Rikafip]

Everyone here is blame because many of these accounts don't get many tags or often they get useless neutral tags.

Red tagging shitposters is not the proper use of trust system. And if managers wan't to hire them for their signature campaigns, no amount of red tags will stop them.

[Satofan44]

Everyone here is blame because many of these accounts don't get many tags or often they get useless neutral tags.

Red tagging shitposters is not the proper use of trust system.

You are supposed to red tag cheaters, which is the case here and in many others topics in this section.

"Red tagging shitposters is not the proper use of trust system" debate I won't get into here. You guys need to stop listening to theymos like he's your elementary school teacher and you've just stopped being toddlers 2 years ago.

And if managers wan't to hire them for their signature campaigns, no amount of red tags will stop them.

Tag the managers and flag the service that hired them, problem solved. Don't give unnecessary excuses they are a waste of bytes, all issues relating these situations are easily solvable.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Everyone here is blame because many of these accounts don't get many tags or often they get useless neutral tags.

Red tagging shitposters is not the proper use of trust system. And if managers wan't to hire them for their signature campaigns, no amount of red tags will stop them.

This dude was served those two neutral tags on his profile right, and it fits him just perfectly. If it weren't for that, I had a couple of questions to ask him, but Hushh!!!
We all know the number of new accounts that gets registered on a daily basis in here, and I don't know what makes him feel like they can't just create 50 of those for the same purpose. And hey, this was about "shit posters" (from my quote under Don dinero's sub quote), not cheaters..

[Satofan44]

Everyone here is blame because many of these accounts don't get many tags or often they get useless neutral tags.

Red tagging shitposters is not the proper use of trust system. And if managers wan't to hire them for their signature campaigns, no amount of red tags will stop them.

This dude was served those two neutral tags on his profile right, and it fits him just perfectly. If it weren't for that, I had a couple of questions to ask him, but Hushh!!!
We all know the number of new accounts that gets registered on a daily basis in here, and I don't know what makes him feel like they can't just create 50 of those for the same purpose.

It seems to me that someone feels threatened by my proposition, that already tells me that you are involved in this kind of farming. Perhaps someone will take a look.  

And hey, this was about "shit posters" (from my quote under Don dinero's sub quote), not cheaters..

No, it is not about that -- the quote comes from my post and has nothing to do with you or Don Dinero. Spamming liar. 
Anyone who is against measures that are against account farming should be tagged as well. The problem can be solved within a month. Don't waste time writing bullshit excuses or doing roundabout ad hominems.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

You guys need to stop listening to theymos like he's your elementary school teacher and you've just stopped being toddlers 2 years ago.

Well, he is the forum owner and the creator of the trust system, so I do listen to him.

Anyone who is against measures that are against account farming should be tagged as well.

I think no honest forum member is against that, but not the way you propose.

It seems that you take differences of opinion on this matter very personally, and I am not going to get into pointless arguments. Feel free to investigate whether I have other accounts or tag me if you think I am against account farming.

[Satofan44]

You guys need to stop listening to theymos like he's your elementary school teacher and you've just stopped being toddlers 2 years ago.

Well, he is the forum owner and the creator of the trust system, so I do listen to him.

For the forum rules that is fine, for the rest it is not. Theymos is often wrong on many things and with this allegedly "decentralized" trust system you can do whatever you want. It is time to grow up, most of you are still authority appealing toddlers. Which is just a big sad irony given that this forum is about Bitcoin. 

I think no honest forum member is against that, but not the way you propose.

Measures that do not work are not worth writing about, they only serve to stroke the ego of the Dunning-Kruger idiot that proposed them.

Feel free to investigate whether I have other accounts or tag me if you think I am against account farming.

Your reputation is not good on this topic anyway, but I will not waste my time investigating you. You recently wanted to help account farmers with using AI to post translations. Coincidences I guess.  

[dkbit98]

The question is whether it’s even in the forum’s best interest to somehow magically remove all spammers and alt account farms, given the ever decreasing activity.

It's better to have real activity than more fake activity.
To remove ALL spammers and altaccounts is very hard if not impossible, but that doesn't mean we should just give up and let them do whatever they want.

There's actually no forum rule against having multiple accounts. Even some moderators have alternate accounts and have joined different campaigns using them. The issue only comes in when those accounts join the same campaign, that's generally considered cheating, which makes it a violation of the campaign's own rules, thus they deserved negative tag.

There is also an issue if you are sending merits to your altaccount, or if you are adding your altaccount to trust list with positive feedback.
Several forum members have been caught doing that in the past, so it's not conspiracy theory anymore.

Usually, you cannot have more than one account on a centralized exchange that uses KYC.  Its against their rules.

You can if you use documents of your family members, cousins, friends, grandparents, etc.
And some centralized exchanges still allow customers to use them without strict kyc.

[nutildah]

The question is whether it’s even in the forum’s best interest to somehow magically remove all spammers and alt account farms, given the ever decreasing activity.

It's better to have real activity than more fake activity.
To remove ALL spammers and altaccounts is very hard if not impossible, but that doesn't mean we should just give up and let them do whatever they want.

The real reason why activity is decreasing is because legitimate members are leaving the forum. Some are probably frustrated at the idea of having to compete for open campaign spots with hordes of alt accounts, but many probably leave because the signal-to-noise ratio is too low, which is also largely caused by verbally promiscuous alt accounts, who type not to be read but to occupy digital space on which their signature can sit.

If you forced a lot of multi-accounters to go back and read their own posts, they'd probably be like fuck no, I ain't doing that.

So yes trying to maintain some kind of standard of post quality is a worthwhile endeavor because people would be more likely to stay here if it isn't such a spam fest. It seems like a losing battle but its still worth fighting.

Anyone who is against measures that are against account farming should be tagged as well. The problem can be solved within a month. Don't waste time writing bullshit excuses or doing roundabout ad hominems.

I appreciate your deep knowledge of the technical underpinnings of bitcoin and the fact that you can give meaningful perspectives on complex topics that relate to that subject. I also appreciate your enthusiasm for making the forum a cleaner, better place, even if it means an all out war on account farmers... I can get behind that. But overuse of the red tag leads to a lessening in the value of a red tag across the board. Already some managers don't care if their members have reds if they are left by certain accounts, or for certain reasons.

There are some campaign managers that are at the other end of the spectrum and go out of their way to avoid enrolling alt accounts, and to them, I give thanks. Some of us really do appreciate it.

The most common type of complaint I get via PM is could I please remove a neutral... Its not even a red, just a neutral, but it makes it clear that this account belongs to a farm. So anyway the point is neutrals can be just as effective as reds, under the right circumstances.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[Satofan44]

Anyone who is against measures that are against account farming should be tagged as well. The problem can be solved within a month. Don't waste time writing bullshit excuses or doing roundabout ad hominems.

I appreciate your deep knowledge of the technical underpinnings of bitcoin and the fact that you can give meaningful perspectives on complex topics that relate to that subject. I also appreciate your enthusiasm for making the forum a cleaner, better place, even if it means an all out war on account farmers... I can get behind that. But overuse of the red tag leads to a lessening in the value of a red tag across the board. Already some managers don't care if their members have reds if they are left by certain accounts, or for certain reasons.

There are some campaign managers that are at the other end of the spectrum and go out of their way to avoid enrolling alt accounts, and to them, I give thanks. Some of us really do appreciate it.

Thanks for the genuine reply, you are one of the few users that I needn't doubt at all which makes things easier. If managers and services are getting a free pass for enrolling scammy/shady/hacked accounts and you believe that overuse of red tags would diminish their values, then what is your proposed solution? This would at least be an attempt at doing something, even if it would fail (according to you).

I believe in experimental iteration, that is actually why we have Bitcoin too. Since I have joined here not even the tiniest step has been done to combat a problem that seems to be bigger with each day that I spend here.

The most common type of complaint I get via PM is could I please remove a neutral... Its not even a red, just a neutral, but it makes it clear that this account belongs to a farm. So anyway the point is neutrals can be just as effective as reds, under the right circumstances.

Such managers deserve a reward, whoever they are.  
I made a small analysis of one source of the issue here. I should add a disclaimer though, any changes that push toward higher quality posts will disproportionately benefit me (whether through campaign structure changes, red tags or otherwise). That itself doesn't diminish the value of the ideas though.

[nutildah]

If managers and services are getting a free pass for enrolling scammy/shady/hacked accounts and you believe that overuse of red tags would diminish their values, then what is your proposed solution? This would at least be an attempt at doing something, even if it would fail (according to you).

Yes. Well, this is the real question. In all fairness I think it would be beneficial to hear from all campaign managers on the issue as there seems to be a wide difference in takes among them when it comes to the issue of employing accounts that are alts, purchased, or hacked. I think on one hand a manager would want sufficient proof of connection, and I know they don't always see things like I see them.

Like for me, the recently active donator account from 2011 that changed its name and parades around as a fake OG -- that was probably the first account I ever red tagged for being a bought account, and there's not 100% solid proof it was bought, either. However, the changing in English fluency, changing in subjects of interest, making up stories about being a miner, and shitposting in well-known merit whoring threads in my mind is enough to know beyond a doubt this account no longer belongs to its original owner.

Campaign managers don't have the time to investigate the past of everyone they accept, I understand this, but if your campaign endorses dishonest behavior by continuing to employ accounts that belong to cheaters or were stolen, I don't think its an overall good for the forum, and these managers don't have Bitcointalk's interest at heart.

[PX-Z]

There's actually no forum rule against having multiple accounts. Even some moderators have alternate accounts and have joined different campaigns using them. The issue only comes in when those accounts join the same campaign, that's generally considered cheating, which makes it a violation of the campaign's own rules, thus they deserved negative tag.

There is also an issue if you are sending merits to your altaccount, or if you are adding your altaccount to trust list with positive feedback.
Several forum members have been caught doing that in the past, so it's not conspiracy theory anymore.

That DT thing is really a big political issue in the past, politically motivated groups attacking X and Y. It's like you're something if you are part of the DT1 and DT2. Until theymos change it, so far there's no same thing like those before today.

[DYING_S0UL]

Well this is the latest update from altcoinstalk admin regarding these two user,

bitterguy28, peter0425 there is a link ,
Baofeng has not been active since these 2 started posting, thus not possible to establish link

can't move to zoom1 unless they are wearing both signatures , because they would be breaking a rule

[Rikafip]

The real reason why activity is decreasing is because legitimate members are leaving the forum. Some are probably frustrated at the idea of having to compete for open campaign spots with hordes of alt accounts, but many probably leave because the signal-to-noise ratio is too low, which is also largely caused by verbally promiscuous alt accounts, who type not to be read but to occupy digital space on which their signature can sit.

I would agree that a bad signal to noise ratio is the main cause of decreased forum activity if I didn’t see exactly the same thing happening on every other forum I’m currently active on. We all know that forums aren’t as popular as they used to be, and we are seeing the results: old members leave while there aren't enough new ones to replace them as potential new members rather choose some other platforms like Twitter etc.

Sure, some members do leave, annoyed by all the shitposters, but I don’t think that number is significant or among the main reasons for the current state of bitcointalk.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

You recently wanted to help account farmers with using AI to post translations. Coincidences I guess.  

What is no coincidence is that you have the comprehension skills of an amoeba when it comes to things that do not suit your agenda. And what is also no coincidence either is that you are in no position to lecture anyone on how to use the trust system, as the facts speak for themselves. If you think there is something wrong with that thread, you can report it and/or tag me for it.