👉Poll: Vote Update and Enforce Bitcointalk Official Rules or Keep the Wild West

[howardsentell]

🗳️ Poll: Vote Update and Enforce Bitcointalk Unofficial Rules or Keep the Wild West

Subject: New perspective on the "Wild West" – thoughts on Rules 2, 3, 7, and 8 BTC.

I know I’m posting this with a "New Full Member" tag. In Bitcointalk’s hierarchy, that usually means I should sit down, be quiet, and "pay my dues" before offering an opinion. I respect the history here. While I may be new to this forum, I’m not new to how communities work or the school of hard knocks. Fresh eyes may spot cracks in the foundation that the old guard has learned to step over. As I become a full member, I want to share my thoughts on the rules, especially the difference between what’s written and what really happens.

1. The "Selectively Enforced" Rules (2, 3, and 8 BTC. We have clear guidelines. Rule 2 says "no off-topic posts," Rule 3 forbids trolling, and Rule 8 draws a hard line at threats. Yet, in my short time here, I’ve seen threads derail into chaos where all three are broken repeatedly with no consequence. This sends a confusing message to new members: Are these rules, or just suggestions? If we want high-quality discussion, we can't enforce these rules only when it’s convenient or when a user is disliked. Consistency is the backbone of any respectable platform. If we have Rule 8, a death threat should mean a ban, not a debate.

2. The "Begging" Paradox (Rule 7 and Trust BTC. I think we have a blind spot here. Rule 7 is clear: "No begging." I agree; nobody wants the forum clogged with handouts. However, a gray area in the Trust system, especially in the Collectibles and Marketplace sections, creates a contradiction. I have seen legitimate buyers, including myself, purchase items, pay promptly, and receive no Trust feedback from the seller. When a buyer fulfills their obligation, positive Trust should not be a favor from the seller; it is simply a record of a successful transaction.

The "Wild West" vs. Standards. I know some of you prefer the "Wild West" approach: unregulated, raw, and chaotic. But there is a difference between freedom of speech and a lack of professional standards. If we want this forum to remain the top destination for Bitcoin discussion and commerce, we need to decide if the rules on the sidebar are laws or just decorations. I’m not here to start a revolution; I just want to share a perspective from someone who values order and equity.

What’s the members’ consensus? Is the lack of enforcement a feature or a bug?

My two sats. Thank You

[yahoo62278]

As a new full member, this is only an opinion: should the forum rules be regularly updated and consistently enforced? I have observed several instances in which members violate these rules without facing any consequences. Some long-standing members may argue that if I disagree with the rules, I should either establish my own forum or wait until I have accrued more experience before offering suggestions. However, I maintain that new members can contribute valuable perspectives that may be overlooked by those more familiar with the forum. While some may assert that I have not 'paid my dues,' I consider myself an older, experienced individual who has lived life in the school of hard knocks. I have repeatedly witnessed violations of Rules 2 (no off-topic posts), 3 (no trolling), and 8 (no threats of bodily harm or death). Furthermore, Rule 7 (no begging) lacks clarity, particularly regarding the expectation of receiving positive trust, for example, when you purchase $1000 in collectibles, and the seller does not reciprocate. Although I recognize that participation in the forum is voluntary. I welcome recommendations on any rules that are not currently enforced, that should be revised, or like the wild west.

If you see someone violating rule 2 report the post and give the reason why you reported it in the description. If the mods agree, they will delete the post in most cases. Witnessing it and doing nothing about it makes you just as guilty. Rule 3 I have never really seen enforced as it seems like the trolls run rampant at times and we just ignore them. With rule 8 report it if you see it and it is usually handled but don't be petty and take shit out of context if someone is just fucking around.

Your positive trust deal is easy to answer. Nowhere on this forum does it say that i you engage in a deal for $1 or $1000 that someone must leave you a positive trust. Guaranteeing you get a positive point only helps potential scammers figure out how to farm trust. If users want to give you positive trust that's their choice, but never expect it or ask someone to give it to you.

Should some rules be updated, yea probably.

[Kazkaz27]

As a new full member, this is only an opinion: should the forum rules be regularly updated and consistently enforced? I have observed several instances in which members violate these rules without facing any consequences. Some long-standing members may argue that if I disagree with the rules, I should either establish my own forum or wait until I have accrued more experience before offering suggestions. However, I maintain that new members can contribute valuable perspectives that may be overlooked by those more familiar with the forum. While some may assert that I have not 'paid my dues,' I consider myself an older, experienced individual who has lived life in the school of hard knocks. I have repeatedly witnessed violations of Rules 2 (no off-topic posts), 3 (no trolling), and 8 (no threats of bodily harm or death). Furthermore, Rule 7 (no begging) lacks clarity, particularly regarding the expectation of receiving positive trust, for example, when you purchase $1000 in collectibles, and the seller does not reciprocate. Although I recognize that participation in the forum is voluntary. I welcome recommendations on any rules that are not currently enforced, that should be revised, or like the wild west.

If you see someone violating rule 2 report the post and give the reason why you reported it in the description. If the mods agree, they will delete the post in most cases. Witnessing it and doing nothing about it makes you just as guilty. Rule 3 I have never really seen enforced as it seems like the trolls run rampant at times and we just ignore them. With rule 8 report it if you see it and it is usually handled but don't be petty and take shit out of context if someone is just fucking around.

Your positive trust deal is easy to answer. Nowhere on this forum does it say that i you engage in a deal for $1 or $1000 that someone must leave you a positive trust. Guaranteeing you get a positive point only helps potential scammers figure out how to farm trust. If users want to give you positive trust that's their choice, but never expect it or ask someone to give it to you.

Should some rules be updated, yea probably.

Now, this statement—“Should some rules be updated? Yeah, probably.”—is very important.

I’d like to hear from you, yahoo62278: What are your suggestions for updates?

[_act_]

I have repeatedly witnessed and reported violations of Rules 2 (no off-topic posts), 3 (no trolling), and 8 (no threats of bodily harm or death). Additionally, I find that Rule 7 (no begging) lacks clarity, particularly regarding the expectation of receiving positive trust when purchasing collectibles and the seller's failure to reciprocate that trust. Although I recognize that participation in the forum is voluntary, I welcome recommendations on any rules that are not currently enforced, should be revised, or should be like the wild west.

So you expect people not to violate the rules? Just like the off topic, did you report it and it was not deleted if it is a post, or moved to the right board or deletd if it is a topic?

Trolling is not what can be easily handled because of the freedom of speech that this forum allows.

No threat of bodily harm: If you see such post, just report it and it will be deleted. But just that what is an insult is not considered a threat. Some people consider it as threat but which is different.

Rule 7 has clarity, if you make a post about request for donation, the post will be deleted. Only people that are established might be pardoned because of the contributions they have made on this forum. The rule might not be for people that have contributed to this forum.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

VOTE Yes or No: Should the forum's official rules be updated, or The Wild West⁉️

If you see any rule needs to be changed, you can ask for change but need to listen to community opinion - including moderators - on it like most of them support the proposed change or against it, eventually you will need to get approval from forum admins.
If you are in a forum a long time enough, you would know that the forum rules have been updated many times so community voice has contributions for such updates.

By the way, let's see the following topic title is like Unofficial of official ...
Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ

Rule 7 has clarity, if you make a post about request for donation, the post will be deleted. Only people that are established might be pardoned because of the contributions they have made on this forum. The rule might not be for people that have contributed to this forum.

Since some dramas from donations, charity hosted by community, the forum no longer allow any user to post any topic with that purpose of asking of community charity or donation to any person for individual need.

[_act_]

Since some dramas from donations, charity hosted by community, the forum no longer allow any user to post any topic with that purpose of asking of community charity or donation to any person for individual need.

Where did you get this information from? It is not true. The forum will leave the donation alone if the person that created the thread is an established member. Only when it is deleted is if a newbie is asking for donation.

But you can make yourself clearer if you post the link but I know what I am saying and I still saw on one the reputation board last year in October or November created by a hero on anlegendary member.

[owlcatz]

Nice... I see you couldn't figure out how to make a simple actual poll for your yes/no question.  

[SatoPrincess]

I noticed you’re finding it difficult to create a poll for your question. If you look to the bottom right on your screen, you will find the option “add poll” as shown in the image below. As for question about posts going against the forum rules, I’d suggest you report those posts with comments on how they are in violation of the rules, and if they aren’t deleted by the mods, you can create a topic about it.

[howardsentell]

Nice... I see you couldn't figure out how to make a simple actual poll for your yes/no question.  

I have no idea why you think sacraicsm is helpful. Thank you for your consistent support and dedication to helping our members.

I noticed you’re finding it difficult to create a poll for your question. If you look to the bottom right on your screen, you will find the option “add poll” as shown in the image below. As for question about posts going against the forum rules, I’d suggest you report those posts with comments on how they are in violation of the rules, and if they aren’t deleted by the mods, you can create a topic about it.

Thanks for the suggestion.

[Xylber]

Maybe specific things like advertising a Mixer service are specific, but for everything else, just use common sense.

The only rule I don't like is:
18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.
but you can't control what people is doing with their accounts.

[POLL]VOTE Yes or No: Update Bitcointalks Unofficial Rules or Keep The Wild West!?

I know I’m posting this with a "New Full Member" tag. In Bitcointalk’s hierarchy, that usually means I should sit down, be quiet, and "pay my dues" before offering an opinion. I respect the history here.

Ignore them, I lost an account created in 2013, and with this account it looks like my opinion worth less than the opinion of some bots that flood the forum with non sense farming.

[nutildah]

Yeah I'm afraid we're gonna need a poll on this one as its unclear what you're asking...

I'm going to infer that Yes = Update Bitcointalks Unofficial Rules and No = Keep the Wild West.

In which case I vote "No." Its not really a wild west. There are plenty of rules in place -- as someone who has had over 130 posts deleted by moderators, you should have realized this by now.

As things stand, I feel the forum's moderation policies are pretty common sense. Once you stop fighting them you'll have more success with your interactions here.

[howardsentell]

Yeah I'm afraid we're gonna need a poll on this one as its unclear what you're asking...

I'm going to infer that Yes = Update Bitcointalks Unofficial Rules and No = Keep the Wild West.

In which case I vote "No." Its not really a wild west. There are plenty of rules in place -- as someone who has had over 130 posts deleted by moderators, you should have realized this by now.

As things stand, I feel the forum's moderation policies are pretty common sense. Once you stop fighting them you'll have more success with your interactions here.

Friendly advice: Clarity would be improved if ambiguous or figurative language were avoided, enabling members to better understand the content. Thank you for your consistent support and dedication to helping our members.

[FinneysTrueVision]

(Rule 7 and Trust BTC)
...
(Rule 7 BTC)

I don’t know why “BTC” is randomly inserted where it doesn’t make sense. The AI who wrote this must be glitching.


Rule 1 is about low quality posts and that is easily the most violated rule on this forum. There is a large degree of leniency and moderator discretion, so not everything is always going to be enforced as strictly as you might expect. That is how Theymos intends the forum to function, according to his statements.

The rule on begging is good and doesn’t need change. You won’t get in trouble for politely asking somebody to confirm publicly that your trade was successful. They shouldn’t feel obliged to use the trust system for this, they can just write a comment in one of your threads.

If we have Rule 8, a death threat should mean a ban, not a debate.

You’ve made many complaints but haven’t given specific examples where these rules were broken. As far as I know, threatening to kill someone isn’t tolerated. The only exceptions I have seen is when a statement is unserious or not literal.

[howardsentell]

(Rule 7 and Trust BTC)
...
(Rule 7 BTC)

I don’t know why “BTC” is randomly inserted where it doesn’t make sense. The AI who wrote this must be glitching.


Rule 1 is about low quality posts and that is easily the most violated rule on this forum. There is a large degree of leniency and moderator discretion, so not everything is always going to be enforced as strictly as you might expect. That is how Theymos intends the forum to function, according to his statements.

The rule on begging is good and doesn’t need change. You won’t get in trouble for politely asking somebody to confirm publicly that your trade was successful. They shouldn’t feel obliged to use the trust system for this, they can just write a comment in one of your threads.

If we have Rule 8, a death threat should mean a ban, not a debate.

You’ve made many complaints but haven’t given specific examples where these rules were broken. As far as I know, threatening to kill someone isn’t tolerated. The only exceptions I have seen is when a statement is unserious or not literal.

Could you clarify whether your comments regarding rule 1 and AI were intended as constructive feedback or could be interpreted as disparaging? If you want examples, read your post and the other comments.

I don’t know why “BTC” is randomly inserted where it doesn’t make sense. The AI who wrote this must be glitching.

Also, quoting your statement, you agree to.

As far as I know, threatening to kill someone isn’t tolerated. The only exceptions I have seen is when a statement is unserious or not literal.

[FinneysTrueVision]

Could you clarify whether your comments regarding rule 1 and AI was intended as constructive feedback or could be interpreted as disparaging?

I wasn’t trying to imply that your post was low quality. My comment about rule 1 was a general statement about something that is widely perceived as fact, which is that the forum is full of spammers. It wasn’t related to your use of AI, that’s why I used a line break to separate those comments.

With that said, I do think your post here and some other posts you’ve made sound like generic AI writing. It would be better if you could express your own thoughts, in your own words, instead of having AI do it for you.

[howardsentell]

Could you clarify whether your comments regarding rule 1 and AI was intended as constructive feedback or could be interpreted as disparaging?

I wasn’t trying to imply that your post was low quality. My comment about rule 1 was a general statement about something that is widely perceived as fact, which is that the forum is full of spammers. It wasn’t related to your use of AI, that’s why I used a line break to separate those comments.

With that said, I do think your post here and some other posts you’ve made sound like generic AI writing. It would be better if you could express your own thoughts, in your own words, instead of having AI do it for you.

You are using AI. It is embedded in the modern internet, working behind the scenes to process data, power search, and generate content. A friendly suggestion: abandon the internet and start writing letters.