Blanket ban on signature campaigns, what it'd yield? Let's discuss

[LoyceV]

Honestly, I wish I could overthrown theymos, do a Bukele and start banning people all around. I feel like theymos/mods here are too lenient to spamming, like a judiciary system that allows criminals to keep commiting crimes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying mods are useless or that they do a bad job, or that it's their fault that they don't nuke everyone. I'm just saying that I would be a ruthless dictator.

My first impression: I'd love it!
But: then I realized every other forum on the planet does that already, and yet, I'm posting here, not elsewhere. So this place must be doing something right (for me) too

Like, why allow the Bitcoin Discussion board to be a megaspam fest?

Agreed. I've said it before: Bitcoin Discussion should be one of the most interesting boards on the forum, but I can't even get myself to read it now.

[FinneysTrueVision]

Rather than punishing the entire forum for the actions of the worst users, which I believe Theymos has ruled out previously, you could instead find some middle ground and take a more targeted approach. For the most part, spammers tend to be predictable and follow similar patterns.

I'm still thinking about ways to resolve this issue, possibly involving rejiggering how merit works.

Reworking the merit system is long overdue, and would make a significant difference. Perhaps someone could develop a scoring system that could determine how many smerits are allocated to sources. This would lead to questionable merit sources having their smerits reduced.

It is complete madness that spammers are able to rank up so easily just by talking about Chamby tokens and doing push ups. Stricter guidelines around campaigns and spamming are also definitely necessary so these farmers don’t go on to join campaigns with half a dozen or more alt accounts.

[stompix]

Cons:
— Significant drop is traffic. 

Significant? Does that include 95%? 

I'm not even joking, I do a few reports nowadays, but I do report full topics, and some of them get moved from the gambling section to Politics and Society, the moment it moves that's the perfect example of how a topic dies, from 20 posts in an hour to zero in a day!  Why? Of course, because the P&S board is not counted for payouts.

Honestly, I wish I could overthrown theymos, do a Bukele and start banning people all around. I feel like theymos/mods here are too lenient to spamming, like a judiciary system that allows criminals to keep commiting crimes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying mods are useless or that they do a bad job, or that it's their fault that they don't nuke everyone. I'm just saying that I would be a ruthless dictator.

I wonder if you would be as ruthless as I would!
In my case, I would open each user's post history and just look at the posts, are they all 3/4 lines of text or the same length over the last two pages like a broken xerox machine? I would not even read them, instant ban!

[nutildah]

OP forgot to mention that most accounts still here after the campaign ban would be posting because they actually wanted to... they actually had something to say or wanted to contribute out of their own free will.

I'm personally to the point where I'm OK with less traffic and higher quality discussions.

Seeing as how the forum has the funds to continue operation for an infinite amount of time, it doesn't actually need traffic, or anything. As I like to say all it needs to do is keep satoshi's posts accessible to the public, as they were written. Everything else is a bonus.

I think most of the community are too the point where enough is enough, its quite tedious to read the same sort of hashed together response just because they want a payment.

The other day I got a PM asking me to remove a neutral trust (happens somewhat regularly). Part of this person's reasoning was I should forgive them because they have 7 kids.

This was a low-rank account that had never been accepted to a sig campaign. Yet they were placing all their hopes and dreams on getting that sweet sig money (which is not a living these days unless you're a multi-accounter).

Meanwhile, they had been specifically using AI to make their posts less readable and in principle less detectable, but it backfired spectacularly.

So this is the kind of behavior the system is currently encouraging...

If we really wanted to crack down and become real strict in terms of moderation, I think over 80% of signature campaign participates would have enough posts removed per week, that they wouldn't earn the minimum thresholds to get paid and stay in the campaign, which is saying a lot. Probably leading to more overall bans.

I'm all for it, let me know if I can help.

[NotATether]

Signature campaigns aren't the only way to earn incentives on this forum. Also consider the potential for backlink, ANN thread visibility campaigns, etc. (remember how 1xbet did this in the past?). If the pay was comparable, everyone would still farm alts. I don't think spam will ever disappear completely; it will likely be more concentrated on boards that are allowed to carry specific brands.

Exactly. This will just drive away normal users, while the scoundrels and scheming marketers for scam platforms like 1xBit find creative ways to circumvent the restrictions because they have nothing to lose by being banned here. (By the way, have you guys noticed the explosion of 1xbet ads during the World Cup?)

[Don Pedro Dinero]

This is really funny. Do people actually shit post for entertainment purposes?lol
Who are those being entertained with shit posting? I admire your good play with words, it makes reading interesting.

Are you only on this forum?  Of course, people shitpost for fun, without being paid. See this forum for example:

https://forocoches.com/foro/

It is the largest forum in the Spanish-speaking world. The main section 'General' is worse than Bitcoin Discussion here. People shitpost, post one-liners, AI usage is allowed even if you don't quote it or reference it, and people post there just for fun or entertainment. They don't wear signatures, even less paid ones.

[NotATether]

It is the largest forum in the Spanish-speaking world. The main section 'General' is worse than Bitcoin Discussion here. People shitpost, post one-liners, AI usage is allowed even if you don't quote it or reference it, and people post there just for fun or entertainment. They don't wear signatures, even less paid ones.

A lot of people will remember CryptoTalk.org. It's dead now, but the quality of discussion there was genuinely abysmal. It may have something to do with the fact that the entire forum was treated like a signature campaign.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

A lot of people will remember CryptoTalk.org. It's dead now, but the quality of discussion there was genuinely abysmal.

I don’t remember it; I don’t think I knew it at the time, but that doesn’t surprise me – the higher the ‘quality’ of a forum, the less traffic it has. A forum with little traffic but high quality is something else entirely; it’s not really a forum, but rather a modern-day version of the Viennese coffee houses, not intended for general audiences, for the masses, but only for the modern-day equivalents of Freud, Schnitzler and others. It’s an exclusive place, not for everyone.

If any of you would like a site like that, you could set up elitebitcointalk.org and see how it goes.

[Vod]

I'm personally to the point where I'm OK with less traffic and higher quality discussions. I think most of the community are too the point where enough is enough, its quite tedious to read the same sort of hashed together response just because they want a payment. Seriously, its annoying. Some days it feels like the same type of responses going around in your head. I feel for those that might have OCD and get triggered by things being repeated, since there's a ton of that around here.

I considered this community my home for the first few years.  I tried to start conversations on topics I found interesting, and sometimes it worked.  But once signature campaigns introduced new methods of income (manager, poster) and an informal trust requirement, that marked the end.  Every petty trust issue become a forum war for the best campaigns.

We been bombarded from the top 1% on this forum about the incredible money to be made, and the stupidity of not making as many posts as possible.    Now if I post a topic of interest, I will get many replies - but all to my original post.   Not a single person will read the thread because that is more time they would be here instead of wherever.  

Removing signature campaigns will improve conversation, but in the same way removing alcohol from a bar would.  There will be a lot of intelligent conversations between the bartenders and staff - because no one else will be there.  :/

A lot of people will remember CryptoTalk.org. It's dead now, but the quality of discussion there was genuinely abysmal. It may have something to do with the fact that the entire forum was treated like a signature campaign.

Great point!   They paid per post and the result was not surprising to anyone.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Now, in some local sections, the forum is perceived as a place to earn money, and as nutildah said, it is simply not possible to feed a family, all seven children, by "working" from one account. Reading such PMs, everything comes out, even without searching for alts. Once the same topic was raised, a low-ranking participant answered the question of what you would do if the company's signatures on the forum stopped, quite frankly stating that he would have nights in which he could sleep and there would be personal time.

I think everyone understood what it was all about and the amount of time and accounts that some users have available. But publishing posts around the clock, it is obvious that people will write nonsense, especially if people are not strong in knowledge.

There is a solution that will make it very difficult to create alternative accounts, using some kind of fraud protection system.. One device, one IP, and a bunch of trackers, which are also used by casinos to identify cheaters.

But yes, the forum pursues freedom, and it, as a consequence, allows everything that these fathers, the breadwinners of families, do.

[m2017]

The points have been raised hither and thither on random threads, but I'd like to bring same in one thread.

Before raising such a question for discussion, OP should get rid of his signature and avatar.

And in my opinion, this discussion is pointless, as the forum administration hasn't even discussed banning signatures (though I understand that this would lead to the forum's demise, as this communication format is already "technically" outdated and an "echo" of the past. How many "live" forums do you know of on the internet?).

Pros:

— No multi-accounting since there will be no incentive to do so. But, people may still have separate ones for: mobiles, desktop, etc.

I can't estimate the scale of this problem, but do you really think it's a universal forum-wide issue? And how is that bad? More accounts mean more discussions on the forum (even if just with yourself). Isn't that right?

— Less spam, since again there will no incentive to do so. Less because I am pretty sure, some may still shitpost for entertainment purposes.

Again, do you really think signature campaigns generate spam? Campaign managers often impose strict quality standards on posts, so I consider this a myth, as most signature campaign participants will engage in constructive discussion.

— Stable/genuine distribution of merits since accounts possibly won't be pushed to rank up in local boards.

Haven't you already reached the maximum rank to whine about fair distribution of merit and rank increases? Only if someone doesn't have multiple accounts that want to increase their rank.

Cons:

— Significant drop is traffic.

You're underestimating the scale, as this will lead to the "death" of the forum (probably not immediately, but with a delay). I imagine the forum will turn into a bitcoin museum, where people will occasionally come to look at old posts, but there will be very little real-time activity.

[Charcol]

Now, in some local sections, the forum is perceived as a place to earn money, and as nutildah said, it is simply not possible to feed a family, all seven children, by "working" from one account. Reading such PMs, everything comes out, even without searching for alts. Once the same topic was raised, a low-ranking participant answered the question of what you would do if the company's signatures on the forum stopped, quite frankly stating that he would have nights in which he could sleep and there would be personal time.

I think everyone understood what it was all about and the amount of time and accounts that some users have available. But publishing posts around the clock, it is obvious that people will write nonsense, especially if people are not strong in knowledge.

There is a solution that will make it very difficult to create alternative accounts, using some kind of fraud protection system.. One device, one IP, and a bunch of trackers, which are also used by casinos to identify cheaters.

But yes, the forum pursues freedom, and it, as a consequence, allows everything that these fathers, the breadwinners of families, do.

This is exactly what is happening now. There is nothing in some people's posts. They are just fulfilling the requirements to get money from the campaign and nothing else. If you check the accounts of all these people, you will understand that they are posting the minimum number of posts according to the campaign rules and are moving to alternative accounts. I have seen a situation where some users start farming 100-150 merits among themselves in just 2 months before joining the campaign. They start giving merit to each other. In this way, they eventually participate in some kind of campaign. But the problem appears when after participating in the campaign, they can no longer earn merit on their own. If you look at their merit lists, you will understand that this is part of a huge farm. Although I am not at all expert in these matters, I can clearly understand their business.

[Betwrong]

~
Cons:

— Significant drop is traffic.

Off you go.

I personally think, no forum should be afraid of multi-accounting and spamming if it wants the more traffic the better. As far as I know, making such amounts of money by just posting is a unique feature of bitcointalk and losing it by banning signature campaigns would be a big mistake. I know that for high-income countries, this money is nothing, yet it helps many people in other parts of the world survive.

[libert19]

...

Yeah, I feel if there's a sort of poll where there's more people in support of a pause, it could push Theymos to try it out but the truth is, there are still good posters who drop good content irrespective of signature campaigns or not.

As I said earlier, number of spammers spamming due to signature campaigns outweighs the posters who post good content.

Add this to the pros;

- Less posts bemoaning the drought of merit flow because there'd be no need to be in a hurry to rank up, eh?

That's a good one.

Also, my name was a product of a dare. Too bad that the forum can't easily change names like that. 

Dare to choose forum username? And Why would anybody want to change it?

Perhaps question should be why does spam exist in the first place? Simple, not everyone has the technical know how of cryptocurrecies, and is simply new playing ground for most.. and unfortunately to get to speed of how this ecosystem works people need to ask questions and sometimes they come out sounding stup*d .

That's not spam and this reminds me of Jerry0.

Btw if forum traffic can be analyzed, I think it could reveal a lot of why certain things happen here on the forum..

WDYM?

Cons:
— Significant drop is traffic. 

Significant? Does that include 95%? 

Yes.

The points have been raised hither and thither on random threads, but I'd like to bring same in one thread.

Before raising such a question for discussion, OP should get rid of his signature and avatar.

It took a while to encounter this comment. And no, I won't. Do you not know how rare is it for somebody to hire me, and you tell me to remove it!? How dare you, do you not care for my la familia? Do you want my children to starve? How sadist of you? Mods pls ban this sadist.

And in my opinion, this discussion is pointless, as the forum administration hasn't even discussed banning signatures

Did you miss this? And I am pretty sure there ought to me more than this.

Ideas for improving post quality?
Signature advertisers: suggestions?

How many "live" forums do you know of on the internet?).

Well, I have been on several, and I don't think any is/was as lively as this one.

Pros:

— No multi-accounting since there will be no incentive to do so. But, people may still have separate ones for: mobiles, desktop, etc.

I can't estimate the scale of this problem, but do you really think it's a universal forum-wide issue? And how is that bad? More accounts mean more discussions on the forum (even if just with yourself). Isn't that right?

No. Discussions with yourself is not right, and pretending to discuss with yourself is even worse.

— Less spam, since again there will no incentive to do so. Less because I am pretty sure, some may still shitpost for entertainment purposes.

Again, do you really think signature campaigns generate spam?

Yes they do.

Campaign managers often impose strict quality standards on posts, so I consider this a myth, as most signature campaign participants will engage in constructive discussion.

It's not myth, and I don't think they impose strict quality standards, to an extent? Sure.

— Stable/genuine distribution of merits since accounts possibly won't be pushed to rank up in local boards.

Haven't you already reached the maximum rank to whine about fair distribution of merit and rank increases? Only if someone doesn't have multiple accounts that want to increase their rank.

It's not whining. It's a thing in local boards where users reach hero/leggy rank fast and then their merit receiving rate gets stagnant, so you know what's up. As for me, I don't even post in my local board that often and I have earned my each peanut of merit fair and square though when I was close to reaching leggy I was given 9 merits by local board member on a generic post. I must also mention Nutildah's merit scholarship of 100 merits as well, and Ratimov — who was generous with me and with others as well... so I have heard — gone but not forgotten.

(oh shit, I got too defensive for my peanuts)

...

I have seen a situation where some users start farming 100-150 merits among themselves in just 2 months before joining the campaign. They start giving merit to each other. In this way, they eventually participate in some kind of campaign.

This is why BM's must only pay attention to post quality (albeit, I accept then AI is there) and nothing else that can be manipulated.

[Lucius]

@Welsh, what do you think about the proposal to remove the signature option for all but Hero/Legendary members at least temporarily? Not that all members of that rank are super posters, but my opinion is that most of those sig spammers are in the lower ranks.

Honestly, kind of reluctant. I'd prefer broader restrictions rather than targeting lower ranked users. I think this forum can be daunting, intimidating and outright hostile to users who are newer already.

My example given earlier was a hero member for example. I personally think that there's a ton of heros and legendary users who are posting crap content for the sake of it. Maybe, I need to dedicate some time to reporting these users, collecting that data and then presenting it in a month or so publicly. Maybe, we could take a look at how many reported posts consisted of higher ranks vs lower ranks. Maybe then we'd have a better idea?
~snip~

You're right, there are a lot of hero/legendary members who are from the old era before merits and some haven't managed to collect even a few hundred merits from 2018 to today. It would probably be unfair to punish all the lower ranks, because there are good posters among them.

A selective approach would be much better, but it would require a lot of time and more forum members to work on it. Again, the question arises whether we can even define what a spammer is, given that people have different criteria for such things. If we're talking about members who are participants in sig campaigns (and I think they're the ones under discussion), then managers should be the first to notice the problematic ones and do something about them, right?

[Majestic-milf]

As I said earlier, number of spammers spamming due to signature campaigns outweighs the posters who post good content.

I believe this is something we experience everywhere. Only some places are quite different than some but as long as it's a social space where people come to share their thoughts and ideas, you'd find things like this. The Holy Book mentioned a situation where a farmer who plants crops discovered tares(weeds) amongst the wheat.

Dare to choose forum username? And Why would anybody want to change it?

Yeah, long story. Overtime I've come to see how weirdly unique it is so I decided to keep it.

[/quote]