Signature Ban Appeal and Q&A : appeal your sigban here

[Rikafip]

But I have a little question about the points to focus on in the violations that are made, I think this should be clearer, such as if Bob violate only one of all that is prohibited, then how long the punishment will be given, we need clearer criteria about any law in the forum, or maybe it depends on the subjectivity of the assessor?

How about not doing any of those things, and that way not having to worry about getting signature ban?

So far I've seen 4 banned members:

Why I am not surprised that 3/4 are Stake members. 


Anyway, I am glad that theymos decided to try something new to fight the spam, and most importantly he couldn't chose the better person to do it.

[CucakRowo]

Anyway, I am glad that theymos decided to try something new to fight the spam, and most importantly he couldn't chose the better person to do it.

Critical questions, but 10,346 earned merit speak for themselve. At this point, he really has nothing left to gain or lose from forum. Yeah, he may come across as a bit harsh at times, but there's no denying the value of his contributions.

So far I've seen 4 banned members:

I think they were banned 4-5 days ago. Usually, shitposters stop posting the moment their signature gets banned, but all 4 of them are still posting! If they would be human, they'd realize their signature is gone. Are they all bots?

They probably don't even realize they've been banned yet.
Hopefully, the spammers will start filing their appeal once they get kicked out of their signature campaign.

[promise444c5]

Nice to have this new forum update..
So are you the only one in charge of that for now? Or there’s possibility of adding more in future?

I’m also in support of having a log as mentioned by welsh.. something like a separate log just like the seclog.. I can also add it to banned users identifier Userscript, with an appropriate label indicating sig ban profiles.

Would like to call loyce.club again if they scrape it.

[LoyceV]

Would like to call loyce.club again if they scrape it.

As long as there's no log, the only way to scrape signature bans would be by checking all profiles on a regular basis. I'll skip this one for now.

Update: https://bpip.org/TempBans exists!

[promise444c5]

I'll skip this one for now.

Even with a provided log?

[fuguebtc]

Substandard posting habits considered in the decision to issue the ban include at least two of the following:

- Unoriginal or low effort replies, including inappropriate use of AI content.

I have never used AI to generate my posts. On average, I make only 3-4 post within a 24-hour period because I prefer to focus on quality rather than quantity.

- Repetitive, previously-expressed or generic comments that don’t add value or encourage conversation.

This might occasionally happen in sports-related threads. Those threads move very fast, and it's simply not possible to read every single post because many users write long replies. Even then, I usually make only 2-3 posts per day in sports threads. Look through my posts in non-sports section, I challenge you to find repetitive or previously expressed comments there.

- Consistent burst posting (regularly writing posts less than 10 minutes apart).

I only post when I have some free time. Since I make just 3-4 posts per day, there is hardly any opportunity for burst posting.

- Off‑topic posting or shallow engagement (doesn't provide insight, analysis or perspective).

I have never intentionally posted off-topic. I take my time and try to ensure that every post is relevant to the discussion.

- Posting in principle for signature campaign payment and not for the sake of contributing actual discussion.

If my goal were simply to earn from signature campaign, I could easily make 70+ posts per week. There are many users who make 100+ posts weekly to maximize their campaign earnings. I have never had that intention.

fuguebtc - Stake campaign
I tagged them so they get notified about this thread and can give their comments if they want.

And thank you for quoting me, I was not aware of this thread.

If you believe your signature ban is incorrect or you've made some improvement to your posting habits, please feel free to explain your case below.

Anyway, I completely respect your decision, nutildah.

Yes I have made plenty of mistake in past. I used to work on ANN thread bumping and I was part of a group that was hired by different project to keep their ANN thread active. Because of that I made lot of spam post on forum I won't deny it.

But that was a long time ago, back when ICOs and IEOs were booming and forum was flooded with those project.

Since then, I have changed the way I post significantly. These days I am much more selective and put real thought into what I write. If I were still spamming then I could easily make over 100 post per week, since I used to get paid for making 70+ post. But I honestly cannot remember last time I even came close to that. Most week, I make around 25 to 30 post and on an average day maybe 3 or 4.

So if I am still being labeled as spammer based on what I do nowadays, I do not think that's a fair assessment.

I know nutildah does not like me for various reason, I have seen he mentioned my name many times on reputation board. But I hope personal feeling aren't influencing the way I'm being judged.

Since theymos entrusted you with this responsibility, I believe he did so because he trusted your judgment. You may have concern about my posting habit but I believe enforcement should primarily target users who genuinely abuse the forum. For example, those who use AI-generated content or spam 100+ low-quality posts every week solely for campaign payments.

I respectfully ask that you re examine my case from a neutral perspective and make your decision based on my overall posting history rather than assumption.

[PrivacyG]

This will be an interesting experiment.  Do you decide on your own analysis whether someone should have their signature banned?

[AakZaki]

Based on their signatures (1, 2, 3, 4), I think they were banned 4-5 days ago. Usually, shitposters stop posting the moment their signature gets banned, but all 4 of them are still posting! If they would be human, they'd realize their signature is gone.

I think that's part of the strategy, they hope the campaign manager doesn't realize that.
It might be nice if any of their signatures were banned, we need to mention the name of the campaign manager as well to let the manager know.

Are they all bots?

To be more precise, "account farms" who are always looking for superficial discussions and end up making posts that don't even have any value.

2/4 of them a few months ago had a history of merit distribution on cheater accounts, but I haven't found any linked addresses among them.
In fact, I once encouraged them to be active in the technical section of my local, but they avoided it and never made a post in that section.

Yeah.. I think that's how account farms create posts, so that in the end they can create as many junk posts as they want and distribute the posts evenly for other accounts.

[LTU_btc]

Very interesting and probably something what was needed. Yes, we will see many members crying that they didn't deserved to get signature banned, but it's normal thing. It's appeal topic, but since everyone is discussing here, I also have few questions. If it's not secret, could you give us more details you you got right to ban signatures? You're alone who have such right or there is more members who can do this?

[TokenTikas]

If you believe your signature ban is incorrect or you've made some improvement to your posting habits, please feel free to explain your case below.

This may sound or seem difficult to accept for many people, going through this process will improve the quality of every poster, they will not be able to make random posts. Users' posts will become valuable, and they will not be able to meet the requirements just by making any kind of post whenever they want. Everyone will always pay attention to the quality of their posts and make quality posts. But the thing to see here is how the campaign managers look at this matter. If they give importance to this, then maybe it will become acceptable.

[PrivacyG]

If it's not secret, could you give us more details you you got right to ban signatures? You're alone who have such right or there is more members who can do this?

Reading so many questions about this and asking one myself, it feels like this is the beginning of yet another Bitcoin Talk Gang!  Probably the most feared even!

-----

If they give importance to this, then maybe it will become acceptable.

Managers not giving importance to an attempt at cleaning up the B S off Bitcoin Talk actually blurs their own reputation or image.  In fact.  At this point it will be interesting because if we get a log of banned signatures we will be able to see which of the managers is going to have the least participants banned.  It will outline the best of them very quickly and even help the most serious ones build an even stronger reputation.

[nutildah]

I respectfully ask that you re examine my case from a neutral perspective and make your decision based on my overall posting history rather than assumption.

The decision was based on your overall posting history. The merit system was introduced in January 2018. Since that time you've written 6,387 posts yet only managed to acquire 65 merits. That's about 1 merit for every 98 posts. Can I ask you why do you think that is?

[BitBakerr1]

Good one, I just hope the forum management and everyone involved in this project will take it very serious for a very long time, it will be very serious now but as time goes on those handling it may start getting tired, so I will advise more people to get into this and again we all should contribute by reposting members that are shit posting and that deserves to be given signature ban.
With this new forum development it will help put a lot of people in check and those who are shit posters will have no other option but to develop in there posting partner.
Good one OP I love this.

[fuguebtc]

The decision was based on your overall posting history. The merit system was introduced in January 2018. Since that time you've written 6,387 posts yet only managed to acquire 65 merits. That's about 1 merit for every 98 posts. Can I ask you why do you think that is?

That's because I'm not merit hunter.

These days people can earn 100+ merit even from a post about making pizza I don't mean to downplay their effort by saying that, sorry.
The reality is that many merit hunter have formed group that constantly feed each other merit. You don't have to look very far to see it. the recent situation involving summonerrk's group is good example. Even now, he still has over 100+ earned merits in the last 120 days.

On top of that, I don't post in any local board which naturally mean I earn far fewer merit than those who do with their alts farm

There are plenty of user with fewer earned merit than I have who still make 60+ post every week just to maximize their campaign earning
Meanwhile, I am being accused of spamming even though I only make 3 / 4 posts a day

[theymos]

Thanks to nutildah for helping out! Since they are easy to appeal and don't harm the user's ability to speak, sigbans are a good way of addressing users who don't have any single post which breaks the rules, but whose posts seem to contribute more noise than signal.

Note that I just now made a couple of adjustments:
 - Sigbans now also hide avatars, personal text, and website icons next to posts.
 - Sigbans are now listed in the modlog.

[[btc]]

- Sigbans now also hide avatars, personal text, and website icons next to posts.
- Sigbans are now listed in the modlog.

For a few members in the modlog, all of those are hidden when viewing their post in a thread or something, but the personal text and avatar are still visible when looking at the user's profile.

(I've been given the ability to issue signature bans).

This is cool of you to do! Happy hunting.

Is this thread only for appealing a sig ban or can we request you to look into members we feel deserve a ban? If it's the former only, are you going to make another thread where users can request accounts be looked into or would that be too much drama in your opinion?

Perhaps it's own dedicated thread, sort of like the AI report thread. Could also possibly wait a little and see if the AI report thread is a good enough resource on it's own, as I'm almost certain that the majority of users that have a signature ban in their forecast, are just LLM abusers anyway.

[nutildah]

That's because I'm not merit hunter.

You are definitely not a merit hunter, but I don't think that adequately explains it. Many accounts with lots of merits don't "hunt" merits. They just come naturally because the community appreciates their posts.

You're right that the value of merit is diluted when alt accounts and friends give it to each other, but it still has some value as a symbol of community appreciation, and your posts are among the most unappreciated on the entire forum.


For those wondering how it works, I will make the process of signature ban candidate selection a little clearer and more transparent in the next couple days.

[Satofan44]

Are you interested in submissions of users for review, here, in another thread or via PM? I mean you don't really need them right now, you can take a look at any section or in any campaign and you will find plenty of candidates to issue a ban to. I didn't want to drop a few hundred usernames if you are not looking for such input yet.

So far I've seen 4 banned members:

Why I am not surprised that 3/4 are Stake members. 

The Stake campaign is notorious for shitposting, more than 90% of its users are just posting completely useless and generic rubbish that is wrong most of the time. But you know how it works, you scratch the back of the manager and he keeps you inside. Business as usual. 

[nutildah]

Are you interested in submissions of users for review, here, in another thread or via PM? I mean you don't really need them right now, you can take a look at any section or in any campaign and you will find plenty of candidates to issue a ban to. I didn't want to drop a few hundred usernames if you are not looking for such input yet.

Thanks for your enthusiasm. I'm trying to find a way to do this as unbiased as possible, and even though there's a large potential backlog of candidates, its probably better if I do something closer to random sampling.

Its probably only fair that I disclose the method, to make things more transparent. It will take me a couple of days to put something together to show everybody.

[promise444c5]

 Do you decide on your own analysis whether someone should have their signature banned?

Here is likely one:

..overall posting history.

This case particularly seem to also include merit according to him .. But I think it fits more with filtering and not as a Determinant fmv .  It should get more clearer in the upcoming bans anyway.

Its probably only fair that I disclose the method, to make things more transparent. It will take me a couple of days to put something together to show everybody.

Will that include answers to the questions being asked on the thread so far, that does not relate to what method you’re using ?