Additional ideas to tackle spam on BTT

[cryptofrka]

I said I'd write a few words when I collect my thoughts a bit, so here goes.. Roast me

Sigbans are the latest hot topic - but overall, it's a continuous discussion about spam.
It's run rampant for a while, Gambling is probably most affected by it, considering I spend a lot of time there I'd like to toss a few alternative ideas for consideration.

Before I do that, I'd like to make some things clear so that they are not susceptible to interpretations:

• Everything I'm about to write is mostly about Gambling boards. I don't know what the situation is like elsewhere.
• I support bans, sigbans, account nukes - basically every legitimate action against users that are here just to leech, scam or benefit only themselves
• I don't support evaluating posts/users based on merits received, posting patterns or an individual feeling about a certain post's meaningfulness in a certain thread
• I do think we should not hide from the fact that writing posts on BTT is a job. Many senior users oppose the idea, yet many opened accounts on Altcointalks and started writing there as soon as it started getting paid
• I think we should strive to bring businesses to BTT and respect the work of those that work with clients. That being said, I think that, as a community, we are too lenient with some managers and that we can collectively do better

Ok, let's go to some suggestions on how to improve the situation:

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

Paid pools are the fuel of the Gambling boards. They help create a circular economy in which users pay to play, have fun and promote the business through interesting and organic conversations.
Separating these threads from the rest of the gambling boards would bring more visibility to them, be easier to find for potential sponsors, would help streamline conversations and make it easier for managers to check if their signature campaign wearers contribute in these conversations that are organic in nature.
I'd like to make these threads more visible, more relevant and nudge more people towards participating in them.
As a campaign manager looking to hire a member predominantly from the Gambling boards, there is where I'd look for members.
Hopefully, it would give these members a certain level of protections from sigbans - last member I saw getting banned is Strongkored, for a whole year, and from memory he participates in a lot of paid pools.
I'm not saying that paying for a pool should give you full protection, just that paid pools often have what you'd call 'low quality' posts if you look at them from the outside. It's banter, but it's organic and should not be punished. Believe me, these are the posts that are being read more often than a post of better quality in one of the threads opened specifically to fulfill quotas.

How does it tackle spam?
Logic says that people will either join organic conversations or remain in the other parts of the Gambling boards in which their posts carry less weight, are less relevant and will be easier to filter as spam.

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

Instead of us depending just on nutildah's judgment, why not have our own? There's already a 'report to moderator' tool available to us all. I think the first users on the sigban lists should be the ones whose posts are often reported and deleted and I think we should have a process that does it automatically. We can implement a simple formula that gives a bit of power and meaning to DT1 (and maybe DT2) users that says something like - if 5% of your posts in the last 30 days are successfully reported by multiple DT1 members, you automatically receive a 1-month sigban. Repeated offences increase the length of future bans.

People generally stopped reporting bad/repeating posts because many remained unhandled. This would probably require either more mods or some sort of responsibility rebalancing - but if we would use the whole DT1 as a gauge of what kind of content we want to see, it would carry more weight than a voice of a single person does. I'm not saying nutildah should be fully stripped of his duties - there were some things that I disagreed with and still disagree with but I will also be the first one to admit that some progress was achieved after the sigbans started. We do have to realize though that the spam reduced because most of banned users were not replaced - if they were, the situation would probably be as bad as it was before the bans started.

How does it tackle spam?
The most trusted part of the community flags the content they do not wish to see. Moderators evaluate it and the users that spammed the forum are sigbanned automatically.
This would also give the community a sense of purpose, meaningfulness and a desire to work towards making this place better.

3. Demand more from campaign managers

It is tough to get a client, sell him the idea and keep him happy. Considering it's basically a job - we all want to earn as much as possible from it.
That being said, the criteria of some managers has dropped a lot (or was always low - not really sure). I'm not here to point fingers or name names, but simply to say that I'd like to see more effort from all of us while we conduct business on Bitcointalk.
Primarily I'm talking about short-term (often unescrowed) sig campaigns that have literally no value for the client, for the forum or for anybody other than the manager taking the fee. There should be a way to hold us to higher standards and to easily see in what standing the managers currently are. We can't use Trust ratings - for campaign managers they are skewed, often openly asked for and given in hope that the members that gave them will get another sig gig down the road.

A few ideas on 'how to demand more':

• Have an overview of the campaigns that create the most spam (and have the most users sigbanned/most posts successfully reported as spam)
• Block a spot in the campaign for a certain period (2-4 weeks) from which a user was sigbanned, make it visible
• Have an 'average campaign duration' or a similar metric for managers
• (Briefly) sigban companies whose campaigns are badly managed, nudging them to change campaign managers

How does it tackle spam?
Low paying test campaigns are responsible for a lot of spam, and what's even worse - these companies often don't know that they are paying money to be a net negative for the forum. By taking a more holistic approach and by building a longer-term relationship with the clients the campaigns would attract better members and we'd also avoid a lot of scams that are looking for a quick money grab by running short-term sig campaigns.

4. Reward the cleanest campaigns

Let's consider 'taxing' every sig campaign by a small amount, something totally negligible - 1-2% of total budget, up to 200$ max monthly. We keep it escrowed, at the end of the month we statistically evaluate what the cleanest campaign was and we simply pay that money to all members of that campaign equally.
For companies it would be a really small fee and they would not mind and it would hopefully create a willingness to write better for everyone involved. It would create a financial incentive, and there'd be a list of the best performing campaigns for a quick overview of the managers' work as well.
It would also give members of smaller (or newer) campaigns a great incentive to do well for that company - if it is a small campaign, the potential financial benefit is quite big.

How does it tackle spam?
Ideally, by default. People are competitive in nature, if you give them incentive most will strive to do better.

________________________________________

For now, all of these are broad ideas without actual numbers, without the data to back them up, without the needed safeguards in place to stop manipulations/actions done in bad faith.
Consider them as opening discussion points, and if the community likes them and we get the proper backing then we can all work towards making these more robust and more concrete before implementation.

What I would like to see is #1 being implemented as soon as possible and #2 to be seriously considered in the near future.
Ideally, we'd collectively work towards #3 not being needed at all and #4 is a cherry on top that I feel has the power to connect the community - but is definitely not mandatory at this point in time.

All that is written revolves around the concept of a community working together to achieve common goals - a thriving community that attracts business and ultimately has a strong base of happy, long-term clients.
I think the majority of these ideas would be easy to implement and would improve the situation regarding spam.

I'm all ears

[Mahiyammahi]

cryptofrka your idea was genuine to protect pure gambler from this shit sig ban. Cause often gambler don't wants to engage other than gambling discussion. Yet this only discussion is watching as spam.

Paid pool sounds like a good idea - casino sponsor on the first hand cause they want more paid user's. But for this instant I think a mandatory long term contract should be closed with casino and manager other wise casino will come and go it will effect the user's.

I like most the idea of banning companies not the user's. This way campaign Manager's had to work double what they are doing now , I hope they will charge according to it.

What I'm against is taxing every sig campaigns lol.
You're now unofficially saying to bribe theymos . Donation has been made on this forum previously right? Unless this forum ain't keeping up with the budget to control the forum they can ask for another round of donation.

I think theymos is smiling behind the doors after watching ur proposal ,lol . It's benefiting only the higher ups

[stompix]

Ok, let's go to some suggestions on how to improve the situation:

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

Just do it, it will make it clear who is a gambler and who's not!
It would be nice to have a criteria of having x posts in that section instead of overall gambling when selecting participants for campaigns but let's not push it.

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

I proposed the same: decentralized signature power based on trust ratings, wasn't well received!

3. Demand more from campaign managers

Yeah...who is going to do that? People are afraid of calling someone out because it might hurt their chances in the future to get in a sig campaign....
Actually fuck it.... let's do it

Can both Hhampuz and Nutildah tell me why you're still paying / this guy hasn't yet been sig banned?
Of course it's the union barikin guy

What Union barikin did to Girona was so surprising, the result was really a shock to me. Because Union Berlin is not in a good performance compare to what Gurin performance looks like, I expected Girona to win the match even they will not score many goals, but ended up giving union Berlin the opportunity. I believe after this match it’s another motivation for union Berlin in their coming match, this will boost their confidence in winning the match.

Who just a few days ago blessed us with these posts in a row, all full of knowledge:

The first half is over, and Manxhester United look strong but I think they are pressing city because Manchetser city got red card, this is not because they are doing better than them this season. And I'm still giving manchester city a chance to win this match, because they are also doing everything to see that they dominate the game. They're back the second half already started so lets see what will happen.

Manchester united percormance doesn't look concibv8bg honestly, what happened yesterday is a good sign that they may no do anything great this season. Manchester won them with 10 men, When Manchester City player got a red card I honestly thought Manchester United will win Manchester City at the end they could not even draw the game game.
Arsenal will actually repeat same thing as last season, with what I'm seeing because Manchester City that won against United their performance isn't as good as last season. Lastly, we can't predict everything at the moment let's wait and see how the season will go.

Sorry cryptofrka for hijacking your topic but I really needed to blow off some steam cause evey time I open a damn topic in the gambling board it makes me puke so I really want to know, are you guys so lenient just because this shitposter fucking illiterate spammer owes $2k to Shasan?
Is this the reason?
Is this the reason why so many true shitposters are still keeping their place in various campaigns across the boards, and none has yet been sigbanned?

[NotATether]

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

Instead of us depending just on nutildah's judgment, why not have our own? There's already a 'report to moderator' tool available to us all. I think the first users on the sigban lists should be the ones whose posts are often reported and deleted and I think we should have a process that does it automatically. We can implement a simple formula that gives a bit of power and meaning to DT1 (and maybe DT2) users that says something like - if 5% of your posts in the last 30 days are successfully reported by multiple DT1 members, you automatically receive a 1-month sigban. Repeated offences increase the length of future bans.

People generally stopped reporting bad/repeating posts because many remained unhandled. This would probably require either more mods or some sort of responsibility rebalancing - but if we would use the whole DT1 as a gauge of what kind of content we want to see, it would carry more weight than a voice of a single person does. I'm not saying nutildah should be fully stripped of his duties - there were some things that I disagreed with and still disagree with but I will also be the first one to admit that some progress was achieved after the sigbans started. We do have to realize though that the spam reduced because most of banned users were not replaced - if they were, the situation would probably be as bad as it was before the bans started.

Definitely not to DT2. And to be honest, I wouldn't want such a power anyway (I'm DT1). This is supposed to be a moderator's decision, not assigned to people just because they're trustworthy with large sums of money.

[Rikafip]

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

When it comes to creating new child boards, forum practice so far is to do it when certain type of threads dominate the board, and I don't think that's been the case when it comes to paid pools. Forum staff can always make an exception of course, but I doubt they gonna go down that road.

Generally, its not a bad idea and it wouldn't hurt to have separate board for paid pools but I don't think that it would noticeably increase the amount of people that are joining those pools.

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

It would be way too easy to abuse it with the way DT system works.

3. Demand more from campaign managers

Couldn't agree more on that, and I think it would be the easiest way to increase post quality and reduce the spam. If all managers were truly following Signature Campaign Guidelines (and forum staff acting on it), there wouldn't be no need for this new sig ban initiative. Managers being more strict when deciding whether to pay a certain post or not is probably the easiest way to fight the spam.

It would be nice to have a criteria of having x posts in that section instead of overall gambling when selecting participants for campaigns but let's not push it

Managers can already implement that rule if they want.

Can both Hhampuz and Nutildah tell me why you're still paying / this guy hasn't yet been sig banned?
Of course it's the union barikin guy

Ahh, union barikin guy. Every time I check sig ban list, I hope to see him name there.

Since more than 200 members have been sig banned in last two months, this guy should consider himself very lucky to be able to avoid that because I think nutildah would have sig ban him if he actually checked his account. Beside that, he is also another example of the current failure of merit system.

[MarryWithBTC]

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

Paid pools are the fuel of the Gambling boards. They help create a circular economy in which users pay to play, have fun and promote the business through interesting and organic conversations.
Separating these threads from the rest of the gambling boards would bring more visibility to them, be easier to find for potential sponsors, would help streamline conversations and make it easier for managers to check if their signature campaign wearers contribute in these conversations that are organic in nature...

I endorse this. Having a child board for paid pools will perform an automatic filtering of low quality/effort posts from organic conversations. Pool participants are group of people who really understand the sport, commit a stake and also have fun promoting and discussing what they like.

I was invited to participate in the Duelbits EPL Fantansy sponsored pool, that thread is always on topic with connected discussion and not some mega threads where people dump a post and don't care to follow up the conversation.

Speaking about giving paid pools visibility by create a child board;

It was just yesterday that I knew that Bitcointalk has a full blown league from Division 4 to 1. Thanks to SmartVirus.

Meanwhile, do you care to tell me what BSFL is all about? I know we are together in the Duelbit premier league fantasy. What's BSFL, is it what I can join from next year/season?

Sure.

Just like the FPL, we have a localized league of our own (forum), Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League (BSFL) where some of us that are gamblers and about the sports in the forum can come together and have fun, run an entirely unique season irrespective of different sports and seasons. We get to answer questions on several sports as well as predictions, you manage a team of your own, go H2H against other players, play in a division and get promoted or relegated based on league standing at the end of the season.

We have sponsorship deals and this season being season 10 is sponsored by Rainbet, alone with free bets every week. There is an entry fee as well and for those coming in for division 4 which is the last division, the fee is usually zero.

We even have cup rounds, running concurrently in our regular league season.
It’s a unique league and quite fun to participate to simply put it and it’s always running through every week. Covering several sports like football, tennis, Dota Games and more. Just some place to be a fanatic and win prizes if your good.

Assuming there was a child board for paid pools, it would be so easy to see all the paid pools and choose where to participate.

The gambling discussion board looks like football child board, dominated by different leagues as EPL, Laliga, Bundesliga, UCL etc. It is also where we discuss how my uncle gambled before his son who later allowed his wife became addicted and gambled with the family retirement savings blah blah

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

Instead of us depending just on nutildah's judgment, why not have our own? There's already a 'report to moderator' tool available to us all. I think the first users on the sigban lists should be the ones whose posts are often reported and deleted and I think we should have a process that does it automatically. We can implement a simple formula that gives a bit of power and meaning to DT1 (and maybe DT2) users that says something like - if 5% of your posts in the last 30 days are successfully reported by multiple DT1 members, you automatically receive a 1-month sigban. Repeated offences increase the length of future bans.

I agree that there should be a kind of formula to work around this... If x amount of your posts are reported by users and deleted by mods, you'll receive x number of months signature ban.

I would not reserve the reporting only for DT members, it will wear them out, reporting and keeping the forum clean should be the collective effort of everyone, the reason I stroke out the DT1 i quoted above.

[Woodie]

All four proposals are welcome and hope can be implemented, but a few questions;

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

This is a partial solution because you would have cherry picked the users that you the pool organizers would control or influence the quality of how participants get to contribute on these new boards and all that, but what happens to the other gambling boards where the real cleanup is needed .  Burn them all   I guess thats where the extra pair of hands comes in

4. Reward the cleanest campaigns

Who gets to be on this board that gets to vote and remain unbiased?

Btw I see this working first few months but if same winners keep appearing.. it gets to be a boring task, but it should be worth a try as you are the only one that has proposed alternative solutions .

Solution 2 &3 are good 👍  

[SuperBitMan]

Firstly I want to commend you for taking your time to bring out ideas that will help make the forum more better, you have done very well.

I’m going to comment on two things first were you talked about Creating a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling, I agree with you and I don’t think this should be the only child board that should be created within Gambling, a child board for only sports discussions should also be created, if you check the gambling board some discussion are about sports discussions and not actually gambling discussion.

Secondly were you talked about Giving sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community,As for me signature ban should be moderated same way permanent ban is moderated, a thread should be created were people can report 5 posts and above that is low quality posts and then those giving the signature ban power will look at it and all agree that the member that posted those content deserves a signature ban or not.
This way everything will be more transparent.
But I don’t see any changes being implemented immediately, the forum management wants to give more time to the way things are going before taking any decision or making any changes.

[bitmover]

3. Demand more from campaign managers
...

4. Reward the cleanest campaigns

You talk as if there was a central authority controlling managers, campagins , etc. There isn't.  Theymos do not moderate, pay or interfer in any campagin

And I think that it works well..
You could select the campagins  and managers you prefer to work with

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

I think it is already  

Everything I'm about to write is mostly about Gambling boards. I don't know what the situation is like elsewhere.

You should go to other boards. There is a much better forum out of Gambling.

[Rikafip]

You talk as if there was a central authority controlling managers, campagins , etc. There isn't.  Theymos do not moderate, pay or interfer in any campagin

The quote below is from Signature Campaign Guidelines thread, so there are measures in place for managers who are not doing their jobs properly. The question is, have these measures ever actually been enforced?
Also, at one point theymos stopped Yobit campaign due high amount of spam, so its not like he won't meddle at all.
 

Campaign Operators:

Signature Campaigns are a great way to introduce your business and advertise your services to the bitcoin ecosystem but this cannot be abused by you paying people to make poor contributions en masse. As a signature campaign operator you will ultimately be held responsible for the quality of posts of users bearing your signature advertisement and you will need to monitor your users closely or it will be quickly abused. If you are running a campaign and it becomes blatantly obvious to Staff that you are doing little to nothing to stop spam on your campaign you will be issued a PM warning by a Global Moderator that you need to make immediate improvements to curb low-quality posts. You will have 7 days to remove low-quality posters and respond to the message detailing what you are going to do to make changes to your campaign to reduce the amount of spam. If improvements are not noticeable within 21 days of that and Staff do not believe you are doing enough to prevent low quality posts your signatures will be blacklisted from the forum by an Admin and you will no longer be permitted to advertise here in such a way. The Staff and Admins do not want to have to do this but it's a last resort in an attempt to clean up the forum as signature campaigns cannot continue to operate here in such a lazy way as it is not fair that others have to go through pages of drivel to find anything of substance nor should Staff be left to clean up the mess you are paying people to make.

[cryptofrka]

What I'm against is taxing every sig campaigns lol.
You're now unofficially saying to bribe theymos . Donation has been made on this forum previously right? Unless this forum ain't keeping up with the budget to control the forum they can ask for another round of donation.

I think theymos is smiling behind the doors after watching ur proposal ,lol . It's benefiting only the higher ups

These funds would, in theory, be held by trusted signature campaign managers, not theymos. They would also be quite small, so nothing that would incentivize people to steal them.

I proposed the same: decentralized signature power based on trust ratings, wasn't well received!

I swear I didn't steal it
I'm the happiest when I'm far away from Meta. It is a good idea though - at least I think so.

Definitely not to DT2. And to be honest, I wouldn't want such a power anyway (I'm DT1). This is supposed to be a moderator's decision, not assigned to people just because they're trustworthy with large sums of money.

You misunderstood. DT1 would not have power to delete posts.
What I'm suggesting is that, when a post is reported to moderators, if it came from a DT1 member and ends up as deleted, it automatically counts against the member that wrote it.
Many such posts deleted by moderators and a sigban is automatically triggered.

When it comes to creating new child boards, forum practice so far is to do it when certain type of threads dominate the board, and I don't think that's been the case when it comes to paid pools. Forum staff can always make an exception of course, but I doubt they gonna go down that road.

Generally, its not a bad idea and it wouldn't hurt to have separate board for paid pools but I don't think that it would noticeably increase the amount of people that are joining those pools.

There are 10+ paid pools every season, there were 20 or so at one point in time. It would make a lot of sense to separate them.
Not sure whether it would attract more users or not - but I'm sure a lot of people don't even know some of them exist because they hate going into Gambling. And I fully understand that.
Hopefully, more people would be drawn to organic discussions that take place there. The buyin for a full year of normal conversation is usually quite low.

It was just yesterday that I knew that Bitcointalk has a full blown league from Division 4 to 1. Thanks to SmartVirus.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's running since 2023.
Join us from next season, we'd love to have you

This is a partial solution because you would have cherry picked the users that you the pool organizers would control or influence the quality of how participants get to contribute on these new boards and all that, but what happens to the other gambling boards where the real cleanup is needed .  Burn them all   I guess thats where the extra pair of hands comes in

Well, kind of - yeah. I hope that discussions would improve there little by little but I'd also be ok with letting a part of the forum burn if it means that Gambling in general improves.

Who gets to be on this board that gets to vote and remain unbiased?

It would be purely statistical, based on previously agreed parameters (mostly revolving around deleted posts and banned members).

You talk as if there was a central authority controlling managers, campagins , etc. There isn't.  Theymos do not moderate, pay or interfer in any campagin

And I think that it works well..
You could select the campagins  and managers you prefer to work with

This is about tackling spam, not choosing who I like to work with. I don't suggest we select central authorities to police us, just to have an overview about which campaigns perform good and which do not.

You should go to other boards. There is a much better forum out of Gambling.

I like gambling very much. I don't really like the gambling boards. Therefore, I'd really like to improve the situation on the part of the forum that attracts me the most - at least based on a personal preference.

[Rikafip]

There are 10+ paid pools every season, there were 20 or so at one point in time. It would make a lot of sense to separate them.
Not sure whether it would attract more users or not - but I'm sure a lot of people don't even know some of them exist because they hate going into Gambling. And I fully understand that.
Hopefully, more people would be drawn to organic discussions that take place there. The buyin for a full year of normal conversation is usually quite low.

As a sort of the next best thing (since getting child board is realistically a long shot given how things work here), have you tried contacting cyrus and/or hilariousandco about maybe pinning el che's BTT Community Contests Directory & Discussion thread, with the list of all active pools? That could bring more attention to them.

[Upgrade00]

The quote below is from Signature Campaign Guidelines thread, so there are measures in place for managers who are not doing their jobs properly. The question is, have these measures ever actually been enforced?

These are my thoughts too. We as a community are yet to enforce the basic rules and regulations that prevent spam. Stricter moderation to enforce adherence should be the first step we take.
I do not think this is an issue that has overrun moderation. Beginners and help has had stricter moderation for the last few weeks reducing the amount of low quality threads there. This can be applied elsewhere, boards with more traffic and activity gets more hands to do the job and they heavy handedly apply the rules. Lock and trash threads, delete posts, temp ban spammers; Sending a clear message that this level of conversation is not allowed.

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

This is a good idea. It will help the companies and the forum too.
If we get such child board it will still need heavy moderation too, so users do not think it is a ticket to "improve" the quality of their posts. But joining an active community makes it more difficult to drop spam as normal. It is easier to dump refuse in a trash site than a clean park. It's easier to notice said trash too.

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

I do not support more DT power. Moderators in those boards and users with the highest good reports can be selected to help sig ban the worst of posters there.
We need more people with experience in those boards making decisions on them

[nutildah]

I'm glad that you're interested in working toward finding some middle ground.

#1 - I think creating the child board is a good idea if you think it will help reduce spam overall. As we saw with the case of ILuckyGuyI, just because someone is paying to participate in a pool, it doesn't mean they're not primarily generating low quality posts. We can debate "low quality" from account to account, but this type of account that exists solely to game the system shouldn't be immune from moderation simply because they are posting in one particular board.

#2 - I'm largely in agreement here, although almost everything you mentioned could have been done long ago, and can still be done now, without the need for a special committee. People can report bad posts and the mods could sigban the most egregious offenders. But the thing is, it wasn't getting done, and it wouldn't be with only the pre-existing incentives in place.

I am open to feedback about sigbans, and I think the appeals process works well enough as it currently is that no restructuring of mod duties is required. If you disagree, feel free let me know why, and perhaps I can learn something to improve the process. IIRC in our last conversation, you said you couldn't disagree with any particular sigban (as of late), so I'm just wondering why you think an overhaul is needed.

#3 - I don't know what to tell you on this one. You guys are 100% responsible for your own actions. What you're talking about in the 'how to demand more' section is stuff you guys should be imposing on yourselves. If you want to consider signature campaigns a job, its unreasonable to expect your employees to also be your overseers.

#4 - This is also something that campaign managers could work together to implement, and it could be a positive change. I think some kind of union between the managers could go far in helping to set standards for campaign entry while also rewarding honest participants.

Ultimately, whatever changes are made should be with the goal of reducing spam and rewarding quality content. Currently, incentives heavily favor the mass production of low quality posts which affects all areas of the forum. This needs to change first and foremost.

The managers can help everybody out by not hiring low quality posters to begin with. Only they can stop the propagation of the perception that its possible to earn a living here by being a spammer. Its this perception that encourages people to spend their time leveling up a particularly meaningless skill, not applicable to human development or any other corner of the world economy.

A managers union could potentially act as the primary guard against spam if you guys would be willing to work together to implement a general plan. I support this change first and foremost.

[yahoo62278]

I will add more when I have time to read and evaluate the rest of your ideas but while it's fresh on my mind I would like to comment on suggestion #2. Give the power to ban to DT? I think this suggestion could be largely manipulated and used as a bullying tactic. Ideally we would like to think that the DT members of the site are all level headed and have good judgement but have you guys taken a look around and seen some of the tags that some of these DT leave? I am of the belief that half of these guys don't even know how to properly use the trust system.

We might like most of the guys currently in DT but that doesn't mean they are the smartest group. Have you guys ever heard the term "gangs of bitcointalk"? I pretty sure you probably have and IMO it is a real thing to a point. Now imagine this group of people now have the power to kill multiple users earnings just by reporting your posts.

In theory it could be a good idea but with the way DT works couple with not knowing how to use DT power properly just makes me feel like it will be a shitshow that ends in multiple legitimate users being screwed over. If the DT parameters were tightened up a bit and not just any TOM, DICK, or HARRY could get in I might be more on board. Would rather a person have to prove they understand the trust system before even being allowed to enter the DT lottery.

Keep an eye in reputation and look at some of the stuff there. Proof that some do not know how to tag properly. I'm not gonna call anyone out but take a look and see what I mean.

[joker_josue]

I liked the analysis and presentation of your ideas, @criptofrka. I believe that at least some aspects should really be considered.

1. Create a 'Paid pools' child board within Gambling

The idea is good, but if those who organize these pools don't organize the space well afterwards, it will be a mess again in a short period of time.

Furthermore, if it were a slightly more "permissive" section, it could attract spammers, as already happens now. It is true that there would be stricter controls, followed by the pool operators themselves, but this alone would not eliminate the low quality. Furthermore, more pools of this kind could emerge, which in reality were only serving as a front.

Despite everything, I think having its own board would be a way to reorganize this section of the forum, which is currently a real mess.

2. Give the sigban power to the DT1 (DT2?) community

If I understand the idea correctly, if a user has x posts reported by DT1 members, they could automatically receive a ban, is that right?
I don't think automatic bans are a good idea, even if they follow some predefined parameters.

Furthermore, it could cause other confusion in the forum, since some also question the DT1 system and say that they are the "owners of the forum". To have confusion, @nutildah already has broad shoulders to back it up.

Now, DT1s could be called upon to analyze potential ban cases. Not that they would have specific banning powers, but they would provide a different perspective on the analysis. In either case, the more people involved, the more complicated the decision-making process can become. Therefore, even this case should be carefully analyzed and implemented to avoid complications in the process.

3. Demand more from campaign managers

Honestly, this was to be expected, even now.

I think a campaign manager doesn't do this kind of management for free; they receive some kind of commission for it. Therefore, he already has an obligation to ensure that the participants in his campaign maintain good quality standards, as this will create a positive image for the advertiser.

In turn, the campaign manager himself wants the best possible outcome for Bitcointalk, because that's where he can generate some revenue. Therefore, the priority will not only be satisfying his client, but also ensuring that Bitcointalk remains an attractive platform.

A user who only seeks to meet weekly posting quotas, regardless of being very active on the forum, does not in itself mean that they are bringing value to the brand or profitability. In most cases, there is no guarantee that a user who meets the quotas will reinvest that money in the advertising platform (as this can often be a way to attract advertisers). In turn, the user who posts only for the sake of quotas doesn't care about the forum or its growth; they just want to maximize their weekly earnings.

We must keep in mind that if an advertiser chooses Bitcointalk for advertising, it's because they see value in the platform. The platform's value isn't solely based on the content of its participants; it stems from its history and influence on the internet. If that influence begins to diminish due to a drop in quality, the platform starts to lose value.

Theymos may not place any value on SEO and forum ranking in search engines. But, for an advertiser, this is valuable. To maintain this good ranking, good quality posts/content are necessary.

In summary, campaign managers are more interested in maintaining high quality in the forum than many campaign participants are.

Another point is that many campaign managers aren't exactly friends, so reaching an understanding on certain issues can be complicated. It would only work if there were a third entity that could handle some of the management, but that entity would have to be supported by all the campaign managers. Even then, any user could be a campaign manager, so it always ends up being difficult.

4. Reward the cleanest campaigns

This could be an interesting element to compensate the entire community, even those who do not participate in campaigns. It could be like a monthly raffle, where everyone who signed up could get the bonus.

Even if not all campaign managers agreed with the idea, those who wanted to support it could do so. In any case, I think it's still too early to think about that kind of "bonus".

[philipma1957]

Meta is 65% spam about spam on the rest  of the forum.
No issue about it at all.

My plan is tax all signature earning 5%.

Then offer a monthly drawing giving the tax funds away to those that don't have a signature and have not had one for six months.

Thus every single person on the forum either directly gains from signatures or can potentially gain for not signing.

This makes spam good not bad.

Problems all solved.

No more spam threads in meta complaining about spam.

The irony  of it is almost too hard to bear without laughing hysterically.

Anyway just wanted to point out how many posts have earned coin posting spam on spam.

When my idea fixes the issue completely.

[notocactus]

Fix the merit system rather than let shitposters ranking up easily without governance, then try to fill no longer separating trash but many landfills created by farm shitposters.

Any solutions used without fixing the merit system will not have long term effects.

Farms in threads like Buy and sell, Buy dips and hodl, Chamby, they won't stop if the merit system won't be fixed.

There is not perfection, no perfect fairness, and the fiction book of Orwell is always right. You can post shit without signature ban or account ban if you have good reputation or a staff. How did you get a good reputation and how did you get a staff badge is another thing but after you had such, you will have a good layer of protection.

[nutildah]

The irony  of it is almost too hard to bear without laughing hysterically.

Anyway just wanted to point out how many posts have earned coin posting spam on spam.

There's often more independent thought being expressed in Meta topics than other boards. Sure, some Meta discussion is just banter and borderline spam, but less frequently so than most other sections, IMO. Its actually something that's provable, and when I have a moment I'll run some numbers to demonstrate.

Fix the merit system rather than let shitposters ranking up easily without governance, then try to fill no longer separating trash but many landfills created by farm shitposters.

Any solutions used without fixing the merit system will not have long term effects.

Indeed. According to your latest merit source data, it looks like a change is already underway, in that there was an 8% reduction in merit source merits between June 2025 and August 2026.

I've come up with a way to make merits less fungible, but not many people are going to like it. How deep do you guys want to go down the merit rabbit hole?

[Vod]

Instead of spending resources to sigban, put the responsibility back on the campaign managers.  Or push it back on Theymos holding the big bucks.
For example, a manager embeds a code hash in the signature, and the forum only displays the sig if the hash is valid.  A one time coding change on Theymos' end, and the community would probably develop the hashing system to go with it.