Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ

[TheGr33k]

I'm not completely sure if I even understand the official unofficial rules. In my humble opinion, it seems as though they were not well thought out.

The interpreted definition of spam and trolling is incorrect in the OP. It also doesn't sound very professional to post documents of someone without their consent. That's a breach of privacy. For example, if you repost a photo from someone's Facebook, that's fine because they clearly don't mind sharing their photos as long as it is a public Facebook. Anything that is set private, but posted publicly is a breach of privacy.

I'm not completely sure if I even understand the official unofficial rules.

Unofficial list, as in not made by the admin. Official rules, as in rules that apply in Bitcointalk.

Also, see notice on top of the thread:

NOTE: This is meant to serve as a reference/educational/informational thread, NOT a rock solid list of rules.

In my humble opinion, it seems as though they were not well thought out

These rules were gathered by me from various, sticky threads, advice from administrators and other moderators and my experience as a Bitcointalk moderator.

The interpreted definition of spam and trolling is incorrect in the OP

There is no incorrect definition. It's the definition that applies here (not everywhere in the internet), in Bitcointalk.

It also doesn't sound very professional to post documents of someone without their consent. That's a breach of privacy. For example, if you repost a photo from someone's Facebook, that's fine because they clearly don't mind sharing their photos as long as it is a public Facebook. Anything that is set private, but posted publicly is a breach of privacy.

Q: What about deleting DOXes?
A: Nope, we don't delete them either as long as they are on topic and the information can be obtained legally (no SSNs for example). Why? Because such doxing is just compiling information about a user already available publicly, often via search engines.

In all honesty, I don't really believe you understood the nature of the comment.


It is not something that can truly be answered in a sense. As for trolling and spamming, there is a set definition on the internet.

[1713935725]

1713935725

[1713935725]

1713935725

[1713935725]

1713935725

[1713935725]

1713935725

[mprep]

In all honesty, I don't really believe you understood the nature of the comment.


It is not something that can truly be answered in a sense. As for trolling and spamming, there is a set definition on the internet.

In all honesty, I don't really believe you understood the nature of the comment. It is not something that can truly be answered in a sense.

No, but I can attempt to address your concerns.

As for trolling and spamming, there is a set definition on the internet.

No, there isn't:

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Electronic spamming is the use of electronic messaging systems to send unsolicited messages (spam)

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming

spamming
posting useless crap on forums over and over
this

Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spamming

[TheGr33k]

In all honesty, I don't really believe you understood the nature of the comment.


It is not something that can truly be answered in a sense. As for trolling and spamming, there is a set definition on the internet.

In all honesty, I don't really believe you understood the nature of the comment. It is not something that can truly be answered in a sense.

No, but I can attempt to address your concerns.

As for trolling and spamming, there is a set definition on the internet.

No, there isn't:

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Electronic spamming is the use of electronic messaging systems to send unsolicited messages (spam)

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming

spamming
posting useless crap on forums over and over
this

Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spamming

Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

[shorena]

-snip-
Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

Google is a credible source? Please tell your teacher they need to quit their job. Anyway. No they dont need a credible source, in fact the staff here needs no source at all. They can just define spam in the way that is to be understood here. It might be confusing for some, it might even be irritating for some, but there is no need to have credible source for the rules of a private forum.

[TheGr33k]

-snip-
Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

Google is a credible source? Please tell your teacher they need to quit their job. Anyway. No they dont need a credible source, in fact the staff here needs no source at all. They can just define spam in the way that is to be understood here. It might be confusing for some, it might even be irritating for some, but there is no need to have credible source for the rules of a private forum.

Please refrain from belittling teachers for doing their jobs correctly. You do not have a degree in teaching journalism, so you have no right to belittle any of the teachers I know of.


This is not a private forum if it is open to the public for anyone to sign up. Therefore, it does not belong to one single person. If it did, only one person would log in, which would not make it a forum. When describing Bitcoin or Bitcoin forums, refrain from terms such as "private" in order to avoid this currency or this forum having a very excluding image. We need diversity, and we need a large community.  We need people to join, and not feel intimidated to do so. That is how the currency grows.

[onemorexmr]

This is not a private forum if it is open to the public for anyone to sign up. Therefore, it does not belong to one single person. If it did, only one person would log in, which would not make it a forum.

lol...
that means if i someone invite me to visit me at my house they own that house too?

[tmfp]

-snip-
Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

Google is a credible source? Please tell your teacher they need to quit their job. Anyway. No they dont need a credible source, in fact the staff here needs no source at all. They can just define spam in the way that is to be understood here. It might be confusing for some, it might even be irritating for some, but there is no need to have credible source for the rules of a private forum.

Please refrain from belittling teachers for doing their jobs correctly. You do not have a degree in teaching journalism, so you have no right to belittle any of the teachers I know of.


This is not a private forum if it is open to the public for anyone to sign up. Therefore, it does not belong to one single person. If it did, only one person would log in, which would not make it a forum. When describing Bitcoin or Bitcoin forums, refrain from terms such as "private" in order to avoid this currency or this forum having a very excluding image. We need diversity, and we need a large community.  We need people to join, and not feel intimidated to do so. That is how the currency grows.

While 'refraining' mode is on, how about you refraining from posting tendentious crap at every opportunity?
Your mixture of fantasy and facile opinion is boring and contentless, the true definition of spam.
 

[shorena]

-snip-
Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

Google is a credible source? Please tell your teacher they need to quit their job. Anyway. No they dont need a credible source, in fact the staff here needs no source at all. They can just define spam in the way that is to be understood here. It might be confusing for some, it might even be irritating for some, but there is no need to have credible source for the rules of a private forum.

Please refrain from belittling teachers for doing their jobs correctly. You do not have a degree in teaching journalism, so you have no right to belittle any of the teachers I know of.

In fact I do, have a right to belittle anyone that I deem fit to be belittled. Teaching Google as a credible source would explain Fox News though.

This is not a private forum if it is open to the public for anyone to sign up.

Still private, even if the doors are open.

Therefore, it does not belong to one single person.

Thats not a requirement for private property, what you have in mind is personal property.

If it did, only one person would log in, which would not make it a forum. When describing Bitcoin or Bitcoin forums, refrain from terms such as "private" in order to avoid this currency or this forum having a very excluding image. We need diversity, and we need a large community.  We need people to join, and not feel intimidated to do so. That is how the currency grows.

[TheGr33k]

-snip-
Urban dictionary is not a creditable source. Anyone would know that. It is basically like wikipedia which is an online source made by everyone, for everyone. Ask a teacher who has been a teacher for several years in the art of journalism. They will tell you the same words I'm telling you. You'll need a creditable source such as Google or Webster.

Google is a credible source? Please tell your teacher they need to quit their job. Anyway. No they dont need a credible source, in fact the staff here needs no source at all. They can just define spam in the way that is to be understood here. It might be confusing for some, it might even be irritating for some, but there is no need to have credible source for the rules of a private forum.

Please refrain from belittling teachers for doing their jobs correctly. You do not have a degree in teaching journalism, so you have no right to belittle any of the teachers I know of.

In fact I do, have a right to belittle anyone that I deem fit to be belittled. Teaching Google as a credible source would explain Fox News though.

This is not a private forum if it is open to the public for anyone to sign up.

Still private, even if the doors are open.

Therefore, it does not belong to one single person.

Thats not a requirement for private property, what you have in mind is personal property.

If it did, only one person would log in, which would not make it a forum. When describing Bitcoin or Bitcoin forums, refrain from terms such as "private" in order to avoid this currency or this forum having a very excluding image. We need diversity, and we need a large community.  We need people to join, and not feel intimidated to do so. That is how the currency grows.

Private, personal. Not identical, but both quite similar. Okay. If you want to, I suppose you can belittle someone's degree.

Have a good day.

[botany]

Is making consecutive posts acceptable?
There was a discussion on this here, but I would like this to be clarified.

An example is this thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1066885.1780

The last 100+ posts have been made by the same user.
Multiple posts in a single day....

That's fucking ridiculous. He has over 250 posts all in a row talking to no one but himself and he's already nearly made ten posts today alone. It's clear nobody is interested in his tips and is likely only doing it for signature payment but there's no reason why the daily updates can't all be in one post. I've notified Marco but at the very least I reckon it's spam and violates the one bump per 24 hour rule but not sure how that should be handled as there's a major clean up needed. I've asked the admins for clarification on double/multi-posting but in my opinion it's blatant spam and completely unnecessary (and same goes for others double/triple/quadruple posting when there's no apparent need for it).

Did we get clarifications from the admin on multi-posting?
That thread continues to grow (25 posts from him yesterday)...

[mexxer-2]

Did we get clarifications from the admin on multi-posting?
That thread continues to grow (25 posts from him yesterday)...

Well he is still getting paid from the sig campaign(Bit-x) , so yeah a sufficient amount of sig spam right there. It was there since ages ago, I thought I'd report it when I saw it on the Bit-x campaign thread(when he was complaining not getting paid and then later said he wouldn't spam and all and got paid) , I thought it would be quite obvious to any moderator and he'd be banned soon. Kinda forgot about it since then

[onemorexmr]

Did we get clarifications from the admin on multi-posting?
That thread continues to grow (25 posts from him yesterday)...

Well he is still getting paid from the sig campaign(Bit-x) , so yeah a sufficient amount of sig spam right there. It was there since ages ago, I thought I'd report it when I saw it on the Bit-x campaign thread(when he was complaining not getting paid and then later said he wouldn't spam and all and got paid) , I thought it would be quite obvious to any moderator and he'd be banned soon. Kinda forgot about it since then

isnt that breaking this rule:
13. Bumps, "updates" are limited to once per 24 hours.[2]

or is this only valid for marketplace (lol...just noticed it even is in Marketplace/Gambling)?

[mexxer-2]

isnt that breaking this rule:
13. Bumps, "updates" are limited to once per 24 hours.[2]

or is this only valid for marketplace (lol...just noticed it even is in Marketplace/Gambling)?

You have a lot of stuff to catch up on: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=312678.1440 , and thats just one example of those type of threads.
And well technically CB is breaking the rule by posting BTC price every 5 mins as well

[botany]

I've notified Marco but at the very least I reckon it's spam.

Marco doesn't seem to be bothered.
This user has been paid 3.22 BTC by bit-x for this spam and his posts are still getting counted.

violates the one bump per 24 hour rule but not sure how that should be handled as there's a major clean up needed.

Can't the mods just lock this particular thread for now?

I've asked the admins for clarification on double/multi-posting

Still no response?

[hilariousandco]

Nope. I never get a reply to anything from the admins these days which is frustrating and BadBear is away a lot. I told that user to knock it off but not sure what to do with the posts/thread. Told Marco about it and I got a reply a few days ago from him saying that he'll give him another warning but nothing seems to have changed.

[botany]

Nope. I never get a reply to anything from the admins these days which is frustrating and BadBear is away a lot. I told that user to knock it off but not sure what to do with the posts/thread. Told Marco about it and I got a reply a few days ago from him saying that he'll give him another warning but nothing seems to have changed.

Warnings don't seem to help.
Here is another bit-x user thread who seems to have found a similar way to mint unlimited money.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1139662.0

As long as bit-x keeps paying for such spam, these users will keep posting. 

[hilariousandco]

Well if they continue after the warnings I've just given them their posts will be deleted and normally people who repeatedly don't follow the bumping rule after warnings usually get a temp ban. Not sure why Marco hasn't booted them off though when he has others.

[Mitchell]

Well if they continue after the warnings I've just given them their posts will be deleted and normally people who repeatedly don't follow the bumping rule after warnings usually get a temp ban. Not sure why Marco hasn't booted them off though when he has others.

Maybe they are his alt-accounts?

[Mitchell]

Q: Why is my IP banned? What are those units of evil?
A: Your IP might be banned because it was used by a user that got perma banned. Don't worry - IP bans decay over time if there's not too many of them during a small period. If you register using a banned IP, are using TOR, VPNs or well known proxies, you will have to pay a small fee. This is to prevent spammers while allowing legitimate members to post without many restrictions.

So, if this account was not locked right after registration through Tor, I will not be locked because of Tor in future?

If you didn't have to pay a fee upon registration, you won't have to pay a fee in the future.

[mprep]

Added another rule with example:

30. Similar marketplace items must be listed together.[2][e]

30. This includes (but is not limited to) domains, software keys and membership invitations. What's considered similar is up to the moderator handling the situation.