Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 08:19:57 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Just remove signatures already. As in delete, disable, gone.  (Read 44219 times)
Blazed
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile WWW
October 06, 2015, 12:20:17 PM
 #401

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=877765.msg12607907#msg12607907

Look how much some of these guys depend on the campaigns. There are so many people that must use them as their primary source of income  Huh

*For the record I get a flat rate no matter how many I post*

.BITSLER.                 ▄███
               ▄████▀
             ▄████▀
           ▄████▀  ▄██▄
         ▄████▀    ▀████▄
       ▄████▀        ▀████▄
     ▄████▀            ▀████▄
   ▄████▀                ▀████▄
 ▄████▀ ▄████▄      ▄████▄ ▀████▄
█████   ██████      ██████   █████
 ▀████▄ ▀████▀      ▀████▀ ▄████▀
   ▀████▄                ▄████▀
     ▀████▄            ▄████▀
       ▀████▄        ▄████▀
         ▀████▄    ▄████▀
           ▀████▄▄████▀
             ▀██████▀
               ▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄            
▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀    ▄▄█▄▄ ▀▀▄         
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄      
█  ▀▄▄  ▀█▀▀ ▄      ▀████   ▀▀▄   
█ █▄  ▀▄   ▀████       ▀▀ ▄██▄ ▀▀▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█  ▀▀       ▀▄▄ ▀████      ▄▄▄▀▀▀  █
█            ▄ ▀▄    ▄▄▄▀▀▀   ▄▄  █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
█ ▄▄   ███   ▀██  █           ▀▀  █ 
█ ███  ▀██       █        ▄▄      █ 
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  
▀▄            █        ▀▀      █  
▀▀▄   ███▄  █   ▄▄          █   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀    
▀▀▄   █   ▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀         
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▀▀▀▀              
              ▄▄▄██████▄▄▄
          ▄▄████████████████▄▄
        ▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████▄
▄     ▄█████▀             ▀█████▄
██▄▄ █████▀                ▀█████
 ████████            ▄██      █████
  ████████▄         ███▀       ████▄
  █████████▀▀     ▄███▀        █████
   █▀▀▀          █████         █████
     ▄▄▄         ████          █████
   █████          ▀▀           ████▀
    █████                     █████
     █████▄                 ▄█████
      ▀█████▄             ▄█████▀
        ▀██████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
          ▀▀████████████████▀▀
              ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
            ▄▄▄███████▄▄▄
         ▄█▀▀▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▀▀▀█▄
       █▀▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▀█
     █▀▀ ███████████████████ ▀▀█
    █▀ ███████████████████████ ▀█
   █▀ ███████████████▀▀ ███████ ▀█
 ▄█▀ ██████████████▀      ▀█████ ▀█▄
███ ███████████▀▀            ▀▀██ ███
███ ███████▀▀                     ███
███ ▀▀▀▀                          ███
▀██▄                             ▄██▀
  ▀█▄                            ▀▀
    █▄       █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
     █▄      ▀█████████▀
      ▀█▄      ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀▀█▄▄  ▄▄▄
            ▀▀█████
[]
1511425197
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511425197

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511425197
Reply with quote  #2

1511425197
Report to moderator
1511425197
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511425197

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511425197
Reply with quote  #2

1511425197
Report to moderator
1511425197
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511425197

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511425197
Reply with quote  #2

1511425197
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511425197
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511425197

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511425197
Reply with quote  #2

1511425197
Report to moderator
mrbrt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 707


View Profile
October 06, 2015, 07:43:41 PM
 #402


This forum would likely be dead without signature campaigns, the bitcoin price has been about as active as an 85 year olds sex life for a while now so the forum has become quieter.


If the forum would be dead without signature campaigns lets just let it die. What non-signature campaigner would want to participate in a forum that only exists because of idiots posting nonsensical garbage to other idiots to up their post count? What does this say about the usefulness of advertising on the forum in the first place, given the forum would be dead without ad-campaign spammers?
TheRealSteve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686

FUN > ROI


View Profile
October 06, 2015, 09:35:13 PM
 #403

how would u find my blog if there was no signature here? Smiley
By going from this: http://i.imgur.com/py58ywm.png
to this, maybe: http://i.imgur.com/0kg4rC2.png
( I can't see your signature, had to pop it open in an incognito window.  My variant of the blocker script happily assigns a high score to my own signature, for that matter Smiley )

But honestly the complaint is mostly the nature of signatures since ad campaigns, and not really signatures in general; but if signature campaigns aren't really policed (should it get even worse), then removing signatures in general would be the idea.

Seems unlikely to happen, so blocker script it is; doesn't take care of nonsense posts, but at least removes some of the eyesores.

Xialla
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


/dev/null


View Profile
October 09, 2015, 07:40:15 PM
 #404

signature campaign managers kick those people off their campaigns any way.

signature managers don't care, especially guy from bit-x. reason is simple, even stupid non-sense post brings link to website in same way as constructive one + he can't manage it, if dozens or maybe even hundreds of guys are in..
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


GUNBOT Licenses -15% with ref. code 'GrumpyKitty'


View Profile WWW
October 09, 2015, 07:54:56 PM
 #405

signature managers don't care, especially guy from bit-x. reason is simple, even stupid non-sense post brings link to website in same way as constructive one + he can't manage it, if dozens or maybe even hundreds of guys are in..
Most campaign managers do not care at all, this is correct. We can not generalize in this case either and there are exceptions. I know one. The problem is actually quite complex and at the moment there is no efficient solution to it.


We're looking into options. Banning campaigns should be the last option since it would harm the good people.


▄██████████████████
███████████████████
███████████████████
█████████████████
███████████████
████████████████
████████████████
█████████████████
███████████████████
████████████████████
█████████████████████
▀████████████████████
Bazista®
██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██
██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██
██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██

██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██
██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██
██ █  ██ ██
██   ██  ██
██  ██   ██
██ ██  █ ██
|||
HostFat
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2646


I support freedom of choice


View Profile WWW
October 10, 2015, 01:32:11 AM
 #406

An user of the italian section (Anon39) suggested to prohibit campaign that pay for post, and allowing only campaigns that pay a fixed value every month.
I'm not sure if this is the solution, but it can be a good improvement.
It must be also forbidden to compel the user to write a minimum of posts.

NON DO ASSISTENZA PRIVATA - The Rock Trading (ref): A good exchange / gateway Ripple, with support for multisig, since 2007. 
https://bitcointa.lk: Bitcointalk backup if offline - Bitcoin Foundation Italia - Blog: http://theupwind.blogspot.it
Xian01
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


Ø1Ø11ØØØ


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 01:48:01 AM
 #407

FWIW, I run with signatures disabled. It adds too much visual noise to threads.

I would not shed a tear seeing signatures being completely removed, and abolishing pay-per-post / sig campaigns.

I feel it cheapens the place.
hilariousandco
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484


How does one bitcoin?


View Profile WWW
October 10, 2015, 07:10:45 AM
 #408

An user of the italian section (Anon39) suggested to prohibit campaign that pay for post, and allowing only campaigns that pay a fixed value every month.
I'm not sure if this is the solution, but it can be a good improvement.
It must be also forbidden to compel the user to write a minimum of posts.

Fixed rate campaigns do cause less spam for sure but it's more about who runs the campaign and whether they're doing their job or not. Pay per post campaigns like yobit and secondstrade do cheapen the place because their companies do nothing apart from pay spammers automatically without checking posts and it gets worse everyday because they then tell their friends they can get free bitcoins for posting crap and the knock on effect continues on. It would be hard to enforce people to only pay fixed rate though and even fixed rate can be abused if there's no one actually managing their campaign. What we actually need to do is put more pressure on the lazy campaign managers to do what they're supposed to and if they can't get on top of it there will be consequences ie bans.

onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:13:25 AM
 #409

An user of the italian section (Anon39) suggested to prohibit campaign that pay for post, and allowing only campaigns that pay a fixed value every month.
I'm not sure if this is the solution, but it can be a good improvement.
It must be also forbidden to compel the user to write a minimum of posts.

Fixed rate campaigns do cause less spam for sure but it's more about who runs the campaign and whether they're doing their job or not. Pay per post campaigns like yobit and secondstrade do cheapen the place because their companies do nothing apart from pay spammers automatically without checking posts and it gets worse everyday because they then tell their friends they can get free bitcoins for posting crap and the knock on effect continues on. It would be hard to enforce people to only pay fixed rate though and even fixed rate can be abused if there's no one actually managing their campaign. What we actually need to do is put more pressure on the lazy campaign managers to do what they're supposed to and if they can't get on top of it there will be consequences ie bans.

why dont ban (tempban) lazy campaign managers until they fix and enforce their rules

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
subSTRATA
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Bountie- Do You Have Game?


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:16:18 AM
 #410

An user of the italian section (Anon39) suggested to prohibit campaign that pay for post, and allowing only campaigns that pay a fixed value every month.
I'm not sure if this is the solution, but it can be a good improvement.
It must be also forbidden to compel the user to write a minimum of posts.

Fixed rate campaigns do cause less spam for sure but it's more about who runs the campaign and whether they're doing their job or not. Pay per post campaigns like yobit and secondstrade do cheapen the place because their companies do nothing apart from pay spammers automatically without checking posts and it gets worse everyday because they then tell their friends they can get free bitcoins for posting crap and the knock on effect continues on. It would be hard to enforce people to only pay fixed rate though and even fixed rate can be abused if there's no one actually managing their campaign. What we actually need to do is put more pressure on the lazy campaign managers to do what they're supposed to and if they can't get on top of it there will be consequences ie bans.

why dont ban (tempban) lazy campaign managers until they fix and enforce their rules
because managing a campaign poorly isnt against the forum's rules; theyre not breaking a rule so there are no grounds for a ban. a rule for this should be implemented, but its difficult to draw a line as to when the campaign can be considered to be causing rampant spam.

onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:18:34 AM
 #411


why dont ban (tempban) lazy campaign managers until they fix and enforce their rules
because managing a campaign poorly isnt against the forum's rules; theyre not breaking a rule so there are no grounds for a ban.

ok, i change my question: why arent the forum rules changed to tempban sigcampaigns which dont check forum posts Huh

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
hilariousandco
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484


How does one bitcoin?


View Profile WWW
October 10, 2015, 07:32:42 AM
 #412

Temp banning them is exactly what I've suggested. More temp bans need to be handed out to the users on their campaigns too until they get the message. And being a lazy campaign manager might not be against the rules but but spamming poor quality posts which they encourage is and do nothing to stop. A rule can always be added that if people can't run a campaign effectively then there will be punishments. Regardless, these campaigns are still being a nuicance and nuicance users are usually banned. If a user signed up to this forum and created a thread that said they were going to pay users to post crap all over do you think they wouldn't receive negative feedback or be banned? No difference here really. The signature campaigns like yobit and secondstrade are causing a significant mess and it's unfair on everyone. Signature campaigns could actually improve the post quality of the forum if campaign managers only accepted and paid users who made decent posts and there are some campaigns that do that but it's futile ultimately when the users that don't get accepted or paid for their posts just go to a campaign like yobit and secondstrade that will pay them for any crap they post.

n2004al
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:33:35 AM
 #413

The forum is nearing the lowest point content-wise I have seen. Click on just about any thread and it is mindless replies and bumps from people with big signature ads pushing something. There is nothing here, no content, no dialog. It is certainly not the place for cryptographers and programmers and entrepreneurs to exchange information about Bitcoin. If you are lucky, you will find someone completely out of their depth asking a stupid question answered a hundred times, someone that then cannot understand the answer.

There is no reason or need for a signature. Limiting the BBcode to higher-activity members helped the look of the forum, but just creates a market for old accounts to do the spamming.

What is needed is to deincentivize this crap posting by completely removing the signature. End the signature campaigns and the pay for obnoxious scam sites. People are profiting from posting nonsense and making this forum useless, and this is seemingly the only way to make it stop.

Then we have the activity/post count chasers, which you can see from dozens of "why isn't my activity going up" posts. There's another number that can just be removed from posts. Take away that incentive to post junk also.

You are right on some things. For example when you write: "If you are lucky, you will find someone completely out of their depth asking a stupid question answered a hundred times, someone that then cannot understand the answer." There are to many threads when you can meet such things.

But you are wrong in having fear from these people. Their never, according to me, enter in threads when the discussion is about questions regarding "cryptographers and programmers and entrepreneurs" which want to "exchange information about Bitcoin".

So it was enough for you to eliminate the "easy" threads which are the preferred ones for that kind of people and you are safe.

Fortunately the forum has to many boards, child boards, and threads. Everyone of those has its content well defined and its name write clearly on it. You choose those which interest to you and if your interest are particular I can assure you that you not find any post with signature campaign there.

The signature campaigns are not the fault and the cause of your problem. Their target are never such boards or child boards for which you talk in your post. Or even if there are people with signature campaign who write in such places I am sure that those understand well those and want to tell their thoughts in those. Which, I think, cannot be crap. If someone dares to write in those, that meaning that he cannot be an crap author. It is another thing if someone spam there. But their posts can be reported and he will banned from the forum.

I think that who have something with the signature campaigns are you. And what is the reason of this ire that it is known only by you.  Smiley
subSTRATA
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Bountie- Do You Have Game?


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:41:20 AM
 #414

Temp banning them is exactly what I've suggested. More temp bans need to be handed out to the users on their campaigns too until they get the message. And being a lazy campaign manager might not be against the rules but but spamming poor quality posts which they encourage is and do nothing to stop. A rule can always be added that if people can't run a campaign effectively then there will be punishments. Regardless, these campaigns are still being a nuicance and nuicance users are usually banned. If a user signed up to this forum and created a thread that said they were going to pay users to post crap all over do you think they wouldn't receive negative feedback or be banned? No difference here really. The signature campaigns like yobit and secondstrade are causing a significant mess and it's unfair on everyone. Signature campaigns could actually improve the post quality of the forum if campaign managers only accepted and paid users who made decent posts and there are some campaigns that do that but it's futile ultimately when the users that don't get accepted or paid for their posts just go to a campaign like yobit and secondstrade that will pay them for any crap they post.
its spelled "nuisance" btw, and that aside, banning the campaign managers, i feel, might be ineffective to some extent; they could use alt accounts to manage campaigns, and they dont even have to be able to post to 'manage' the campaign if they get banned; all they have to do is be able to count posts and punch in numbers to send payouts. i think simply being more stringent on what qualifies as a constructive post might do better; hand out more bans and raise the bar a little bit.

of course, there is also the option of going as far as to ban the campaign entirely by banning any user that wears 'x' campaign's signature, but it would never come to that given the current "rules."

onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:44:26 AM
 #415

Temp banning them is exactly what I've suggested. More temp bans need to be handed out to the users on their campaigns too until they get the message. And being a lazy campaign manager might not be against the rules but but spamming poor quality posts which they encourage is and do nothing to stop. A rule can always be added that if people can't run a campaign effectively then there will be punishments. Regardless, these campaigns are still being a nuicance and nuicance users are usually banned. If a user signed up to this forum and created a thread that said they were going to pay users to post crap all over do you think they wouldn't receive negative feedback or be banned? No difference here really. The signature campaigns like yobit and secondstrade are causing a significant mess and it's unfair on everyone. Signature campaigns could actually improve the post quality of the forum if campaign managers only accepted and paid users who made decent posts and there are some campaigns that do that but it's futile ultimately when the users that don't get accepted or paid for their posts just go to a campaign like yobit and secondstrade that will pay them for any crap they post.
its spelled "nuisance" btw, and that aside, banning the campaign managers, i feel, might be ineffective to some extent; they could use alt accounts to manage campaigns, and they dont even have to be able to post to 'manage' the campaign if they get banned; all they have to do is be able to count posts and punch in numbers to send payouts. i think simply being more stringent on what qualifies as a constructive post might do better; hand out more bans and raise the bar a little bit.

of course, there is also the option of going as far as to ban the campaign entirely by banning any user that wears 'x' campaign's signature, but it would never come to that given the current "rules."

they cant use alt-account: that would be ban-evading.
but you are right, that they dont need a forum account et al to create and manage a campaign. but IMHO they wont get that much users without forum visibility which might help a bit

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
subSTRATA
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Bountie- Do You Have Game?


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:46:39 AM
 #416

Temp banning them is exactly what I've suggested. More temp bans need to be handed out to the users on their campaigns too until they get the message. And being a lazy campaign manager might not be against the rules but but spamming poor quality posts which they encourage is and do nothing to stop. A rule can always be added that if people can't run a campaign effectively then there will be punishments. Regardless, these campaigns are still being a nuicance and nuicance users are usually banned. If a user signed up to this forum and created a thread that said they were going to pay users to post crap all over do you think they wouldn't receive negative feedback or be banned? No difference here really. The signature campaigns like yobit and secondstrade are causing a significant mess and it's unfair on everyone. Signature campaigns could actually improve the post quality of the forum if campaign managers only accepted and paid users who made decent posts and there are some campaigns that do that but it's futile ultimately when the users that don't get accepted or paid for their posts just go to a campaign like yobit and secondstrade that will pay them for any crap they post.
its spelled "nuisance" btw, and that aside, banning the campaign managers, i feel, might be ineffective to some extent; they could use alt accounts to manage campaigns, and they dont even have to be able to post to 'manage' the campaign if they get banned; all they have to do is be able to count posts and punch in numbers to send payouts. i think simply being more stringent on what qualifies as a constructive post might do better; hand out more bans and raise the bar a little bit.

of course, there is also the option of going as far as to ban the campaign entirely by banning any user that wears 'x' campaign's signature, but it would never come to that given the current "rules."

they cant use alt-account: that would be ban-evading.
but you are right, that they dont need a forum account et al to create and manage a campaign. but IMHO they wont get that much users without forum visibility which might help a bit
i meant they could get approval from 'x' service provider to run the campaign, and with the intent to be lazy as fuck, create an alt account or buy a cheap one to manage the campaign, and if they decide to do so, they can use a vpn, whatever to hide the link between the alt and main account. that way, if the campaign was deemed to be poorly managed, the alt account would suffer the ban instead of the manager's main one.

onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:50:06 AM
 #417


they cant use alt-account: that would be ban-evading.
but you are right, that they dont need a forum account et al to create and manage a campaign. but IMHO they wont get that much users without forum visibility which might help a bit
i meant they could get approval from 'x' service provider to run the campaign, and with the intent to be lazy as fuck, create an alt account or buy a cheap one to manage the campaign, and if they decide to do so, they can use a vpn, whatever to hide the link between the alt and main account. that way, if the campaign was deemed to be poorly managed, the alt account would suffer the ban instead of the manager's main one.

i dont think its that easy for them...
imagine primedice gets banned: i would ban their primary primedice account as well: this would serious affect their business as well.

i know this would be a paradigm shift (treat businesses as a person): but law outside of the forum usually works that way

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
subSTRATA
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Bountie- Do You Have Game?


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 07:54:43 AM
 #418


they cant use alt-account: that would be ban-evading.
but you are right, that they dont need a forum account et al to create and manage a campaign. but IMHO they wont get that much users without forum visibility which might help a bit
i meant they could get approval from 'x' service provider to run the campaign, and with the intent to be lazy as fuck, create an alt account or buy a cheap one to manage the campaign, and if they decide to do so, they can use a vpn, whatever to hide the link between the alt and main account. that way, if the campaign was deemed to be poorly managed, the alt account would suffer the ban instead of the manager's main one.

i dont think its that easy for them...
imagine primedice gets banned: i would ban their primary primedice account as well: this would serious affect their business as well.

i know this would be a paradigm shift (treat businesses as a person): but law outside of the forum usually works that way
i feel that would be quite unfair, to pin the manager's shortcomings on the one running the actual site/service. however, i can also see how that would be incredibly effective, making it the responsibility of service/casino owners to pick effective campaign managers and monitor the post quality of participants from time to time.

Xialla
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


/dev/null


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 08:39:46 AM
 #419

An user of the italian section (Anon39) suggested to prohibit campaign that pay for post, and allowing only campaigns that pay a fixed value every month.
I'm not sure if this is the solution, but it can be a good improvement.
It must be also forbidden to compel the user to write a minimum of posts.

great points. time to time is clearly visible, that some members here are hunting posts "hours before deadline" and this brings negative experience to all members online at this time.

anyway is tricky to set fixed value without minimal post counts..
botany
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
October 10, 2015, 11:37:17 AM
 #420

It might be time to bump up the signature restrictions
i.e. New Legendary Signature Restriction = Current Hero Signature Restriction
New Hero Signature Restriction = Current Senior Signature Restriction

I notice a lot of spam from full member accounts.
People might think twice about destroying senior accounts by spamming.
Moreover, it has been quite some time that Legendary position has been introduced, but nothing has changed on the signature restriction front.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!