Just remove signatures already. As in delete, disable, gone.

[zimmah]

Seriously though, you can just disable signatures in settings.

And seriously you don't get that the point is the SHIT POSTS not the sigs themselves?

(sheesh)

Assumption 1:
People without sigs post no shit

Falsified: Case in point, falllling and his 1000 alts. Among others

Assumption 2:
People with signature do not post constructive posts

Falsified: Several mods and legendary members have ads

Your argument is therefore invalid

What did you say about shit posts again? Stop posting shit please.

Also, by the way, i make well over 50 posts/month (which is the requirement of most ad campaigns at the moment) even without padding with useless posts.

So that argument is also invalid. I'm not posting to get my post count up, i'm posting because i am voicing my opinion. You might disagree with me, but still, a forum is for voicing opinions. Having an ad does not influence my posting frequency or content at all.

[1715021766]

1715021766

[1715021766]

1715021766

[1715021766]

1715021766

[justusranvier]

Assumption 1:
People without sigs post no shit

Falsified: Case in point, falllling and his 1000 alts. Among others

Assumption 2:
People with signature do not post constructive posts

Falsified: Several mods and legendary members have ads

Your argument is therefore invalid

Deliberately pretending to misunderstand an argument so that you can refute something different is called a "strawman fallacy."

[tspacepilot]

Let's make it more explicit for Zimmah:

The argument is that signature-ads and shit posts are positively correlated.  A positive correlation isn't falsified by a single counterexample.

[railzand]

I really like ordinary sigs, and learn a lot from them. But it's impossible to stop just the paid sigs.

Could we give each account say 5 spam points? If you spam and are correctly reported, you get deducted a point by senior staff and sent a warning. If you get to 0, you're fired.

edit: I guess this is much like what is happening at the moment - I'm sure if BadBear saw 5 useless posts on an account, he'd just fire the guy. But I think a more formalised approach would end up being fairer to all: an incentive to report, a disencentive to post garbage, a guideline for the staff.

[peligro]

The only way to get completely away from "pay per post" is to pay users a fixed amount regardless of how much they post during that payment period.

They should pay based on just activity only. Activity will also has be modified so that it drops if the poster is inactive for long. This will prevent somebody just signing up and earning while inactive.

[RocketSingh]

http://we.lovebitco.in/how-bitcoin-works/
1DCeLERonUTsTERdpUNqxKTVMmnwU6reu5
"Certified Schmertified"

There can be legit sigs like yours and mine (where there's either public service stuff or personal projects), but no matter how much we beg for the sig ad spamming to be stopped, it never happens.

My sig should be considered as legit or not ? I dont get paid per post. I get paid per referral !!!

[koshgel]

So many butthurt people over signature campaigns and advertising. Pretty sure I can go through posts of members without an advertisement/campaign and find posts that aren't constructive to the forum. If you don't like users with campaigns, ignore the user. Voila! You don't have to see their spam posts or their advertisements. Problem solved.

[marcotheminer]

So many butthurt people over signature campaigns and advertising. Pretty sure I can go through posts of members without an advertisement/campaign and find posts that aren't constructive to the forum. If you don't like users with campaigns, ignore the user. Voila! You don't have to see their spam posts or their advertisements. Problem solved.

You CAN find some unconstructive BUT relatively there are much more spam posts for users with a paid incentive to post.

[CIYAM]

If you don't like users with campaigns, ignore the user. Voila! You don't have to see their spam posts or their advertisements. Problem solved.

So people who don't want to see spam should have to "solve their own problem by slowly trying to ignore all of its creators by removing them one by one (with new ones appearing every day)"?

Doesn't seem like a great solution to me sorry (so problem *not solved*).

[IIOII]

I fully endorse signature campaigns, for the reasons already given:

1) Promotion of the bitcoin economy

2) Getting some bitcoins into the hands of semi-newbies

And I like to add:

3) Greed is an integral part of how Bitcoin works, so let's do not suppress it.


While I agree that "spam" has increased in the last months, I still like to point out that "quality" is a very subjective criterion. What some people consider crap others will find interesting or entertaining.
I think one of the most significant aspects of  Bitcoin is that it frees money and empowers people. Personally I have been drawn in this community by the spirit of freedom and the diversity of opinions that are voiced straightforwardly. In the spirit of Bitcoin, this forum should reflect that.
Therefore I'm much more tolerant when it comes to "quality". Some users post lengthy on serious topics, others post very short and jokingly. Both kinds of posts make up the whole community feeling that I enjoy. Nonetheless to reduce the amount of "spam" tentatively attributable to some types of signature advertising I have the following suggestions:

a) disallow advertising that pays solely per post

b) disallow advertising that demands more than a reasonable number of posts for a given time period to pay out  (I think 30-60 posts per month is not excessive)

c) all users starting from junior member level should have the same formatting / content rights for signatures (which could be the level of a full member today), thereby discouraging  posts to grow member level to attain advertising opportunities while at the same time opening up advertising opportunities for newer members

d) reintroduce the newbie prison, to avoid spammers spilling over directly into the main forum

e) opening of a "serious discussion" subsection, which everyone can read but only invited members can post to satisfy the needs of the "quality only"-fraction

I'm confident that implementing these measures can have a significant positive effect on quality while at the same time preserving the community spirit.

some people are just really complaining about everything...

Just noticed your sig - no wonder you are posting this crap.

I have reported you and your sponsor owes me 0.001 BTC now.

CIYAM, I seriously doubt that all of your posts live up to the standard you try to forcefully impose on others.

[CIYAM]

CIYAM, I seriously doubt that all of your posts live up to the standard you try to forcefully impose on others.

I am not trying to impose some "great standard" (I would just like to raise the bar from the "shit" that I've been seeing everywhere lately) but you are more than welcome to look through my entire post history and work out the % of "complete crap" posts that I've made.

[HeroC]

Perhaps, but some people use it for valid reasons.

[yraskk]

if you don't want to see any signatures you could do that in your profile, Deleting them as a whole is a big move IMO, Also if you see someone posting for the sake of getting there signature payment "in your opinion at least" you can just add them to your ignore list.

[dserrano5]

if you don't want to see any signatures you could do that in your profile, Deleting them as a whole is a big move IMO, Also if you see someone posting for the sake of getting there signature payment "in your opinion at least" you can just add them to your ignore list.

Man, read the thread. Both concerns have been addressed already. Damn, the second one is answered FOUR FUCKING POSTS above yours. Posts like yours are the very reason this thread exists.

[Malin Keshar]

if you don't want to see any signatures you could do that in your profile, Deleting them as a whole is a big move IMO, Also if you see someone posting for the sake of getting there signature payment "in your opinion at least" you can just add them to your ignore list.

Man, read the thread. Both concerns have been addressed already. Damn, the second one is answered FOUR FUCKING POSTS above yours. Posts like yours are the very reason this thread exists.

Why?

He is not part of a signature program. He has no signature at all.

He is like a counterexample for those who say the spam issue is due to signature programs

[TradersWay.JC]

While I agree that there is a problem with the signatures, people will still make pointless posts to get their activity points on the site so they appear more legitimate. Really, I believe that whatever system is put into place, it will be open to new types of abuses. This is a high traffic website and there are many people wanting to be seen.

[justusranvier]

e is not part of a signature program. He has no signature at all.

He is like a counterexample for those who say the spam issue is due to signature programs

Newbies don't get paid for signatures, AFAIK.

That's one of the causes of pointless posts, as well as the high volume of posts asking about precisely how activity works (they want to know when they roll over to the next category so they can start advertising).

If you want to argue about counterexample, wait until after yraskk reaches "senior member" status.

[koshgel]

If you don't like users with campaigns, ignore the user. Voila! You don't have to see their spam posts or their advertisements. Problem solved.

So people who don't want to see spam should have to "solve their own problem by slowly trying to ignore all of its creators by removing them one by one (with new ones appearing every day)"?

Doesn't seem like a great solution to me sorry (so problem *not solved*).

It's the only viable solution. Removing signatures is an overreaction. There will always be spam posts from newbies trying to gain activity or promote something.

If you care so much, report each post you find as spam and mods will deal with it. When you complain about lack of content, you just seem whiny.

[alc]

It's the only viable solution.

Removing signatures is totally viable. In practical terms, it's remarkably simple.

Removing one of the major sources of noise in this forum isn't an overreaction at all; I'd argue it's necessary. Yes, a much smaller subset of the user base will still spam for post count prestige, but with the financial incentive removed the reduction in mindless shitposting would be significant.

Signatures should be removed.

[Fernandez]

I had suggested sometimes back about rescaling the signature priviledges. For instance halving activity, or increasing tier, or increasing signature quality limitations. It will discourage spamming as providers will be reluctant to pay the same amount for smaller signatures and the intent to post meaningless posts will be less.

The activity introduction cut out a lot of spam immediately, but it also encouraged at least 1 post a day. I would suggest decreasing the formula from 14 posts/ 2 weeks to 7 or less per two weeks, and a necessity to post every week to make sure some just don't sign up and leave the account to mature. Maybe make it 1 post a week and you can only gain 52 activity points a year.