Spondoolies Spam

[Koontas]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

[1715583149]

1715583149

[1715583149]

1715583149

[Blazed]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Well played fight "spam" with a useless spam post! 

[sidehack]

Eh, he's not the only one thinking it. They handed out what, 10 of them? So we're about to have 10 different review threads flopping around for the same product. A consolidated thread with all ten reviews would be nice and organized, but not allow Q&A. But ten independent threads is gonna mean a lot of overlap and wasted space. Advertisement by saturation.

[y_boonstra]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

And your not spamming?

I think its a brilliant move what they did, sending free miners to members wich were not given specific guidelines for writing a review.

[mavericklm]

Call it whatever you want!

I love it!!!

Did we get free miners from bitmain, knc or am??? Hell no! Publicity well deserved!

[Guy Corem]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Well played fight "spam" with a useless spam post! 

Adding some spam of my own 

[hurricandave]

Scene: A cafe. One table is occupied by a group of Vikings with horned helmets on. A man and his wife enter.

Man (Eric Idle): You sit here, dear.

Wife (Graham Chapman in drag): All right.

Man (to Waitress): Morning!

Waitress (Terry Jones, in drag as a bit of a rat-bag): Morning!

Man: Well, what've you got?

Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;

Vikings (starting to chant): Spam spam spam spam...

Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...

Vikings (singing): Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!

Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor au Crevette with a Mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.

Wife: Have you got anything without spam?

Waitress: Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

Wife: I don't want ANY spam!

Man: Why can't she have egg bacon spam and sausage?

Wife: THAT'S got spam in it!

Man: Hasn't got as much spam in it as spam egg sausage and spam, has it?

Vikings: Spam spam spam spam (crescendo through next few lines)

Wife: Could you do the egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam then?

Waitress: Urgghh!

Wife: What do you mean 'Urgghh'? I don't like spam!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!

Vikings: Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up! (Vikings stop) Bloody Vikings! You can't have egg bacon spam and sausage without the spam.

Wife (shrieks): I don't like spam!

Man: Sshh, dear, don't cause a fuss. I'll have your spam. I love it. I'm having spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam!

Vikings (singing): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!

Waitress: Shut up!! Baked beans are off.

Man: Well could I have her spam instead of the baked beans then?

Waitress: You mean spam spam spam spam spam spam... (but it is too late and the Vikings drown her words)

Vikings (singing elaborately): Spam spam spam spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spam! Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam. Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Spam spam spam spam!

[johnyj]

It must COST SOMETHING to spam, you can also spam the bitcoin network by sending useless transactions between your accounts, if you have spare bitcoins 

[mavericklm]

At least good deserving bitcoin ppl got free units!!!

[Tupsu]

The first free SP20 has been sold.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897986.0


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896134

[Bicknellski]

Dogie spam.

Technobit spam.

Yet we are all worried about Spondoolies Spam?

[mavericklm]

All of them should sell the sp20 and buy sp35
or buy more sp20!

[kabopar]

If it's coming from SPT, it couldn't be spam, which is clearly non-Kosher

Happy Hannukah

[Guy Corem]

If it's coming from SPT, it couldn't be spam, which is clearly non-Kosher

Happy Hannukah

Yes, we're selling only Kosher miners, not manufactured in Shmita year.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmita

[Tupsu]

Yes, we're selling only Kosher miners, not manufactured in Shmita year.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmita

I ordered Dec 17, 2014 6x SP20     (order #3798 #3797)
Paid the same day  with EU transfer.

Order status is still unfulfilled.

Can I get them before Christmas

or do I get from Santa Claus again, only to coal...

I sent a letter to sales@ and Barbara 04.12.14 and so far  has not received a response.

and my December 05, 2014, PM you Answered

Please be patient, it's the weekend here.

Now we have another weekend , Therefore, I ask here
Can I get them before Christmas

[wh00per]

If it's coming from SPT, it couldn't be spam, which is clearly non-Kosher

Happy Hannukah

Yes, we're selling only Kosher miners, not manufactured in Shmita year.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmita

lol

You sure they're not _the_ hefker miners?

[The last Shmita year began in September 2014, corresponding to the calendar year 5775]

[wpgdeez]

Eh, he's not the only one thinking it. They handed out what, 10 of them? So we're about to have 10 different review threads flopping around for the same product. A consolidated thread with all ten reviews would be nice and organized, but not allow Q&A. But ten independent threads is gonna mean a lot of overlap and wasted space. Advertisement by saturation.

They essentially bought the first page of the hardware forum 

[Soros Shorts]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Well played fight "spam" with a useless spam post! 

Adding some spam of my own 

How come I see ads for SP20 miners when I visit my favorite porn sites? Don't you guys know I already own a bunch of them?

[sidehack]

Should they start advertising porn on SP20 sites then?

[mavericklm]

They should provide sp20 to porn movie's companies as decoration or actors...
)

[dogie]

I did point this out in the thread before it started, that all should be posted in one place. There is already the ST thread, an unofficial SP20 thread and my SP20 thread. That's fine, its 2 1/2 for one product. But adding another 10.... no other product or company would be allowed to do that. And unfortunately ck has been put in a compromised position by receiving one (outside the competition). If he moves or consolidates them then he will seem ungrateful, if he doesn't he will seem biased.

Lets take for example the Antminer S3. There have likely been 6 figures of S3s sold into the world, yet they only have 2 1/2 threads [S3 tech, mine and for a bit Sushi's]. If Bitmain threw out 10 to the community to make 10 threads, they'd be immediately locked / moved / banned because its spam / pay to spam. Unless of course the SP20 is being used to set an admin precedence.... and which point now every other company is free to spam review threads. 10 'review' threads for each of Bitmain's products, that's no different right?

Ps this thread should head over to meta once its got a bit more of a soak here.

[Guy Corem]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Well played fight "spam" with a useless spam post! 

Adding some spam of my own 

How come I see ads for SP20 miners when I visit my favorite porn sites? Don't you guys know I already own a bunch of them?

Care to share which porn sites ?

[Dexter770221]

Desperate times needs desperate moves.....
So if they will want to make pre orders for SPXX, DON'T DO IT...

[Guy Corem]

...
So if they will want to make pre orders for SPXX, DON'T DO IT...

Your comment can be understood in several way:
- Don't do pre-orders?
- Don't buy pre-orders?
- Don't do reveiew party on future products (which can't be pre-orders)?
- All of the above?
- Some of the above?

[OgNasty]

There is only one way to fight this sort of spam... Other manufacturers need to also give away free mining equipment to Legendary members for reviews. That's the only way it will be fair. 

[SaltySpitoon]

Moved this into Meta, but I wont touch the issue any further since I'm involved and bias could be unfair.

The first free SP20 has been sold.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897986.0


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896134

To be fair, I'm planning to upgrade to a SP31/35 (as per the thread wtt request) so not being a total jerk/ingrate in selling/trading it.

[dogie]

So to continue this debate now we're in meta.... does anyone have an objection to Bitmain having 50 review threads (10 for each active product)? That's the same as ST did.

[/sarcasm]. I hope the answer is everyone, which highlights the need for a revised revision policy to prevent multi-spam of this nature.

[Guy Corem]

There is only one way to fight this sort of spam... Other manufacturers need to also give away free mining equipment to Legendary members for reviews. That's the only way it will be fair.  

What a nasty suggestion  

[Guy Corem]

So to continue this debate now we're in meta.... does anyone have an objection to Bitmain having 50 review threads (10 for each active product)? That's the same as ST did.

[/sarcasm]. I hope the answer is everyone, which highlights the need for a revised revision policy to prevent multi-spam of this nature.

I would love to see 10 different reviews of future BMT products.
We gave the products with no string attached, except doing fair review.
So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.
It's much easier to track the conversation and review progress per thread, not in one big thread.

I believe that a better solution will be to create manufacturer sub folders under Hardware.

[raskul]

I did point this out in the thread before it started, that all should be posted in one place. There is already the ST thread, an unofficial SP20 thread and my SP20 thread. That's fine, its 2 1/2 for one product. But adding another 10.... no other product or company would be allowed to do that. And unfortunately ck has been put in a compromised position by receiving one (outside the competition). If he moves or consolidates them then he will seem ungrateful, if he doesn't he will seem biased.

Lets take for example the Antminer S3. There have likely been 6 figures of S3s sold into the world, yet they only have 2 1/2 threads [S3 tech, mine and for a bit Sushi's]. If Bitmain threw out 10 to the community to make 10 threads, they'd be immediately locked / moved / banned because its spam / pay to spam. Unless of course the SP20 is being used to set an admin precedence.... and which point now every other company is free to spam review threads. 10 'review' threads for each of Bitmain's products, that's no different right?

Ps this thread should head over to meta once its got a bit more of a soak here.

I, in turn, made a proposal in Meta that each manufacturer should have their own child boards.. so - if the SP-Tech reviews are getting such attention to be always at the top of the boards they are in, it's not Spondoolies fault, is it? it's clearly a fault of the forum structure.

note: i made this proposal before any of those reviews went up. I think Dogie is just a little too precious about his own review threads (which should be within manufacturer child boards in the first place)

[Beastlymac]

I did point this out in the thread before it started, that all should be posted in one place. There is already the ST thread, an unofficial SP20 thread and my SP20 thread. That's fine, its 2 1/2 for one product. But adding another 10.... no other product or company would be allowed to do that. And unfortunately ck has been put in a compromised position by receiving one (outside the competition). If he moves or consolidates them then he will seem ungrateful, if he doesn't he will seem biased.

Lets take for example the Antminer S3. There have likely been 6 figures of S3s sold into the world, yet they only have 2 1/2 threads [S3 tech, mine and for a bit Sushi's]. If Bitmain threw out 10 to the community to make 10 threads, they'd be immediately locked / moved / banned because its spam / pay to spam. Unless of course the SP20 is being used to set an admin precedence.... and which point now every other company is free to spam review threads. 10 'review' threads for each of Bitmain's products, that's no different right?

Ps this thread should head over to meta once its got a bit more of a soak here.

I, in turn, made a proposal in Meta that each manufacturer should have their own child boards.. so - if the SP-Tech reviews are getting such attention to be always at the top of the boards they are in, it's not Spondoolies fault, is it? it's clearly a fault of the forum structure.

note: i made this proposal before any of those reviews went up. I think Dogie is just a little too precious about his own review threads (which should be within manufacturer child boards in the first place)

It is Spondoolies fault it was in my view their primary goal when hosting the giveaway/competition. By giving away a unit to 10 different people that are seen as valued and knowledgable in this community they have got them advertising the miners and with 10 reviews they knew that when they asked everyone reviewer to post in the main sub forum of the biggest resource for bitcoin mining and information that they would clog up the front page. With the front page clogged any new person who comes and looks at miners will instantly see the Sp20 being praised by high rank people on the forum that are part of an "elite" group (hence the requirement for Legendary users only) and this will increase sales for the Sp20. Spondoolies giving away 10 miners to secure the backing of 10 high ranked members and more then likely securing 100's of Sp20 and future model sales is a smart tactic.

So don't be mistaken this is what spondoolies want as it is an ideal form of advertising for them and i think they have pulled it off well.

[raskul]

I thought your issue here was that Spondoolies-Tech have a pile of great reviews which are active threads, but you have debunked that myth by stating that you are just annoyed that a company who produce a product are using valuable marketing methods to have their product recognised.

you clearly know nothing about marketing and your readiness to state the obvious is indeed astounding, if not a tad immaturely astounding.
dogie has several review threads, and IMHO - they should all be within manufacturer child boards. I'm not butt-hurt about the fact that dogie seems to get a free unit from every manufacturer and i'm not complaining about his review threads.

you sound like an angry child.

I did point this out in the thread before it started, that all should be posted in one place. There is already the ST thread, an unofficial SP20 thread and my SP20 thread. That's fine, its 2 1/2 for one product. But adding another 10.... no other product or company would be allowed to do that. And unfortunately ck has been put in a compromised position by receiving one (outside the competition). If he moves or consolidates them then he will seem ungrateful, if he doesn't he will seem biased.

Lets take for example the Antminer S3. There have likely been 6 figures of S3s sold into the world, yet they only have 2 1/2 threads [S3 tech, mine and for a bit Sushi's]. If Bitmain threw out 10 to the community to make 10 threads, they'd be immediately locked / moved / banned because its spam / pay to spam. Unless of course the SP20 is being used to set an admin precedence.... and which point now every other company is free to spam review threads. 10 'review' threads for each of Bitmain's products, that's no different right?

Ps this thread should head over to meta once its got a bit more of a soak here.

I, in turn, made a proposal in Meta that each manufacturer should have their own child boards.. so - if the SP-Tech reviews are getting such attention to be always at the top of the boards they are in, it's not Spondoolies fault, is it? it's clearly a fault of the forum structure.

note: i made this proposal before any of those reviews went up. I think Dogie is just a little too precious about his own review threads (which should be within manufacturer child boards in the first place)

It is Spondoolies fault it was in my view their primary goal when hosting the giveaway/competition. By giving away a unit to 10 different people that are seen as valued and knowledgable in this community they have got them advertising the miners and with 10 reviews they knew that when they asked everyone reviewer to post in the main sub forum of the biggest resource for bitcoin mining and information that they would clog up the front page. With the front page clogged any new person who comes and looks at miners will instantly see the Sp20 being praised by high rank people on the forum that are part of an "elite" group (hence the requirement for Legendary users only) and this will increase sales for the Sp20. Spondoolies giving away 10 miners to secure the backing of 10 high ranked members and more then likely securing 100's of Sp20 and future model sales is a smart tactic.

So don't be mistaken this is what spondoolies want as it is an ideal form of advertising for them and i think they have pulled it off well.

"clogged up"
 

none of this forum is clogged up. Please point me to a forum board which takes too long to load, or fails in any way.

 

[Beastlymac]

I thought your issue here was that Spondoolies-Tech have a pile of great reviews which are active threads, but you have debunked that myth by stating that you are just annoyed that a company who produce a product are using valuable marketing methods to have their product recognised.

you clearly know nothing about marketing and your readiness to state the obvious is indeed astounding, if not a tad immaturely astounding.
dogie has several review threads, and IMHO - they should all be within manufacturer child boards. I'm not butt-hurt about the fact that dogie seems to get a free unit from every manufacturer and i'm not complaining about his review threads.

you sound like an angry child.

I did point this out in the thread before it started, that all should be posted in one place. There is already the ST thread, an unofficial SP20 thread and my SP20 thread. That's fine, its 2 1/2 for one product. But adding another 10.... no other product or company would be allowed to do that. And unfortunately ck has been put in a compromised position by receiving one (outside the competition). If he moves or consolidates them then he will seem ungrateful, if he doesn't he will seem biased.

Lets take for example the Antminer S3. There have likely been 6 figures of S3s sold into the world, yet they only have 2 1/2 threads [S3 tech, mine and for a bit Sushi's]. If Bitmain threw out 10 to the community to make 10 threads, they'd be immediately locked / moved / banned because its spam / pay to spam. Unless of course the SP20 is being used to set an admin precedence.... and which point now every other company is free to spam review threads. 10 'review' threads for each of Bitmain's products, that's no different right?

Ps this thread should head over to meta once its got a bit more of a soak here.

I, in turn, made a proposal in Meta that each manufacturer should have their own child boards.. so - if the SP-Tech reviews are getting such attention to be always at the top of the boards they are in, it's not Spondoolies fault, is it? it's clearly a fault of the forum structure.

note: i made this proposal before any of those reviews went up. I think Dogie is just a little too precious about his own review threads (which should be within manufacturer child boards in the first place)

It is Spondoolies fault it was in my view their primary goal when hosting the giveaway/competition. By giving away a unit to 10 different people that are seen as valued and knowledgable in this community they have got them advertising the miners and with 10 reviews they knew that when they asked everyone reviewer to post in the main sub forum of the biggest resource for bitcoin mining and information that they would clog up the front page. With the front page clogged any new person who comes and looks at miners will instantly see the Sp20 being praised by high rank people on the forum that are part of an "elite" group (hence the requirement for Legendary users only) and this will increase sales for the Sp20. Spondoolies giving away 10 miners to secure the backing of 10 high ranked members and more then likely securing 100's of Sp20 and future model sales is a smart tactic.

So don't be mistaken this is what spondoolies want as it is an ideal form of advertising for them and i think they have pulled it off well.

"clogged up"
 

none of this forum is clogged up. Please point me to a forum board which takes too long to load, or fails in any way.

 

I think you miss understand my view point here. I think that what they have done is smart and i have no qualms with spondoolies having communicated and worked with them previously i think that they are a great company that they have great products. I was just pointing out one of the meanings behind the review.

In regards to you not saying i understand marketing or sales techniques i would say that is mildly preposterous if you do some research.

"Clogged up" is the figure of speech that i used in reference to the first page of the hardware board again i didn't say this was negative i said that it was smart marketing.

I am not "annoyed" about anything i am talking about the smart way they have marketed the SP20.

I would also like to point out my response in the previous post was only in reference to the marketing tactic of spondoolies and you saying "it's not Spondoolies fault, is it?" to point out that they would have had an understanding of the effect it would have on the section.

[SaltySpitoon]

The problem with company specific boards, is Asic producers are being created and disappearing every other day. Half of the companies that promise to produce Asics just kind of don't. Not only would it be a big time waster for Theymos to constantly be adding specific manufacturer boards, but this discussion will inevitably end with someone suggesting that there is a Asic producer vetting procedure, which would be unfair to startup companies (the ones that aren't scammers) and that would give some sort of Forum based bias towards those that are "vetted" then if one of those companies runs off with people's money, people will be complaining. As much as you might be surprised, moderators don't really like big blowouts in the Meta section.

When I first saw the stipulations of the giveaway, that 10 separate threads would be created, I figured it might be an issue, but I won't get involved in anything relating to this as it would be unfair for me to do so, so the other moderators can decide what happens here. In my opinion anyway, since the majority of the reviews have a good deal of overlap, the most detailed review or reviews will stay afloat in the first page or pages, and the others that are already encapsulated into the more popular reviews will sink away.

[dogie]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

[SaltySpitoon]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

7 of the Legendary reviews are on the 2nd/3rd page. It seems that the unofficial review and support threads are staying bumped though.

[Guy Corem]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

My involvement is a short courtesy thank you for the reviewer.
Be patient and most of the threads will sunk soon.
I did reply that I'll be happy to see 10 different reviews of a new BMT product.

I really don't understand all the negative attitude towards our legendaries review party. It's fun and harmless.

[dogie]

Taken this second. So of the first 17 threads, 11 are review threads, 2 are other ST threads and 4 are other threads. This is the definition of spam.

[hurricandave]

Ya missed one Dogie! The last post in the Groupbuy child thread is......

[mavericklm]

from SPTECH

[hurricandave]

I love it.  I'm so tired of seeing the thread board clogged with Bitmain,- I flashed my firmware and bricked my S-?, it's not SPTech's fault Bitmain has missed the their release date for the S-5 or that would be dominating the board instead.

[Flying Hellfish]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

My involvement is a short courtesy thank you for the reviewer.
Be patient and most of the threads will sunk soon.
I did reply that I'll be happy to see 10 different reviews of a new BMT product.

I really don't understand all the negative attitude towards our legendaries review party. It's fun and harmless.

Why does bitmain only get 10, what if they wanted to do 50?

Is it also OK for any manufacture to do as many review threads as they like?

If it's all harmless fun and they will sink away in a few days what is so bad about having them all together?  You might actually get a single review thread to stay on the front page a lot longer with everyone circle jerking in it.

To be honest I think SPT is the best manufacture to date (the company is very proffesional and their products are reportedly fantastic), if this was Bitmain, AM or ANY other vendor I would have exactly the same problem with it.

[dogie]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

My involvement is a short courtesy thank you for the reviewer.
Be patient and most of the threads will sunk soon.
I did reply that I'll be happy to see 10 different reviews of a new BMT product.

I really don't understand all the negative attitude towards our legendaries review party. It's fun and harmless.

Why does bitmain only get 10, what if they wanted to do 50?

Is it also OK for any manufacture to do as many review threads as they like?

If it's all harmless fun and they will sink away in a few days what is so bad about having them all together?  You might actually get a single review thread to stay on the front page a lot longer with everyone circle jerking in it.

To be honest I think SPT is the best manufacture to date (the company is very proffesional and their products are reportedly fantastic), if this was Bitmain, AM or ANY other vendor I would have exactly the same problem with it.

That's what I mean, its "all fun and games" to the issuing company, who is sitting there making money while others refrain. When others choose to fight back, then its no longer 'fun'. And they will and can and rightly should if the moderation allows things like this to go on.

[Beastlymac]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

My involvement is a short courtesy thank you for the reviewer.
Be patient and most of the threads will sunk soon.
I did reply that I'll be happy to see 10 different reviews of a new BMT product.

I really don't understand all the negative attitude towards our legendaries review party. It's fun and harmless.

I agree that in the span of things it is harmless. In a week the majority of the review threads will be on the second or third page and we all know almost nobody looks past the first page. So i don't think people need to get as worked up about it as they have been.

[malaimult]

I think Spondoolies did somewhat cause the spam by giving away so many of their miners under the condition that a review was to be made for the device. I really don't see it causing that much harm though as each thread is not going to cause that much of a distraction and they will probably quickly die/fade away.

It probably would have been more appropriate for Spondoolies to have the reviews be made in the "main" thread and then they could quote the review in the OP or 2nd/3rd reserved page

[Flying Hellfish]

So Hardware was flooded for 3-4 days. It's not such a big deal.

As of this post, 7/10 review threads, +the SP20 unofficial thread, + the spondoolies thread are all active on the front page. In part, because you are being active in each and all of them.

I'll say it again, does anyone have an objection to Bitmain paying for 50 review threads? Seems not.

My involvement is a short courtesy thank you for the reviewer.
Be patient and most of the threads will sunk soon.
I did reply that I'll be happy to see 10 different reviews of a new BMT product.

I really don't understand all the negative attitude towards our legendaries review party. It's fun and harmless.

I agree that in the span of things it is harmless. In a week the majority of the review threads will be on the second or third page and we all know almost nobody looks past the first page. So i don't think people need to get as worked up about it as they have been.

If they allow this once they have to allow it again...  

I would like to officially ask any manufacture who decides to advertise here this way to consider me for the list!!!  

I really thought conmans solution was pretty reasonable LOL.  It allowed for everyone to get basically what they wanted.

SPT got the advertising they paid for and according to them they will sink into oblivion any ways (there is still multiple active SPT threads and links to the reviews can be posted in lots of places for future reference)
Legendaries got sweet toys
Forum gets to set a precedent saying something like, "this is cool and peps had some fun but hey we can't let every one do this so ya we're gonna lock em down after they run their course" and "no more spammy advertising we don't get a cut/control of...".

And of course if the forum admin and mods don't agree and they think it's perfectly fine than like I said, can I go on the next list from any manufacture please!

[Flying Hellfish]

I think Spondoolies did somewhat cause the spam by giving away so many of their miners under the condition that a review was to be made for the device. I really don't see it causing that much harm though as each thread is not going to cause that much of a distraction and they will probably quickly die/fade away.

It probably would have been more appropriate for Spondoolies to have the reviews be made in the "main" thread and then they could quote the review in the OP or 2nd/3rd reserved page

Consolidation into a single thread (SPT had a couple to choose from) would have been the smart and right thing to do.

If the other manufactures don't do it then ya it was completely harmless (unless you care about SPT spending money to advertise here and the forum not getting paid for it, which some do and some don't).  If all of a sudden other manufactures start to do it to compete it will detract from the readability of the Hardware forum IMO.

[malaimult]

I think Spondoolies did somewhat cause the spam by giving away so many of their miners under the condition that a review was to be made for the device. I really don't see it causing that much harm though as each thread is not going to cause that much of a distraction and they will probably quickly die/fade away.

It probably would have been more appropriate for Spondoolies to have the reviews be made in the "main" thread and then they could quote the review in the OP or 2nd/3rd reserved page

Consolidation into a single thread (SPT had a couple to choose from) would have been the smart and right thing to do.

If the other manufactures don't do it then ya it was completely harmless (unless you care about SPT spending money to advertise here and the forum not getting paid for it, which some do and some don't).  If all of a sudden other manufactures start to do it to compete it will detract from the readability of the Hardware forum IMO.

Manufacturers could potentially start signature campaigns which the forum does not receive proceeds from either. I think the market should regulate this kind of behavior as this does kind of make them look bad, as it is no secret they gave away free miners.

IMO Spondoolies should ask the OP of each of the threads to lock their respective threads, quote and/or reference the review in their thread so people can get several independent perspectives as to their miner's performance.   

[Mushroomized]

10 posts != spam...  then again i did get a free miner

[Flying Hellfish]

10 posts != spam...  then again i did get a free miner

Dude there's like 15 or so SPT threads in Hardware ATM.  If all the others do it because it's allowed it's could get pretty gross in the Hardware section

[dogie]

I think Spondoolies did somewhat cause the spam by giving away so many of their miners under the condition that a review was to be made for the device. I really don't see it causing that much harm though as each thread is not going to cause that much of a distraction and they will probably quickly die/fade away.

It probably would have been more appropriate for Spondoolies to have the reviews be made in the "main" thread and then they could quote the review in the OP or 2nd/3rd reserved page

Consolidation into a single thread (SPT had a couple to choose from) would have been the smart and right thing to do.

If the other manufactures don't do it then ya it was completely harmless (unless you care about SPT spending money to advertise here and the forum not getting paid for it, which some do and some don't).  If all of a sudden other manufactures start to do it to compete it will detract from the readability of the Hardware forum IMO.

Which is why it needs to be stopped, now. It would be entirely unfair to allow this episode to continue and NOT let a further one by a different manufacturer continue.

There is also the issue that mod's that actively decide what is allowed and not are involved in this (and potentially future) giveaways. SS received a unit from the main giveaway and CK rightly from a cgminer perspective. At what point does it simply become a bribe in order to circumvent otherwise 'accepted' standards? [This is an entirely theoretical question, I'm not suggesting that's what happened here. But seriously, what if every admin was targeted in a giveaway, such that no one wants to actually stop the obvious spam?]

[Guy Corem]

Taken this second. So of the first 17 threads, 11 are review threads, 2 are other ST threads and 4 are other threads. This is the definition of spam.

Dogie, you do realize that people are playing with you ?
Instead of letting those threads sunk, you kept this spam thread alive.
Eventually, if you'll continue to post here and people will continue to bump those threads, Con will be forced to lock them.

I suggest no more posting here and no more artificial bumps.
(disclaimer: we don't initiate those bumps)

Guy

[mavericklm]

It's just the envy in them that is raging! let them cry

[sjc1490]

It's just the envy in them that is raging! let them cry

Agreed, excellent marketing move, could it be jealousy that it wasn't thought of first by someone else?

P.S.
I am very happy with the SP20 I recently PURCHASED.

[mavericklm]

I got 2 incoming! I feel, a bit like a child waiting for them to arrive!

It's as simple as upgrading the forum with subforums for each manufacturer, else is ok i guess!

[raskul]

I got 2 incoming! I feel, a bit like a child waiting for them to arrive!

It's as simple as upgrading the forum with subforums for each manufacturer, else is ok i guess!

I have made the proposal for this, some time before the review threads appeared and the consensus from the forum moderators was
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=889336.0


'meh, can't be arsed it's too much bother' or words to those effects.


dogie reckons

/Hardware would be significantly damaged with the introduction of further subforums. Who would decide what companies to add and remove, how would anyone see what was active or newly announced without entering 15 subforums, and even in each subforum there would be content sometimes years old. There simply isn't 25 topics required per company, unless you attempt to break the system like ST did. And ah, if there was subforums, ST wouldn't have spent the money to do that kind of activity in the first place. Back to not needing more than a few topics per company.

so, there you have it. butt-hurt because his own threads have been bumped down.

[mavericklm]

He must have some big ass ego!

[BadBear]

If sig campaigns are allowed, I don't see what's so particularly heinous about this. Targetting sig campaigns would also provide a better ROI, it's by far the worst type of corporate spam here.

I do see how it may become a problem if it becomes common. Though one would think that since a significant majority of their customers come from here they would ultimately want to do what's best for the forum, and not just short term profits, but that's greed for ya. I guess we'll find out.

[wh00per]

I think Spondoolies did somewhat cause the spam by giving away so many of their miners under the condition that a review was to be made for the device. I really don't see it causing that much harm though as each thread is not going to cause that much of a distraction and they will probably quickly die/fade away.

It probably would have been more appropriate for Spondoolies to have the reviews be made in the "main" thread and then they could quote the review in the OP or 2nd/3rd reserved page

Consolidation into a single thread (SPT had a couple to choose from) would have been the smart and right thing to do.

If the other manufactures don't do it then ya it was completely harmless (unless you care about SPT spending money to advertise here and the forum not getting paid for it, which some do and some don't).  If all of a sudden other manufactures start to do it to compete it will detract from the readability of the Hardware forum IMO.

Which is why it needs to be stopped, now. It would be entirely unfair to allow this episode to continue and NOT let a further one by a different manufacturer continue.

There is also the issue that mod's that actively decide what is allowed and not are involved in this (and potentially future) giveaways. SS received a unit from the main giveaway and CK rightly from a cgminer perspective. At what point does it simply become a bribe in order to circumvent otherwise 'accepted' standards? [This is an entirely theoretical question, I'm not suggesting that's what happened here. But seriously, what if every admin was targeted in a giveaway, such that no one wants to actually stop the obvious spam?]

Dogie and the rest ..

While I find dogie's guides not technical enough to read respond to them, they should be consolidated too ..
I don't see a reason for dogie's individual reviews remaining out there as posted and MY review  (if any) should be made part of any other one's thread.


In the screen capture above I actually ran through all the reviews I found and try to understand how steep is the learning curve for all legendary and hero members involved. I "bumped them" so that I can track user interest and response time for each of them.

With the Christmas around the corner, try think of giving something to the community without impersonating the forum staff. If you feel threatened in one way or the other, report my posts. The moderators do a nice job altogether .. and while I did not post too much since I joined in 2012, I read most of the forum members output. We all play by the rules ..

[Blazed]

I do not see any issues with the give away for some good reviews..it does get old seeing the same old boring stuff in that thread. I really would like to see a manufacture specific sub for each company though. Maybe after a company has released a working product allow them a specific sub? *Disclaimer I was given one of these wonderful miners*
I would be good with Bitmain giving samples - I am ready to review a S4 anytime they wish to ship me one 

[Mabsark]

An obvious compromise between having numerous review posts and having manufacture sub-forums is to create a mining review sub-forum.

[raskul]

An obvious compromise between having numerous review posts and having manufacture sub-forums is to create a mining review sub-forum.

that's a good idea, however I still prefer the idea of manufacturers child boards, simply because it'd be more user-friendly in navigation.

[Mushroomized]

An obvious compromise between having numerous review posts and having manufacture sub-forums is to create a mining review sub-forum.

I agree, a manufacturer subforum would be too much hassle but this is a good idea

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

If sig campaigns are allowed, I don't see what's so particularly heinous about this. Targetting sig campaigns would also provide a better ROI, it's by far the worst type of corporate spam here.

I do see how it may become a problem if it becomes common. Though one would think that since a significant majority of their customers come from here they would ultimately want to do what's best for the forum, and not just short term profits, but that's greed for ya. I guess we'll find out.

I couldn't agree more. I appreciate the fact that it allows n00bs like me a way of (possibly) earning some starter bitcoins, but sig campaigns are unbecoming to the forum. I would personally sign a petition to have them removed. I was fine with faucets

[dogie]

If sig campaigns are allowed, I don't see what's so particularly heinous about this. Targetting sig campaigns would also provide a better ROI, it's by far the worst type of corporate spam here.

I do see how it may become a problem if it becomes common. Though one would think that since a significant majority of their customers come from here they would ultimately want to do what's best for the forum, and not just short term profits, but that's greed for ya. I guess we'll find out.

The greater problem is that there isn't a concrete admin policy on the issue. One company was allowed and it appears that the policy is that anyone can do it. But if another company does exactly the same thing but on a larger scale, can we guarantee there would be no admin intervention?

[raskul]

If sig campaigns are allowed, I don't see what's so particularly heinous about this. Targetting sig campaigns would also provide a better ROI, it's by far the worst type of corporate spam here.

I do see how it may become a problem if it becomes common. Though one would think that since a significant majority of their customers come from here they would ultimately want to do what's best for the forum, and not just short term profits, but that's greed for ya. I guess we'll find out.

The greater problem is that there isn't a concrete admin policy on the issue. One company was allowed and it appears that the policy is that anyone can do it. But if another company does exactly the same thing but on a larger scale, can we guarantee there would be no admin intervention?

The above Post has been sponsored by Bitmain-Tech.

yes dogie, cheers for that.

[dogie]

If sig campaigns are allowed, I don't see what's so particularly heinous about this. Targetting sig campaigns would also provide a better ROI, it's by far the worst type of corporate spam here.

I do see how it may become a problem if it becomes common. Though one would think that since a significant majority of their customers come from here they would ultimately want to do what's best for the forum, and not just short term profits, but that's greed for ya. I guess we'll find out.

The greater problem is that there isn't a concrete admin policy on the issue. One company was allowed and it appears that the policy is that anyone can do it. But if another company does exactly the same thing but on a larger scale, can we guarantee there would be no admin intervention?

The above Post has been sponsored by Bitmain-Tech.

yes dogie, cheers for that.

Again, says the christmas tree -_- My relationship with bitmain does not extend outside their threads. Can we get back OT though please?

[mavericklm]

i count 11 threads with bitmain in the title! did any1 complained?

i count 4 threads starting with [Guide] Dogie's  by some guy that thinks is the l'ombelico del mondo

yes! you are the spam!

[AJRGale]

there is one simple way of fixing these "omg spamz" problem, each major company has their own sub forum inside the "Hardware" section, and an extra for the "New Companies" and its upto the main company to monitor their subs.

... oh i can see whats going to happen if that ever came in. "i don't like your words, *delete*"

but if people going to have hate over Ckolivas de-cluttering the forums by collating all the reviews, they have a problem, i was surprised it never happened.

Hell, even if the thread owners locked the original post and moved onto the other 2, that would help out the "spamz in ma face" issue

[dogie]

i count 11 threads with bitmain in the title! did any1 complained?

There is no where near 11, and if people are asking questions outside of the appropriate areas then report those posts. I would be more than happy to merge anything bitmain into one of the two bitmain threads per product but I'm not an admin so you have to have patience.

[dogie]

Issue has been resolved, CK has set an appropriate precedent:

There are quite a number of these reviews now cluttering up the hardware area and while it was nice publicity for spondoolies, I will be locking each thread after they have been up for a couple of days and I suggest further discussion regarding the reviews should go here. @spondoolies-tech, you may wish to create links to all the original review threads in your top post.

I understand but these should really have all been collated here as it ends up being advertising for spondoolies on the forum that costs spondoolies but did not actually pay the forum. Unfortunately there is no merge function in this forum software which would be the ideal solution. Out of respect for the legendaries I've forgone the locking for now, but can I urge the reviewers themselves to lock their threads and refer back to this one once they have completed whatever they have to say instead then?

tldr no one is allowed to flood spam

[mavericklm]

i count 11 threads with bitmain in the title! did any1 complained?

There is no where near 11, and if people are asking questions outside of the appropriate areas then report those posts. I would be more than happy to merge anything bitmain into one of the two bitmain threads per product but I'm not an admin so you have to have patience.

are u blind or just acting like a fool??

14threads related to bitmain miners atm! and it goes like this:  5 threads started by bitmain and 4 by you!
the rest are from customers with bitmain miner related problems!
btw: any thread with SPTech customers crying like bitmain customers?

Did any1 complain that bitmain has a thread for each of its own miner??
and SPTech only 1 for all.....

[Guy Corem]

I think that we got some very interesting threads.
The uninteresting slowly sunk.
I wish MrTeal will unlock his thread.

I think that it turns out very nicely, and it's clearly not "spam".

[raskul]

I think that we got some very interesting threads.
The uninteresting slowly sunk.
I wish MrTeal will unlock his thread.

I think that it turns out very nicely, and it's clearly not "spam".

well, in reality, this thread was started by one of your biggest haters.
It just goes to show how truly 'impartial' that dogie (et al) is, when joining in with this type of hate-campaign.
dogie and his 'manufacturers trustworthyness guide' what a crock of shit.

dogie, lock all your threads, by the standards you have set out in this thread, they are all spam.

[Guy Corem]

I think that we got some very interesting threads.
The uninteresting slowly sunk.
I wish MrTeal will unlock his thread.

I think that it turns out very nicely, and it's clearly not "spam".

well, in reality, this thread was started by one of your biggest haters.
It just goes to show how truly 'impartial' that dogie (et al) is, when joining in with this type of hate-campaign.
dogie and his 'manufacturers trustworthyness guide' what a crock of shit.

dogie, lock all your threads, by the standards you have set out in this thread, they are all spam.

I wanted to add that it seems that now innocent posts I am making are being reported and deleted.
It's ludicrous but it won't deter me.

[theymos]

The moderation guidelines say:

Topic creation should not be annoying. There should not be too many topics about the same thing in a short time period, and individuals should not post too many topics. "Too many" depends on the quality of the topics.

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics. How this should be handled is more tricky, since I don't want to suppress anyone's honest opinion. We'll see if ckolivas' locking solution is helpful.

[mavericklm]

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics

there was no page full of sp20 review threads as there is always few threads by bitmain or dogie on main page!
also bfl and knc fucked up bussines

did anyone make any fuss about the fact that dogie has 20 or more threads of ''guides''?
or about the fact that bitmain has a thread for each of it's miners? spondoolies has only 1 main thread and that is it!

[Guy Corem]

The moderation guidelines say:

Topic creation should not be annoying. There should not be too many topics about the same thing in a short time period, and individuals should not post too many topics. "Too many" depends on the quality of the topics.

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics. How this should be handled is more tricky, since I don't want to suppress anyone's honest opinion. We'll see if ckolivas' locking solution is helpful.

I believe those reviews turns out very nicely and a lot of them contains very interesting information and new tweaking.
Yes, few users include some well known haters (not Dogie!) complained and created this thread.
Dogie also complained and kept this thread alive. Some users enjoyed "playing" with him by artificially bumping the threads up.
I don't think locking by moderator is the right solution. Each Legendary may choose to lock his/her own thread.

In the last days, three of my posts were deleted by moderator, probably due to someone complaining.
I urge the moderators to be more careful with censorahip and posts deleting.

Compare to our main competition, we usually have much less threads under hardware main page.

[raskul]

People!

Give a burgeoning business a chance.

I've been in the media industry for 17 years and i feel a serious dejavu about all of this.

Final conclusion: censorship is bad.

Stop deleting posts.

I even had a post 'sorry for your loss'

Deleted.

Sick censorship is what's going on here.
Theymos, recognise that your moderators have an agenda and be more liberal in making sure your users are allowed to express an opinion.

[MrTeal]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

[Guy Corem]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

Very nicely put and exactly what I've meant.
We don't want to spam Hardware. Yes, for few days, hardware was flooded with reviews.
Few days afterwards,  only the intersting stuff remains.

Dogie pressed the panic button too fast. My guess is that BitmainTech got nervous due to the immenet S5 launch.
They didn't want the SP20 reviews to spoil their (inferior IMHO  ) product launch.
The moderators are being used and doesn't exercise enough judgment here (I'm referring to posts that got reported and deleted in those threads)

Edit: We're at inherent disadvantage here. BitmainTech is paying a lot for ads and we don't.
Edit2: MrTeal, can you unlock your thread?

[MrTeal]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

Very nicely put and exactly what I've meant.
We don't want to spam Hardware. Yes, for few days, hardware was flooded with reviews.
Few days afterwards,  only the intersting stuff remains.

Dogie pressed the panic button too fast. My guess is that BitmainTech got nervous due to the immenet S5 launch.
They didn't want the SP20 reviews to spoil their (inferior IMHO  ) product launch.
The moderators are being used and doesn't exercise enough judgment here (I'm referring to posts that got reported and deleted in those threads)

Edit: We're at inherent disadvantage here. BitmainTech is paying a lot for ads and we don't.
Edit2: MrTeal, can you unlock your thread?

I'm not sure I can. I locked it by editing the OP and selecting lock under the advanced options, but I don't seem to be able to edit any posts in that thread anymore so I'm unable to do the reverse to unlock. I'll muck around to see if I can figure it out, but it might require an act of Mod to unlock it at this point.
Edit: Fixed. The unlock is in the very bottom left of the thread.

[malaimult]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

By having 10 reviews (13?) from 10 long standing members of the community, the review process is much more decentralized then it is when we only have dogie's review, a "main" thread and little incentive for anyone else to create a meaningful review thread. IMO this gives potential customers the opportunity to see how well the machines work and can make an informed choice if they want to purchase.

I agree that whenever a new 'model' miner is released the mining subforum is going to be somewhat cluttered with that model's reviews. A simple solution would be to create two additional subforums - one for 'official' threads and one for customer reviews

[MrTeal]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

By having 10 reviews (13?) from 10 long standing members of the community, the review process is much more decentralized then it is when we only have dogie's review, a "main" thread and little incentive for anyone else to create a meaningful review thread. IMO this gives potential customers the opportunity to see how well the machines work and can make an informed choice if they want to purchase.

I agree that whenever a new 'model' miner is released the mining subforum is going to be somewhat cluttered with that model's reviews. A simple solution would be to create two additional subforums - one for 'official' threads and one for customer reviews

I don't necessarily agree with Dogie essentially using the forum as a free for-profit review website and if I were the mods I would ban his in-thread banner ads, but (I assume) he gets his revenue because his threads get a lot of hits. If anyone else is interested, many of his reviews are very basic with not a lot of real content so there is much room to improve if anyone else is actually interested in putting in the work. There's a bunch questionable things with how he conducts himself (such as the veiled aggression towards companies who don't pay him or the whitewashing of the extremely sketchy behavior of HashCoins who are), but I don't see that as a reason to not let him post a thread per device. It's not like he's banning other reviews, other people just don't bother making them which you can hardly blame on dogie.

[malaimult]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

By having 10 reviews (13?) from 10 long standing members of the community, the review process is much more decentralized then it is when we only have dogie's review, a "main" thread and little incentive for anyone else to create a meaningful review thread. IMO this gives potential customers the opportunity to see how well the machines work and can make an informed choice if they want to purchase.

I agree that whenever a new 'model' miner is released the mining subforum is going to be somewhat cluttered with that model's reviews. A simple solution would be to create two additional subforums - one for 'official' threads and one for customer reviews

I don't necessarily agree with Dogie essentially using the forum as a free for-profit review website and if I were the mods I would ban his in-thread banner ads, but (I assume) he gets his revenue because his threads get a lot of hits. If anyone else is interested, many of his reviews are very basic with not a lot of real content so there is much room to improve if anyone else is actually interested in putting in the work. There's a bunch questionable things with how he conducts himself (such as the veiled aggression towards companies who don't pay him or the whitewashing of the extremely sketchy behavior of HashCoins who are), but I don't see that as a reason to not let him post a thread per device. It's not like he's banning other reviews, other people just don't bother making them which you can hardly blame on dogie.

I am not saying that anything is wrong with the fact that dogie makes a thread for every new miner. What my point is that if more people do the same thing then there is a better chance that people will find value from a review.

Plus some people think the fact that dogie is paid by bitman makes him somewhat biased (I don't agree with this point of view, but it is shared by some)

[smoothie]

I think if people want to post reviews or comments on a product and there is that much discussion then it isn't spam.

Spam should be when one user posts multiple threads with the same topic over and over.

[Newar]

Some thoughts looking at Hardware page 1:

Bitmain have a thread for every model. The title says "announcement and support". There is a support section, so?

Spondoolies, apart from the reviews, have one thread plus an unoffficial model specific and the Legendary thread.

My suggestion is to have a model specific thread per model per manufacturer. Reviewers could post there. And if it turns into a support thread (which it will), so be it.


Guides how to do things belong in Support, IMHO.

[dogie]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

By having 10 reviews (13?) from 10 long standing members of the community, the review process is much more decentralized then it is when we only have dogie's review, a "main" thread and little incentive for anyone else to create a meaningful review thread. IMO this gives potential customers the opportunity to see how well the machines work and can make an informed choice if they want to purchase.

I agree that whenever a new 'model' miner is released the mining subforum is going to be somewhat cluttered with that model's reviews. A simple solution would be to create two additional subforums - one for 'official' threads and one for customer reviews

I don't necessarily agree with Dogie essentially using the forum as a free for-profit review website and if I were the mods I would ban his in-thread banner ads, but (I assume) he gets his revenue because his threads get a lot of hits. If anyone else is interested, many of his reviews are very basic with not a lot of real content so there is much room to improve if anyone else is actually interested in putting in the work. There's a bunch questionable things with how he conducts himself (such as the veiled aggression towards companies who don't pay him or the whitewashing of the extremely sketchy behavior of HashCoins who are), but I don't see that as a reason to not let him post a thread per device. It's not like he's banning other reviews, other people just don't bother making them which you can hardly blame on dogie.

My setup guides act as a box to mining reference guide, they're not meant to be entirely exhaustive for 99.999% of people and anything and everything they could ever encounter towards that miner. Just because I don't publish pages and pages of test data doesn't mean its not being taken in different simulated environments and verified. That gets condensed into the miner specifications (as a validation of the manufacturer's rating), because 99% of users don't need raw data. I also don't think you understand the amount of time required to process that quality of photos.

Now, to answer your other concerns (which, including this discussion are heading towards OT-ness), there has to be a reason to post on the forums and keep things going. I could move my threads off site and monetise them there, but then that harms the community. The majority of the products I review in the modern market don't get close to paying for their time via the unit's value. Studios charge up to $1000 for the photography I do and up to $400 for the product 360s I've started doing when you put multiple products in at once. Tldr, expensive.

By offering exactly the same service to all manufacturers - big or small - it provides an even playing field which gives everyone to show off their wares in a sterile environment. Then, the review thread transforms into a setup guide, providing everything customer needs to go from box to mining. And then, if a customer falls into difficulty they can post their problems and they'll be dealt with as soon as I'm available. Advertising, (all $1000 of it a month...) helps pay for a portion of that environment and level playing field.

My threads are also published and then they drop off the 1st and 2nd pages until they are needed. When a customer has a problem, they post, I answer and it drops off again - they're not in the way unless they're being specifically utilised. If only one thread is being utilised, then only one thread is on the front page etc. That is different from posting 10-15 threads simultaneously and juggling to keep them all active at the top of the front page at once. Additionally, the majority of the traffic comes from Google searches, which brings external users onto the forums and keeps the ecosystem on bitcointalk healthy. The guides do not rely on the front page to garner views, hence some reviews with only a few replies have 1000s of views.

Now, to answer your other accusations - which should be in a scam accusation thread... can you provide an example company to which I show veiled aggression towards because they don't 'pay me'? I would also very much likely to highlight YOUR actions involving HashCoins, as I did nothing but provide a level playing field by not jumping to conclusions. In contrast, YOU decided that what they were doing was impossible, and so without proof YOU left them negative trust. Imagine if when you were establishing yourself [even though they have 9-12 months trading history...], someone else decided they didn't like what you were doing and dumped negative trust on you and called you a scammer - without giving them a chance to prove anything? You decided that they were a scam, until they could prove anything. You acted as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner in one move. Now, are able to explain what I did (by saying don't jump to conclusions....) was so heinous?

[dogie]

Some thoughts looking at Hardware page 1:

Bitmain have a thread for every model. The title says "announcement and support". There is a support section, so?

Spondoolies, apart from the reviews, have one thread plus an unoffficial model specific and the Legendary thread.

My suggestion is to have a model specific thread per model per manufacturer. Reviewers could post there. And if it turns into a support thread (which it will), so be it.

Guides how to do things belong in Support, IMHO.

One of the things /hardware is suffering from at the moment is that users are spilling out of different threads by asking too many questions. I tend to get flamed when posting that they'd be better off in the S2/S3/S4 threads etc, but that's where they belong. The whole point of these centralised support threads is it keeps the boards clean, reduces the time for a user to get support and centralises the knowledge base and information.

The solution is more timely moderation, but that's not really a solution in itself as there are only so many mods, so many hours they can spend on here. CK did a great job of helping to clean up things when he was made a mod.

[dogie]

I don't mind unlocking my thread, I primarily did it as a courtesy to Con and the forum. Discussion of the reviews hasn't transferred over to the main thread as I'd hoped though.

I'm pretty mixed on the whole thing. I don't think there needs to be 13 review threads in addition to all the others, and I am a little worried that it does set a bad precedent. On the other hand, while a lot of reviews were pretty similar, there were a good number that put a lot of effort into their and gave some good data; often more in depth in terms of things like efficiency curves than is available elsewhere. As a whole they did add value to the forum and are not just pointless spam like a lot of the sig campaign garbage.
If there was an elegant way to merge them I'd support that, but I can't think of a way to do it without it becoming a nightmare to read and follow.

Very nicely put and exactly what I've meant.
We don't want to spam Hardware. Yes, for few days, hardware was flooded with reviews.
Few days afterwards,  only the intersting stuff remains.

Dogie pressed the panic button too fast. My guess is that BitmainTech got nervous due to the immenet S5 launch.
They didn't want the SP20 reviews to spoil their (inferior IMHO  ) product launch.
The moderators are being used and doesn't exercise enough judgment here (I'm referring to posts that got reported and deleted in those threads)

Edit: We're at inherent disadvantage here. BitmainTech is paying a lot for ads and we don't.
Edit2: MrTeal, can you unlock your thread?

You can blame the 'spam' on users purposely spamming as to why those threads become what they become, but at the same time it doesn't change what the threads become. It was more than a WEEK after when I posted the screenshot that virtually every single SPTech thread was at the top of the front page, because the same few users kept bumping all of the threads at once.

I still don't think you understand why I argued that the practice was not a good thing. Its to retain that level playing field. How could a new or small company compete with a larger company giving $1000s and $1000s of products away so they can layer the front page? And on the flip side, you would have been complaining just as hard when larger companies were spamming even more threads than you could have. Bitmain could have posted literally 100s of threads if you had your way and review 'parties' were allowed. Its not a good practice, not a good idea and not something that should continue.... as you've said in private but seem to be saying the exact opposite in public.

Regarding your claims that you receive different admin policies to any other company because you don't spend on advertisement, please break that into a separate meta thread. Its a serious allegation and (if true), needs to be dealt with.

Regarding some of your posts being deleted, its because they often don't add information/content and are too short. You can't simply quote someone elses post and say "Thanks" when the post wasn't written towards you and you'd had no interaction with that thread beforehand. I have no say in this policy as its a policy and working standard of the forum which we all have to adhere to all the same. Again, if you feel like you're being singled out then you can post a meta thread so a tribunal of peers and admins can discuss the problem and if things need to change.

[mavericklm]

What else can we expect from dogie than a bunch of spam...

[raskul]

What else can we expect from dogie than a bunch of spam...

Xmas day and he still takes time out to whinge

Dogie Spam McScrooge.

[Bicknellski]

The moderation guidelines say:

Topic creation should not be annoying. There should not be too many topics about the same thing in a short time period, and individuals should not post too many topics. "Too many" depends on the quality of the topics.

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics. How this should be handled is more tricky, since I don't want to suppress anyone's honest opinion. We'll see if ckolivas' locking solution is helpful.

Anyone annoyed yet with Dogie's 30 threads? He really seems to like bumping Antminer or Avalon or his own set up guides.

Just today I saw 7 Dogie posts in a row on a single Bitmain thread. Seriously? Does that not constitute spam. Make one post and reference 7 people you are responding to not 7 separate posts holy shit dude.

Even in this thread 3 posts in a row. Be economical.

[raskul]

The moderation guidelines say:

Topic creation should not be annoying. There should not be too many topics about the same thing in a short time period, and individuals should not post too many topics. "Too many" depends on the quality of the topics.

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics. How this should be handled is more tricky, since I don't want to suppress anyone's honest opinion. We'll see if ckolivas' locking solution is helpful.

Anyone annoyed yet with Dogie's 30 threads? He really seems to like bumping Antminer or Avalon or his own set up guides.

Just today I saw 7 Dogie posts in a row on a single Bitmain thread. Seriously? Does that no constitute spam. Make one post with and reference 7 people you are responding to.

He is just a disgruntled child, let him get on with it. None of it bears any significance because a lot of his posts are just banner ads. Fuck knows how he has the guile to complain, he's an open book.

[MrTeal]

My setup guides act as a box to mining reference guide, they're not meant to be entirely exhaustive for 99.999% of people and anything and everything they could ever encounter towards that miner. Just because I don't publish pages and pages of test data doesn't mean its not being taken in different simulated environments and verified. That gets condensed into the miner specifications (as a validation of the manufacturer's rating), because 99% of users don't need raw data. I also don't think you understand the amount of time required to process that quality of photos.

Now, to answer your other concerns (which, including this discussion are heading towards OT-ness), there has to be a reason to post on the forums and keep things going. I could move my threads off site and monetise them there, but then that harms the community. The majority of the products I review in the modern market don't get close to paying for their time via the unit's value. Studios charge up to $1000 for the photography I do and up to $400 for the product 360s I've started doing when you put multiple products in at once. Tldr, expensive.

By offering exactly the same service to all manufacturers - big or small - it provides an even playing field which gives everyone to show off their wares in a sterile environment. Then, the review thread transforms into a setup guide, providing everything customer needs to go from box to mining. And then, if a customer falls into difficulty they can post their problems and they'll be dealt with as soon as I'm available. Advertising, (all $1000 of it a month...) helps pay for a portion of that environment and level playing field.

My threads are also published and then they drop off the 1st and 2nd pages until they are needed. When a customer has a problem, they post, I answer and it drops off again - they're not in the way unless they're being specifically utilised. If only one thread is being utilised, then only one thread is on the front page etc. That is different from posting 10-15 threads simultaneously and juggling to keep them all active at the top of the front page at once. Additionally, the majority of the traffic comes from Google searches, which brings external users onto the forums and keeps the ecosystem on bitcointalk healthy. The guides do not rely on the front page to garner views, hence some reviews with only a few replies have 1000s of views.

Like I said, I have no problem with your guides or with you monetizing them. You providing photography to manufacturers worth more than the value of the unit you get is a great service to small manufacturers. I would just delete or mod out your banner ads with the forums if I were them, as while it helps you pay costs having manufacturers bypass the established forum advertising route and inserting them into your threads is against the interest of the forum, IMO. Obviously they disagree or don't care, so it's not a big deal to me.

Now, to answer your other accusations - which should be in a scam accusation thread... can you provide an example company to which I show veiled aggression towards because they don't 'pay me'? I would also very much likely to highlight YOUR actions involving HashCoins, as I did nothing but provide a level playing field by not jumping to conclusions. In contrast, YOU decided that what they were doing was impossible, and so without proof YOU left them negative trust. Imagine if when you were establishing yourself [even though they have 9-12 months trading history...], someone else decided they didn't like what you were doing and dumped negative trust on you and called you a scammer - without giving them a chance to prove anything? You decided that they were a scam, until they could prove anything. You acted as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner in one move. Now, are able to explain what I did (by saying don't jump to conclusions....) was so heinous?

It probably could be in a scam accusation against HashCoins, but as far as I know they haven't actually sold their Zeus miners or actually scammed anyone yet.
We've gone over this is the HashCoins thread, but your characterization that I just looked at their claim and dumped negative trust on them is hardly accurate.
In November I posted that the numbers they were using for frequency and hashrate were impossible after they called jimmothy a troll for questioning them, but I left it alone after they said they'd send you a unit to test. It could have been a typo, after all.
I didn't press the issue until a week and a half later, when I asked if they could back up their claims. In response, they posted up a cgminer screenshot with doctored values. Even then I didn't post negative trust; I went through the hashrate metering section of the cgminer code to ensure my claim on the error between the WU value and reported hashrate was correct, and PMed the lead cgminer developer to confirm it.
It was only then that I accused them of doctoring the cgminer stats showing proof of the impossibility of their MHz->GH/s relationship, and the errors in the relationship between WU and hashrate displays in cgminer. At that point, I added a 0BTC risked negative trust as in my opinion anyone should treat dealing with them with extreme caution.
Whitewashing may be a strong term, but it is very suspect when you are the only one (other than Hashcoins) stating that their claims are correct and it's all most likely an unexpected software bug and that the negative trust is unjustified. On one hand you have someone who is an expert in the chip used stating one of their claims is impossible and providing documented evidence of it along with an expert in the software used saying the numbers displayed are impossible, and on the other a company who's response was handwaving about magic boards, demanding personal information (including attempting to get forum staff to turn over personal information) and threatening lawsuits while not addressing any of the issues raised. Negative trust is absolutely justified until Hashcoins either retracts their claims or is able to demonstrate them.

[dogie]

None of it bears any significance because a lot of his posts are just banner ads.

Again, says the guy with the christmas tree sig 

[dogie]

The moderation guidelines say:

Topic creation should not be annoying. There should not be too many topics about the same thing in a short time period, and individuals should not post too many topics. "Too many" depends on the quality of the topics.

If an entire page is taken up by Spondoolies reviews, then that's probably too many topics. How this should be handled is more tricky, since I don't want to suppress anyone's honest opinion. We'll see if ckolivas' locking solution is helpful.

Anyone annoyed yet with Dogie's 30 threads? He really seems to like bumping Antminer or Avalon or his own set up guides.

Just today I saw 7 Dogie posts in a row on a single Bitmain thread. Seriously? Does that no constitute spam. Make one post and reference 7 people you are responding to not 7 separate posts holy shit dude.

Even in this thread 3 posts in a row. Be economical.

Its just quote hygiene. You don't combine 7 messages if they're with 7 different people about 7 different topics. If you do, then 7 different people each quote the entire conversation about 7 different topics with 7 other people and before you know it one quote is 40 lines long.

And have you seen the size of the messages I posted above? So long that Guy simply replied "tldr" rather than reading them?

PS, if you want to talk about consecutive posts then in your ratings thread I think you managed 16 in a row, self bumped posts before one of the troll accounts posted about what a terrible person I was. I'm more than happy for you to do whatever you want, I'm just saying don't attempt to call the cops because someone stole a watch when you're walking around with a cliche'd bag of swag.

[dogie]

Whitewashing may be a strong term, but it is very suspect when you are the only one (other than Hashcoins) stating that their claims are correct and it's all most likely an unexpected software bug and that the negative trust is unjustified. On one hand you have someone who is an expert in the chip used stating one of their claims is impossible and providing documented evidence of it along with an expert in the software used saying the numbers displayed are impossible, and on the other a company who's response was handwaving about magic boards, demanding personal information (including attempting to get forum staff to turn over personal information) and threatening lawsuits while not addressing any of the issues raised. Negative trust is absolutely justified until Hashcoins either retracts their claims or is able to demonstrate them.

I'm not saying, and have never said their claims are correct. What I did say is that you're still relying on conjecture that 'its impossible and it can't be done', rather than concrete evidence that they're scamming. And what I did say before is that there are no customers / no customers complaining, so its hard to claim they're scamming when there are no victims.

Either way you're free to rate how you want as its your liability if their speeds turn out to be true, not mine. All I'm asking is that just because you're more willing to chop someone's head off before I am, doesn't make me biased / a suspect / a scammer etc etc.

[MrTeal]

Whitewashing may be a strong term, but it is very suspect when you are the only one (other than Hashcoins) stating that their claims are correct and it's all most likely an unexpected software bug and that the negative trust is unjustified. On one hand you have someone who is an expert in the chip used stating one of their claims is impossible and providing documented evidence of it along with an expert in the software used saying the numbers displayed are impossible, and on the other a company who's response was handwaving about magic boards, demanding personal information (including attempting to get forum staff to turn over personal information) and threatening lawsuits while not addressing any of the issues raised. Negative trust is absolutely justified until Hashcoins either retracts their claims or is able to demonstrate them.

I'm not saying, and have never said their claims are correct. What I did say is that you're still relying on conjecture that 'its impossible and it can't be done', rather than concrete evidence that they're scamming. And what I did say before is that there are no customers / no customers complaining, so its hard to claim they're scamming when there are no victims.

Either way you're free to rate how you want as its your liability if their speeds turn out to be true, not mine. All I'm asking is that just because you're more willing to chop someone's head off before I am, doesn't make me biased / a suspect / a scammer etc etc.

I'll take that back, you never said their claims were correct. You said that their claim was possible and that there is a good chance it's that cgminer and the chips are behaving in a new way.

I don't like the manner in which they were attacked in that thread, ie "its a scam unless you do x y z and I've given you negative trust". There are Zeus customers out there and they haven't complained, so its more than possible what they've claimed is correct. I know you and CK say it isn't in your views, but then were are the complaining customers? There is a good chance that cgminer / the chips are simply behaving in a way not observed yet.

Also, I never said you were a scammer. I would say you are biased and financially motivated to protect those companies that are paying your bills, even if it's not something you intentionally set out to do. You've posted several times after Con or I have posted that our claims are conjecture, it might just be a bug, "allegedly falsified", etc. You can say that it is just your concern for fairness, I would call it a whitewashing of what is an intended deception. "It totally looks like a scam and smells like a scam and there's some proof, but let's just see where it goes" is the reason why the securities/services subforums are full of cloudmining ponzies in various stages of collapse.

[dogie]

Whitewashing may be a strong term, but it is very suspect when you are the only one (other than Hashcoins) stating that their claims are correct and it's all most likely an unexpected software bug and that the negative trust is unjustified. On one hand you have someone who is an expert in the chip used stating one of their claims is impossible and providing documented evidence of it along with an expert in the software used saying the numbers displayed are impossible, and on the other a company who's response was handwaving about magic boards, demanding personal information (including attempting to get forum staff to turn over personal information) and threatening lawsuits while not addressing any of the issues raised. Negative trust is absolutely justified until Hashcoins either retracts their claims or is able to demonstrate them.

I'm not saying, and have never said their claims are correct. What I did say is that you're still relying on conjecture that 'its impossible and it can't be done', rather than concrete evidence that they're scamming. And what I did say before is that there are no customers / no customers complaining, so its hard to claim they're scamming when there are no victims.

Either way you're free to rate how you want as its your liability if their speeds turn out to be true, not mine. All I'm asking is that just because you're more willing to chop someone's head off before I am, doesn't make me biased / a suspect / a scammer etc etc.

I'll take that back, you never said their claims were correct. You said that their claim was possible and that there is a good chance it's that cgminer and the chips are behaving in a new way.

I don't like the manner in which they were attacked in that thread, ie "its a scam unless you do x y z and I've given you negative trust". There are Zeus customers out there and they haven't complained, so its more than possible what they've claimed is correct. I know you and CK say it isn't in your views, but then were are the complaining customers? There is a good chance that cgminer / the chips are simply behaving in a way not observed yet.

Also, I never said you were a scammer. I would say you are biased and financially motivated to protect those companies that are paying your bills, even if it's not something you intentionally set out to do. You've posted several times after Con or I have posted that our claims are conjecture, it might just be a bug, "allegedly falsified", etc. You can say that it is just your concern for fairness, I would call it a whitewashing of what is an intended deception. "It totally looks like a scam and smells like a scam and there's some proof, but let's just see where it goes" is the reason why the securities/services subforums are full of cloudmining ponzies in various stages of collapse.

[Rather than breaking this down because its the same answer to both parts]. I said you couldn't be absolutely 100% sure, and so it is possible. And so by jumping the gun you're potentially creating so much self liability because you've potentially damaged a perfectly good company's reputation and potentially interfered with their ability to do business. That's your decision and your prerogative, but as I said before just because I'm not willing to create liability as freely as you are isn't a reflection on me.

[raskul]

Tl;dr

* raskul yawwwwns at the hypocrasy

[MrTeal]

Whitewashing may be a strong term, but it is very suspect when you are the only one (other than Hashcoins) stating that their claims are correct and it's all most likely an unexpected software bug and that the negative trust is unjustified. On one hand you have someone who is an expert in the chip used stating one of their claims is impossible and providing documented evidence of it along with an expert in the software used saying the numbers displayed are impossible, and on the other a company who's response was handwaving about magic boards, demanding personal information (including attempting to get forum staff to turn over personal information) and threatening lawsuits while not addressing any of the issues raised. Negative trust is absolutely justified until Hashcoins either retracts their claims or is able to demonstrate them.

I'm not saying, and have never said their claims are correct. What I did say is that you're still relying on conjecture that 'its impossible and it can't be done', rather than concrete evidence that they're scamming. And what I did say before is that there are no customers / no customers complaining, so its hard to claim they're scamming when there are no victims.

Either way you're free to rate how you want as its your liability if their speeds turn out to be true, not mine. All I'm asking is that just because you're more willing to chop someone's head off before I am, doesn't make me biased / a suspect / a scammer etc etc.

I'll take that back, you never said their claims were correct. You said that their claim was possible and that there is a good chance it's that cgminer and the chips are behaving in a new way.

I don't like the manner in which they were attacked in that thread, ie "its a scam unless you do x y z and I've given you negative trust". There are Zeus customers out there and they haven't complained, so its more than possible what they've claimed is correct. I know you and CK say it isn't in your views, but then were are the complaining customers? There is a good chance that cgminer / the chips are simply behaving in a way not observed yet.

Also, I never said you were a scammer. I would say you are biased and financially motivated to protect those companies that are paying your bills, even if it's not something you intentionally set out to do. You've posted several times after Con or I have posted that our claims are conjecture, it might just be a bug, "allegedly falsified", etc. You can say that it is just your concern for fairness, I would call it a whitewashing of what is an intended deception. "It totally looks like a scam and smells like a scam and there's some proof, but let's just see where it goes" is the reason why the securities/services subforums are full of cloudmining ponzies in various stages of collapse.

[Rather than breaking this down because its the same answer to both parts]. I said you couldn't be absolutely 100% sure, and so it is possible. And so by jumping the gun you're potentially creating so much self liability because you've potentially damaged a perfectly good company's reputation and potentially interfered with their ability to do business. That's your decision and your prerogative, but as I said before just because I'm not willing to create liability as freely as you are isn't a reflection on me.

Where did I say I was not 100% sure? I wouldn't have offered them a 100BTC wager if I wasn't sure their claims were false. Prior to me leaving negative trust I gave them the opportunity to correct their claim.

Either way, you are shifting the goalposts here. I never claimed you should be creating liability for yourself and calling them a scam. You were actively trying to downplay the arguments of those who were calling them a scam. If anything, that would create more liability for yourself in the case that some actually does buy a Zeus and gets scammed than if you'd said nothing.

[mavericklm]

 Ofcourse he is hurt, he is the most guilty spammer! him and his company!

Atm on hardware page:

12 threads related to bitmain products!
4 threads by bitmain!
3 threads by dogie!!!
2 threads by unhappy bitmain clients!

7 threads related to SPTech products!
2 threads by SPTech!

[cathoderay]

Plus he like to post in every other thread - then accuses people of following him......

[mavericklm]

he doesn't post in every thread! he just post 3times in a row on every page of that thread!!!!!!

i see legendary reviews are closed by guys with respect for the forum and ppl of the forum!
guess who's got 3 ''guides'' on main page atm!!!

[Argwai96]

Ofcourse he is hurt, he is the most guilty spammer! him and his company!

Atm on hardware page:

12 threads related to bitmain products!
4 threads by bitmain!
3 threads by dogie!!!
2 threads by unhappy bitmain clients!

7 threads related to SPTech products!
2 threads by SPTech!

This is exactly why the review threads should not have been locked.

Granted the threads were somewhat repetitive, however they will also serve as a way that potential customers can make an informed decision as to what hardware to purchase as they will get many points of views for this particular model (and hopefully encourage other manufacturers to offer similar 'promotions' in the future so there can be many independent reviews of new hardware.

[wh00per]

You can blame the 'spam' on users purposely spamming as to why those threads become what they become, but at the same time it doesn't change what the threads become. It was more than a WEEK after when I posted the screenshot that virtually every single SPTech thread was at the top of the front page, because the same few users kept bumping all of the threads at once.

You said earlier that your picture-editing effort takes a lot of time. IMHO that's honest, but as long as I personally don't need those pictures, your effort is worthless from my point of view.
The screenshot you posted was part of another effort, this time mine. You did not ask for, and I don't feel like getting you involved in.  

Taken this second. So of the first 17 threads, 11 are review threads, 2 are other ST threads and 4 are other threads. This is the definition of spam.

I'm not sure you read all the posts as they were at that time BEFORE you counted them out. All of them are unread .. heh. Why should I be happy and understanding with what I consider "your spam" and you should not be understanding with what you consider mine? Did you ask at least what was it for? And why? .. I don't recall reading anything related, except your biased bitching.

I'll leave it here.

[Guy Corem]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

[Beastlymac]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

[dogie]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

That's for you to talk to Bitmain with, I'm dogie not Bitmain. Also, I did not open this thread, I didn't even post in here until the second page.

[Guy Corem]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

That's for you to talk to Bitmain with, I'm dogie not Bitmain. Also, I did not open this thread, I didn't even post in here until the second page.

Indeed.

[Bicknellski]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

Hypocrisy or irony can't decide which this is.

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

It is clearly a shitstorm of his own creation he should have just kept his mouth shut and kept spamming his 40 or so threads instead of shitting on others threads by using the MODERATOR button. How did this thread get out of the TRASH bin dogie explain that? Who suggested it be sent to meta?

Obvious there is lean or bent in how he operates and that should be and has been addressed by companies that feel he may have undue or negative influence on their business. The moderators need to do their job and cull the flood of post to recycle threads back to the first page. At what point does 25 to 40% of the 1st page on the hardware board being dogie  inspired recycling become about his business rather than a community board. Something where he can freely use the board without moderators policing him so that it fills with his clutter. It is not support it is moving into pandering and it really detracts from the important information from others getting through to the community. If I wanted to read what dogie thinks on every brand of miner I would go to his website. We are being held hostage with a constant recycling of dogie support, dogie reviews, dogie getting into arguments with others.

It's a bit much.

[SaltySpitoon]

Dogie, it seems your employer uses the exact same method - sending review units (of course in a much less elegant way ...)

Two review threads already popped up.

Don't you think you should open another meta thread to discuss it ?

Hypocrisy or irony can't decide which this is.

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

It is clearly a shitstorm of his own creation he should have just kept his mouth shut and kept spamming his 40 or so threads instead of shitting on others threads by using the MODERATOR button. How did this thread get out of the TRASH bin dogie explain that? Who suggested it be sent to meta?

Obvious there is lean or bent in how he operates and that should be and has been addressed by companies that feel he may have undue or negative influence on their business. The moderators need to do their job and cull the flood of post to recycle threads back to the first page. At what point does 25 to 40% of the 1st page on the hardware board being dogie  inspired recycling become about his business rather than a community board. Something where he can freely use the board without moderators policing him so that it fills with his clutter. It is not support it is moving into pandering and it really detracts from the important information from others getting through to the community. If I wanted to read what dogie thinks on every brand of miner I would go to his website. We are being held hostage with a constant recycling of dogie support, dogie reviews, dogie getting into arguments with others.

It's a bit much.

That is all correct, there is a lot of Dogie spam, but what half of the people in this thread fail to mention, is that a large majority of it is in reply to off topic questions that they ask him and vice versa. People (in Bitmain's threads) say something to Dogie, he responds, then another person responds, etc etc and then every party involved reports each other's posts. This has happened one time before, I know how to clean the spam, but I will need Bitmain's permission first and everyone involved should expect an unbiassed total wipe of all offtopic spam. I dont have a bias towards or against Dogie. I do however feel bad for Bitmain and their customers that are looking for an uncluttered thread for information regarding their purchases.

@Everyone involved take it to PM or make a thread in off topic to argue in.

[Guy Corem]

... I dont have a bias towards or against Dogie...

With the exception of his un-proportional reaction (IMHO) towards our SP20 Legendaries review party, I have a bias towards Dogie.

[dogie]

... I dont have a bias towards or against Dogie...

With the exception of his un-proportional reaction (IMHO) towards our SP20 Legendaries review party, I have a bias towards Dogie.

Bick changed the post thread title to "Dogie spam", but this is still the Spondoolies Spam. It didn't matter who's owned the review party it was a dangerous game to play as we're now seeing.

In the same way as publishing an exploit, it doesn't matter if the publisher gets close to breaking the system as a demonstration but doesn't push it further, because someone can then utilise the exploit to entirely break the system.

I will need Bitmain's permission first and everyone involved should expect an unbiassed total wipe of all offtopic spam.

The main BITMAIN account can answer that, although get the PM in soon as after tonight its Chinese New Year and everyone will be hard to get hold of.

[Guy Corem]

... I dont have a bias towards or against Dogie...

With the exception of his un-proportional reaction (IMHO) towards our SP20 Legendaries review party, I have a bias towards Dogie.

Bick changed the post thread title to "Dogie spam", but this is still the Spondoolies Spam. It didn't matter who's owned the review party it was a dangerous game to play as we're now seeing.

In the same way as publishing an exploit, it doesn't matter if the publisher gets close to breaking the system as a demonstration but doesn't push it further, because someone can then utilise the exploit to entirely break the system.

I will need Bitmain's permission first and everyone involved should expect an unbiassed total wipe of all offtopic spam.

The main BITMAIN account can answer that, although get the PM in soon as after tonight its Chinese New Year and everyone will be hard to get hold of.

We didn't find an exploit. You blew it out of all proportion. Without your action, the threads would have sunk much faster.
Chinese New Year is February 19.

[dogie]

We didn't find an exploit. You blew it out of all proportion. Without your action, the threads would have sunk much faster.
Chinese New Year is February 19.

The calendar one is but the public holidays remain locked to ~normal end of year: http://www.travelchinaguide.com/essential/public-holiday.htm

[raskul]

We didn't find an exploit. You blew it out of all proportion. Without your action, the threads would have sunk much faster.
Chinese New Year is February 19.

The calendar one is but the public holidays remain locked to ~normal end of year: http://www.travelchinaguide.com/essential/public-holiday.htm

yes dogie. there's a good boy.

[Bicknellski]

... I dont have a bias towards or against Dogie...

With the exception of his un-proportional reaction (IMHO) towards our SP20 Legendaries review party, I have a bias towards Dogie.

Bick changed the post thread title to "Dogie spam", but this is still the Spondoolies Spam. It didn't matter who's owned the review party it was a dangerous game to play as we're now seeing.

In the same way as publishing an exploit, it doesn't matter if the publisher gets close to breaking the system as a demonstration but doesn't push it further, because someone can then utilise the exploit to entirely break the system.

I will need Bitmain's permission first and everyone involved should expect an unbiassed total wipe of all offtopic spam.

The main BITMAIN account can answer that, although get the PM in soon as after tonight its Chinese New Year and everyone will be hard to get hold of.

We didn't find an exploit. You blew it out of all proportion. Without your action, the threads would have sunk much faster.
Chinese New Year is February 19.

Yup.

+1. We have seen this happen before.

Never admits his role in this whole mess.

If he'd just shut his yap then this would blow over and the SP20s reviews would have come and gone. But no now we have him bumping the crap out of Bitmaintech and his other clients threads and his own guides. I get it he wants to make money but at what point does the forum do something about it?

[dogie]

Yup.

+1. We have seen this happen before.

Never admits his role in this whole mess.

If he'd just shut his yap then this would blow over and the SP20s reviews would have come and gone. But no now we have him bumping the crap out of Bitmaintech and his other clients threads and his own guides. I get it he wants to make money but at what point does the forum do something about it?

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

[raskul]

why are you quoting posts without making a comment?
methinks this is not a spondoolies spam thread but the dogie spam thread, to where he should be sin-died for a period and not allowed to post in any other thread than this one.
... should I move this comment to META and make a proper proposal for it?

Yup.

+1. We have seen this happen before.

Never admits his role in this whole mess.

If he'd just shut his yap then this would blow over and the SP20s reviews would have come and gone. But no now we have him bumping the crap out of Bitmaintech and his other clients threads and his own guides. I get it he wants to make money but at what point does the forum do something about it?

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

[Bicknellski]

why are you quoting posts without making a comment?
methinks this is not a spondoolies spam thread but the dogie spam thread, to where he should be sin-died for a period and not allowed to post in any other thread than this one.
... should I move this comment to META and make a proper proposal for it?

Yup.

+1. We have seen this happen before.

Never admits his role in this whole mess.

If he'd just shut his yap then this would blow over and the SP20s reviews would have come and gone. But no now we have him bumping the crap out of Bitmaintech and his other clients threads and his own guides. I get it he wants to make money but at what point does the forum do something about it?

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

Funny just running up his count.

Just because I have him BLOCKED and IGNORED doesn't mean I won't comment on his spam here. It is goes on day in and day out. Seriously at what point does the forum cull his threads back to 2 or 3? We get it he is a super hero and knows every product on the Earth. Sick of seeing it. Make a single thread and stop flooding the Hardware section with his threads. Too much of it.

The moderators should either get a FORUM cut of his ads or cull his threads. They are losing ad revenue.

I count 9 fresh posts from dogie that are on the first page. Imagine if it were a busy day to reply to newbs who mysteriously post on some older antminer guides I can't wait to see a complete page one all DOGIE. Define spam? 1  person with 10 threads or 10 threads from 10 people? Difference is the 10 people posting 10 threads say for review unit go away they don't keep posting everyday of the week... 365 days a year.

[dogie]

why are you quoting posts without making a comment?
methinks this is not a spondoolies spam thread but the dogie spam thread, to where he should be sin-died for a period and not allowed to post in any other thread than this one.
... should I move this comment to META and make a proper proposal for it?

Yup.

+1. We have seen this happen before.

Never admits his role in this whole mess.

If he'd just shut his yap then this would blow over and the SP20s reviews would have come and gone. But no now we have him bumping the crap out of Bitmaintech and his other clients threads and his own guides. I get it he wants to make money but at what point does the forum do something about it?

Blocked dogie from PM's and ignoring him from this point forward.

Funny just running up his count.

Just because I have him BLOCKED and IGNORED doesn't mean I won't comment on his spam here. It is goes on day in and day out. Seriously at what point does the forum cull his threads back to 2 or 3? We get it he is a super hero and knows every product on the Earth. Sick of seeing it. Make a single thread and stop flooding the Hardware section with his threads. Too much of it.

The moderators should either get a FORUM cut of his ads or cull his threads. They are losing ad revenue.

I count 9 fresh posts from dogie that are on the first page. Imagine if it were a busy day to reply to newbs who mysteriously post on some older antminer guides I can't wait to see a complete page one all DOGIE. Define spam? 1  person with 10 threads or 10 threads from 10 people? Difference is the 10 people posting 10 threads say for review unit go away they don't keep posting everyday of the week... 365 days a year.

They do get a cut of my ads, they have ads on my pages.

I don't think you understand what is spam is. Spam is posts for the sake of posts, me replying to questions and requests for technical support from customers is not spam. I can't help it if I am more useful than you.

Keep to the right thread please: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=905210.msg10005067#msg10005067

[mavericklm]

the fact that you make 4 post in a row is spam!

[MrTeal]

the fact that you make 4 post in a row is spam!

Not really. If you have four separate questions asked of you, it makes things easier for quoting and flow if you answer each one in a single post than if you try to combine them all.

Now if he was answering one question every couple hours to keep all his threads topped that would be different, but just writing four posts in a row isn't really spam if they're all on topic.

[mavericklm]

So you find that normal? like the 6 dogie threads on main page?

[MrTeal]

So you find that normal? like the 6 dogie threads on main page?

I'm not sure what you mean by "normal", really. The majority of the dogie guides fall off the main Hardware page as you'd expect for something like the Hashcoins Apollo, old AM gear or XBtec gear. The S1 thread got bumped by some guy asking a question about a fan, which dogie answered. Prior to that there hadn't been a post in that thread since the very start of November. I'd imagine it'll quickly fall off the main page again.
If you don't want to see an old dogie S1 thread on the main page, make up your own super awesome S1 setup thread so that people ask questions there instead of in dogie's thread.

[dogie]

Thanks Mr Teal, if I explained it then I'd just get flamed.

Can we please direct further dogie related accusations to the dogie accusation thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=905210.0. This thread is for a very different and specific issue.

[mcdougle]

I have just spent 1.5 hours reading to get 10 min worth of legitimate information about the SP20. That is 70 minutes time wasted that I did not want to waste.

I don't care who got a free miner. I don't care who wanted a free miner or who is upset because they didn't. I really don't care about a fledgling barrister trying to flash elementary legal definitions at the world, or the hoard of pack minded "Legends" jumping into the fray at the most trivial hint of impropriety.  Many are Legends in mind (theirs) only.

What I am concerned about is jaded post deletion, arbitrary or inconsistent administrative action, and conflict of interest. If there is any concern (or care) for receding membership or doubt regarding this forum's integrity, you need only read the very informative parent thread and how it was ruthlessly hijacked to know...

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Of the former there are too few, and the ladder, too many. Written over two hundred years ago and it is surprising how current that quote remains.

Those of you to whom I speak directly, and you should know who you are; resign with honor or live without it. There are only a sparse few who have not seen the taint growing here. Most all of us have seen you operate before, and we see your actions for what they are.

[iCEBREAKER]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Force the issue: repeatedly bump every single Spamdoolie thread, so they clog up the hardware sub until Something Is Done.

[mavericklm]

Smart move by Spondoolies, but what a bunch of bullshit spam.

Money talks!

Force the issue: repeatedly bump every single Spamdoolie thread, so they clog up the hardware sub until Something Is Done.

Look! a smart ass! How much does bitmain pays you?

Lets see what we got now on main page in hardware:

1thread  Spondoolies-Tech
5threads BITMAIN
3threads dogie

7threads related to SPTech
16threads related to BITMAIN


@dogie: why move to another thread when you posted here? the main flooder complains about reviews from different people! is kind of an irony? hypocrisy?

@MrTeal: https://www.google.ro/#q=sorry+for+double+posting+forums 26.600.000 results
that is for double posting, not 4 posts in a row!
I just answer to 3 ppl in 1 post! how about that?

[MrTeal]

@MrTeal: https://www.google.ro/#q=sorry+for+double+posting+forums 26.600.000 results
that is for double posting, not 4 posts in a row!
I just answer to 3 ppl in 1 post! how about that?

Double posting is posting the same message twice in a row. Not quite the same thing.

Regardless, even if you consider it spam four posts consecutively in one of his threads only serves to clutter his thread. Since you seem to dislike dogie's threads so much, just don't read them.