PM restriction for new accounts is needed

[botany]

When you receive a message, don't you see the person's activity count and membership group (hero, senior, etc)?
I thought the number of scams succeeding would be really low.

[1715631604]

1715631604

[1715631604]

1715631604

[1715631604]

1715631604

[dserrano5]

if you force users to make at least one post before sending a PM then this problem would be solved.

These s{c,p}ammers could throw an small auto-translated post into a small regional subforum and bam mission accomplished. I didn't knew that shdvb or Blazedout419 were worthy of being impersonated so I for one would leave the posts by their impersonators undeleted (as long as they weren't too badly autotranslated or too insubstantial).

Maybe a flashing bright red "NEWBIE" warning on PMs by newbies would be enough to deter impersonators/scammers, while not preventing legitimate new users from asking their questions?

I actually like this. The ranking "Newbie" could be forum-wide red coloured just like the scammer tag was, both for public and private messages.

[Welsh]

When you receive a message, don't you see the person's activity count and membership group (hero, senior, etc)?
I thought the number of scams succeeding would be really low.

Yes you do.

Maybe a flashing bright red "NEWBIE" warning on PMs by newbies would be enough to deter impersonators/scammers, while not preventing legitimate new users from asking their questions?

Onkel Paul

I wouldn't mind a red label, but not a flashing red label as that would become annoying quickly. Maybe add a warning to the footer of the message for every newbie message. I still don't think it's necessary.  

[hilariousandco]

It is not just the impersonators that is a problem, I have gotten several unsolicited PMs advertising some website or service from brand new accounts, forcing them to make one post will make this much more difficult for these spammers.

They wouldn't *have* to post in the thread but it would just be there if they don't have anything else to post.

Making one additional post isn't a biggie. There are bots that will do this for them.

When you receive a message, don't you see the person's activity count and membership group (hero, senior, etc)?
I thought the number of scams succeeding would be really low.

Yes, you see all that plus their trust etc and it is very rare for someone to get scammed by an imposter. I've only seen it happen twice (though I'm sure there are a few other instances).

if you force users to make at least one post before sending a PM then this problem would be solved.

These s{c,p}ammers could throw an small auto-translated post into a small regional subforum and bam mission accomplished. I didn't knew that shdvb or Blazedout419 were worthy of being impersonated so I for one would leave the posts by their impersonators undeleted (as long as they weren't too badly autotranslated or too insubstantial).

Exactly. Any restrictions that are put in place scammers will just get round them.

[redsn0w]

When you receive a message, don't you see the person's activity count and membership group (hero, senior, etc)?
I thought the number of scams succeeding would be really low.

Yes you do.

Maybe a flashing bright red "NEWBIE" warning on PMs by newbies would be enough to deter impersonators/scammers, while not preventing legitimate new users from asking their questions?

Onkel Paul

I wouldn't mind a red label, but not a flashing red label as that would become annoying quickly. Maybe add a warning to the footer of the message for every newbie message. I still don't think it's necessary.  

I've find this old thread about  a bad story , someone has impersonated theymos and asked through PM to pay the "advertise slot"  :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=665923.0  




In this case I really don't know what should I think  .

[hilariousandco]

I've find this old thread about  a bad story , someone has impersonated theymos and asked through PM to pay the "advertise slot"  :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=665923.0  

In this case I really don't know what should I think  .

You should think people should be smart enough to not send money to zero post newbie called theymo5.

[TookDk]

I am happy to see Tomatocage bringing up this issue, it is really a problem, and yes new users fall for the phising scam from time to time.

I know about  the argument "people should use their brain", but I think if you are new to bitcoin then can you be caught a bit off guard and fall for the phishing scam. Its really a bad situation, that a new user gets scammed on his/her first transaction, not likely that the person will want to use bitcoin again. It is bad for the bitcoin ecosystem.

I support OP suggestion, there is really no need for a newbie to send PM, most transactions/sales are already public in the threads anyway. 
I also think that Onkel Pauls suggestion is ok; any PM from a user with zero activity should be marked with a warning by the system.

I suggest that the sticky with Market Place rules is updated to recommend sellers to always place the payment addy in OP.
I also suggest the Escrow's to always write the payment addy in the sales thread, I think this is good practice at least as long as we have this phishing problem.

[Tomatocage]

I get 5-10 PMs a week from newbies / literally just signed up accounts asking legitimate questions or asking for help. These are accounts that more often then not become useful members of the community. You can't paint everyone with the same brush.

Is there a reason why they can post the question publicly?

[Tomatocage]

The evil part of me wants to start a dialog with them and play along until the day I take their precious and use it to fund a crypto class for cops.  

These fake accounts never converse with any user. They're simply created to fire off a PM to one or more potential victims and are immediately abandoned, never to be logged in with again. They just sit back and hope somebody send to their Bitcoin address.

[hilariousandco]

I get 5-10 PMs a week from newbies / literally just signed up accounts asking legitimate questions or asking for help. These are accounts that more often then not become useful members of the community. You can't paint everyone with the same brush.

Is there a reason why they can post the question publicly?

Well they could, but I'm sure there's a myriad of reasons why someone may want PM rather than just make a thread. If you require a specific answer and know a certain person can answer it it seems silly to create a thread and hope they answer it.

The evil part of me wants to start a dialog with them and play along until the day I take their precious and use it to fund a crypto class for cops.   

These fake accounts never converse with any user. They're simply created to fire off a PM to one or more potential victims and are immediately abandoned, never to be logged in with again. They just sit back and hope somebody send to their Bitcoin address.

Oh they'll converse with you if they think there's a possibility they can get some free money from you and that's why they're easy to troll.

[redsn0w]

I've find this old thread about  a bad story , someone has impersonated theymos and asked through PM to pay the "advertise slot"  :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=665923.0  

In this case I really don't know what should I think  .

You should think people should be smart enough to not send money to zero post newbie called theymo5.

So at the end the problems are two : the newbie impostors and (obviously) the users that fall in the "trap". I think there isn't a valid solution for those two problems.

[hilariousandco]

The solution is not to send your money to scammers/imposters but no amount of restrictions or hoops we put in place will ever stop scammers from just jumping through them or finding ways to avoid them all together.

[Madness]

Seems like every day I'm hearing about brand new accounts with names very similar to long-standing trusted accounts who are PM'ing people about offers to buy/sell coins. Examples:

1. sndvb impersonating shdvb
2. Blaizedout419 impersonating Blazedout419
3. deuthedev impersonating devthedev
4. dooqlas impersonating dooglas
5. 0gNazty impersonating OgNasty

The list goes on ad nauseum. They'll PM a new user with an offer that's too good to pass up, dropping a link to the real user's trusted profile. I can't help but think that there are actually people who fall for this.

So can we revisit the idea of putting some sort of time/Activity-based restriction on new users with regard to sending PMs at least?

+1 , Totally agree with this .
If I were you , I would put it on the New software forum section so the developpers take a look at it and implent it on the next forum release

[Quickseller]

if you force users to make at least one post before sending a PM then this problem would be solved.

These s{c,p}ammers could throw an small auto-translated post into a small regional subforum and bam mission accomplished. I didn't knew that shdvb or Blazedout419 were worthy of being impersonated so I for one would leave the posts by their impersonators undeleted (as long as they weren't too badly autotranslated or too insubstantial).

Compared to the time it takes to create an account and send a PM this would be huge. For all intensive purposes each of these accounts is only going to be able to send one PM before it will be reported and they get a trade with caution tag. As it stands now it takes 6 (maybe 7) minutes to create an account, create a payment address, write and send a PM to someone.

If you force them to make one semi-substantial post then they need to wait 6 minutes to make their first post, spend a minute or two writing/translating it, then another 6 minutes to send a PM. Not only that but if they plan on impersonating someone then there is still a chance they will get negative trust before they shoot off their PM.

At a minimum it will take them 12 minutes per account verses 6 minutes, that is a 100% increase in the effort they need to put into it. More realistically it will be ~15 minutes per account verses 7 minutes which is a ~114% increase in effort.

Maybe a flashing bright red "NEWBIE" warning on PMs by newbies would be enough to deter impersonators/scammers, while not preventing legitimate new users from asking their questions?

Onkel Paul

It used to be that the first number was red when you had neutral trust.

I get 5-10 PMs a week from newbies / literally just signed up accounts asking legitimate questions or asking for help. These are accounts that more often then not become useful members of the community. You can't paint everyone with the same brush.

Is there a reason why they can post the question publicly?

I don't see one. People would likely want to post a question privately because they are embarrassed that they appear dumb, however this does not matter because it is a brand new account anyway.

Plus posting questions publicly means that the next person who has the same question can find it via searching instead of having to wait for an answer

[dogie]

I get 5-10 PMs a week from newbies / literally just signed up accounts asking legitimate questions or asking for help. These are accounts that more often then not become useful members of the community. You can't paint everyone with the same brush.

Is there a reason why they can post the question publicly?

Well they could, but I'm sure there's a myriad of reasons why someone may want PM rather than just make a thread. If you require a specific answer and know a certain person can answer it it seems silly to create a thread and hope they answer it.

Yeah we'll never cover all the reasons by speculating, or by trying to make workarounds. Maybe they're coming to one of my guides / the forums for the first time via Google, maybe they're embarrassed. Whatever the reasons, we can't simply block all newbies from PMing.

[tss]

totally agree with this.  def need limits on sending pm's.

although i haven't received a single spam message in months, i'm sure it's a problem.  spammers probably targeting users in the loans/gambling sections.

i would also like to see newbie jail brought back.  when i joined it was an achievement and i felt honored i was allowed to post in the real forum.  thus i respected the right and acted accordingly.  today is just a free for all. btc is dead.  fake troll posts.  all of them are fed by pages of replies.  quite worthless.

[btchris]

Maybe a flashing bright red "NEWBIE" warning on PMs by newbies would be enough to deter impersonators/scammers, while not preventing legitimate new users from asking their questions?

Onkel Paul

I don't care for the idea of completely restricting a newbie's ability to send PMs either, but a very visible warning is definitely something I'd support.

Is there a reason why they can['t] post the question publicly?

Yes, at least in my limited case. People don't often like discussing their password details publicly (for the purposes of attempting to recover a wallet with a forgotten password; see btcrecover). I'd be lying if I said I've received tons of such PMs (I've only received a handful), but at the same time I'm sure that newbies who have contacted me are appreciative that they can.

(Full disclosure: although btcrecover is open source, I've rarely (exactly once) agreed to a paid password recovery at the unsolicited request of another.)

[gogxmagog]

I cant recall ever getting any spam PMs. If I do, they are pretty easy to spot anyway. Maybe some here are more gullible and a "How To Spot A Spam PM" thread could be stickied somewhere?

anyway, I have seen spam PM campaigns recruiting (the sig campaign I am part of offers me the option to sig and PM spam, but I only use the sig option because; I compare the sig to a billboard [passive advertizing] but spam PMs to telemarketers [intrusive, annoying advertizing])

we can report thread post spammers, is there a similar option to report PM spammers? I think I've only ever gotten ~7 PMs ever here, all legit, except 3 or 4 were to inform me I have broken a rule, and/or had a post removed  

EDIT- I have joined the PM campaign. Don't worry, in my case it's "personal text" not Personal messages. Thanks for the clarification Bad Bear  

[BadBear]

the sig campaign I am part of offers me the option to sig and PM spam, but I only use the sig option because; I compare the sig to a billboard [passive advertizing] but spam PMs to telemarketers [intrusive, annoying advertizing])

PM in this context is not personal messages to other members, but the personal text in your profile, it will show up below the avatar.

[gogxmagog]

the sig campaign I am part of offers me the option to sig and PM spam, but I only use the sig option because; I compare the sig to a billboard [passive advertizing] but spam PMs to telemarketers [intrusive, annoying advertizing])

PM in this context is not personal messages to other members, but the personal text in your profile, it will show up below the avatar.

I don't see what the problem with a line of text beneath avatar would be, obviously. Might have to sign up for that, except I really enjoy what I have there now. my greed wins!
Still, I have never received a single spam personal message. Been here for a couple of years now too. Just lucky I guess.