The 1.5 million dollar (5067 bitcoin) new bitcoin talk forum.

[CIYAM]

Signature deals is one thing that can get people interested in bitcoin, and will often be the only way that many bitcoin small businesses can afford to advertise their business. The forum benefits because it gets additional impressions for the advertisements that it sells so the forum ads are worth more.

No-one without an ad-sig would ever back this statement up (apart from sock-puppet accounts created by ad-sig posters of course).

Ad-sigs have *ruined* this forum and if used in the new forum will ruin it to.

People should note the sigs of long-time forum members such as @DannyHamilton.

[Quickseller]

Signature deals is one thing that can get people interested in bitcoin, and will often be the only way that many bitcoin small businesses can afford to advertise their business. The forum benefits because it gets additional impressions for the advertisements that it sells so the forum ads are worth more.

No-one without an ad-sig would ever back this statement up (apart from a sockie created by an ad-sig poster of course).

Ad-sigs have *ruined* this forum and if used in the new forum will ruin it to.

Well I would hope you would agree that Bitcoin is based on free market economics. I believe that the reason Bitcoin was created was to allow commerce to take place more freely without relying on the banking system (which is very centralized).

Without signature advertising then I don't see any cost efficient way for a small business to advertise. The last time that the forum auctioned forum ads each spot cost 2.9 BTC for (at most) a 10 day period. That works out to roughly $1,900 per month at the very minimum. Do you think that many small businesses can afford that large of marketing costs?

My response to my above question is that they cannot. The result of this is that without paid signatures, small businesses would have difficulty advertising their goods and services, and as a result would not be able to grow. If small businesses are unable to grow, then larger businesses will be able to command a larger share of their market and will become more centralized which is not what Bitcoin is all about.

I can say that forum ads was one major thing that got me involved and interested in/with bitcoin (I have had mild interest in both bitcoin and Bitcoin over the years, however never really took the time to buy any or to really understand hot it works until I joined the forum), and once I started posting (with a paid signature ad), I was able to learn more about Bitcoin (notice the little/big "b" in this paragraph and throughout), although I admit that I would probably be considered who is far from an expert regarding most of the technicalities behind Bitcoin.

Has paid signature advertising done some harm to the forum? Yes, absolutely. Paid signatures create the incentives to spam the forum with useless posts. This however is being dealt with by BadBear who is being aggressive in banning people who make insubstantial posts; it is a work in progress. People will also post "fluffed" up posts that have very little contributory value, if they do it enough then they will likely also get banned. The fact that a lot of people have been banned for making insubstantial posts with a paid advertisement has been very public and I suspect that as a result others are going to be more hesitant to go around making useless posts, and will either abandon their account(s), sell their account(s), or put more effort into their posts.

Does the good outweigh the bad for paid signatures? I think so. Any community that has grown to be as large as the bitcointalk community has grown to be is bound to have a spam problem. I would speculate that we would still have a small amount (maybe ~10-20%) of the shitposts that we have today even if paid signatures were banned.

[funtotry]

Signature deals is one thing that can get people interested in bitcoin, and will often be the only way that many bitcoin small businesses can afford to advertise their business. The forum benefits because it gets additional impressions for the advertisements that it sells so the forum ads are worth more.

No-one without an ad-sig would ever back this statement up (apart from sock-puppet accounts created by ad-sig posters of course).

Ad-sigs have *ruined* this forum and if used in the new forum will ruin it to.

People should note the sigs of long-time forum members such as @DannyHamilton.

I disagree.
I am maybe just a bit biased considering I have a signature.
But look at how large primedice got, and how large bit-x is getting. This is the free market, so on the forum, the best companies will be able to afford advertising and push out all the scams from the mass advertising. Companies and most users will probably support the sig campaigns.

[SaltySpitoon]

There are a lot of proposals about how to handle paid signature advertising that are being worked on, the issue doesn't really pertain to the new forum software, but more to forum policy. Sure something in the new forum software might help limit the damage done by people abusing paid advertising signatures, but for the most part, its going to come down to making feasible and reasonable changes. I have no stake in paid advertising signatures, but most can agree that if spam isn't a factor, then paid advertising signatures are a neat idea that gives some people a bit of coin to spend.

There are a lot of interesting spam reducing measures bouncing around. By the time the new forum software comes, I'd hope that we have implemented some new policies to cut down on spam. Its getting out of hand.

[QuestionAuthority]

Paid signatures suck and are designed to create spammers. The worst ones are the mining companies. Not only are the ads spamming the forum but the companies are stealing from people. Are there any mining companies left that have not robbed their customers? I don't know of one.

On the other hand, if you completely stop advert spammers this forum might not have many regular members left. The number of regular, long time, members posting daily compared to 2012 is greatly reduced. I don't just mean the Clipse, PatrickHarnett, Goat types either. I expect them to be gone. Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

[Mikestang]

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are.  Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting.  This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it.  I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

[Snagglebone]

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are.  Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting.  This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it.  I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

[Mikestang]

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are.  Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting.  This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it.  I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation.  There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

[QuestionAuthority]

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are.  Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting.  This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it.  I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation.  There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

The posts you're talking about are all in altcoins, mining, marketplace and gambling. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=unread

Those sections are almost not moderated at all. The altcoin section is a little better now than it used to be. A couple of years ago there were death threats and all kinds of shit happening in altcoins.

[TerminatorXL]

...
I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation.  There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

No need to wonder, Mikestang, I'll tell you.
Accounts are being farmed by budding bitcoin entrepreneurs. These accounts have to make a certain number of posts, over a certain period of time, before they become "Full Member Accounts."
Needles to say, account farmers generate some volume.

Once these accounts are ready for the market, they are sold, right on this forum, in Auctions or Digital Goods sections, to their proud new owners.
"Why would anyone buy an account, when they could make one for free?" you must be asking right about now. Lolno, you're not. You know why it's done - to make money from ad campaigns. Yeah, those farmed accounts just keep on giving.

So now you don't have to wonder about where all the spam comes from - it's bought and paid for

[Mikestang]

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust.  Trust must be earned, not purchased.  I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more.  New change?

[SaltySpitoon]

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust.  Trust must be earned, not purchased.  I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more.  New change?

TerminatorXL and I discussed this in length, I'd recommend reading: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1038547.0

the last couple pages especially, some misunderstandings made the first couple pages a bit confrontational.

[TerminatorXL]

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust.  Trust must be earned, not purchased.  I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more.  New change?

Trust is only shown in some of the subs (where trading between members happens, I think). As far as account sales, yeah, that's a jaw-dropper, but not likely to change. I started a thread about it in the Meta section, and quickly got some red trust (later removed) from an account dealer who happens to be on default trust. <- obligatory dig.

Bitcointalk is a forum about money and anonymity, without an official set of rules. A recipe for banana republic-style corruption, and the reason why law became a thing in the first place.

[QuestionAuthority]

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust.  Trust must be earned, not purchased.  I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more.  New change?

Trust is only shown in some of the subs (where trading between members happens, I think). As far as account sales, yeah, that's a jaw-dropper, but not likely to change. I started a thread about it in the Meta section, and quickly got some red trust (later removed) from an account dealer who happens to be on default trust. <- obligatory dig.

Bitcointalk is a forum about money and anonymity, without an official set of rules. A recipe for banana republic-style corruption, and the reason why law became a thing in the first place.

Oh, don't talk about the rule of law here. These people like to imagine a world of anarchy where they can run naked in the streets smoking a joint (Until they get ripped off, of course. Then they run to the SEC, FTC or police like a bunch of conservative republicans at a country club.)

[koelen3]

I wouldn't mind if the signature campaigns are banned in the new upcoming forum. Though i've one in my profile too but it's because it's good earning something than nothing . But some people really go overboard with these. I think if new forum has it , there should be a limit of like 100 posts maximum allowed to be paid by a campaign manager or so . IT will decrease the spam rate .

[Muhammed Zakir]

I wouldn't mind if the signature campaigns are banned in the new upcoming forum. Though i've one in my profile too but it's because it's good earning something than nothing . But some people really go overboard with these. I think if new forum has it , there should be a limit of like 100 posts maximum allowed to be paid by a campaign manager or so . IT will decrease the spam rate .

Better to enforce rules on campaign managers.

[Snagglebone]

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

[Muhammed Zakir]

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

[Snagglebone]

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

I'm not denying that people put useful things in their signatures. But there's no need to enable them by default. You can view a persons signature from their profile page. There's absolutely no information in a signature that is needed to be displayed every post. It's purely a vanity move (or advertising). Any information that is important in a signature can be viewed from the profile page when it's needed.

For those people that like to see signatures, they could enable them. There's no reason to have signatures enabled by default and it would solve the divide between those who don't want advertising in signatures and those who do... that way, you can have whatever you want in a signature and only those people that decide they want to be subjected to them will be.

[Vod]

It would be much easier to just make a rule that forum signatures cannot include trade or promotion, or something like that.

Now people are starting to spam using their avatars as well.