Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign)

[erikalui]

I find it even more confusing now and I don't know if my posts are constructive or not. I don't post much in the Marketplace as I just find people out there posting on each newbie thread, use an escrow, you are selling fraudulent goods, nobody will go first and so on. I understand sometimes it is necessary to warn but if this gets repetitive, it appears as the member is spamming.

[1715146509]

1715146509

[1715146509]

1715146509

[1715146509]

1715146509

[1715146509]

1715146509

[1715146509]

1715146509

[shorena]

-snip-
I get your point.

What we did was that, we gave them a chance to improve. To show that this is not what we are looking for, not what the community wants.
If we only give spots to those who post well, others will never improve.

Its a more educational approach, I like it.

Yes, we are slowly getting more strict on enrollment.. The change will be noticeable from next week.

Damn, now I gotta bring my A game

-snip-
I wouldn't call this discussion pointless mate, since there are very interesting thoughts popping up from the very same community we prefer to be part of our campaign. But I agree with certain points you made: i.e. to allow a constructive poster to participate, even if there are only 25 or 30 posts per week. Also our goal is to have permanent participants, with very few leaving. That will surely make it in the weeks to come hard to join, since there wouldn't be many free spots.

ndnhc and I are permanently discussing our campaign, trying to improve it! Also we feel it is essential to discuss the campaign with you guys, the participants, since you are the backbone of it - thus this thread.

Thank you all for being with us!

I dont think you are doing it work honestly and the discussion is obviously not pointless. It was a bit provocative, but I stand by it that its not possible to define in a very clear way what a constructive post is.

I find it even more confusing now and I don't know if my posts are constructive or not. I don't post much in the Marketplace as I just find people out there posting on each newbie thread, use an escrow, you are selling fraudulent goods, nobody will go first and so on. I understand sometimes it is necessary to warn but if this gets repetitive, it appears as the member is spamming.

I have seen people get banned for those posts. Its fine to ask for escrow etc. if you want to trade, but if you just want to warn others use the trust system.

[tspacepilot]

While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections.  I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?

[arallmuus]

While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections.  I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?

the main issue about this is that a campaign manager cant judge wether the post is a rubbish or a constructive post because the campaign manager cant understand the language, people can claim that all his post is constructive in local boards while the fact that he only posted spam useless post cant be known since the campaign manager doesnt speak that language

[tspacepilot]

While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections.  I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?

the main issue about this is that a campaign manager cant judge wether the post is a rubbish or a constructive post because the campaign manager cant understand the language, people can claim that all his post is constructive in local boards while the fact that he only posted spam useless post cant be known since the campaign manager doesnt speak that language

That is a reasonable point, whatever you post in a foreign language section is basically unmoderated.  Nevertheless, I think I also have a valid point which is don't these guys want the advertising there?  Also, couldn't the campaign manager communicate with the moderator of that subforum if someone was making rubbish posts.  I imagine that one of the conditions of being a subforum moderator would be the ability to communicate in English.

[arallmuus]

That is a reasonable point, whatever you post in a foreign language section is basically unmoderated.  Nevertheless, I think I also have a valid point which is don't these guys want the advertising there? 

You are right at one point , the vital point of advertisement is to target a wider area of customer
which of course include the local boards

Also, couldn't the campaign manager communicate with the moderator of that subforum if someone was making rubbish posts. 

It would take some extra work as the moderator will need to browse through the campaigner post count because  if local boards is allowed, i bet that 90% of the campaigner will take advantage of this to post the majority of the post count there as it is more easy to post in local boards

[Bizmark13]

I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=677129

Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.

Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.

As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.

For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.

While it might be more time-consuming for signature campaigns than the current system we have now, some form of automated method like the one Bitmixer.io currently uses combined with a manual method that roughly scans through users' posting histories and paying users in proportion to the constructiveness of their posts should be encouraged in my opinion - i.e. make lots of constructive posts and you will get paid more and spam the forums with one line posts that simply parrot whatever previous posts said and you will get paid less. Not only would the advertiser benefit but the system should, at least in theory, increase the average quality of posts across the board since it would provide an incentive for users to create higher quality posts.

[tspacepilot]

I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=677129

Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.

Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.

As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.

For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]

Of course you're right that this is indeed beyond the scope of most signature ad campaigns but in fact we might have the technology to do this, given the work.  Imagine you train a classifier on the posts of a thread and then measure the perplexity of a given post with respect to that thread, I wonder if you could find the right set of features such that this sort of framework could be a proxy for "constructiveness". 

[ndnh]

I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=677129

Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.

Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.

As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.

For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]

Of course you're right that this is indeed beyond the scope of most signature ad campaigns but in fact we might have the technology to do this, given the work.  Imagine you train a classifier on the posts of a thread and then measure the perplexity of a given post with respect to that thread, I wonder if you could find the right set of features such that this sort of framework could be a proxy for "constructiveness". 

Yeah, that is why we don't use bots

[ndnh]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=995029.new#new

Thread will be locked soon. You can continue the discussion there.