Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign)

[sgk]

Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.

For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.

Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.

You are probably right.
But for a moderator whose native language is English, it is easy to eveluate quality of posts in English boards opposite to other local languages.

But it is a call that ndnhc needs to take after all.

[erikalui]

Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.

The fact is that Indian users should usually talk in Hindi (local language) in the Local boards section but they talk only in English for everyone to understand it. If that's the case in other Local sections where users make posts in English, it would be more relevant for the admin also to add that section.

[Hazir]

-snip-


Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...

[erikalui]

-snip-


Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...

Is Bitcoins discussion section excluded? If so then I probably have made 0 posts till now 

[maku]

-snip-


Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...

Is Bitcoins discussion section excluded? If so then I probably have made 0 posts till now 

No, it is not excluded. And hopefully it won't be never banned but you can read something like that in Rules of DaDice's campaign:

"Too many posts in Politics and Society, Press or related boards is not preferable."

Say if I hypothetically posted 100 posts during the week how many of these posts I can write in News or Politics? 10%, 20%, 30%? It is a thin line here.

[Flep182]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=759743.msg10772479#msg10772479

This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.

It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.

Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.

Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.

[ndnh]

I have already complained about this last week and I will again because I've seen a comment that it's bad to write "one liners". What is a one liner? I have a big screen and can fit over 35 words in a single line, so most of my posts are one liners. Short posts can be constructive, so either you as the manager will read every single post and decide if it is relevant to the topic, or just choose the easy way and pick a minimum number of characters or words (like Bitmixer does) and we'll try to comply.

I think that short sentences can be brilliant and genius sometimes. Lets not judge posts by their length. After all some of the best quotes in history are just 'one liners'.

Example, quote by Satoshi Nakamoto from Feb. 14, 2010:

"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."

By your standard ndnhc would you consider this post a spam and useless if it was post written by one of the users enrolled in DaDice campaign?

No, we don't consider one-liners as non-constructive. There seems to be a misunderstanding about this. It just happens that some of them had their entire posts just one sentence. (They got banned later). You can see we have counted one-liner posts if it provides something constructive to the topic.
Similarly, we don't consider a post constructive if it says simply 'Congrats on winning this', by just copying the above post probably.

Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.

The fact is that Indian users should usually talk in Hindi (local language) in the Local boards section but they talk only in English for everyone to understand it. If that's the case in other Local sections where users make posts in English, it would be more relevant for the admin also to add that section.

Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.

Rank   Language   2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 )   1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988)   Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers   Percentage   Speakers   Percentage   Speakers
1   Hindi languages[6]   422,048,642   41.03%   329,518,087   39.29%   366 M
2   Bengali   83,369,769   8.11%   69,595,738   8.30%   207 M
3   Telugu   74,002,856   7.19%   66,017,615   7.87%   69.7 M
4   Marathi   71,936,894   6.99%   62,481,681   7.45%   68.0 M
5   Tamil   60,793,814   5.91%   53,006,368   6.32%   66.0 M
6   Urdu   51,536,111   5.01%   43,406,932   5.18%   60.3 M
7   Gujarati   46,091,617   4.48%   40,673,814   4.85%   46.1 M
8   Kannada   37,924,011   3.69%   32,753,676   3.91%   35.3 M
9   Malayalam   33,066,392   3.21%   30,377,176   3.62%   35.7 M
10   Oriya   33,017,446   3.21%   28,061,313   3.35%   32.3 M
11   Punjabi   29,102,477   2.83%   23,378,744   2.79%   57.1 M
12   Assamese   13,168,484   1.28%   13,079,696   1.56%   15.4 M
13   Maithili   12,179,122   1.18%   7,766,921   0.926%   24.2 M

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India

Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.

For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.

Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.

Yeah, this is the reason why we decided to exclude the local board (India)

-snip-


Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.

It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...

I just included that since I saw two posters who posted almost 100% of their posts there If I made just a few posts there, it will be included as usual in full. But we don't want too many posts there, since the active members of that particular boards are not very likely to be interested in playing dice

[ndnh]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=759743.msg10772479#msg10772479

This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.

It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.

Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.

Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.

Okay, in a way what you said is right. But it is not practicable for us to go through each thread a user posted. Last week, we paid out 1300+ posts, lol, (that is just constructive ones). It is near impossible to do so.

Yes, signature is visible to all. But, if the user spams a lot, the user as well as the campaign looses credibility. Most importantly, it is our duty to keep the forum clean, useful, and constructive

They are included already. (bolded ones)

Thank you

[erikalui]

Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.

Rank   Language   2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 )   1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988)   Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers   Percentage   Speakers   Percentage   Speakers
1   Hindi languages[6]   422,048,642   41.03%   329,518,087   39.29%   366 M
2   Bengali   83,369,769   8.11%   69,595,738   8.30%   207 M
3   Telugu   74,002,856   7.19%   66,017,615   7.87%   69.7 M
4   Marathi   71,936,894   6.99%   62,481,681   7.45%   68.0 M
5   Tamil   60,793,814   5.91%   53,006,368   6.32%   66.0 M
6   Urdu   51,536,111   5.01%   43,406,932   5.18%   60.3 M
7   Gujarati   46,091,617   4.48%   40,673,814   4.85%   46.1 M
8   Kannada   37,924,011   3.69%   32,753,676   3.91%   35.3 M
9   Malayalam   33,066,392   3.21%   30,377,176   3.62%   35.7 M
10   Oriya   33,017,446   3.21%   28,061,313   3.35%   32.3 M
11   Punjabi   29,102,477   2.83%   23,378,744   2.79%   57.1 M
12   Assamese   13,168,484   1.28%   13,079,696   1.56%   15.4 M
13   Maithili   12,179,122   1.18%   7,766,921   0.926%   24.2 M

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India

[/quote]

LOL! The main reason Hindi is considered to be our local language because of the Bollywood (Hindi Film Industry) and so Indian TV serials are also in Hindi langauges. "Hindi is the most widespread language of India" as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India

[sgk]

Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.

Rank   Language   2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 )   1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988)   Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers   Percentage   Speakers   Percentage   Speakers
1   Hindi languages[6]   422,048,642   41.03%   329,518,087   39.29%   366 M
2   Bengali   83,369,769   8.11%   69,595,738   8.30%   207 M
3   Telugu   74,002,856   7.19%   66,017,615   7.87%   69.7 M
4   Marathi   71,936,894   6.99%   62,481,681   7.45%   68.0 M
5   Tamil   60,793,814   5.91%   53,006,368   6.32%   66.0 M
6   Urdu   51,536,111   5.01%   43,406,932   5.18%   60.3 M
7   Gujarati   46,091,617   4.48%   40,673,814   4.85%   46.1 M
8   Kannada   37,924,011   3.69%   32,753,676   3.91%   35.3 M
9   Malayalam   33,066,392   3.21%   30,377,176   3.62%   35.7 M
10   Oriya   33,017,446   3.21%   28,061,313   3.35%   32.3 M
11   Punjabi   29,102,477   2.83%   23,378,744   2.79%   57.1 M
12   Assamese   13,168,484   1.28%   13,079,696   1.56%   15.4 M
13   Maithili   12,179,122   1.18%   7,766,921   0.926%   24.2 M

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India

You're not wrong in saying Hindi is the most spoken language in India.

But most internet users in India are well versed in English and they use English as the main communication language on internet, regardless of their native tongue (unlike China, where most users use Chinese). Hindi is a pain in the butt to type on keyboard, too.

And especially the ones interested in Bitcoins - and part of this forum - come from well educated background and English is their main communication language on internet.

I'm not saying this to include the India forum in post count; if other local boards are excluded, India should be excluded too. I just wanted everyone to know the facts about Hindi and English in India when it comes to internet.

[ndnh]

Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.

--snip--

Speakers   Percentage   Speakers   Percentage   Speakers
1   Hindi languages[6]   422,048,642   41.03%   329,518,087   39.29%   366 M
2   Bengali   83,369,769   8.11%   69,595,738   8.30%   207 M

LOL! The main reason Hindi is considered to be our local language because of the Bollywood (Hindi Film Industry) and so Indian TV serials are also in Hindi langauges. "Hindi is the most widespread language of India" as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India

Bollywood is not the only film industry in India.  You are ignoring Kollywood (lol, I like they way they put that 'ollywood') that is the Tamil film Industry which is also very famous. That is just one among many.
TV serials are also in any other language just as it is in Hindi. There are thousands of channels that are in other Indian languages, lol.
Hindi is prevalent mostly in north.

You're not wrong in saying Hindi is the most spoken language in India.

But most internet users in India are well versed in English and they use English as the main communication language on internet, regardless of their native tongue (unlike China, where most users use Chinese). Hindi is a pain in the butt to type on keyboard, too.

And especially the ones interested in Bitcoins - and part of this forum - come from well educated background and English is their main communication language on internet.

I'm not saying this to include the India forum in post count; if other local boards are excluded, India should be excluded too. I just wanted everyone to know the facts about Hindi and English in India when it comes to internet.

Yeah, Local boards (India) are excluded just like any other local boards are.

[shorena]

I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.

There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.

I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.



http://xkcd.com/810/

[dadice]

I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.

There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.

I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.



http://xkcd.com/810/

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!

[tspacepilot]

Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive.  Then apply those rules.  There's obviously going to be some gray area on this topic and I think if you shoot for getting rid of the clearly unconstructive then that will be basically as good as you can do without becoming very controversial.

One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post.  If I'm asking something like "how do you start bitcoind so it's listening on a particular port for RPC commands?"  then a really constructive reply might only be a few characters long "$ bitcoind -daemon ...".  You could say that a longer reply would be even more constructive (explaining what the various command line options mean) however the simple, direct answer is really quite constructive.

I think this kind of thing illustrates what I mean about looking instead for clearly unconstructive posts and trying to rule them out.

Cheers!

[arallmuus]

Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive.  Then apply those rules. 

One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post

Agree with both of this

Direct short answer could never be judged as non constructive, a short reply but if that is what the answer of the question will be then i will consider it as to be constructive

[Stargazer]

Simple and clear rules are the way to go. Right now they aren't because you said that you don't want people to post a lot in politics or news sections but on the other hand will count the posts if there's not a lot of them.  How many are they allowed to make? 1, 5, or maybe it's counted as a percentage, so 5%? This is ambiguous to say the least. Either pick sections you want them to post in or let them to do it as they please.

[ndnh]

Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive.  Then apply those rules. 

One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post

Agree with both of this

Direct short answer could never be judged as non constructive, a short reply but if that is what the answer of the question will be then i will consider it as to be constructive

Ground rules, seems a good idea. Can you give me a few examples?
Like I can't say no +1 posts, etc.? It also depends on individual opinion. If I set down a rules, a few will like it, others won't. So, in the first weeks, I will not be so direct and precise. Constructive posts is a relative subject that varies from person to person.  It is practically impossible to set down clear cut rules for that. But, you can certainly give some examples, and we will surely consider it.

The counting is not based on length. (I think I already said that a million times already, lol), if it was it is very easy to do the counting. It can be fully automated. That is not how it is done.
(But if you see all 20 posts in first page as one-liners and the ones are completely useless ones, what can you do?)

Simple and clear rules are the way to go. Right now they aren't because you said that you don't want people to post a lot in politics or news sections but on the other hand will count the posts if there's not a lot of them.  How many are they allowed to make? 1, 5, or maybe it's counted as a percentage, so 5%? This is ambiguous to say the least. Either pick sections you want them to post in or let them to do it as they please.

I just mentioned it. It was not a rule, just a suggestion. As long as it is less than around 50%, it will be counted. I just added it since 2 of the prevoius week's participants had almost 90%+ of their posts there. And it didn't seem not very good to put them at the same level with those who posted good, constructive ones in the Maketplace boards.

It is just a mere suggestion, like we prefer posts in the marketplace section.

I wanted to change it, but I thought it is best to do so, when the net period starts. I don't want to make changes in the middle of the campaign and confuse people.

[ndnh]

I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.

There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.

I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/constructive.png

http://xkcd.com/810/

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.

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

[ndnh]

If we review your overall post history and assign post count according to that, will it be acceptable to everyone?

Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.

If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?

Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.

[Flep182]

If we review your overall post history and assign post count according to that, will it be acceptable to everyone?

Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.

If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?

Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.

I'd probably quit the campaign with uncertainty. I'm certain that I don't post crap for raising my amount of posts. I'm renting out my signature space because it's a nice way to rake in some coin, I wouldn't be hurt if I wouldn't get the payments, when I wouldn't rent it out at least.
But mainly, I want the payment to be fair. The effort to check up with rules, check payouts and also have to add the "perceived value"of the posts would start to be too much. Then I'd go for a lower paying campaign or just quit altogether.

See it like this:

If one would post in a certain thread, have a world shocking post, really have a lot of people thinking etc. 10 out of 10.

Let's say you accept 4 out of 10 as minimum post quality and this user would after his rocking the world post 3 posts that -to you- are a 3. See the example that i gave before, that post is (at least I think that is to the thread/readers) a 7. You could easily see it as a 3 because you don't take the time to read the context around the post. This user would  get 1 out of his 4 posts paid. Another user that has 4 posts with quality 4 would get all 4 posts paid.
I don't think it's reasonable to keep these "high but unspecified" quality rules while you're not wanting to check the context of a post. In that sense I'm with some other posters in this thread, rules should be clear. Telling me that my posts are low-quality (as the Q in the spreadsheet suggests) annoys me because it's unspecific. I'm ok with wearing your company name on all the posts I make now including all the ones I've made on this forum before. Getting a "we accept X out of your Y posts, the rest is not up to our standards" notice isn't a way to go for me.