[BIT-X] Signature Campaign - Discussion

[marcotheminer]

From this moment on: Meta, auctions, politics & society do not count towards a user's post count. This will last until the start of the new campaign, when things will change. (1 or 2 weeks from now).

This big change was brought by the large increase in spam.

Beginners & help may soon be excluded too, if posters do not improve.

If you spam, or post unneeded replies, you will be kicked. End of discussion.

Please play your part in keeping this forum readable .

[hilariousandco]

You should just cut down on spam and spammers rather than ban half the forum.

[marcotheminer]

You should just cut down on spam and spammers rather than ban half the forum.

I'll do so too.

[Lauda]

I'm seeing an unusually high rate of excluded post. What's going on?
What happens when threads get moved into a section that doesn't get counted?

Update: I've found your post and I'm dissapointed. Because a group of individuals in the campaign is doing 50-100 posts daily you decide to punish everyone by excluding more sections? Hm.
If the campaign in 2 weeks doesn't bring something good I'm probably going to leave it. Things are out of control.

[pawel7777]

From this moment on: Meta, auctions, politics & society do not count towards a user's post count.

Just for the record, are the posts made in those boards before the announcement counted or excluded?

[Lauda]

From this moment on: Meta, auctions, politics & society do not count towards a user's post count.

Just for the record, are the posts made in those boards before the announcement counted or excluded?

I think they're excluded because mine jumped by 10 in a refresh.

[pawel7777]

From this moment on: Meta, auctions, politics & society do not count towards a user's post count.

Just for the record, are the posts made in those boards before the announcement counted or excluded?

I think they're excluded because mine jumped by 10 in a refresh.

If so, that's not right, you cannot change the rules like that. Plus, the announcement clearly states "From this moment", so previous posts should be counted.

[marcotheminer]

All previous posts will be counted. The bot just needs to know that. I'll look into it.

[irfan_pak10]

Hi Marco please add  Next payment date option in the bot. And please don't make changes in the mid of the week, lol.

Thanks

[marcotheminer]

Sorry if this gets confusing: There have been no changes until the campaign launches in 1-2 weeks

Meta, auctions, politics & society still count.

I will be reviewing all members once again.

[marcotheminer]

Hi Marco please add  Next payment date option in the bot. And please don't make changes in the mid of the week, lol.

Thanks

It's actually the beginning of the week and as per the campaign thread if rules are to be changed they do so on Monday.

[marcotheminer]

Sorry if this gets confusing: There have been no changes until the campaign launches in 1-2 weeks

Meta, auctions, politics & society still count.

I will be reviewing all members once again.

[erikalui]

How about considering 1 post per thread in the Politics & Society/Meta threads in the coming campaign? I have usually seen people keep posting in 1-2 threads again and again and have over 10-15 replies in one thread.

[hilariousandco]

How about considering 1 post per thread in the Politics & Society/Meta threads in the coming campaign? I have usually seen people keep posting in 1-2 threads again and again and have over 10-15 replies in one thread.

That would probably be hard to do with the bot but people shouldn't be penalised if they get into dialogue or a meaningful conversation in a thread. As I've said before, there should be little to no restrictions of where you can post but the campaign manager should crack down on spammers instead or preferably not allow them onto the campaign in the first place.

[erikalui]

That would probably be hard to do with the bot but people shouldn't be penalised if they get into dialogue or a meaningful conversation in a thread. As I've said before, there should be little to no restrictions of where you can post but the campaign manager should crack down on spammers instead or preferably not allow them onto the campaign in the first place.

It's not about restrictions as now as well many members do post in off topic and other Local sections even if they are excluded. Yeah, it would be hard for a bot to do it but if we set a counter that counts the number of posts by a member in a thread in those sections, all posts above "1" would be excluded which won't be hard to code. It's like an "if and else" statement.

It's just to prevent any member from spamming and they will know that if I keep posting here, I won't get paid and those who post there, will be posting inspite of not getting paid and will thus stop spamming and make constructive posts.

[hilariousandco]

Your logic doesn't make sense. It won't stop spamming at all. It actually encourages it. Should we not encourage people getting into meaningful conversations but instead just pay them to make one spam comment in as many different threads as they can because that's what will happen? Clamp down on actual spammers not just people who get into a conversation or discussion in a thread.

[redsn0w]

Your logic doesn't make sense. It won't stop spamming at all. It actually encourages it. Should we not encourage people getting into meaningful conversations but instead just pay them to make one spam comment in as many different threads as they can because that's what will happen? Clamp down on actual spammers not just people who get into a conversation or discussion in a thread.

I think every users (also if he is not paid for his posts) should 'make a post' only if he wants to add something 'useful' to the thread, or want to say his personal opinion about that fact. If someone doesn't know what he is saying why the hell he 'make that post'?

[Lauda]

Your logic doesn't make sense. It won't stop spamming at all. It actually encourages it. Should we not encourage people getting into meaningful conversations but instead just pay them to make one spam comment in as many different threads as they can because that's what will happen? Clamp down on actual spammers not just people who get into a conversation or discussion in a thread.

I think every users (also if he is not paid for his posts) should 'make a post' only if he wants to add something 'useful' to the thread, or want to say his personal opinion about that fact. If someone doesn't know what he is saying why the hell he 'make that post'?

That's how it is supposed to go. That's not how it is going here. When you have people doing 40-50+ posts a day in a campaign it's spam.
Who likes to waste their whole day here? Nobody. Especially people with flawed English who are making a lot of posts, definitely spam. Instead of putting restrictions around the forum, they should be forever banned from signature campaigns.

[erikalui]

Your logic doesn't make sense. It won't stop spamming at all. It actually encourages it. Should we not encourage people getting into meaningful conversations but instead just pay them to make one spam comment in as many different threads as they can because that's what will happen? Clamp down on actual spammers not just people who get into a conversation or discussion in a thread.

I believe in prevention being better than cure but your logic is that you need to stop spammers rather than preventing them from spamming. So well it's like wait till they spam and then ban them but in this way, the campaign's reputation suffers saying that it has a lot of spammers.

Not exactly sure if a signature gets benefited by having the same user posting over 20-30 replies in the same thread. For you and me, the meaning of having an interesting conversation might be different.

[hilariousandco]

Your logic doesn't make sense. It won't stop spamming at all. It actually encourages it. Should we not encourage people getting into meaningful conversations but instead just pay them to make one spam comment in as many different threads as they can because that's what will happen? Clamp down on actual spammers not just people who get into a conversation or discussion in a thread.

I believe in prevention being better than cure but your logic is that you need to stop spammers rather than preventing them from spamming. So well it's like wait till they spam and then ban them but in this way, the campaign's reputation suffers saying that it has a lot of spammers.

No it isn't. If you read what I said you would see I suggested doing both. When people sign up check their posts - if they're crap they get denied straight away. Then keep an eye on them throughout the campaign and if they start spamming warn or kick them off.

Not exactly sure if a signature gets benefited by having the same user posting over 20-30 replies in the same thread. For you and me, the meaning of having an interesting conversation might be different.

Are you saying each thread just needs one signature impression then advertising objective achieved? Not at all. The ads actually work better when there's several, just don't pay people to make poor posts, pay them to make quality ones and not the opposite as you're suggesting.