Woke up this morning...Blamed VOD

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

My point being, if you have never been banned, you then get a paid advertising signature and continue posting how you have in the past, you aren't going to get a ban just because of the advertising signature. If you let your post quality deteriorate to meet quotas as tends to happen, then you do risk being banned.

I think people are referring to this post when they say that having a signature tends to increase the chances of getting banned. After all, doesn't the ban message say "Insubstantial Post + Signature Campaign"?

There are people who just don't post very well in general, post "too much", or don't really have anything to say, they just like to participate in the community and post. This itself is fine. But when you add an ad to these kinds of posters, it's difficult or impossible to tell if they just aren't quality posters or if they are attempting to boost their post count. I used to err on the side of caution here because I do not want to ban the former, just the latter, but too many of the latter are slipping through the cracks because it's very difficult to gauge someone's intentions. This is the main thing that has changed lately.

I like to think I fall into this category and just got caught in the crackdown.

Or maybe not. Banned again

With all due respect to the administrators of this forum: this is nuts!

It isn't like I've been horning in on other people's discussions. I stay in like two threads. I don't flame nobody.

I don't get it

What is the reason this time? Is it a perma-ban or limited ban? Can you explain better  I can't understand.

7 days ban for Insubstantial Posts + sig.  

I'm tempted to blame VOD!

[dothebeats]

...to 11 deleted posts. Mostly watching bumps and approving grins, so I admit it wasn't much of a contribution.

But still, feel a bit violated

You should be very happy that you are not banned. I've seen many people banned recently and I'm seriously scared right now. I don't know how many posts I can write without being assaulted by banning team.

Afaik, there isn't a certain number of posts that you need to accumulate in order for you to get banned. The main point for you to get banned by posting is posting nonsense post (usually bump, +1, single pictures etc.) and replies that are really far from what the topic really is. You can actually post as many as you want and as you like, as long as it is constructive and doesn't stray away from what is being tackled upon in the topic.

Have you read the forum guidelines? 

[botany]

Or maybe not. Banned again
With all due respect to the administrators of this forum: this is nuts!
It isn't like I've been horning in on other people's discussions. I stay in like two threads. I don't flame nobody.
I don't get it

What is the reason this time? Is it a perma-ban or limited ban? Can you explain better  I can't understand.

7 days ban for Insubstantial Posts + sig.  

I'm tempted to blame VOD!

Second ban and just 7 days?
You should count yourself as being lucky.
The usual trend is 14 days, 60 days and then perma-ban.

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

Or maybe not. Banned again
With all due respect to the administrators of this forum: this is nuts!
It isn't like I've been horning in on other people's discussions. I stay in like two threads. I don't flame nobody.
I don't get it

What is the reason this time? Is it a perma-ban or limited ban? Can you explain better  I can't understand.

7 days ban for Insubstantial Posts + sig.  

I'm tempted to blame VOD!

Second ban and just 7 days?
You should count yourself as being lucky.
The usual trend is 14 days, 60 days and then perma-ban.

I don't feel lucky. I feel like I have a target on my back.

NLC posts non-stop all day every day about Bitcoiners defiling children. What am I missing?

I otoh actually like Bitcoin, and Bitcoiners. I call out the occasional scam for sport, but that's it. I stay out of technical discussions I'm not qualified to participate in. I hang out in the speculation lobby mostly and try to be funny.


@Empowering

Thanks bro!

[Lauda]

You should be very happy that you are not banned. I've seen many people banned recently and I'm seriously scared right now. I don't know how many posts I can write without being assaulted by banning team.

Afaik, there isn't a certain number of posts that you need to accumulate in order for you to get banned. The main point for you to get banned by posting is posting nonsense post (usually bump, +1, single pictures etc.) and replies that are really far from what the topic really is. You can actually post as many as you want and as you like, as long as it is constructive and doesn't stray away from what is being tackled upon in the topic.

Have you read the forum guidelines? 

Actually it looks like this is not the case. I've been watching some members that are involved in signature campaigns, including the one that I'm in. The number of posts doesn't matter which is strange. I mean unless the posts are really really useless, why ban someone who makes a very low amount of posts a day? Back in the days of Inputs.io I don't remember such bans. I guess times have been changing.
Although the staff seems to miss some of the "good spammers".

[abyrnes81]

My point being, if you have never been banned, you then get a paid advertising signature and continue posting how you have in the past, you aren't going to get a ban just because of the advertising signature. If you let your post quality deteriorate to meet quotas as tends to happen, then you do risk being banned.

I think people are referring to this post when they say that having a signature tends to increase the chances of getting banned. After all, doesn't the ban message say "Insubstantial Post + Signature Campaign"?

There are people who just don't post very well in general, post "too much", or don't really have anything to say, they just like to participate in the community and post. This itself is fine. But when you add an ad to these kinds of posters, it's difficult or impossible to tell if they just aren't quality posters or if they are attempting to boost their post count. I used to err on the side of caution here because I do not want to ban the former, just the latter, but too many of the latter are slipping through the cracks because it's very difficult to gauge someone's intentions. This is the main thing that has changed lately.

I like to think I fall into this category and just got caught in the crackdown.

Or maybe not. Banned again

With all due respect to the administrators of this forum: this is nuts!

It isn't like I've been horning in on other people's discussions. I stay in like two threads. I don't flame nobody.

I don't get it

What is the reason this time? Is it a perma-ban or limited ban? Can you explain better  I can't understand.

7 days ban for Insubstantial Posts + sig.  

I'm tempted to blame VOD!

Then you should stop to wear a sig ad (when you will be unbanned). I think the forum staff will abolish the signature campaign, this is the unique and valid way to stop who is posting insubstantial posts.

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

I was happy to wait out the last ban in lurker limbo. But is there any way to appeal this? It seems like a very subjective call. And it makes me feel dirty

If it's about the sig or whatever I'd be happy to remove it. I'm on record somewhere as being against them on principle. But I was just invited by PM to this one. Seemed legit. IDK





@Abyrnes81

I'm not reporting anything here. Signature campaings are an officially sanctioned feature of the forum are they not? I'm offering to remove it

[abyrnes81]

If it's about the sig or whatever I'd be happy to remove it. I'm on record somewhere as being against them on principle. But I was just invited by PM to this one. Seemed legit. IDK

If you were invited through PM then report that personal message. I'm sure that who has sent that message will be banned.

[dothebeats]

You should be very happy that you are not banned. I've seen many people banned recently and I'm seriously scared right now. I don't know how many posts I can write without being assaulted by banning team.

Afaik, there isn't a certain number of posts that you need to accumulate in order for you to get banned. The main point for you to get banned by posting is posting nonsense post (usually bump, +1, single pictures etc.) and replies that are really far from what the topic really is. You can actually post as many as you want and as you like, as long as it is constructive and doesn't stray away from what is being tackled upon in the topic.

Have you read the forum guidelines? 

Actually it looks like this is not the case. I've been watching some members that are involved in signature campaigns, including the one that I'm in. The number of posts doesn't matter which is strange. I mean unless the posts are really really useless, why ban someone who makes a very low amount of posts a day? Back in the days of Inputs.io I don't remember such bans. I guess times have been changing.
Although the staff seems to miss some of the "good spammers".

That's what I have stated in my previous comment. Not sure if you read that one entirely or understood it clearly. The users who post useless and off-topic replies are more likely to get a ban than those who posts more often but do not post insubstantial ones. Well it is clearly stated in the forum guidelines, and one user (or staff, can't clearly remember who) stated that anyone without the signature ad in their signature space is fine to engage in different topics and may reply off-topic posts as well, as their intentions are somewhat related to join the discussion. Whereas, those who wear signature banners and spams or posts insubstantial replies/posts are more likely to get a ban because it is a way to boost their post count.

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

What constitutes an insubstantial post anyway? A member opens a thread about an avatar change, I respond, we have a few laughs.

An autopost bot bumps a speculation thread to lobby status and we entertain ourselves when there are no walls to observe.

Then there is the answer questions with questions thread. I love that thread! I play by the rules and everything.


Have any specific posts offended anyone on the forum specifically?



*Shakes fist, blamingly: VODDDDD!!!!

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

I'm bored. Someone come visit me in my meta dungeon!!

Edit: I invite you to say insubstantial things. I think we're safe here

[uhoh]

To ban a contributing member like BlindMayorBitcorn for basically nothing,  and to allow the rampant trollfest from NLC&sockpuppets, is in my opinion completely insane, makes no sense whatsoever, and is really really backwards.

If you guys care about this forum, reinstating newbie jail, would be a better move than banning BlindMayorBitcorn for a +1 or whatever.

I have been in touch with the admins regarding this in the past.

Also the constant references to pedophilia seem to be ok? complete overt racism is ok, spamming the thread for months and months on end is ok... but a +1 or a short post is not?

Someone needs to pull their head out of their arse imho.

400 billion times this ^

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

Thanks bro!

I think NLC and his bag of alts must have a guardian angel

[abyrnes81]

To ban a contributing member like BlindMayorBitcorn for basically nothing,  and to allow the rampant trollfest from NLC&sockpuppets, is in my opinion completely insane, makes no sense whatsoever, and is really really backwards.

If you guys care about this forum, reinstating newbie jail, would be a better move than banning BlindMayorBitcorn for a +1 or whatever.

I have been in touch with the admins regarding this in the past.

Also the constant references to pedophilia seem to be ok? complete overt racism is ok, spamming the thread for months and months on end is ok... but a +1 or a short post is not?

Someone needs to pull their head out of their arse imho.

400 billion times this ^

The problem is that he is not wearing a paid sig ad, so for the staff his post are all substantial and he is not trying to boost his post count.


*NLC

[Anotherthing]

Thanks bro!

I think NLC and his bag of alts must have a guardian angel

Or maybe he doesn't ban-evade by making insubstantial and off-topic posts outside Meta, hmm?

yawn

Bored? Come by for a visit! There's pie

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999262.msg10991033#msg10991033

Ban evasion just earned you a permanent ban, criminal scum!

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

Thanks bro!

I think NLC and his bag of alts must have a guardian angel

Or maybe he doesn't ban-evade by making insubstantial and off-topic posts outside Meta, hmm?

yawn

Bored? Come by for a visit! There's pie

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999262.msg10991033#msg10991033

Ban evasion just earned you a permanent ban, criminal scum!

I was loney:(

Thanks for dropping by!

Edit: NLC is actually my favourite troll, too...

PS. If this leads to a perma-ban, I'd like to thank you all for some good laughs and wall observing.
I guess I'll have to join the Reddit:/

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

To ban a contributing member like BlindMayorBitcorn for basically nothing,  and to allow the rampant trollfest from NLC&sockpuppets, is in my opinion completely insane, makes no sense whatsoever, and is really really backwards.

If you guys care about this forum, reinstating newbie jail, would be a better move than banning BlindMayorBitcorn for a +1 or whatever.

I have been in touch with the admins regarding this in the past.

Also the constant references to pedophilia seem to be ok? complete overt racism is ok, spamming the thread for months and months on end is ok... but a +1 or a short post is not?

Someone needs to pull their head out of their arse imho.

400 billion times this ^

The problem is that he is not wearing a paid sig ad, so for the staff his post are all substantial and he is not trying to boost his post count.


*NLC

Odd logic this..

[abyrnes81]

To ban a contributing member like BlindMayorBitcorn for basically nothing,  and to allow the rampant trollfest from NLC&sockpuppets, is in my opinion completely insane, makes no sense whatsoever, and is really really backwards.

If you guys care about this forum, reinstating newbie jail, would be a better move than banning BlindMayorBitcorn for a +1 or whatever.

I have been in touch with the admins regarding this in the past.

Also the constant references to pedophilia seem to be ok? complete overt racism is ok, spamming the thread for months and months on end is ok... but a +1 or a short post is not?

Someone needs to pull their head out of their arse imho.

400 billion times this ^

The problem is that he is not wearing a paid sig ad, so for the staff his post are all substantial and he is not trying to boost his post count.


*NLC

Odd logic this..

It is not my logix, but (I think) the forum team's logic. They will ban only who is wearing a sig add and post insubstantial message here at bitcointalk.org . However, NLC is a troll and "be a troll" isn't against the forum rules, isn't it (correct me).

[BlatchMajorBitstaff]

Hi, please don't turn into a power tripping mod Theymos, I've had enough of them lately, what you guys should be worrying about is all these spammers and hackers gathering on these boards to con people out of their Bitcoins. Trying to appeal to over-sensitive muppets who don't know about the ignore function is just going to be a waste of time and will also lead to all sorts of bullshit rules that will swiftly empty this forum.

This corresponds to my current thinking on the subject.

The quote can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=14356.60

I was really vocal about the inclusion of so-called investor-based-games in the forum, for example. Basically they just up and legitimized ponzi schemes by devoting a whole, semantically misguided category to it. But I get banned for a giraffe

[abyrnes81]

Hi, please don't turn into a power tripping mod Theymos, I've had enough of them lately, what you guys should be worrying about is all these spammers and hackers gathering on these boards to con people out of their Bitcoins. Trying to appeal to over-sensitive muppets who don't know about the ignore function is just going to be a waste of time and will also lead to all sorts of bullshit rules that will swiftly empty this forum.

This corresponds to my current thinking on the subject.

The quote can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=14356.60

I was really vocal about the inclusion of so-called investor-based-games in the forum, for example. Basically they just up and legitimized ponzi schemes by devoting a whole, semantically misguided category to it. But I get banned for a giraffe

This is how the forum works, if you don't agree with this system you can leave the forum now and create another one with your own rules.