Topic: Account Farmers are the new Ponzis - page 3. (Read 7937 times)

They wont come forward because they are guilty

There are bad apples but this is all aspects of the forum. Think punishing those caught in the crossfire is wrong and we should be addressing more moderation of those abusing the perk.

As for lack of voice coming from the campaign, not everyone likes to put their ass out to be flogged.
We have had 2 months now of house cleaning and its not always clear if discussions like this one are something that the signature wants.
But there is something to the echo I hear from myself in this discussion. Least we can validate the point if no one comes thru.

If they contributed to the forum in any meaningful way (legitimately participating) then we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.  You are merely proving our point.

I think that if no one from the signature comes in to defend themselves I will have to join the rest of you in reasoning.
Should be interesting to see though if people do care. Was debating posting something similar in other signatures as well but thought it might cause a flood of posts,looks like I am way off in how I viewed the potential response here,will give it the day to see.

The comment I was making about posts was in reference to signature members making long posts with little substance.
I know there are a lot of users posting one to three word dribble responses,think those are easier to hunt down and get rid of with raising the cut off to full member. I am not a full member and have no problem waiting till then if that becomes the new criteria.

Willing to show I am wrong,no big deal for me but would like due dilgence on the issue because I do feel it is a game changer in many aspects that could be detrimental to the forum. Starting to think my philosophy is also something that can only be found on the darkwebs away from government.

I'm a signature campaign manager, and hence directly involved with signature campaigns (deeper than some YoBit spammers, you might even say).
I still have to say that there have been several valuable inputs to this thread, and that I'd rather see this 'very lopsided' discussion from people that actually care,
than 100 posts from alt-account xyz saying "All signatures are good, I earn from it" in a slightly different way over and over again.

---

Let me just say that I saw your post in yobit's thread and I think It's cute thhat you think the spammers care. Lets take things into perspective, after reading your post in the yobit thread, I saw the user above you say something uncalled for (spam, one liner) so, out of curiosity, I checked his latest posts, here they are.

---

---

Is this enough proof for you?

Lack of signature members is a issue for me and think that this discussion as become very lopsided, so I have pointed Yobit towards this thread to voice their concerns here. Tired of seeing the same people clapping each other on the back acting like their is no other opinions in a discussion. So we shall see if the signature is meek,timid and voiceless in due time.

Before I get full hog tied,I endorse the idea of Full member and up for signatures but a out right ban seems short sighted and with out stats can not be discussed with a rational mind.
Lets not forget that one of the favorite tactics in this forum is to state "You have a signature,therefore your opinion is paid for and is just spam"! Dismissive and a tad arrogant because we are all equal human beings and this need for a dynasty of 1% seems like a game where the forum will not prosper. I know a lot of you feel the opposite but wheres the proof?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This seems to be the talking point as of late about signature users talking a lot but saying nothing. Can it be more that you do not agree with what is being stated and this is a way to cut the person off? Can you show me some examples of these type of posts because I think the people still posting crap are not changing the format. May be a handful of users that are doing this but as a whole very few are posting pages.

I see alot of spammers making long wordy posts with little content, If your system is adopted, those users will rank quickly although they are spamming.

Also, the forum had to change it's activity update system because it was taking up too many resources and a few days ago theymos had to disable the view members page for the same reason. Your plan will need too many resources.

The biggest topic of conversation in the Donators section over the last year or so is why nobody posts in the Donators section.  Letting more Donators in would be a positive in my opinion.  Their coins would be just as much a donation as anyone else's.

The sig campaigns that dont police spam are bad but even the ones with campaign managers against spam end up promoting a particular brand of postings - its 1 or 2 paragraphs long, it doesn't really say much of anything, its not actually how real people post.  People post short stuff all the time, see reddit.  I dont like the idea that someone might have 10-20 accounts all signed up to yobit though, agree.

Why not just make signatures plain text, no more colors and no more BBcode. This may give those trying to get their first coins a chance to participate in a text-only advertising campaign, which isn't going to pay as much and isn't going to be as obnoxious. You could still have a 2BTC cost to be allowed BBcode, which I assume would result in entries into higher-paying campaigns?   Just a thought that I haven't really had time to process, so feel free to rip it apart  

I'm struggling to fully support the idea just because I am against the thought of buying any rank on a forum. The 'donator' status had a purpose at one point in time, but at this point I do not agree with the idea of buying a status that subsequently provides a false sense of trust to others.

Regardless, I'm not sure how else you would stop the activity without having a price set that makes it a much longer ROI and possibly not worth their time. But maybe just get rid of the 'rank' part... or give them the rank, but do not give them 5 coins under their name, access to donator forum, etc. the way the donator status does now. They are not really donating anything, they are trying to participate in paid signature campaigns for a profit... Or just make the rank name "Profiteering Glutton"  

Also, I assume this may have been looked at before but maybe ranking in general could be based on the word count or character count of posts as opposed to the quantity of them?  Maybe too resource intensive?

Prone to abuse.

Still prone to abuse.

They can still suppress someone's input in other threads.

End result is that there's a lot more work for moderators for a small benefit (if any).

The situation is clearly a hard to clean mess. i think that the spam attacks are not gonna stop anytime soon.

Let's initiate the process by Stopping YoShit and Secondstrade signature campaigns.It will have greater impact,the number of spam posts will be reduced eventually.

just ideas...

Anyone could mark posts as spam? or could have only certain ranks allowed? a post needing 5 votes or whatever before its marked as true spam etc.  

To combat abuse, dont allow anyones OPs to be marked as spam incase people hurt other competiting businesses OP.  Leave OP deleting to the mods. Spammers dont usually make an OP anyway they like to hide deep in threads.

Mods could also have powers to see who is marking what posts as spam incase businesses start to attack eachother.

Yeah people could gang up, you have that problem on reddit with upvoting manipulation.

Exactly who would be allowed to mark posts as spam? How would you plan on abuse? A few people could 'gang up' on someone with the opposite view and suppress his posts.

Are there any modifications to the current simple machines forum software which allow members to mark posts as spam (blocking the post from general view etc).  That would put sig campaign managers mostly out of business haha.  The community will then police the issue, account farming becomes pointless.

There are plenty of ways that the money could be spent.

So, the right approach is not to completely ban them, but go in the lines of OgNasty's suggestion.

That is one of the main problems in their posting habits. They don't read posts, end up rewriting what someone else already wrote and they keep repeating this cycle. Their overall posting quality becomes trash.

That is a hasty generalization. You can't know this, as an example I choose myself, assuming that staff members also lose this functionality, I would pay the 2 BTC fee.

Risking 20$   Whoa, now I'm scared; I shall not spam anymore!  

As long as people see posting as some kind of investment, and buying accounts in order to ROI, this will be a problem. The point of this forum was to initially discuss Bitcoin related stuff and provide help for people, not make 100 pages of posts in threads like 'Why is gambling bad?0 (note: 1 post was sufficient to answer this question).

I disagree. If hilarious ends up making less posts then the advertiser anticipates (even if he does not communicate this expectation to hilarious) then the advertiser will not renew his agreement (and may even end up asking to end it early and ask for a partial refund).

I have a special referral link in the BB code of my signature so my advertisers can track with my signature, and I presume they will elect to not renew my agreement with me if the advertising is not profitable, and I expect that is directly correlated with the number of posts that I made, and likely how diverse my posts are. 

Nope nothing like it, hilarious has a similar deal but he received the payments until ~6 months.