Pages:
Author

Topic: @Admins: Merit not working as configured, trolls just don't care (no surprise) - page 3. (Read 1269 times)

hero member
Activity: 2576
Merit: 882
Freebitco.in Support https://bit.ly/2I9BVS2
Well, spammers can mine, spammers with $ can pay, merit can be traded, accounts can be created in masses.

I got it the way things can be improved only, not totally fixed.

I gave my reasons I disagree with the OP here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.35059537

Paying to post is effectively a tax that the spammers could pay. Making it mining is just a different payment method of the tax.

PS. But thank you, I at least won "The wackiest idea" prize Smiley

You earned it.  Cheesy

There's a number of good suggestions about. The most effective would be to ban the ICO bounty campaigns from advertising here. They've already been banned from taking out banner ads on the forum and extending that to signatures would reduce spam dramatically.
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 17
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Probably charging for posts is too much, but it could be acceptable to require some amount of PoW instead? Say, mining one of the Cryptonote based currencies for btctalk account?

That's got to be the wackiest idea yet. Is there any particular reason that you think spammers can't mine?


Well, spammers can mine, spammers with $ can pay, merit can be traded, accounts can be created in masses.

I got it the way things can be improved only, not totally fixed.

PS. But thank you, I at least won "The wackiest idea" prize Smiley
hero member
Activity: 2576
Merit: 882
Freebitco.in Support https://bit.ly/2I9BVS2
Probably charging for posts is too much, but it could be acceptable to require some amount of PoW instead? Say, mining one of the Cryptonote based currencies for btctalk account?

That's got to be the wackiest idea yet. Is there any particular reason that you think spammers can't mine?
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 17
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This might be somewhat unpopular, but is popularity the goal? A good resource should be the goal IMO, I exclusively read this forum for about 1 year before I felt knowledgeable enough to post at all.


Getting the signal:noise ratio up can probably only be achieved using real resources. I'd be very happy if a BTC cost was introduced for posting:

  • Nuke the old rank status for all members, re-adjust according to merit only
  • Charge BTC for every post, low rank = highest fee
  • Set the charges incredibly low to begin with, slowly increase to tweak the quality level


Lightning payments would be necessary, of course. Maybe I'm taking too hard a line, but if I have to pay even 500 satoshis per post, that would be a small price to pay to improve quality again.

Look at the inverse situation: 1000's of accounts are posting meaningless, obvious, copy-pasta or troll content, only in order to get paid per post by sig campaigns or trolls-in-chief.

Price discovery can solve this problem, it's a geniune "tragedy of the commons" issue after all.

Probably charging for posts is too much, but it could be acceptable to require some amount of PoW instead? Say, mining one of the Cryptonote based currencies for btctalk account?

legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18587
You definitely cannot do anything in which users have administrative power over others. The red-trusted scammers would have a field day just using the system against the people who had sent them the feedback.

Pretty much this. Under this system most of the default trust network would be banned within the hour as all the scammers and spammers they had red-tagged retaliated against them.
copper member
Activity: 2562
Merit: 2510
Spear the bees
Okay, so you don't like my suggestion but didn't suggest an alternate approach yourself... Forgive me if I don't take your rebuttal too seriously, then.
That's pretty close-minded, mate. Rejecting opinions just because others don't offer a solution to a problem isn't logical. It's just ignorant.
That's something along the lines of a Russell's Teapot argument where you place an onus on the opposition.

You definitely cannot do anything in which users have administrative power over others. The red-trusted scammers would have a field day just using the system against the people who had sent them the feedback.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18587
That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban.

I still don't think this would work. There are a number of members with large numbers of alt accounts who could still easily abuse this, and mods are busy enough as it is without having a bunch of fake bans to review.

Okay, so you don't like my suggestion but didn't suggest an alternate approach yourself... Forgive me if I don't take your rebuttal too seriously, then.

Providing an alternative is not a requirement for disagreeing with someone's point of view, and not providing an alternative does not make my argument any less valid. Your system is too open to abuse and manipulation.
full member
Activity: 420
Merit: 182
That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban.

I still don't think this would work. There are a number of members with large numbers of alt accounts who could still easily abuse this, and mods are busy enough as it is without having a bunch of fake bans to review.

Okay, so you don't like my suggestion but didn't suggest an alternate approach yourself... Forgive me if I don't take your rebuttal too seriously, then.

legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18587
That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban.

I still don't think this would work. There are a number of members with large numbers of alt accounts who could still easily abuse this, and mods are busy enough as it is without having a bunch of fake bans to review.
member
Activity: 103
Merit: 35
I really don’t believe paying to post inspires conversation and theymos has made it abundantly clear that while he intends to continuously moderate and promote people to moderate, he does not want to inhibit the discussion at all. It seems to be one of his main goals when determining who is capable of the responsibility.

I believe signature campaigns are still fine, but I don’t understand why there is a necessity to make people post x amount of posts in a week, that should be against TOS because it incentivizes posting. Those that are higher ranking got that way because they’re active already and don’t really need to be told how to contribute to the forum and those who are lower ranking shouldn’t be as active in an ideal situation so why are we okay with bounties telling them to be?

Also- I feel like we’re all focusing on punishments or deincentivizing current activities. I don’t think this works well with any problems we encounter that include others. I believe what we actually need is a reason for the spammers and trolls to stop posting here. Eliminate jr member, make newbies and members have a scaling post limit(% result of posts/merit) until they get to full member at 100 merit and create a very very slow merit drip site like in a telegram channel that allows spammers to earn .5 merit after 500 posts but have a bot that deletes duplicates, spam, links and advertisements. I’m okay with someone posting 1000 posts on a chat channel to earn 1 merit if it eliminates the 1000 posts that individual would have posted on btt and earned 4-5 merit for. Plus if they do it too much, telegram has anti spam capabilities already monitoring the users that would allow mods to remain focused on the forum itself and promote personal responsibility because it might have an effect on their telegram account. OR.. you know, just have a scaling post limit.

The entire situation reminds me of dealing with children. Telling them what they can’t do rarely works as smoothly as you’d expect, but distracting them by telling them what they can do works like a charm. We need to give trolls and spammers an avenue that allows them to benefit, because they will find a way to benefit regardless and we're currently trying to stop an entire flood with a bucket. Isolating them from the communal aspects of BTT is a strong approach and I'd be surprised if they didn't go willingly to something they believe benefits them more than junking up BTT.


We all have our suggestions and there are reasons all of them won’t work. Merit is pretty new so it wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if they revamped their policy with new specifications in the future.
jr. member
Activity: 143
Merit: 1

Nuke the old rank status for all members, re-adjust according to merit only


I agree with this part only. This would be the first pay to post forum, sure its revolutionary, but more likely it'll fall flat on its face.
Like if you started to charge for breathing air, then people will just go somewhere else to breathe
full member
Activity: 420
Merit: 182
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature.
...

Hah, my suggestion to charge for sigs has taken hold subliminally!  Grin

Not quite. I've been suggesting we remove signatures from ranks for years.

Hence the overly-smiley emoticon... I didn't think that suggesting charging for sigs (or avatars, etc.) was terribly original, either.

such offenders be automatically temp-banned if, say, x different members mark any of offender's posts as "shitposts."

This would be abused. People would just report or bot people's posts they don't like.

That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban.

That said, I have long since grown weary of "free" services/sites on the internet. How is that Facebook doesn't charge any of its is >2B users yet still brings in >$12B in revenue each quarter? Well, that's because you are the product... Honestly, I would much rather pay for a service like that rather than exchange all of my privacy for the proverbial beads and trinkets; same applies here - it is undoubtedly costly to host this site and paying an annual membership and/or to unlock various accessories/accoutrements would not only be fine by me, it would be preferable.

legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 3036
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature.
...

Hah, my suggestion to charge for sigs has taken hold subliminally!  Grin

Not quite. I've been suggesting we remove signatures from ranks for years.

Dedicated spammers/scammers will figure out a way to game any system

I don't think they'll be able to game paying a hefty fee for a signature, but any way of being able to achieving anything here naturally will be gamed/abused though.

such offenders be automatically temp-banned if, say, x different members mark any of offender's posts as "shitposts."

This would be abused. People would just report or bot people's posts they don't like.

legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1218
Change is in your hands
Quote
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng
Agreed...

Quote
If you get money back for receiving merits it will just lead to even more abuse and the system is already heavily exploited by those giving merit to their alts and "friends" so this would just happen in even greater numbers when there's cash refunds on the line.
Hmm Interesting perspective.. Didn't thought of it in that way...
full member
Activity: 420
Merit: 182
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature.
...

Hah, my suggestion to charge for sigs has taken hold subliminally!  Grin

I did think there might possibly be some merit to charging a fee for posts that varied inversely with rank, but upon further consideration I now think this is unavoidably regressive/centralizing. Dedicated spammers/scammers will figure out a way to game any system so I am starting to warm up to the idea - which is not at all original - that such offenders be automatically temp-banned if, say, x different members mark any of offender's posts as "shitposts." A possible implementation would be to scan for keywords in a moderation report such as, shitpost, bot, spam, scam, off-topic., etc. Temp-banned users could appeal via a single thread in meta - same as now - which only non-bots would attempt. If the same user is auto-banned three times then make the ban permanent.

legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 3036
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I kinda agree with Carlton Banks.. I believe bitcointalk has reached a stage where everything has been answered... most of these posts by newbies are repeats.. Like how to export wallet key etc.. They keep on repeating the same stuff.. They need to learn how to use the search function.. Plus the general discussion section gets spammed with shit posts which are repetitive and are in broken English, which ruins the reading experience for other users.. Like if you believe you have something super important to add to the discussion which has been missed by other users then happily pay a 500 Satoshi fee... Also i kinda like the repayment idea.. Like if your reply gets merited you get back your 500 satoshi.. This can work and can do wonders for this community.. But on the other hand i believe the merit introduction has been working wonderfully.. So far the posts i have read have been less shitty.. So by giving it more time it will eventually give us the same result..

The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature. If you get money back for receiving merits it will just lead to even more abuse and the system is already heavily exploited by those giving merit to their alts and "friends" so this would just happen in even greater numbers when there's cash refunds on the line.
member
Activity: 238
Merit: 40
First Payment Gateway using GoldBacked cryptocurre
I kinda agree with Carlton Banks.. I believe bitcointalk has reached a stage where everything has been answered... most of these posts by newbies are repeats.. Like how to export wallet key etc.. They keep on repeating the same stuff.. They need to learn how to use the search function.. Plus the general discussion section gets spammed with shit posts which are repetitive and are in broken English, which ruins the reading experience for other users.. Like if you believe you have something super important to add to the discussion which has been missed by other users then happily pay a 500 Satoshi fee... Also i kinda like the repayment idea.. Like if your reply gets merited you get back your 500 satoshi.. This can work and can do wonders for this community.. But on the other hand i believe the merit introduction has been working wonderfully.. So far the posts i have read have been less shitty.. So by giving it more time it will eventually give us the same result..
If people have to pay for their post do you think they will ever post BTC development enhancement for free from their part or they will post bounty related material so that they can earn back some reward, furthermore once we set some kind of fees they will post whatever they want and without fear of getting caught because they consider their posting as paid posting that more like advertisement then anything else
hero member
Activity: 1442
Merit: 629
Vires in Numeris
I kinda agree with Carlton Banks.. I believe bitcointalk has reached a stage where everything has been answered... most of these posts by newbies are repeats.. Like how to export wallet key etc.. They keep on repeating the same stuff.. They need to learn how to use the search function.. Plus the general discussion section gets spammed with shit posts which are repetitive and are in broken English, which ruins the reading experience for other users.. Like if you believe you have something super important to add to the discussion which has been missed by other users then happily pay a 500 Satoshi fee... Also i kinda like the repayment idea.. Like if your reply gets merited you get back your 500 satoshi.. This can work and can do wonders for this community.. But on the other hand i believe the merit introduction has been working wonderfully.. So far the posts i have read have been less shitty.. So by giving it more time it will eventually give us the same result..
What if we don't allow newbies and jr. members to open a new topic everywhere, just let them to open a new topic in the off-topic section? (this is not my own idea, I have read this somewhere, but I like this idea).
(Newbies can buy copper membership, if they really want to "grow up" earlier...)
They will have to use the search function, if they have a question, not randomly open a new thread for every type of headache... and if they don't like the forum's own search function, they still can use the google one, like searching for "bitcoin price increase /site:bitcointalk.org" and voilá....
If they find the proper topic (because as you have mentioned, 99% of the newbie questions has already been answered, most of them several times in several topics), they can still ask a question there, and it would be on-topic post, so it would improve their posting habits as well...
member
Activity: 172
Merit: 34
They need to learn how to use the search function..
With thousands of posts, the search function does not guarantee the specific question of a newbie.
Like if you believe you have something super important to add to the discussion which has been missed by other users then happily pay a 500 Satoshi fee... Also i kinda like the repayment idea.. Like if your reply gets merited you get back your 500 satoshi.. This can work and can do wonders for this community.. But on the other hand i believe the merit introduction has been working wonderfully.. So far the posts i have read have been less shitty.. So by giving it more time it will eventually give us the same result..
Not all good posts can have merits, that is the problem of the community.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1218
Change is in your hands
Quote
To be honest, I got into this Forum because I heard there's an easy job that can make a lot of money, and that's a Signature Campaign.

This is the real problem.. This perspective needs to go away.. Do you expect to get paid when you use facebook? The short answer is no! so you shouldn't have a mindset like this here at bitcointalk.. If you want to discuss technology then its fine.. But why do you need to be that desperate for some extra cash? Also i feel sad for people who think that they can live their life off through signature campaign earnings.. you guys need help.. Do something better for yourself... There are far better things and ways to make a living than spamming a forum.
Pages:
Jump to: