If you see fit... you could add some of the suggestions for improvement below to the general list.
Topic: Community generated suggestions to improve the forum (+ eventual voting on them) (Read 26714 times)
October 22, 2020, 10:41:02 AM
Ave! Thanks to this post, now I know where I can store my suggestions for the forum
If you see fit... you could add some of the suggestions for improvement below to the general list.
If you see fit... you could add some of the suggestions for improvement below to the general list.
September 13, 2020, 03:13:38 PM
1. Make a restriction that only users of the Member/Copper Member ranks can create self-moderated topics, because trolls abusing this option on the forum.
2. Give a temporary or permanent ban for vandalism to users which continuously creating self-mod topics and then deleting all replies there.
2. Give a temporary or permanent ban for vandalism to users which continuously creating self-mod topics and then deleting all replies there.
December 26, 2019, 04:47:06 PM
What about someone who hasn't used the forum for months?
These members will continue to be able to wear old signatures, but they can't put another signature if they haven't got any merit in the last 3-4 months.
What about business owners (who usually only post updates) but never receive a merit point?
What about the valuable posters who receive rarely merit (Many cases could be found especially in local boards if there is not Smerit source) but their comments worth a lot more than the majority?
What about the users who don't care to participate in a campaign but would like to promote something in their signature space?
What about the valuable posters who receive rarely merit (Many cases could be found especially in local boards if there is not Smerit source) but their comments worth a lot more than the majority?
What about the users who don't care to participate in a campaign but would like to promote something in their signature space?
If forum members willing to promote something in the signatures, but at the same time they can't get any merit points, then I think such users might have been able to make a some fee to the forum, once every few months, in order to edit their signatures.
As for users who write good posts but don't get merit, so there's a special topic for such cases: "Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source".
What about if their old signature is outdated, redirect to a hacked domain, outdated discount code, dead blog, etc So many examples.
LOL, if we listen to you, in some time you will suggest paying a monthly fee just to open our mouth
"Special topics": the type of topics we call, introduction to beggars and prostitutes. Not all members here are Smerit prostitutes
December 25, 2019, 07:27:55 PM
When users receiving money for posting, then I believe their comments should have at lest some value for other forum members.
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
The situation isn't dreadfully bad to require a change, its comparatively fine. There are many people out there that make normal, not so merit worthy posts, which are still moderate posts, and not get merit for it. It could be a constructive post, but it may not be "merit-worthy", as a lot of people initially go like : "Does this post deserve merit? Probably not, maybe I will merit someone with a better post". One instance, there are more, obviously. So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
The change ain't required for now, if situation tends to become worse, then maybe not so bad of a idea.
December 25, 2019, 05:32:04 PM
What about someone who hasn't used the forum for months?
These members will continue to be able to wear old signatures, but they can't put another signature if they haven't got any merit in the last 3-4 months.
What about business owners (who usually only post updates) but never receive a merit point?
What about the valuable posters who receive rarely merit (Many cases could be found especially in local boards if there is not Smerit source) but their comments worth a lot more than the majority?
What about the users who don't care to participate in a campaign but would like to promote something in their signature space?
What about the valuable posters who receive rarely merit (Many cases could be found especially in local boards if there is not Smerit source) but their comments worth a lot more than the majority?
What about the users who don't care to participate in a campaign but would like to promote something in their signature space?
If forum members willing to promote something in the signatures, but at the same time they can't get any merit points, then I think such users might have been able to make a some fee to the forum, once every few months, in order to edit their signatures.
As for users who write good posts but don't get merit, so there's a special topic for such cases: "Report unmerited good posts to Merit Source".
December 25, 2019, 01:23:30 PM
I've read a topic that hundreds Bitcointalk users can participate in the paid signature campaigns, but at the same time they don't have any earned merit, except airdropped (10, 100, 250, 500, 1000).
When users receiving money for posting, then I believe their comments should have at least some value for other forum members.
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
When users receiving money for posting, then I believe their comments should have at least some value for other forum members.
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
Senseless, to me, it's like punishing people because of a few bad apples.
What about someone who hasn't used the forum for months?
What about business owners (who usually only post updates) but never receive a merit point?
What about the valuable posters who receive rarely merit (Many cases could be found especially in local boards if there is not Smerit source) but their comments worth a lot more than the majority?
What about the users who don't care to participate in a campaign but would like to promote something in their signature space?
December 25, 2019, 12:35:28 PM
I would suggest pinning this thread like some other useful posts.
It has everything that needs a discussion of has been already discussed thousand of time on the forum.
Nice work by hilariousandco
It has everything that needs a discussion of has been already discussed thousand of time on the forum.
Nice work by hilariousandco
December 25, 2019, 11:30:50 AM
Quote from: Veleor
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
+1. Although many signature campaigns do have this requirement I feel like this should be something set as default. Not All signature Campaign managers have this rule and some new ones don't give a F@@k about spam.
December 22, 2019, 04:04:42 PM
I've read a topic that hundreds Bitcointalk users can participate in the paid signature campaigns, but at the same time they don't have any earned merit, except airdropped (10, 100, 250, 500, 1000).
When users receiving money for posting, then I believe their comments should have at least some value for other forum members.
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
When users receiving money for posting, then I believe their comments should have at least some value for other forum members.
So I have a suggestion: if a forum member didn't get any merit in the last, for instance, 90 or 120 days, then such user will not be able to change the signature.
It should be noted that users without new merit still might have been able to continue wear their old signatures.
October 10, 2019, 02:01:12 PM
Since this post has started to decay, I want to bump this thread and bring Theymos's Attention to @Veleor's suggestion. I recently ran out of sMerits and i liked this post: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52716329 , I was about to create a post just to write that I agree with them but I didn't cuz that would have been just a shitpost and would have ruined the reading experience for other users. Instead, I thought of an upvoting/liking For "non-merit Sources". But after reading the last few posts of @Veleor They had the same idea as mine. Is there any chance of it getting implemented?
June 19, 2019, 02:33:44 AM
How would we prevent spam, putting anything down to majority vote the system can be easily abused, and would need extra moderation. <...>
To avoid abuse, votes may have a limited amount (10 for example) which will be replenished every 24 hours.
The number of received votes is the same for all ranks from Jr. Members. Unused votes cannot be accumulated.
June 18, 2019, 11:31:40 AM
These voices could be sent for the comments you like, but they must not affect the number of Merit.
On the base of such system it would be possible to organize a regularly updated list of popular comments, with the help of which it will be more convenient for Merit sources to detect good messages on the forum.
How would we prevent spam, putting anything down to majority vote the system can be easily abused, and would need extra moderation.
Increasing merit sources and smerits available to them would also be a good idea.
I suggest we also start considering lower ranked members as sources. This would help quell the idea of segregation, and would also give reliable members a chance to gain trust early on.
June 18, 2019, 10:40:02 AM
The main difficulty in finding useful forum comments, in my opinion, lies in the initial uneven sMerit allocation between members and that the whole work of the Merit distribution falls to a few dozen sources at most.
Along with Merit, it would probably make sense to introduce additional assessment points (voices) for all forum users, starting with Jr. Members.
These voices could be sent for the comments you like, but they must not affect the number of Merit.
On the base of such system it would be possible to organize a regularly updated list of popular comments, with the help of which it will be more convenient for Merit sources to detect good messages on the forum.
The picture below shows how the post with received Merit and votes might look like.
Along with Merit, it would probably make sense to introduce additional assessment points (voices) for all forum users, starting with Jr. Members.
These voices could be sent for the comments you like, but they must not affect the number of Merit.
On the base of such system it would be possible to organize a regularly updated list of popular comments, with the help of which it will be more convenient for Merit sources to detect good messages on the forum.
The picture below shows how the post with received Merit and votes might look like.
June 11, 2019, 04:29:52 AM
OK so based on Veleor's quote of theymos, if a post gets edited in the first five minutes of it being posted that change never gets saved in any log by the forum and the admins aren't aware that anything was edited. Is that correct?
June 10, 2019, 07:04:07 AM
A question before I do that, can admins see the original post before it was edited?
They can see older versions, but as far as I know the first 10 minutes don't count as edited (and changes aren't saved). <...>5 minutes, but perhaps this is outdated information.
<...> Edits aren't recorded when they occur within 5 minutes of the post time. (This has always been the case.)
June 10, 2019, 06:42:44 AM
A question before I do that, can admins see the original post before it was edited?
They can see older versions, but as far as I know the first 10 minutes don't count as edited (and changes aren't saved).I keep a copy of most new posts before any edits. If it's ever needed, just ask.
June 10, 2019, 05:44:22 AM
@ Veleor
I wanted to create a thread in Meta a few weeks ago discussing a scenario similar to what you mentioned in your post above.
I backed out and decided not to as it could be a bit controversial and would look like free advice on how to frame someone. I will probably just PM theymos and discuss it over PM.
A question before I do that, can admins see the original post before it was edited?
I wanted to create a thread in Meta a few weeks ago discussing a scenario similar to what you mentioned in your post above.
I backed out and decided not to as it could be a bit controversial and would look like free advice on how to frame someone. I will probably just PM theymos and discuss it over PM.
A question before I do that, can admins see the original post before it was edited?
June 09, 2019, 10:57:29 PM
The editing time of comment must be displaying not after ten minutes but immediately when the post has been changed, even after one second.
It will remove the opportunity for scammers to frame other members with a fake plagiarism.
It will remove the opportunity for scammers to frame other members with a fake plagiarism.
April 28, 2019, 03:14:06 AM
I will modify two of my previous suggestions.
1. Private message
No please. This will be used as a tool to pester people. Removes privacy and unnecessary. Just check when they last logged in.
Update: Add checkbox "Notify the sender that you have read the message." The recipient can click it at will.
I suppose, Bitcointalk employees could use this option as well because they're receiving a lot of messages from different members every day.
And the recipient's last login date, in many cases, don't say anything to the sender whether the message has been read or not.
2. Banned accounts
If theymos is against of showing which accounts are banned, then maybe he make an exception for members that have 300 good reports at least? This will reduce an extra work for active reporters and moderators.
Update: Show the 'Banned' marks to the members which have more than 1000 good reports.
I believe that reporters with such statistic are not so many but with this implementation their effectiveness will significantly raise.
1. Private message
Show in Outbox which of private messages were read by recipients.
No please. This will be used as a tool to pester people. Removes privacy and unnecessary. Just check when they last logged in.
Update: Add checkbox "Notify the sender that you have read the message." The recipient can click it at will.
I suppose, Bitcointalk employees could use this option as well because they're receiving a lot of messages from different members every day.
And the recipient's last login date, in many cases, don't say anything to the sender whether the message has been read or not.
2. Banned accounts
It seems like theymos is likely even against showing which users are banned publicly (not sure why, especially when people are reporting dozens of users a day that are already permabanned and it's time-wasting for both users and staff to have to report and handle these).
If theymos is against of showing which accounts are banned, then maybe he make an exception for members that have 300 good reports at least? This will reduce an extra work for active reporters and moderators.
Update: Show the 'Banned' marks to the members which have more than 1000 good reports.
I believe that reporters with such statistic are not so many but with this implementation their effectiveness will significantly raise.
April 16, 2019, 10:13:34 AM
Suggestion: Forbid to delete comments of staff in self-moderated topics.
Moderators messages are often contain important information and their removal can have negative effects.
For instance, member 'korner' deleted posts of two Russian moderators in his self-moderated topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50629148
Moderators messages are often contain important information and their removal can have negative effects.
For instance, member 'korner' deleted posts of two Russian moderators in his self-moderated topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50629148
Jump to: