what happens if a malicious user creates users posing questions as a method of advertisement?
That happens already, the most annoying ones are bots that post a different link in each post. If it looks like advertising, just report it. 
Topic: Confused about the advertising rule (#22) (Read 195 times)
If responding to a recommendation demanded by someone other than the thread-owner, is it advertisement?
If I respond by linking them into a product or just recommend it, then it's automatically an advertisement. If a user wants to get some privacy, I could suggest him to use a mixer and link them to the mixers' list. That wouldn't be an ad, but if I suggested him to use ChipMixer, it's an ad.If not, what happens if a malicious user creates users posing questions as a method of advertisement?
Questions that have to do with products are advertisements and should be deleted, based on the forum's rules. If it's a question regarding a general topic like gambling, it depends on the replier if it'll be an advertisement or not. Just questioning doesn't harm.Now, assume that the malicious user is the thread-creator - acting on behalf of a service for the purpose of Q&Advertisement.
Can the thread creator ask about a specific service/platform?
Now that's a great question and I answer it based on the restriction I've understood that is taken from the moderators during my stay here. Yes, they can, because there are numerous times when someone needs to reveal the service. If they're caught to advertise it, though, should get banned.Can the thread creator ask about a specific service/platform?
What happens if an honest platform is given a malicious Q&Advertisement campaign as an associative attack?
The platform may announce that they get advertised maliciously. The mods should act analogously. 
So, a constant advertisement for a product is worse, than the latter.
Here's some yarn to spin:If responding to a recommendation demanded by someone other than the thread-owner, is it advertisement?
If not, what happens if a malicious user creates users posing questions as a method of advertisement?
Now, assume that the malicious user is the thread-creator - acting on behalf of a service for the purpose of Q&Advertisement.
Can the thread creator ask about a specific service/platform?
What happens if an honest platform is given a malicious Q&Advertisement campaign as an associative attack?
... and so on.
I'm assuming that the mod will remove post that count as ads if it's done each time on several different board and thread like shillers usually do. Since the mod has its own interpretation of recognizing post that smell like ads or regular post, I won't be confused myself by it. As long as it's not off topic because you answered based on the question asked, then I don't think it's an advertisement because of course you don't get paid specifically for it. mprep has explained enough detail to understand.
My interpretation of this rule is that you shouldn't promote for instance Stake in Primedice's thread, but it's okay to mention them elsewhere. I'd say this falls under "thread hijacking", and indeed shouldn't be allowed.
I second this. I also think that the key part of the rule is << in others threads' >> (and I won't care it it's correctly written or not).
Shouldn't we define what's an advertisement?
I think that you may be overthinking it. Best would be that whoever reported or removed your post step up and tell you. I'd say that somebody may have find your post somewhat off-topic and the link was not a big deal.
Just since it was "in the past", it may become difficult. So I'd say: go on as usual and when a post of yours gets deleted, ask again; you may get better answer than the current guessing.
I sometimes mention or even recommend a certain exchanger for a certain task. You could consider that advertising, but in my opinion an occasional recommendation (when appropriate) is different than someone who recommends a specific service in all their posts.
In my case, I'm continuously observing ChipMixer posts throughout the forum, but I had never linked MyCryptoMixer before. Also, whoever advertises a service in every post they made, surely do it worse than an occasional recommendation. So, a constant advertisement for a product is worse, than the latter.Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up for you to decide.
But, up to mods to make the distinction. Nice post, though. Quoting a rule from the unofficial list of official Bitcointalk rules:
Shouldn't this be: "in others' threads"?in others threads'
Based on my experience, linking to a product means advertisement and the post will get removed, but talking about it means that it's fine. Well, that's a false thought in my judgment.
My interpretation of this rule is that you shouldn't promote for instance Stake in Primedice's thread, but it's okay to mention them elsewhere. I'd say this falls under "thread hijacking", and indeed shouldn't be allowed.I sometimes mention or even recommend a certain exchanger for a certain task. You could consider that advertising, but in my opinion an occasional recommendation (when appropriate) is different than someone who recommends a specific service in all their posts.
The issue with a meticulous and hardline standard for "a rule from the unofficial list of official Bitcointalk rules" (and one that requires subjective judgement no less) is exactly that - it's an unofficial attempt at compiling common practices across several boards and over a dozen different moderators. What one moderator deems as an ad, another might consider as a regular post. Me trying to really nail down what exactly is and what isn't an ad will only reflect my own policy, which will give a false impression of clarity and a lot hurt feelings when it inevitably gets enforced on a post that doesn't match the description.
This issue ties into the fact that any attempt to definitively codify rules that require substantial subjective interpretation is going to be going against how theymos wants the forum to be moderated:
Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up for you to decide.
This issue ties into the fact that any attempt to definitively codify rules that require substantial subjective interpretation is going to be going against how theymos wants the forum to be moderated:
I actively disbelieve in the idea of a "rule of law" where hard rules exist and are strictly applied across the board as if we're all robots. Every case should be considered individually in the context of the forum's mission.
- I don't believe in creating definitive rule lists.
Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up for you to decide.
I guess this is a rule in which each case is considered uniquely, based on the mods interpretation.
• If someone where to ask for suggestions about a mixer or an exchange, I could recommend chipmixer or bestchange respectively, if I've used their service and was satisfied with it, I could also insert a link to make it easier for them to find the website and check it out.
• However, in a different situation, like when someone links a website in a thread that was not requesting for it, or is not directly linked to the topic, this is an obvious advertisement and would likely lead to it getting deleted.
A mod may disagree with you on some occasions, but a couple of deleted replies doesn't hurt anyone.
• If someone where to ask for suggestions about a mixer or an exchange, I could recommend chipmixer or bestchange respectively, if I've used their service and was satisfied with it, I could also insert a link to make it easier for them to find the website and check it out.
• However, in a different situation, like when someone links a website in a thread that was not requesting for it, or is not directly linked to the topic, this is an obvious advertisement and would likely lead to it getting deleted.
I'm mainly curious in what extent should I be careful when I'm writing regarding a product.
As long as you're not shilling the website nor were you paid to make that particular post, you should be fine and shouldn't be too bothered.A mod may disagree with you on some occasions, but a couple of deleted replies doesn't hurt anyone.
Quoting a rule from the unofficial list of official Bitcointalk rules:
In the past, I had made a reply to a thread talking about a criminal who got caught using mixers. I remember that I had linked MyCryptoMixer and that's possibly why it got removed.
Now I ask: Shouldn't we define what's an advertisement? There are tons of posts about ChipMixer (and some for BestChange) scattered through the forum, but haven't got removed and I'm mainly curious in what extent should I be careful when I'm writing regarding a product.
Based on my experience, linking to a product means advertisement and the post will get removed, but talking about it means that it's fine. Well, that's a false thought in my judgment.
22. Advertising (this includes mining pools, gambling services, exchanges, shops, etc.) in others threads' is no longer allowed, including, but not limited to, in altcoin announcement threads.
In the past, I had made a reply to a thread talking about a criminal who got caught using mixers. I remember that I had linked MyCryptoMixer and that's possibly why it got removed.
Now I ask: Shouldn't we define what's an advertisement? There are tons of posts about ChipMixer (and some for BestChange) scattered through the forum, but haven't got removed and I'm mainly curious in what extent should I be careful when I'm writing regarding a product.
Based on my experience, linking to a product means advertisement and the post will get removed, but talking about it means that it's fine. Well, that's a false thought in my judgment.
Jump to: