Topic: Define spam. (Read 2677 times)

You will attract attention to your posts in meta, yes, however the standard of something being considered a "shit post" is going to be a lot higher (or lower depending on how you look at it) for posts in meta. In other words a post needs to be a lot shittier for it to be considered insubstantial

That may be true, but you would still be attracting attention to yourself. 

I've been a member of many popular forums in the past. None of them ever had signature campaigns, therefore my posts which ran into the thousands on each forum were never considered as spam.

I was temporarily banned for spam on this forum and 1 other forum. However, what that forum considered as spam was posting referral links and advertising (which I did). On this forum, it seems that people aren't allowed to make "small talk" posts which I have never come across anywhere else before.

"Small talk" responses has been my usual style of conversing on forums for years unless of course there is a topic or discussion that I have a connection with where I feel the need to respond by explaining something in an in-depth manner to someone. Since this forum doesn't support that and considers it as "spam" especially once you are wearing a signature, I have resolved myself to simply posting in threads that mean something to me for example a payment processor issue that concerns me.

Even so, I got banned here for "spam" and when I asked for an explanation, random people highlighted posts such as one where I supposedly responded to a thread as if I were pretending to be a member of the site mentioned in that thread's OP. The commenter said he doubted I was actually a real member of the said site. I had to post a picture of my account to disprove him.

The point is a lot of assumptions are being made about people's intentions which are simply not true! This is why I say that you can't really assume that a person is simply posting to boost his post count.

One thing I am actually happy about with the Dadice signature campaign is that there is no minimum posting threshold required to get paid. A threshold actually encourages either spam or dilution of posts, so please don't change the current policy.

Meta is actually the board that is most tolerant towards bullshit of any kind. The main reason is that mods to not want to censor valid criticism on their actions that is presented in an immature way.

Removing meta from the list of boards that get you paid certainly makes sense from an advertising point of view. Meta is probably used by the same group of people with the occasional exception when someone is complaining about a mod action.

I am surprised to see Meta in this list. If you feel that not enough hits are being generated from signatures in this particular board, then it is okay.
I don't think there is too much spam in Meta, unlike the other boards.
If a person spams in Meta, he would get banned very quickly.

That might be a good move.

I was considering excluding Politics and Society for some time. Still considering..
Meta is actually irrelevant to the campaign, but most of the quality posters are posting there too. If that is excluded, lol, payouts will almost go down by 30% or so.

I had to rule out excluding Beginner's and Help though I was considering it.

Decided to make this happen:


I hope this move will aid in the forum becoming readable again.

Noted.

Thanks to marcotheminer for reporting him.

I looked his/her posts. You are right.

See this for instance:


The question is already answered there, obviously a few times. I don't even understand how the bolded part can be true.

P.S. Although this is a discussion forum, not a Q & A type forum(eg:- Stackexchange), there should be an option to mark a post as answer and locked when it is done. It will reduce spam.

Normal newbies don't go to every thread in beginners & help and post a random reply, they are usually starting the threads we're talking about.

Take a look at this member for example (I don't care if it's another campaign's member, I'm just looking at spam)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/abcbits-359716

I agree, IMHO the beginners and help section is very bad in that regard. Many posts there have page after pages of the same rephrased answer. My impression is that people read the title and (maybe) the OP and just answer without reading any of the previously given answers. Sometimes the answers are not even correct. Its very tiring to read and I have mostly given up on the section. Once a thread reaches a certain number of posts I just stop following it.

How to handle that though? Should we (or rather the mods) discourage newbies from posting by deleting their first post here just because they did not read a possibly 20 pages thread first? Most of these posts are only spam and reiteration in the context of the thread.

You should report all those posts and if them will not removed try send a PM to BadBear, I am sure he will take an action against those forum users.




4. - // If I can say my personal opinion, I don't think it is to be considered "insubstantial" post a post with a ref. link (you should manage case by case).
6. - // I don't think it is wrong (if you do it only to make more easy the legibility of what are you saying)

This is a huge problem too.

I saw many posts which is made by looking the title but not OP. Some of them isn't considered off-topic! For example, if someone wrote a problem with Android wallet, some users spam the thread with Android wallet names. One or two get deleted but not all.


There are some exceptions in this rule. Post containing referral link are spam if it was made only for advertising referral link or if it is off-topic or if the user is spamming with it.

You don't need to worry about those spammers! Marco has already rejected to pay sithara007 due to excessive signature spam
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11125786

Check that Spammer Busted!

I think that something like that shouldn't be allowed either-> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--1029097 This user Sithara007 wrote 5 (sic!) consecutive posts one after another in a row. Is is a prime example, but there are many more users who seems to not use EDIT function at all.

Here are some points that I think should not be relevant in judging the above. (Not in order of relevance)

1. English, grammar, punctuation. (unless some weird words are used - like spouse, contacts,..  ,  or it is illegible)
2. Number of posts. (It just depends on how much time you spend here and how active you are in discussions, generally)
3. Time between each posts. (If you know of a topic, well enough, the time factor may not be that important as some consider.  But there are exceptions)
4. Length. (as long as the message is conveyed, and is relevant)
5. Sarcasm/jokes (but not too often.) (it is often misinterpreted as useless. and sometimes considered as off-topic if the reader doesn't exactly get what it meant)



Should be relevant:
1. Simply rephrasing something said by someone else.
2. Posts that no one else knows why it was made. (tho the person in question will come up with a brilliant theory regarding that)
3. off-topic
4. Posts that contain ref-link
5. Posts that violate any rules. (esp. if it is done more than once)
6..Posting too many posts in a row. (Added later)
7. ?

Thanks
That is exactly what I am looking for.



There are already a few in the campaign, that are simply not quality posters, and is actually posting as they usually do. But there are also the other kind, who is trying to boost their post count.

The issue is when checking, both of the posts are almost exactly the same quality. atm, I am simply judging by the effort into making the posts, but I am looking for a more efficient way to distinguish between them if possible.

Thanks

I reason that 'spam' is ADVERTISING THAT SOMEONE ELSE DOES NOT WANT


Anyone referring to anyone else as a 'spammer' is almost always hypocritical, because they usually advertise somehow themselves, or they receive the proceeds of advertising, their pay.