Doing scam for Using AI Tool in Signature Campaign

The Sceptical Chymist

legendary

Activity: 3332

Merit: 6809

Cashback 15%

Quote from: NeuroticFish on May 27, 2023, 02:16:39 PM

I don't have any experience with that tool so I don't know how accurate it is, hence I've given that account only a neutral tag.
This should draw enough attention and I expect campaign managers will check this out.

Oh, man....this dude PMed me for a post history review, and I'm so glad I thought to check his trust page first. I don't know why I did, because usually I don't even bother, but I want to thank you and the other members who tagged him.

I've got ~DT in my trust list, so I wouldn't even have gotten a clear warning if someone on DT had given him a negative. *Whew* I think I just saved myself (with all y'all's help, of course) from a poopload of regret, something I was just conversing with JollyGood about. From now on I think I'm going to make it a habit to check members' trust pages if they're requesting a review from me for the first time.

As I've said before, the capability of an AI-thingamajig generating posts that can pass as genuinely good ones is effing scary. We all know that if there's a way to earn more money on bitcointalk by cheating in a particular way, somebody is going to do it--and if it's successful, more and more people are going to follow suit. It blows my mind that technology has come to this.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Xiestar on June 08, 2023, 12:16:30 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on June 03, 2023, 02:08:20 AM

If that's the case, he can leave feedback from his other account.

I’m not DT either on my main account.

That's irrelevant. If everyone thought that way, nobody would ever reach DT.

Quote

But why you can’t?

There's no point in adding multiple neutral tags.

Quote

This is a clear cheating.

Cheating deserves a negative tag. Chatbot plagiarism deserves a ban. Pick one

Quote

Maybe because this user is on your soft side?

I don't have a soft side. If you'd know anything about me, you'd know I don't hand out feedback as if it's candy.

Xiestar

newbie

Activity: 64

Merit: 0

Quote from: Apocollapse on June 02, 2023, 06:58:37 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on June 02, 2023, 06:41:26 AM

If you believe someone deserves negative feedback: do it! Don't talk about double standards while you expect others to do the dirty work.

The thing is, his feedback is almost useless and has no chance to ruin someone's reputation because he's not a DT member.

Sure you can say don't need to become a DT member to leave an appropriate feedback, there's might a DT1 user would include him on the trust list. But he already received a neutral feedback from other DT user, based on the explanation it seems his chance become a DT member is really small because other people would be skeptic and think he could ruin the DT system due to suspected as an alt account.

Facts, I already have 1 neutral feedback due to this DT personal view towards my action. Weak has no voice here. As if my feedback will matter here.

The only reason why this user is not -ve tagged is because of his previous action towards other user abusing the campaign that is now bombarded by negative tag by breaking campaign rules only. What if this user got busted first on doing this stuff? I’m sure he will suffer same treatment.

This is the double standard I’m talking on my post. This issue is same cheating but why this user get away with soft neutral tag?

Quote from: LoyceV on June 03, 2023, 02:08:20 AM

If that's the case, he can leave feedback from his other account.

I’m not DT either on my main account. But why you can’t? This is a clear cheating. Maybe because this user is on your soft side?

AB de Royse777

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 3878

Visit: r7promotions.com

Quote from: LoyceV on June 03, 2023, 03:43:07 AM

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 03, 2023, 03:12:01 AM

Loyse777

If you keep this up, I'm going to have to come up with a nickname for you too Tongue

Quote from: examplens on June 03, 2023, 06:32:51 AM

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 03, 2023, 03:12:01 AM

Loyse777

This is some kind of hybrid of LoyceV&Royse777

TSC is up to something. I had to check the keyboard layout and there are no way it can be a typo. L falls under one of the right finger and R falls under one of the left finger. :-)

examplens

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 3098

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 03, 2023, 03:12:01 AM

For years on this forum members have been writing very impersonal, general posts about whatever the subject of a thread is about, almost as if the thread title is an exam question to be answered in 125 characters or so. That's always been the shitposters' MO since they basically don't care about what they're writing and probably don't have any personal anecdotes to share anyway. But man, now that AI-generated writing has arrived it's pretty damn scary what could happen.

I am sure that writing posts on the forum with the help of artificial text generators has been established for a long time.
Even before the appearance and popularization of ChatGPT, which started the AI avalanche, there were content generators. Now they are just much more sophisticated, plus there are free versions available to everyone.

From the point of view of how to recognize AI-generated content, nutildah presented an interesting test and only confirmed that AI cannot confirm with certainty whether the text was written by a human or a machine.
I have a little experience in this topic, I came to the conclusion that AI-generated content is enough small changes by humans to be unrecognizable to AI content detectors.

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 03, 2023, 03:12:01 AM

Loyse777

This is some kind of hybrid of LoyceV&Royse777

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 03, 2023, 03:12:01 AM

Loyse777

If you keep this up, I'm going to have to come up with a nickname for you too Tongue

The Sceptical Chymist

legendary

Activity: 3332

Merit: 6809

Cashback 15%

I just reported a shitposter to Loyse777 who was in one of his capmpaigns, as I'd noticed one of his posts was generic garbage. When I checked the member's post history I saw that such posts were a pattern of his--and now I'm kind of wondering whether it could have been some kind of AI writing them.

For years on this forum members have been writing very impersonal, general posts about whatever the subject of a thread is about, almost as if the thread title is an exam question to be answered in 125 characters or so. That's always been the shitposters' MO since they basically don't care about what they're writing and probably don't have any personal anecdotes to share anyway. But man, now that AI-generated writing has arrived it's pretty damn scary what could happen.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Apocollapse on June 02, 2023, 06:58:37 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on June 02, 2023, 06:41:26 AM

If you believe someone deserves negative feedback: do it! Don't talk about double standards while you expect others to do the dirty work.

The thing is, his feedback is almost useless and has no chance to ruin someone's reputation because he's not a DT member.

Users should only be added on others' Trust lists if they leave accurate feedback. It's more or less decentralized, so as many users as possible should use it.

Quote

Sure you can say don't need to become a DT member to leave an appropriate feedback, there's might a DT1 user would include him on the trust list. But he already received a neutral feedback from other DT user, based on the explanation it seems his chance become a DT member is really small because other people would be skeptic and think he could ruin the DT system due to suspected as an alt account.

If that's the case, he can leave feedback from his other account.

jokers10

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 3016

Quote from: Apocollapse on June 02, 2023, 09:17:28 AM

Others consider you're leaving an appropriate feedback when the case is definitely deserve 100% negative feedback e.g. scam someone or cheating. In this thread the case is about using AI in signature campaign, it's still subjective since there's no rule about plagiarism broke this forum rule or theymos said using AI is deserve to get negative feedback. This will make people think tagging negative feedback due to AI usage is harsh and if you're a newbie or not reputable user, you have a high chance to get distrusted.

While the respected or high account user did that, no one will talk about it and shut their mouth. It's true they already contributed a lot and almost of his feedbacks are correct, but a tiny mistake is still wrong. Why not distrust them? they have a lot appropriate feedbacks, fear of getting distrusted by them and possible of creating new drama.

But if no one decided to do so themselves yet it doesn't mean someone should insist. If the one from DT will do many doubtful things he can be distrusted as well, you can see there are several from DT1 with a negative trust number. So everyone should do the things he is sure in. May be DT members can do something on the very boundaries of a consensus, but it should be their own decision.

Apocollapse

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 728

Quote from: jokers10 on June 02, 2023, 07:25:59 AM

Everyone has a mind of his own. Being in DT means others consider your reviews in trust system correct and appropriate, it doesn't mean you have to make a conclusion in every possible case. Not being in DT doesn't mean your reviews will not be taken in account. If I'm interested to know more about someone I will look through all reviews including untrusted ones.

So if you think that someone should be tagged you should do it yourself even if you are not in DT. If your review will be correct and appropriate someone else can decide to support you and leave the same tag, some can decide that you deserve to be trusted despite your tags. But if you don't do anything yourself but demand acting from others it's not the best way.

Others consider you're leaving an appropriate feedback when the case is definitely deserve 100% negative feedback e.g. scam someone or cheating. In this thread the case is about using AI in signature campaign, it's still subjective since there's no rule about plagiarism broke this forum rule or theymos said using AI is deserve to get negative feedback. This will make people think tagging negative feedback due to AI usage is harsh and if you're a newbie or not reputable user, you have a high chance to get distrusted.

While the respected or high account user did that, no one will talk about it and shut their mouth. It's true they already contributed a lot and almost of his feedbacks are correct, but a tiny mistake is still wrong. Why not distrust them? they have a lot appropriate feedbacks, fear of getting distrusted by them and possible of creating new drama.

jokers10

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 3016

Quote from: Apocollapse on June 02, 2023, 06:58:37 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on June 02, 2023, 06:41:26 AM

If you believe someone deserves negative feedback: do it! Don't talk about double standards while you expect others to do the dirty work.

The thing is, his feedback is almost useless and has no chance to ruin someone's reputation because he's not a DT member.

Sure you can say don't need to become a DT member to leave an appropriate feedback, there's might a DT1 user would include him on the trust list. But he already received a neutral feedback from other DT user, based on the explanation it seems his chance become a DT member is really small because other people would be skeptic and think he could ruin the DT system due to suspected as an alt account.

Everyone has a mind of his own. Being in DT means others consider your reviews in trust system correct and appropriate, it doesn't mean you have to make a conclusion in every possible case. Not being in DT doesn't mean your reviews will not be taken in account. If I'm interested to know more about someone I will look through all reviews including untrusted ones.

So if you think that someone should be tagged you should do it yourself even if you are not in DT. If your review will be correct and appropriate someone else can decide to support you and leave the same tag, some can decide that you deserve to be trusted despite your tags. But if you don't do anything yourself but demand acting from others it's not the best way.

Apocollapse

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 728

Quote from: LoyceV on June 02, 2023, 06:41:26 AM

If you believe someone deserves negative feedback: do it! Don't talk about double standards while you expect others to do the dirty work.

The thing is, his feedback is almost useless and has no chance to ruin someone's reputation because he's not a DT member.

Sure you can say don't need to become a DT member to leave an appropriate feedback, there's might a DT1 user would include him on the trust list. But he already received a neutral feedback from other DT user, based on the explanation it seems his chance become a DT member is really small because other people would be skeptic and think he could ruin the DT system due to suspected as an alt account.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Xiestar on June 02, 2023, 12:00:44 AM

Here we go again with the double standard. A multiple account cheating on campaign deserves a negative feedback while an AI generated post will walk away with just 1 neutral tag.

If you believe someone deserves negative feedback: do it! Don't talk about double standards while you expect others to do the dirty work.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 7892

Quote from: Xiestar on June 02, 2023, 12:00:44 AM

Here we go again with the double standard. A multiple account cheating on campaign deserves a negative feedback while an AI generated post will walk away with just 1 neutral tag.

This is because AI posting is not worthy of a red tag in and of itself. Its spam and possibly plagiarism. So if anything the offending posts should be deleted as spam. If the user makes a heavy habit of it they could potentially be banned as a spammer. But in the meantime spammers should only be neutral tagged at most, and only the more egregious ones at that.

Xiestar

newbie

Activity: 64

Merit: 0

Here we go again with the double standard. A multiple account cheating on campaign deserves a negative feedback while an AI generated post will walk away with just 1 neutral tag.

Both multiple account and AI generated text rules are both set by campaign manager only.

Multiple account - Post an organic post for quota to qualified payment.

AI generated text - Use of this tool because user is lazy.

This user earned money through lazy tools while multiple account post with effort.

Now this user is already applying on other campaign like nothing happened. Roll Eyes

Quote from: rby on June 01, 2023, 03:12:39 PM

No hard feelings and no fatal crime in as much as the reason for the feedback is given.
I mean, if had a successful trade with Bob, the feedback will look somehow like this Traded by bitcoin to fiat, and he trusted me to send first, the transaction was worth $2,000
This type of feedback is different from Alice who is a scam buster may have He is an active scam buster the forum, I trust him.

There is no guarantee that Bob will not scam and Alice will. Besides, anyone wanting to trade bitcoin to fiat will likely transact with Bob and not Alice.
The trust system is not complicated as we try to explain and use it.

Scam buster what? If his recent action on busting campaign cheating is scam therefore he is scammer too because he cheat on campaigns.

This analogy means we should not give red trust on spammer and multi account cheater because they didn't stole money.

rby

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 611

Brotherhood is love

Quote from: bbigtart on May 30, 2023, 07:44:49 PM

Quote from: rby on May 30, 2023, 10:57:49 AM

I remember someone warned both of us, but we still proceeded to hand the positive feedback to the user for bursting scam Grin

I didn't delete my positive feedback, rather I turned it to neutral while being able to capture the AI writing as a reason to change feedback from positive to neutral.

This user bursted an uncommon cheating of a signature swapper who earned from two campaigns simultaneously.
(Positive changed to neutral after accusation of AI posting) (Delete)

Yes, it's okay, I deserve it, I'm also sorry for letting you down. Neutral tags as a reminder for me in the future to be even better.

It's fine, I have forgiven you. You are remorseful and I believe you must have learnt from your mistake, as you have already accepted the consequences of your crime. Good enough no one was scammed and you weren't banned as the moderators had chosen to be adamant in treating AI posting like plagiarism.

Quote from: SatoPrincess on May 30, 2023, 01:08:33 PM

I also didn’t think it was the best use of the trust system at the time, we are lucky he didn’t take advantage of that positive trust to enter a transaction with members of the forum, that would have been really bad.

Quote from: John Abraham on May 31, 2023, 05:14:25 AM

This is irony. This is how the world going on. Someone exposing scammers doesn't mean he is trusted. He can scam someone else. Everyone waits for an opportunity to scam others. This should represent why you shouldn't give positive feedback to a scam buster just because he catches scammers.

No hard feelings and no fatal crime in as much as the reason for the feedback is given.
I mean, if had a successful trade with Bob, the feedback will look somehow like this Traded by bitcoin to fiat, and he trusted me to send first, the transaction was worth $2,000
This type of feedback is different from Alice who is a scam buster may have He is an active scam buster the forum, I trust him.

There is no guarantee that Bob will not scam and Alice will. Besides, anyone wanting to trade bitcoin to fiat will likely transact with Bob and not Alice.
The trust system is not complicated as we try to explain and use it.

jokers10

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 3016

Quote from: John Abraham on May 31, 2023, 05:14:25 AM

Quote from: Cantsay on May 27, 2023, 03:24:50 PM

This is interesting, first the accused user exposed another user @Shan85 for double dipping in signature campiagn and now he's being accused of using AI to generate post to earn from signature.

This is irony. This is how the world going on. Someone exposing scammers doesn't mean he is trusted. He can scam someone else. Everyone waits for an opportunity to scam others. This should represent why you shouldn't give positive feedback to a scam buster just because he catches scammers. I have seen LoyceV's guide about the use of the trust system and feedback. I know some of us follow them and most of us don't.

I have seen a lot of users argue about that. Some forum members were actively looking to expose scammers (Which is good). But they intended to get DT inclusion and get some positive feedback from DT. I don't want to mention the name, but I have seen a DT member get more than 15+ Positive feedback just because he expose scammers. Which is not the correct use of feedback (In my opinion).

Trust system feedback shows that you suppose that a person can be trusted in trading with. If someone consistently and persistently fights scams for years and not seen in anything bad, I'd say that he can be trusted more than an average person so I suppose a positive review for such person is correct.

Of course if someone just came and started with scum exposing it says nothing, but if it is a standard behavior pattern for him for years we can suppose that it is in his character.

So if the one leaves a positive mark in a trust system for one-time scum exposure it is hardly apropriate usage of a system, but if it is for long term work then I think it is correct. No need to hurry nor to place someone to a trust list nor to leave any kind of review. But being too affraid is also not good, if a review we leave is complete then the one interested can read it and make own conclusions if our reasons were good enough for him for making business with the one on whom we left our review.

This case is about a total newbie and comparing it with someone with 15 positive reviews is IMO not the most right thing.

John Abraham

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 547

Quote from: Cantsay on May 27, 2023, 03:24:50 PM

This is interesting, first the accused user exposed another user @Shan85 for double dipping in signature campiagn and now he's being accused of using AI to generate post to earn from signature.

This is irony. This is how the world going on. Someone exposing scammers doesn't mean he is trusted. He can scam someone else. Everyone waits for an opportunity to scam others. This should represent why you shouldn't give positive feedback to a scam buster just because he catches scammers. I have seen LoyceV's guide about the use of the trust system and feedback. I know some of us follow them and most of us don't.

I have seen a lot of users argue about that. Some forum members were actively looking to expose scammers (Which is good). But they intended to get DT inclusion and get some positive feedback from DT. I don't want to mention the name, but I have seen a DT member get more than 15+ Positive feedback just because he expose scammers. Which is not the correct use of feedback (In my opinion).

bbigtart

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 272

Quote from: examplens on May 30, 2023, 07:22:59 AM

Quote from: bbigtart on May 29, 2023, 12:09:30 PM

But I see most of the people commenting here didn't see when I joined the signature campaign and when I made a post with chatgpt AI.

on this occasion I will straighten it out a bit (but I still admit that what I did was wrong and not justified). the two posts that I use via Chatgpt AI are where I haven't joined any campaign and the other is on May 23, at which time I have already joined the BetterCallRaul.it signature campaign managed by royse777. but less than a week after I registered as a participant there, the BetterCallRaul.it campaign has gone into Pause status so I haven't been paid either. (Of course with my cheating I don't deserve to be paid)

It seems to me that you did not understand the essence of your mistake at all and it's not just about your dishonest attempt to earn $50 from a signature campaign.
Why did you think that it can be a constructive discussion if AI writes posts for you? Did you think that each of us knows how to use ChatGPT and we don't need an intermediary if we want his "opinion"?

I fully understand my mistake. In my previous post, I said that the mistakes I made were embarrassing and unethical. I already realized that friend.

What I mean is from that post, because many have cornered me because so far I have been receiving payments from signatures every week, that's all I want to say. Indeed it was my risk to accept judgment from friends like that because of my own mistakes.

Quote from: rby on May 30, 2023, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: robelneo on May 27, 2023, 05:06:05 PM

I deleted my positive feedback it's very likely that he's using AI to create these posts 40% is already too high to consider a post using AI it's ironic for someone to catch a cheater when he himself is a cheater, but of course, we like to hear his side of the story.

I remember someone warned both of us, but we still proceeded to hand the positive feedback to the user for bursting scam Grin

I didn't delete my positive feedback, rather I turned it to neutral while being able to capture the AI writing as a reason to change feedback from positive to neutral.

This user bursted an uncommon cheating of a signature swapper who earned from two campaigns simultaneously.
(Positive changed to neutral after accusation of AI posting) (Delete)

Yes, it's okay, I deserve it, I'm also sorry for letting you down. Neutral tags as a reminder for me in the future to be even better.

SatoPrincess

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 701

Quote from: rby on May 30, 2023, 10:57:49 AM

Quote from: robelneo on May 27, 2023, 05:06:05 PM

Quote from: Cantsay on May 27, 2023, 03:24:50 PM

This is interesting, first the accused user exposed another user @Shan85 for double dipping in signature campiagn and now he's being accused of using AI to generate post to earn from signature.

I deleted my positive feedback it's very likely that he's using AI to create these posts 40% is already too high to consider a post using AI it's ironic for someone to catch a cheater when he himself is a cheater, but of course, we like to hear his side of the story.

I remember someone warned both of us, but we still proceeded to hand the positive feedback to the user for bursting scam Grin

I didn't delete my positive feedback, rather I turned it to neutral while being able to capture the AI writing as a reason to change feedback from positive to neutral.

This user bursted an uncommon cheating of a signature swapper who earned from two campaigns simultaneously.
(Positive changed to neutral after accusation of AI posting) (Delete)

I also didn’t think it was the best use of the trust system at the time, we are lucky he didn’t take advantage of that positive trust to enter a transaction with members of the forum, that would have been really bad. Just because a person bursts a scam onetime or even a seasoned scam burster, that doesn’t mean they are trustworthy. I really think trust should come as a result of monetary transactions done successfully where the value exceeds $100. Even then, the person can still turn out to be not so clean.

Topic: Doing scam for Using AI Tool in Signature Campaign (Read 1195 times)