Topic: Forum ranks/positions/badges (What do those shiny coins under my name mean?) - page 132. (Read 2820302 times)
December 01, 2015, 05:21:45 PM
I know this post is old but thank you for it. I was confused how the rankings worked and what they meant.
November 30, 2015, 10:29:12 AM
I will also try to report useless posts from now 
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
November 11, 2015, 02:01:55 PM
No, the number/accuracy of the posts you have reported.
November 11, 2015, 01:18:40 PM
Staff are selected by how good their reporting is ....
What do you mean by that ? Is it like "the more positive trust points a member possess, more is the chance of becoming a staff member ?
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
November 11, 2015, 06:41:19 AM
It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.
Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?
Why do we need a specific scammer tag when the trade with extreme caution is usually enough and works pretty good at the moment?
And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?
FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.
Staff are selected by how good their reporting is, doesn't mean to say we can be totally trusted. People should do their due diligence with any user here regardless of rank. A staff member might not rip you off for a bitcoin or two but might for 100. Some staff may be open to bribes for certain things as well.
November 11, 2015, 06:16:24 AM
It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.
Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?
And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?
FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.
BTW FYI DefaultTrust members are "chosen" as well
November 11, 2015, 06:14:03 AM
It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.
Can't it be configured manually in such a way that an user with a negative trust of 2 gets that "5-cross tag" forever after 14 days, if the accuser doesn't change his mind (obviously he won't) but if he removes his remark (rare case) for that user within or after 14 days, the "5-cross tag" also gets removed automatically after 30 minutes?
And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way?
FYI, "staff" members are not just selected merely by one's activity count right? If not, then staffs are to be trusted.
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
November 11, 2015, 05:16:16 AM
It would be better to add this tag for scammers since default trust can be manipulated by some green trust members ! 
Quote
SCAMMER: Manually applied by administration, regardless of post count and gets 5 red Xs under his name. 
It would be too much work for staff and mods generally don't get involved with scam accusations and is why it was removed. And what makes you think staff couldn't be manipulated the same way? It would be just too much fuss and people would be pestering mods to tag the hundreds of accounts that try scam here.
November 11, 2015, 05:08:25 AM
It would be better to add this tag for scammers since default trust can be manipulated by some green trust members !
Quote
SCAMMER: Manually applied by administration, regardless of post count and gets 5 red Xs under his name.
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
November 02, 2015, 02:10:55 AM
Avatar is an alternative low rank character of high ranking members in order to make some signatures that some signature campaigns require and other reasons? am i right?
Uwotm8
. Your post makes zero sense but if you mean only Full Members and above can have avatars and some people choose to rent them out on signature campaigns then yes you're right. If not, then no. November 01, 2015, 11:29:48 PM
Avatar is an alternative low rank character of high ranking members in order to make some signatures that some signature campaigns require and other reasons? am i right?.
October 29, 2015, 01:06:05 PM
I already proposed this, but let me expand on it a bit
If you can loose points, a lot of "old spam accounts" wouldn't be sold to new users, because those accounts wouldn't have a high ranking.
I suggest that people can loose 14 points for every period you weren't active starting from the full level. When you have dropped back to the points needed for full level (126), you can't drop any further.
I suggest to reserve the rank "ledgendary" for people who reached some kind of level in the "trust three". I suggest level 2.
This way, we would (1) encourage honest behavior (less scams) and (2) encourage the use of adding people to the trust list, not using the default trust list.
This won't be easy to implement, but I think it would add a lot of value
Also, please remove the "randomness" for ledgendary and just make it 2.5 years be default (910 points) or just 1000 points for the nice round number.
I suggest to take into account inactivity as well
for example when you don't post once every 2 weeks, you can actually loose points once you become a senior member
also scaling the needed activity/posts/login time dynamically somehow (certainly for higher ranks) seems reasonable.
Maybe even add trust to the mix.
for example when you don't post once every 2 weeks, you can actually loose points once you become a senior member
also scaling the needed activity/posts/login time dynamically somehow (certainly for higher ranks) seems reasonable.
Maybe even add trust to the mix.
If you can loose points, a lot of "old spam accounts" wouldn't be sold to new users, because those accounts wouldn't have a high ranking.
I suggest that people can loose 14 points for every period you weren't active starting from the full level. When you have dropped back to the points needed for full level (126), you can't drop any further.
I suggest to reserve the rank "ledgendary" for people who reached some kind of level in the "trust three". I suggest level 2.
This way, we would (1) encourage honest behavior (less scams) and (2) encourage the use of adding people to the trust list, not using the default trust list.
This won't be easy to implement, but I think it would add a lot of value
Also, please remove the "randomness" for ledgendary and just make it 2.5 years be default (910 points) or just 1000 points for the nice round number.
October 28, 2015, 10:01:12 PM
Just considering how many people create an account to ask for help in the german section its good that we no longer have that jail. I suspect this is similar for other local sections.
IIRC local sections were exempt from the newbie jail. They were the only place, besides the newbie section, where newbie members could post.
October 28, 2015, 11:31:19 AM
dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post
That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.
to bad
think that need to be back again
The newbie jail did not stop spammers, but kept many actually new users out.
October 28, 2015, 07:44:53 AM
dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post
That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.
to bad
think that need to be back again
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 28, 2015, 03:49:02 AM
dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post
That's not true and hasn't been the case for probably a year or so.
October 28, 2015, 03:36:38 AM
dont fotget that brand new can post for four hour they need to be on forum for that time after that they can post
October 22, 2015, 03:58:05 AM
AFAIK Anonymous=guest who hasn't registered an account yet, I think posts from non-registered members were allowed in the earlier stage of bitcointalk.
No, it was Atlas. He was registered to the forum but theymos deleted his accounts for trolling.
October 22, 2015, 03:57:14 AM
Just saw this thread
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.169751
whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.169751
whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?
theymos change the name to anonymous and/or deleted the account. posts stays in the database.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.789906
October 22, 2015, 03:51:48 AM
Just saw this thread
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.169751
whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?
Sorry if it's wrong section or if it's a dumb question but is the first time I notice such a "rank"
thanks in advance for your help
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.169751
whose original poster rank is anonymous: why is that?
Is him/her someone who asked to have his account deleted or what?
Or did he just asked to change his/her originale name to "anonymous"?
Sorry if it's wrong section or if it's a dumb question but is the first time I notice such a "rank"
thanks in advance for your help
Jump to: