* Prevent IPs from making more than a certain amount of accounts (currently, its unlimited).
This can be a problem, because there may be a lot of places were several people are using 1 IP.
Topic: I think this would help (and bring back) a lot of bitcointalk users (Read 1535 times)
December 23, 2016, 03:10:10 AM
This can be a problem, because there may be a lot of places were several people are using 1 IP.
December 22, 2016, 07:49:12 AM
* Prevent IPs from making more than a certain amount of accounts (currently, its unlimited).
This can be a problem, because there may be a lot of places were several people are using 1 IP.
December 21, 2016, 08:31:55 PM
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs).
I don't see how spam can be reduced, other than checking IP's and banning multiple-accounts (which I think is already being done) rather than a singular offending account that contains the same IP.
Education is really the best way, but if we force it on people they are likely to leave the boards especially newbies as they may already feel uncomfortable with something revolutionary, such as Bitcoin, for instance.
Note regarding the email not required to be valid: I assume its for privacy reasons, this board respects privacy or so it seems.
Here are some tips to reduce spam but may be detrimental to the new users experience:
* Add a email verification proceedure
* Add a Captcha system when registering
* Prevent IPs from making more than a certain amount of accounts (currently, its unlimited).
December 21, 2016, 07:39:45 PM
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs).
I don't see how spam can be reduced, other than checking IP's and banning multiple-accounts (which I think is already being done) rather than a singular offending account that contains the same IP.
Education is really the best way, but if we force it on people they are likely to leave the boards especially newbies as they may already feel uncomfortable with something revolutionary, such as Bitcoin, for instance.
Note regarding the email not required to be valid: I assume its for privacy reasons, this board respects privacy or so it seems.
Here are some tips to reduce spam but may be detrimental to the new users experience:
* Add a email verification proceedure
* Add a Captcha system when registering
* Prevent IPs from making more than a certain amount of accounts (currently, its unlimited).
December 21, 2016, 06:13:56 PM
im not saying its bitcointalks responsibility to judge scams but when there are obvious cases like leocoin fake shill accounts all showing up with 1-10 posts at the same time its a fair assumption they arent all unique users and their toxic parasitic nature just dilutes the value of any topics.
That's my main point.
and i agree im not countering that. im saying the level of pollution false farming accounts are making needs to be stopped. i used that leocoin person as an example... he can talk all day about it for all i care but im tired of seeing his 20 fake accounts polluting other posts with 1 liners like
cool idea, leocoin is doing this with a phone soon
the intention is not to provide value but just through his agenda everywhere where its not wanted and ive seen topic starters tell him to piss off. it'd be fine if it was just him he gets a name for his 1 account, but hes doing it with 20 accounts. it dilutes forum value. it needs to be stopped.
December 21, 2016, 11:04:17 AM
im not saying its bitcointalks responsibility to judge scams but when there are obvious cases like leocoin fake shill accounts all showing up with 1-10 posts at the same time its a fair assumption they arent all unique users and their toxic parasitic nature just dilutes the value of any topics.
That's my main point.
December 20, 2016, 11:11:53 PM
the other consideration is banner sponsors. if the board is full of this crap and more leave do sponsors get value for money by being displayed to 100 leocoin spamming alt accounts? moving forward and improving should always be a business consideration and its why new start ups take over and beat existing ones. bitcointalk forum could be replaced by another if over time the members migrate to a better managed platform that are over scams and spammers.
im not saying its bitcointalks responsibility to judge scams but when there are obvious cases like leocoin fake shill accounts all showing up with 1-10 posts at the same time its a fair assumption they arent all unique users and their toxic parasitic nature just dilutes the value of any topics.
id be fine if they stayed in their own but they do 1 liner responses just to add a line about leocoin.
its why i suggested ratings etc. give topic starters some power to not let them post if they choose or can i have a profile option to say hide all posts of people below rating x? without hitting ignore on everyone. you'd probably be surprised how different the forum would look.
im not saying its bitcointalks responsibility to judge scams but when there are obvious cases like leocoin fake shill accounts all showing up with 1-10 posts at the same time its a fair assumption they arent all unique users and their toxic parasitic nature just dilutes the value of any topics.
id be fine if they stayed in their own but they do 1 liner responses just to add a line about leocoin.
its why i suggested ratings etc. give topic starters some power to not let them post if they choose or can i have a profile option to say hide all posts of people below rating x? without hitting ignore on everyone. you'd probably be surprised how different the forum would look.
December 20, 2016, 08:04:19 PM
There are always ways to do this, which will not require so much 'human work'. I'm sure that everybody have noticed that recently there are less & less active users on the forum. Not to mention people who were busting scams. One of the main reasons (at least to me) is, because people (who cares) got tired and don't bother anymore. And I want you to perfectly understand me here - I'm not talking about the forum itself, I'm talking about the entire 'ecosystem' of the cryptocurrencies. So anyone, who's not a hypocrite seeking for a extra BTC should participate (at least imho).
December 20, 2016, 07:51:25 PM
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs).
Do you really believe it? If they are paid for it or money's at stake in any other way, they'll keep doing it.
I'll tell you why it's not happening on this forum. They have just a few mods and they don't have enough time to constantly fight spammers. Give this job to a single staff member and you'll have him sit 10 hours a day reading the spam and ban appeals. I also think something should be done and I believe the management have enough money to hire more moderators and keep the boards clean.
December 20, 2016, 07:46:05 PM
need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
I think people should have to pass a basic "financial IQ" test before being allowed on this forum. Make sure people understand how money works, so they can identify a ponzi and other financial schemes.
would be nice. peopleonly post scams because they make money. the world would have no nigerian dying princes if it didnt actually work. as for icos i can only think of eth that actually maintained or exceeded its price. that kinda makes 99% shitty/scams. i dont know any casino where you have a 1% chance to win and i dont think anyone would spin a wheel with 100 numbers knowing they only get to pick one. i dont know the answer but i think more needs to be done to empower proper users and get rid of undesireables than growing reports.
December 20, 2016, 01:16:50 PM
need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
I think people should have to pass a basic "financial IQ" test before being allowed on this forum. Make sure people understand how money works, so they can identify a ponzi and other financial schemes.
That's not the main point here. People running these schemes often have great 'financial IQ', yet they're annoying and kinda deserve... well... I'll keep this to myself..
Well, I wasn't referring to the people who run the schemes. They know they are stealing - they are no empathy and are usually sociapaths. I was referring to the people who fall for the schemes. Educating people after the fact doesn't work.
Even people who run such schemes can drop this low to register a newbie account and spread bs. Anyway... soon they'll feel some heat under their asses.
December 20, 2016, 01:10:44 PM
need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
I think people should have to pass a basic "financial IQ" test before being allowed on this forum. Make sure people understand how money works, so they can identify a ponzi and other financial schemes.
That's not the main point here. People running these schemes often have great 'financial IQ', yet they're annoying and kinda deserve... well... I'll keep this to myself..
Well, I wasn't referring to the people who run the schemes. They know they are stealing - they have no empathy and are usually sociapaths. I was referring to the people who fall for the schemes. Educating people after the fact doesn't work.
December 20, 2016, 01:08:10 PM
need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
I think people should have to pass a basic "financial IQ" test before being allowed on this forum. Make sure people understand how money works, so they can identify a ponzi and other financial schemes.
That's not the main point here. People running these schemes often have great 'financial IQ', yet they're annoying and kinda deserve... well... I'll keep this to myself..
December 20, 2016, 01:00:33 PM
need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
I think people should have to pass a basic "financial IQ" test before being allowed on this forum. Make sure people understand how money works, so they can identify a ponzi and other financial schemes.
December 19, 2016, 08:55:54 PM
i wish rating was tied to what forums you can post in. read all but not reply. would be good if like trust you could mark useless posts for moderator review or something to stop them progressing with useless posts.
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
It would be then hard for the newbies to post. Not all of them are shill accounts. And the trust system could be abused, but probably if they are painted in red by DT forum members (I'm not sure, but I believe I am one)?
i mean a topic starter is given the option for their topic to function that way. its no different to self moderated topic starters deleting what they want.
damned if you do damned if you dont. the current method gives all power to account farming owners. there is no looming negative to them spamming other than losing 2 mins of their life to make a new alt account. basically the honest have to keep them honest theough more work and the never ending tedious battle of flagging which just doesnt solve the problem. need to work smarter with safeguards or options rather than put more work on moderators.
December 19, 2016, 08:23:16 PM
i wish rating was tied to what forums you can post in. read all but not reply. would be good if like trust you could mark useless posts for moderator review or something to stop them progressing with useless posts.
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
It would be then hard for the newbies to post. Not all of them are shill accounts. And the trust system could be abused, but probably if they are painted in red by DT forum members (I'm not sure, but I believe I am one)?
December 19, 2016, 06:43:49 PM
i wish rating was tied to what forums you can post in. read all but not reply. would be good if like trust you could mark useless posts for moderator review or something to stop them progressing with useless posts.
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
or better yet what about an option for topic starter that is
- minimum rating to reply
- accept replies from negative rating profiles
this way you can filter all the leocoin wankers and one liner jr member signature spam?
December 19, 2016, 09:44:23 AM
Some poepla are really annoying with their comments. Cryptotrader16 is a perosn like that, annoying always the same comments, imagine he is even a friend of Cristiano Ronaldo phahahah
December 19, 2016, 09:34:02 AM
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs). The only solution is to educate users..
I'm pretty sure this is not a solution nor is it a feasible one. Given a smaller and finite number of users, it probably would be. However, given a unknown amount of random newcomers I would say that it is not. December 19, 2016, 09:27:05 AM
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs).
Jump to: