Topic: Ideas for improving post quality? - page 5. (Read 4883 times)

You can learn from high member ranks like Hero and Legendary with positive trust and see how do they comment. I don't talk about copy-pasting now, but simply learning from good commentators.

I totally agree with that.

There is an African adage which says ' don't throw the baby and the bath water'. The forum is growing and such observation are very necessary. Option 2 will be fine for me. I suggest you get more post reviewers/ moderators.

The best thing that you could do to improve post quality is listen to hilariousandco and take on board his suggestions. I don't see either of the suggestions in the OP making a good amount of difference.

Theymos values privacy, he didn't like to be forced to use Cloudflare for that reason, he allows total anonymous TOR-access, and I expect there is zero chance he'll require any ID or phone verifications.

---

Nice try NSA!

I've been recently thinking this for about a week, what if you required a phone number that sends them a code to their phone to verify if they were a real person before they get to use that newly account created. And also an account that will needed to verify via email before they can use it. I've been seeing this kind of precautions to a lot of e-mail before they could use it to the fullest. (In my opinion)

P.S. btw, this is for someone who always make a new account of BCT.

I think there should be a thread like "noob questions" separate from "beginners and help", cause these repeated questions will never disappear
As for gyus with 1000 spamming accounts - ID verification. Let people show their passports to be registered

Personally, I can feed my family for a week with those $50, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. The forum will die out if a fee for creating an account is intoruced

5 pages in finally found someone with the same idea.

In addition to this, campaign managers and the whole company/project itself should be the one to be punished more. Here are some problems I noticed:
- In bounty campaigns almost all sig camps have no limit in participants unlike in bitcoin paid campaigns. This potentially makes almost everyone in the forum be able to find a "job".
- Applying for bounty campaigns is too easy, fill up a form and you're in. There's no checking that's taking place unlike, again, in bitcoin paid campaigns.
- Campaign managers handle too many campaigns at the same time. This is not a problem if you can do your job properly. But the thing is there are only a handful of managers that actually read the posts of their participants. Others just count the posts and check where it is posted.

Signature campaigns are fine, but the campaign itself should be regulated with a strict policy. I think this and Hazaki's idea could fix this problem.

Shadowban them how?

If they're shitposters they probably have more then one account, so it probably won't take long for them to find out that their posts on account X are not being seen by the rest of the forum, or their other accounts.

Or even logging out would make their post disappear, i can't imagine that they don't notice that.

Seems a lot of hassle to implement ( Take a look at how long it takes for the new forum to be programmed.  ) for something that doesn't really bring a solution for anything.

Most of us here in forum were jr. members, members and full members and most of them were spammers and shitposters now my suggestion is, disable the signature from those ranks and they must require to pay in terms of bitcoin to enable the signatures if they want or else wait until they reach the sr. member rank. And for account sales you should make a rule about this and you should ban permanently who caught account farming and limit the account creation per IP to 1 to prevent them to create a lot of accounts which could use for spamming.

I wonder if it would be a good idea to also issue these 'merit points' for actively reporting low quality, spammy posts?
That way forum members have some incentive to clean up the forum themselves. Is something like that feasible with the current amount of mods on the forum, or would the workload be too high?

I also like the idea that topic starters wouldn't have their signature displayed in the OP, but something needs to be done about these existing 20+ page spam threads.
I've always wondered why these spam threads aren't closed entirely, they don't add anything to the discussion and most signature spammers use these threads exclusively.

Another idea would be to only allow people who have been registered for x amount of time to join signature campaigns.
Aren't most of the spam problems caused by new-ish members who can just join any bounty/signature campaign?

Edit:

Something that I've also noticed is that a lot of these signature spammers still get accepted into many different signature campaigns, this is the root of the problem IMO.
It shouldn't be too difficult for campaign managers to weed out these people.

Though they might just switch over to account farming instead.

I'm not sure if that's true. Most, or at least many, signature campaigns require to post within the Alt Coin section of the forum. That's also the section where the most spam occurs, according to what I've seen in the forum.

And it's not fair to put innocent newbies in jail just because they're newbies. I know that many of the ultra elite forum members have an obsession about punishing all who do not belong to their clique, but I find it ehtically wrong. 

No, but he might as well be. Just look at his posts. Classic one line shitposter. He's the perfect example of what this thread is trying to combat but as long as anyone is free to create unlimited accounts here and crapcoin icos will continue to pay for one line shitposts then nothing is going to change and those are the two main concerns that need addressing and combatting here.


I think we should consider bringing back the newbie jail in some capacity. People are getting annoyed by all the spam and useless questions/threads being smeared everywhere. I think prohibiting Newbies or lower ranked accounts from posting or creating threads in Off Topic and Politics & Society would also help. Those two subs are the go to boards for sig spammers and account farmers right now and the quality of threads being created in there is appalling.


It would be a solution if signatures are removed from ranks. Accounts would become virtually worthless then because 99% of their value is in their signatures. People buy accounts for their signature so why not allow users to buy the signature directly from us instead.


It's an effective model for the campaigns. Free advertising plastered all over the forum promoting their product. It doesn't get much better than that, but I agree, this can't be acceptable to do anymore. If these spam campaigns are punished for their laziness and greed they will soon change their ways.

This. Much needed!

Currently all topics are filled with nonsense comments coming from sig spammers. Too many of them right now.

Banning account sales wouldn't bring a solution to problem, I believe. People would still sell accounts to each other in different platforms.

Signurate campaigns itself is the biggest problem. Their working model. I mean, "add our signature and spam other threads, maybe one or two clicks to your signurate" what kind of a model is that?

Thing is a lot of reports will be just posting in the wrong section, and it's not directly breaking the rules. There's some tricky threads out there which cross over into two sections. Newbies even though they should read the guidelines shouldn't be expected to know everything. There will also be a lot of witch hunting going on if x number of consecutive reports results in a ban, certain members will be targeted.

I think it's just more reasonable to either ban signature campaigns completely, which I think is an extreme approach, or punish those running the campaigns. I think the paid signature suggestion really does solve a lot of the problems that we are currently having. Not many people are going to fork $100/$200 to be able to wear a signature and even if they were it would prevent them from doing it on multiple accounts, unless they are extremely motivated and have the funds to back that up. It would be nice to know why theymos is against this particular suggestion.

When reporting posts you could put in the notes that the person is spamming throughout the forum and ask the moderator to take a look at their post history. I've noticed when mentioning this a few accounts have been banned in the modlog.

How about "simply" enhancing the "report to moderator" feature? First, allow me to ask a question to mods: when we pressed that button, does mods manually verify if the reported post is truly a spam or does it happen rather automatically?

If mods are manually verifying them, is is possible to make a rule where if a user get five consecutive accurate spam report, they get permaban?

If those reports are verified automatically, is it possible to set a condition where upon 10 or 20 users reported someone's post, they got marked and after 3 marks in one week, they're out.

Furthermore, (suggested by someone on previous page, just recycling) could we automatically delete the permabanned user's entire posts? That way, it won't be an eye sore to a thread.

This method will hopefully helps sweep away spam account as there are a lot of people working together.

As an addition, if we implemented this idea (and to cherish the idea of some "honorable member" like DT), maybe we can add a system where members with high report accuracy will have higher score, like if someone need to have 10 reports from "normal" member to be banned, a collection of five "100% accurate" member is enough to give him a temporary good bye.

---

Everybody here are aware of the existence of "ruled out" keywords on theymos' post, right?

no votings please - here a people that run around with hundreds of accounts 

Restricting new accounts to the beginners forum could be helpful. Maybe there should be a 50 post minimum before posters can spam the discussion forum.

I am actually happy that we are really having a discussion about this. But truth be told, even implementing the whole of the suggestions by people, will not solve all of our problems rather it would only mitigate it to a large extent and I would suggest that after the thread has gathered enough contributions, actions point should be sorted based on opinions that have been expressed then we can all vote on which line of actions because not everyone can be heard the same way not everyone can have something to say.

The issue of member rank before posting should be that people below certain ranks, should not be allowed to post outside certain section of the forum maybe beginners and help and the point to be garnered should be on completion of some tasks such as reading and understanding the forum rules, unwritten rules, what could interpret as untrustworthy actions etc.