Pages:
Author

Topic: Ideas for improving post quality? - page 7. (Read 4874 times)

legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 3060
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 20, 2017, 04:41:51 AM
#76
theymos, this is a perfect example of the beast you have created by linking signatures with activity. Remove signatures from activity and this nonsense stops immediately. How can we compete against bots doing this? Currently anyone can create an unlimited amount of accounts and when users are using bots like he is to just copy a post and change a few words for synonyms it's often very hard to notice. I've just banned this account but how many others does he have doing the same? It's utterly pointless banning accounts if he's got 200 others that I've missed that will still be botting away. Things need to change. Do me favour and look into this user and just tell me how many alt accounts you can find. There are dozens upon dozens of individuals farming thousands of accounts this way and it's only going to get worse over time. The worst thing about this is once they hit a sufficient rank they can get paid by lazy ICO campaigns for merely copy and pasting and they'll never notice the abuse.
if theymos could implement a script for determining something along the lines of 'merit points' asscoated with general post quality, i wouldn't be against the idea of signatures being linked to those points instead, it would provide an initial incentive for good post quality from the start an account is created, and provide a long term incentive for maintaining a good post quality. if theymos can also implement other factors in, suchas deleted posts for not following forum rules, it'll also push members towards following the general forum rules. maybe even diminishing returns on merit points (or whatever they're to be called) can be used for people with alt accounts, or accounts on the same ip.  just some rambling thoughts.

How would this work though? Wouldn't that just be gamed? People could still just copy and paste 'quality' posts in order to get merit points, right? I think it would just cause more headaches than problems it solves to be honest.

for theymos,
I think to prevent multiple acounts should be given mandatory rules to create a signature campaign, such as making a report per day their post link, with it multiple accounts will trouble to use the cheating way, because it reports every post they post is very confusing and make tired

I can't imagine how a one person can control a 200 account in a day or two.

But this brilliant idea can make an account farmer lost his/her head.

It can easily be done with bots if all they do is copy a post from earlier on in a megathread. There are numerous individuals that have been caught with hundreds of accounts and many more that I suspect are doing it that have been reported but not looked into by an admin going on all year (some use bots and others just post of copy and paste manually). One Russian guy had a little over 200 accounts and all they did was rehash their previous posts reworded slightly post after post account after account. The entire Vietnamese sub board thread had to be locked because 99% of the accounts posting in there were just copy and pasting random text from online and of course to anyone not speaking Vietnamese nobody was any wiser....until I noticed it of course. The worst thing is Sylon (the worst campaign manager on these forums despite what his avatar claims) was paying them all to do it and continues to pay spambot accounts because he never checks anyone's post quality at all.

Anyone notice anything wrong with this post?
This is fairly concerning. I would agree that post very well could have been made by a bot. However it will be very difficult to moderate (spot) those types of posts. I would be willing to say you probably would not have spotted this if you had not written, or at the very least interacted with, that post. That person may or may not have a large number of accounts, however at the very least, the likely plan may have been to eventually ramp up his operation to many accounts (he could have been testing his bot, AI, etc.,).

It will have been made by a bot. That's why it doesn't make much sense as he's just used a program to swap a few words for synonyms and that doesn't always work out right. I spot them often, but you're right, it's easier to spot when they've copied your own posts and many people only report their own that have been copied when they notice it. The sad thing is the copy and pasters often stand out like a sore thumb because they tend to copy a well thought out or 'long' post and these stand out a mile over all the one/two line shitposters that have become pretty standard.

One solution to the spambot problem would be to require a captcha to post until you have made x post, have y activity, or some combination of the two. The units of evil system could be incorporated to influence the x and y values.

This is something I've considered and I think it could be worthwhile trying - as annoying as it will be to new users - but I think captchas can also easily be bypassed, but I think it should be considered for maybe all newbie accounts to enter before each post up until they hit maybe 14 activity or Junior status etc.

Or just simply make a subscription fee for all the users or just for participation in spesific forum sections like the bounty and signature once. So in order to participate in a bounty or signature campaign the user have to pay some fee to the forum and those money can be ivested in moderators. The high rank members can have lower fees, higher for newbies. It's just an idea. The forum is a grate place for me and I am willing to pay what it takes to make it even better.

If you read my other posts in this thread you will see that is exactly what I've suggested. I don't think making people pay $100 or so to get a signature will affect traffic very much if at all. People would just pay it because they know they can make it back in a week or so so it's a worthwhile investment. Even impoverished people could probably beg, borrow or steal that money to invest in an account here and it would be worth it.


Or just simply make a subscription fee for all the users or just for participation in spesific forum sections like the bounty and signature once. So in order to participate in a bounty or signature campaign the user have to pay some fee to the forum and those money can be ivested in moderators. The high rank members can have lower fees, higher for newbies. It's just an idea. The forum is a grate place for me and I am willing to pay what it takes to make it even better.

If you believe a fee would discourage spammers you're wrong. It would only impact the economy as paid posting would become a little less profitable. Instead of 0.1BTC per month a spammer would be getting that - the fee, e.g. 0.08BTC. Still worth it! It would also discourage new users because not everyone is able to pay a fee from the start, while the long time spammers (who just have to be rich by now) would keep doing it anyway. 

I think you're wrong and are probably just basing it off the fact that you don't want to have to pay anything to be able to earn here. Do you think a spammer is going to pay $100 to have a signature on each of his 100 accounts? Of course not, but if you can create 100 accounts for free then it will continue to be abused en mass and by people with hundreds of accounts. Charge to have a signature and this abuse will stop almost instantly or be drastically curbed by about 99%. We really can't continue to just let people have dozens to hundreds of accounts because it gets worse day by day and there's not enough manpower or hours in the day to deal with it now, nevermind months down the line as the problem grows exponentially.
full member
Activity: 641
Merit: 106
December 20, 2017, 02:17:24 AM
#75
I am agree.. for me, I think it will can decrease some people that make spamming and not good in make post or just want to get hight level only. As far as I joined thidls forum, I am not an ambisious or agressive people to fast get hight level by make bad post. I am agree to apply that rules. Welcome Sir..and welcome.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
December 19, 2017, 10:57:07 PM
#74
Anyone notice anything wrong with this post?
This is fairly concerning. I would agree that post very well could have been made by a bot. However it will be very difficult to moderate (spot) those types of posts. I would be willing to say you probably would not have spotted this if you had not written, or at the very least interacted with, that post. That person may or may not have a large number of accounts, however at the very least, the likely plan may have been to eventually ramp up his operation to many accounts (he could have been testing his bot, AI, etc.,).

One solution to the spambot problem would be to require a captcha to post until you have made x post, have y activity, or some combination of the two. The units of evil system could be incorporated to influence the x and y values.
legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1192
December 19, 2017, 09:19:03 PM
#73

Or just simply make a subscription fee for all the users or just for participation in spesific forum sections like the bounty and signature once. So in order to participate in a bounty or signature campaign the user have to pay some fee to the forum and those money can be ivested in moderators. The high rank members can have lower fees, higher for newbies. It's just an idea. The forum is a grate place for me and I am willing to pay what it takes to make it even better.

If you believe a fee would discourage spammers you're wrong. It would only impact the economy as paid posting would become a little less profitable. Instead of 0.1BTC per month a spammer would be getting that - the fee, e.g. 0.08BTC. Still worth it! It would also discourage new users because not everyone is able to pay a fee from the start, while the long time spammers (who just have to be rich by now) would keep doing it anyway. 
copper member
Activity: 434
Merit: 278
Offering Escrow 0.5 % fee
December 19, 2017, 08:17:45 PM
#72
for theymos,
I think to prevent multiple acounts should be given mandatory rules to create a signature campaign, such as making a report per day their post link, with it multiple accounts will trouble to use the cheating way, because it reports every post they post is very confusing and make tired

I can't imagine how a one person can control a 200 account in a day or two.

But this brilliant idea can make an account farmer lost his/her head.

full member
Activity: 363
Merit: 101
Cryptocurrency is Dilema
December 19, 2017, 06:43:54 PM
#71
for theymos,
I think to prevent multiple acounts should be given mandatory rules to create a signature campaign, such as making a report per day their post link, with it multiple accounts will trouble to use the cheating way, because it reports every post they post is very confusing and make tired
legendary
Activity: 2240
Merit: 3150
₿uy / $ell ..oeleo ;(
December 19, 2017, 06:01:41 PM
#70
theymos, this is a perfect example of the beast you have created by linking signatures with activity. Remove signatures from activity and this nonsense stops immediately. How can we compete against bots doing this? Currently anyone can create an unlimited amount of accounts and when users are using bots like he is to just copy a post and change a few words for synonyms it's often very hard to notice. I've just banned this account but how many others does he have doing the same? It's utterly pointless banning accounts if he's got 200 others that I've missed that will still be botting away. Things need to change. Do me favour and look into this user and just tell me how many alt accounts you can find. There are dozens upon dozens of individuals farming thousands of accounts this way and it's only going to get worse over time. The worst thing about this is once they hit a sufficient rank they can get paid by lazy ICO campaigns for merely copy and pasting and they'll never notice the abuse.
if theymos could implement a script for determining something along the lines of 'merit points' asscoated with general post quality, i wouldn't be against the idea of signatures being linked to those points instead, it would provide an initial incentive for good post quality from the start an account is created, and provide a long term incentive for maintaining a good post quality. if theymos can also implement other factors in, suchas deleted posts for not following forum rules, it'll also push members towards following the general forum rules. maybe even diminishing returns on merit points (or whatever they're to be called) can be used for people with alt accounts, or accounts on the same ip.  just some rambling thoughts.

Or just simply make a subscription fee for all the users or just for participation in spesific forum sections like the bounty and signature once. So in order to participate in a bounty or signature campaign the user have to pay some fee to the forum and those money can be ivested in moderators. The high rank members can have lower fees, higher for newbies. It's just an idea. The forum is a grate place for me and I am willing to pay what it takes to make it even better.
legendary
Activity: 1288
Merit: 1043
:^)
December 19, 2017, 02:57:58 PM
#69
theymos, this is a perfect example of the beast you have created by linking signatures with activity. Remove signatures from activity and this nonsense stops immediately. How can we compete against bots doing this? Currently anyone can create an unlimited amount of accounts and when users are using bots like he is to just copy a post and change a few words for synonyms it's often very hard to notice. I've just banned this account but how many others does he have doing the same? It's utterly pointless banning accounts if he's got 200 others that I've missed that will still be botting away. Things need to change. Do me favour and look into this user and just tell me how many alt accounts you can find. There are dozens upon dozens of individuals farming thousands of accounts this way and it's only going to get worse over time. The worst thing about this is once they hit a sufficient rank they can get paid by lazy ICO campaigns for merely copy and pasting and they'll never notice the abuse.
if theymos could implement a script for determining something along the lines of 'merit points' asscoated with general post quality, i wouldn't be against the idea of signatures being linked to those points instead, it would provide an initial incentive for good post quality from the start an account is created, and provide a long term incentive for maintaining a good post quality. if theymos can also implement other factors in, suchas deleted posts for not following forum rules, it'll also push members towards following the general forum rules. maybe even diminishing returns on merit points (or whatever they're to be called) can be used for people with alt accounts, or accounts on the same ip.  just some rambling thoughts.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 19, 2017, 12:45:30 PM
#68
There will be a few two factor alternatives on the new gathering so I get why he hasn't tried coding them for this one, yet in the event that the new discussion is still 1+ years away I figure it would be advantageous executing asap. Requiring email check would be another progression in restricting or backing off record cultivating as it's simply one more band to bounce through.Should be Checked the interset rate of every members.

Anyone notice anything wrong with this post?

Why there is no 2FA on the login? If you have sms authentication and long process for changing your initially registered mobile number it will be difficult for people to register 100 account and reduce the account selling.

There will be several two factor options on the new forum so I get why he hasn't bothered coding them for this one, but if the new forum is still 1+ years away I think it would be worthwhile implementing asap. Requiring email verification would be another step in limiting or slowing down account farming as it's just another hoop to jump through.

theymos, this is a perfect example of the beast you have created by linking signatures with activity. Remove signatures from activity and this nonsense stops immediately. How can we compete against bots doing this? Currently anyone can create an unlimited amount of accounts and when users are using bots like he is to just copy a post and change a few words for synonyms it's often very hard to notice. I've just banned this account but how many others does he have doing the same? It's utterly pointless banning accounts if he's got 200 others that I've missed that will still be botting away. Things need to change. Do me favour and look into this user and just tell me how many alt accounts you can find. There are dozens upon dozens of individuals farming thousands of accounts this way and it's only going to get worse over time. The worst thing about this is once they hit a sufficient rank they can get paid by lazy ICO campaigns for merely copy and pasting and they'll never notice the abuse.

What needs the most priority right now is account recovery. We can't have 2 guys taking care of that only, leaving people waiting for ages to get their accounts back. The meta section is filled with people posting address signatures and waiting to be recovered. I wouldn't like to be on their shoes seeing how unreliable the system is.



I've told him numerous times workload needs to be distributed between staff and that we also need another admin for this as there's far too many people who have been waiting months to get their accounts back even with verifiable info posted. There's also dozens of other things that need looking into that never get sorted as well. If he doesn't trust anyone else to do it for whatever reason he should consider paying himself a reasonable wage and do administration duties himself full-time as it's badly needed and the forum's problems grow worse every day.
hero member
Activity: 1764
Merit: 584
December 19, 2017, 10:15:23 AM
#67
I like both of this ideas. I think they are a good start.

1. To attain ranks above Member, you'd have to earn some number of merit points. Merit points would be awarded in a monthly vote on best posts of the previous month, with various measures (TBD) to prevent gaming of the vote. Winning merit points might also come with a BTC prize.

How do you plan to conduct the voting? Forum members ranked "Member" probably number in the thousand now. Are you planning to add an Upvote feature for posts and use the results to determine who ranks up? That might be prone to Like farming like what is happening in Youtube and FB.

As for the BTC prize, I'd rather not have money involved here.

2. Create or designate some sections as "serious discussion" sections, with no signatures. In those sections or maybe in different ones, also have poster restrictions such as Member rank or above only. And/or allow topic-creators to set these restrictions on their topics, similar to selfmod topics.

I'd go along with the topic-creators modding their own threads.

Okay here are a couple of ideas that I could think of:

1. Start banning users that post 5+ posts a day that can be termed as spam.

2. Require unique phone number authentication for every user.


Hmm, with #1 there must be a criteria on what would constitute a spam post and people should be able to vote on it and then the mods can review the ban request first. I mean, I've seen users who have beef with each that start having arguments whenever they meet in a thread so it's not unlikely they'll keep downvoting each other.

#2 might make some uncomfortable but I'm personally fine with it. There are exchanges that require it anyway. I also like that it might protect users against hacking if the authentication is required every log-in.
legendary
Activity: 2604
Merit: 1036
December 19, 2017, 10:14:31 AM
#66
People who are genuinely interested in Bitcoin have visited this forum, educated themselves and left already. It's not so hard to figure out what Bitcoin is and where you can buy some. You can do that in 30 minutes tops. People who are posting here on a daily basis like myself, yourself and mods and admins and everyone else is doing this for money. We know what Bitcoin is and what to do with it. Have you asked yourself why the heck are we still here? Because $$$ lol.
So if you want to curb the amount of new people looking for $$$ like us you either have to remove the payment system or reduce the number of people looking for $$$. Which one seems easier to achieve between these 2?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 19, 2017, 10:13:23 AM
#65
There will be a few two factor alternatives on the new gathering so I get why he hasn't tried coding them for this one, yet in the event that the new discussion is still 1+ years away I figure it would be advantageous executing asap. Requiring email check would be another progression in restricting or backing off record cultivating as it's simply one more band to bounce through.Should be Checked the interset rate of every members.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1252
December 19, 2017, 09:59:14 AM
#64
Terminate all signatures altogether and the problem will go away instantaneously. Keep the banner ads. No incentivizing to post means there will be much less fluff and more on point and concise conversations. As it stands now, it's all artificially inflated chit-chat with zero value.


You already said that and I already applied some logic as to why that is a mistake, I would like a counterargument to my thesis instead of simply repeating yourself:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.26559219

Like I said, apply game theory. SEO is SEO, and we don't want Roger Ver ranking bitcoin dot com's forum as the first bitcoin forum that shows up when you google "bitcoin forum". Bitcoin is only going to keep getting more popular, once the (real) mainstream arrives, you want this forum on top, not his.

Add sections to the forum where signature campaigns are not allowed for high level discussion and leave the rest as it is, ban obvious 100-post-a-day 3rd worlders: forum becomes tolerable and everyone is happy. Maybe add a newbie jail again too.

What needs the most priority right now is account recovery. We can't have 2 guys taking care of that only, leaving people waiting for ages to get their accounts back. The meta section is filled with people posting address signatures and waiting to be recovered. I wouldn't like to be on their shoes seeing how unreliable the system is.

Okay here are a couple of ideas that I could think of:

1. Start banning users that post 5+ posts a day that can be termed as spam.

2. Require unique phone number authentication for every user.


1. You could post 20 times and still wouldn't be spam if it isn't spam. If you are having a conversation replying back and forth with someone on a thread the count can easily go up for example. I post in other forums where I make 0 money and this is the case (I post way more there than here). Please don't ruin the forum for everyone else.

2. Nonsense. Bitcoin is supposed to be anon friendly, this forum should remain anon friendly as well.

member
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
December 19, 2017, 09:44:25 AM
#63
Okay here are a couple of ideas that I could think of:

1. Start banning users that post 5+ posts a day that can be termed as spam.

2. Require unique phone number authentication for every user.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 19, 2017, 09:21:05 AM
#62
Theymos has said multiple times including the op of this thread that getting rid of signatures altogether is not likely to happen:

What are everyone's ideas for improving post quality?

I have mostly ruled out:

- Removing signatures or sig ads globally.
 - Requiring payment to wear sig ads.
 - Banning account sales.


legendary
Activity: 2604
Merit: 1036
December 19, 2017, 09:11:53 AM
#61
Terminate all signatures altogether and the problem will go away instantaneously. Keep the banner ads. No incentivizing to post means there will be much less fluff and more on point and concise conversations. As it stands now, it's all artificially inflated chit-chat with zero value.
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 3060
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 19, 2017, 08:13:41 AM
#60
If you want to lessen the traffic, one of the solution is to have a maximum sig  campaign  post per week. Campaign participants is just following the sig campaign rules. Imagine if there are 300 participants join the campaign and the required post is 20 post per week, then you have  6,000 post in a week or 857 post per day in just 1 campaign. If the maximum post in sig campaign is only 10 post per week then you are cutting the traffic in half or if the maximum post per week is just 5-8 post per week then you have a quality post you need.  

People will just open multiple accounts like many already do just to bleed signature campaigns dry. Whatever limitations like this you put in place people will just find a way around it, and you punish the otherwise decent posters who make great posts but are limited to x amount because of the spammers abusing it. How would we even enforce this? People can only make 20 posts a week and no more? Well I make more than 20 posts a week and I shouldn't be limited by this. A better solution would be to just force campaign managers to do what they're supposed to and not pay for spam and shitposts.
member
Activity: 238
Merit: 10
December 19, 2017, 07:57:20 AM
#59
If you want to lessen the traffic, one of the solution is to have a maximum sig  campaign  post per week. Campaign participants is just following the sig campaign rules. Imagine if there are 300 participants join the campaign and the required post is 20 post per week, then you have  6,000 post in a week or 857 post per day in just 1 campaign. If the maximum post in sig campaign is only 10 post per week then you are cutting the traffic in half or if the maximum post per week is just 5-8 post per week then you have a quality post you need.  
legendary
Activity: 2954
Merit: 3060
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
December 19, 2017, 06:52:10 AM
#58
I'm just trying to understand what happens here; I'm a newbee, but I'm not a teenager and I've tens of years of experience of organizational politics; it seems to me that all these flames, scam/spam accusations, banning people on arbitrary evaluation are completely useless.

I think that a simple "like/unlike" system on every post  could be a good solution. Periodically, it will possible to evaluate who writes quality posts and who writes garbage.
Of course, abuse is possible, but much better that a personal opinion of a moderator, with all respect for his position/experience.
Just my two cents

Some sort of like system has been proposed numerous times before but why would you trust a voting system that in your own words can be gamed over the opinion of staff? Staff don't go around banning people for the fun of it. It's incredibly time consuming to do and I wish people would just not shitpost or campaign managers would actually do their job in the first place and not pay shitposters, but they do, so we have to do their job for them. If people don't like how this forum is run or managed they can click the 'logout' button at the top and all their problems and concerns are solved.
member
Activity: 129
Merit: 10
RedTube & Rasputin Party Mansion
December 19, 2017, 06:22:05 AM
#57
I'm just trying to understand what happens here; I'm a newbee, but I'm not a teenager and I've tens of years of experience of organizational politics; it seems to me that all these flames, scam/spam accusations, banning people on arbitrary evaluation are completely useless.

I think that a simple "like/unlike" system on every post  could be a good solution. Periodically, it will possible to evaluate who writes quality posts and who writes garbage.
Of course, abuse is possible, but much better that a personal opinion of a moderator, with all respect for his position/experience.
Just my two cents
Pages:
Jump to: