This topic will let another forum become more powerful than us. Please think before you come up with such a topic as a lot of traffic and intellectuals of this forum are going to that forum because someone comes up with such an argument
The forum mods or the admin have not developed any AI policy. Do you think such a topic would be welcomed when we know the majority of traffic that the forum gets is because of the signature campaign? Does not make any sense to me at least and not sure about others.
Topic: If you were a campaign manager would you select these members for campaigns? - page 3. (Read 1197 times)
April 06, 2024, 10:36:17 AM
April 06, 2024, 09:34:10 AM
If I’m a campaign manager, I will focus on post quality and not on the merit counts etc because this is what I’m checking when I’m counting post for weekly payment. Some users post a quality post yet doesn’t receive enough merit due to the low merit circulation on the board he or she was posting frequently.
There’s a lot of questionable merit sharing on this topic Get 201 merits in 2 months from a farm
Checking the post quality alone can guarantee you that the user that you will hire will post with your standards.
There’s a lot of questionable merit sharing on this topic Get 201 merits in 2 months from a farm
Checking the post quality alone can guarantee you that the user that you will hire will post with your standards.
April 06, 2024, 09:26:41 AM
No, I would never personally hire such a member for my campaign. Unfortunately, some campaign managers have such low standards and prioritize quantity over quality. Stake's manager is one example of this, as evidenced by the "borovichok" case. Despite multiple warnings, he was only removed after a strong backlash from the community and negative publicity.
April 06, 2024, 09:12:28 AM
It depends on what the customer wants.
If you are hired as a manger to get the people with the most posts in a varied bunch of boards and the customer does not care about quality just quantity then you are talking about a certain group / type of poster.
If you are hired to get a fewer number of posts but want better quality ones then you are going after another group of users.
It also comes down to pay. If you pay very little per post you are (in general) going to get lower quality posters.
Also, some people for whatever personal reasons not advertise certain things. Some will not want to have casinos, others (before the ban) did not want mixers, and so on. So as a manger you loose some of those people. So although there seem to be a ton of users trying to get on campaigns. There is a limited amount of 'really good' ones and then you as a manger are picking thought the 'good enough' and you might have to take some people that are not great but workable.
-Dave
If you are hired as a manger to get the people with the most posts in a varied bunch of boards and the customer does not care about quality just quantity then you are talking about a certain group / type of poster.
If you are hired to get a fewer number of posts but want better quality ones then you are going after another group of users.
It also comes down to pay. If you pay very little per post you are (in general) going to get lower quality posters.
Also, some people for whatever personal reasons not advertise certain things. Some will not want to have casinos, others (before the ban) did not want mixers, and so on. So as a manger you loose some of those people. So although there seem to be a ton of users trying to get on campaigns. There is a limited amount of 'really good' ones and then you as a manger are picking thought the 'good enough' and you might have to take some people that are not great but workable.
-Dave
April 06, 2024, 09:10:13 AM
Let's assume I would have to select a few people for a campaign, the first thing I would look at is not merits, it's not the boards he's active and to be honest not even the reputation if it's not something screaming -2/-15 but the way his last post page looks!
Now in the case mentioned above here is that page archived:
https://archive.ph/PyAad
So, 20 posts, all made out of two paragraphs, depending on the resolution I get only 3 and 4 rows for each paragraph, so basically a machine!
852,732,755,893,927,925,824,882,1068,1023,853,943,912,1069,1188,1040,1033,940,856,1122 characters.
I would not hire a single person whose post-history looks like this, the moment I see all your posts have the same size and not even once, for god's sake at least once you don't break out of that habit of yours it's clear you're not even remotely interested even in what you're typing!
Now in the case mentioned above here is that page archived:
https://archive.ph/PyAad
So, 20 posts, all made out of two paragraphs, depending on the resolution I get only 3 and 4 rows for each paragraph, so basically a machine!
852,732,755,893,927,925,824,882,1068,1023,853,943,912,1069,1188,1040,1033,940,856,1122 characters.
I would not hire a single person whose post-history looks like this, the moment I see all your posts have the same size and not even once, for god's sake at least once you don't break out of that habit of yours it's clear you're not even remotely interested even in what you're typing!
April 06, 2024, 08:49:52 AM
I will assume each manager will have their criteria for selecting participants into their campaign. Could be the board they post in, merits they have, consistency of their posting across several boards, reputation, longevity on the forum. It will be a can of worms to debate the rationale behind the selection of users by a manager.
The amount the campaign pays also affects the quality of participants they can attract.
If I were managing a campaign today, I'll most likely not take that user, but no manager has to share my sentiments
The amount the campaign pays also affects the quality of participants they can attract.
If I were managing a campaign today, I'll most likely not take that user, but no manager has to share my sentiments
April 06, 2024, 06:17:57 AM
I would like to start this thread to discuss what possible logic could be applied by campaign managers when they select certain members to participate in campaigns they manage.
The campaign managers only see the money, and the websites (who are not here) only see the traffic.
Having said that, there is one in particular that did not stop promoting the Sinbad mixer even though around 5 months prior I created a thread outlining it would be seized because it was operated by a criminal enterprise. I would conclude your words are completely appropriate for that individual and maybe some others but definitely not all.
If I bring a campaign right now, I can not taken arimamib becuase he lacks in many areas, both merit ans reputation.
He clearly does lack in many area yet he is enrolled on the Stake campaign like a huge number of participants in that campaign are.I guess the criteria required to wear a Stake signature is extremely low therefore if spammers and super- spammers (several that use AI) are accepted on the Stake campaign, the primary person to blame is their campaign manager Carollzinha
April 06, 2024, 02:39:22 AM
If I am a campaign manager, what I will use to select people into any campaign that I am managing is merit and reputation. They are both important. I may not totally consider reputation but I will strongly not select people with negative reputation which is very valid. As for merit, I will not only consider 120 days merits only but also consider the people that send the merit to them. Lastly is that I will check some of the posts of the user. But I noticed that some campaign managers are not totally considering merits because some people are posting good but have little merits in 120 days. If I bring a campaign right now, I can not take arimamib becuase he lacks in many areas, both merit and reputation.
April 05, 2024, 09:20:27 PM
I would like to start this thread to discuss what possible logic could be applied by campaign managers when they select certain members to participate in campaigns they manage.
The campaign managers only see the money, and the websites (who are not here) only see the traffic.
April 05, 2024, 08:22:10 PM
Some names to consider:
==========
Campaign: Stake
Member: arimamib
Trust: # +0 / =3 / -0
Reason: Using AI generated posts.
==========
==========
Campaign: Bitvest
Member: Zanab247
Trust: # +0 / =2 / -0
Reason: Ban evasion and account farming.
==========
==========
Campaign: Bitcasino
Member: mich
Trust: # +0 / =1 / -4
Reason: Account changed hands. Previous low quality posts/news spammer.
==========
==========
Campaign: Stake
Member: arimamib
Trust: # +0 / =3 / -0
Reason: Using AI generated posts.
==========
==========
Campaign: Bitvest
Member: Zanab247
Trust: # +0 / =2 / -0
Reason: Ban evasion and account farming.
==========
==========
Campaign: Bitcasino
Member: mich
Trust: # +0 / =1 / -4
Reason: Account changed hands. Previous low quality posts/news spammer.
==========
April 05, 2024, 08:20:38 PM
self-moderated to keep this thread clean from trolls, attention-seekers and signature spammers
I would like to start this thread to discuss what possible logic could be applied by campaign managers when they select certain members to participate in campaigns they manage.
Some of us would have great difficulty in understanding the reason why certain members with certain types of feedback (including negative and neutral trust) along with their posting habits would be selected in any campaign at all.
You can all contribute names, in fact I request it. Having said that, I would recommend a maximum of two per post and then allow ample time for comments to discuss those names before other names are posted.
edit:As an example, here is a name to get the conversation started. If you were a campaign manager, would you select this member to participate in any of your campaigns?:
The second post in the thread is where collated names will be listed. You can post the names of any member you have seen wearing a signature that you deem to have enough dubious posts that should really warrant exclusion from enrolling in campaigns and then we can discuss
I would like to start this thread to discuss what possible logic could be applied by campaign managers when they select certain members to participate in campaigns they manage.
Some of us would have great difficulty in understanding the reason why certain members with certain types of feedback (including negative and neutral trust) along with their posting habits would be selected in any campaign at all.
You can all contribute names, in fact I request it. Having said that, I would recommend a maximum of two per post and then allow ample time for comments to discuss those names before other names are posted.
edit:
The second post in the thread is where collated names will be listed. You can post the names of any member you have seen wearing a signature that you deem to have enough dubious posts that should really warrant exclusion from enrolling in campaigns and then we can discuss
Jump to: