Thread will be locked soon. You can continue the discussion there.
Topic: Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign) (Read 2898 times)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=995029.new#new
Thread will be locked soon. You can continue the discussion there.
Thread will be locked soon. You can continue the discussion there.
March 18, 2015, 02:53:53 AM
I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]
Of course you're right that this is indeed beyond the scope of most signature ad campaigns but in fact we might have the technology to do this, given the work. Imagine you train a classifier on the posts of a thread and then measure the perplexity of a given post with respect to that thread, I wonder if you could find the right set of features such that this sort of framework could be a proxy for "constructiveness".
Yeah, that is why we don't use bots
March 17, 2015, 10:01:16 AM
I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
[snip]
Of course you're right that this is indeed beyond the scope of most signature ad campaigns but in fact we might have the technology to do this, given the work. Imagine you train a classifier on the posts of a thread and then measure the perplexity of a given post with respect to that thread, I wonder if you could find the right set of features such that this sort of framework could be a proxy for "constructiveness".
March 16, 2015, 07:08:12 PM
I posted about this topic a few months ago and the responses I got were pretty interesting:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
While it might be more time-consuming for signature campaigns than the current system we have now, some form of automated method like the one Bitmixer.io currently uses combined with a manual method that roughly scans through users' posting histories and paying users in proportion to the constructiveness of their posts should be encouraged in my opinion - i.e. make lots of constructive posts and you will get paid more and spam the forums with one line posts that simply parrot whatever previous posts said and you will get paid less. Not only would the advertiser benefit but the system should, at least in theory, increase the average quality of posts across the board since it would provide an incentive for users to create higher quality posts.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-about-signature-campaigns-definition-of-a-constructive-post-677129
Bitmixer.io automatically excludes posts that are under 75 characters in length although I believe it is the only one out there that has such a restriction. For any particular post, length is a poor-to-average indicator of constructiveness. For example, here is a post I made that was very short but reasonably constructive. The OP complained about the newbie posting limits and believed that their posts were getting discarded by the forum software. I was the first to reply that that this was not in fact true and showed them how to retrieve their posts by accessing the draft feature.
Post length becomes a better indicator of constructiveness once it is applied to posting history. Those with entire post histories that consist of short one or two sentence replies are highly likely to have their posts classed as unconstructive while the opposite is true for those who have a history of making lengthier posts.
As for some examples of highly constructive posts, here is one and here is another. Note that these posts manage to be constructive without being overly long.
For an automated solution, post length is probably the only realistic measure of constructiveness that we have today since machines currently lack the intelligence to classify posts based on their semantics and context within the overall thread.
While it might be more time-consuming for signature campaigns than the current system we have now, some form of automated method like the one Bitmixer.io currently uses combined with a manual method that roughly scans through users' posting histories and paying users in proportion to the constructiveness of their posts should be encouraged in my opinion - i.e. make lots of constructive posts and you will get paid more and spam the forums with one line posts that simply parrot whatever previous posts said and you will get paid less. Not only would the advertiser benefit but the system should, at least in theory, increase the average quality of posts across the board since it would provide an incentive for users to create higher quality posts.
March 16, 2015, 05:19:30 PM
That is a reasonable point, whatever you post in a foreign language section is basically unmoderated. Nevertheless, I think I also have a valid point which is don't these guys want the advertising there?
You are right at one point , the vital point of advertisement is to target a wider area of customer
which of course include the local boards
Also, couldn't the campaign manager communicate with the moderator of that subforum if someone was making rubbish posts.
It would take some extra work as the moderator will need to browse through the campaigner post count because if local boards is allowed, i bet that 90% of the campaigner will take advantage of this to post the majority of the post count there as it is more easy to post in local boards
March 16, 2015, 05:06:41 PM
While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections. I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?
the main issue about this is that a campaign manager cant judge wether the post is a rubbish or a constructive post because the campaign manager cant understand the language, people can claim that all his post is constructive in local boards while the fact that he only posted spam useless post cant be known since the campaign manager doesnt speak that language
That is a reasonable point, whatever you post in a foreign language section is basically unmoderated. Nevertheless, I think I also have a valid point which is don't these guys want the advertising there? Also, couldn't the campaign manager communicate with the moderator of that subforum if someone was making rubbish posts. I imagine that one of the conditions of being a subforum moderator would be the ability to communicate in English.
March 16, 2015, 04:57:07 PM
While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections. I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?
the main issue about this is that a campaign manager cant judge wether the post is a rubbish or a constructive post because the campaign manager cant understand the language, people can claim that all his post is constructive in local boards while the fact that he only posted spam useless post cant be known since the campaign manager doesnt speak that language
March 16, 2015, 04:49:36 PM
While we're chatting about posts and what is or isn't constructive, I have to say that I've always been surprised that most campaigns don't count the posts in other language sections. I mean, don't you guys want non-english users to roll your dice just as much as you want english users?
March 16, 2015, 04:30:33 PM
-snip-
I get your point.
What we did was that, we gave them a chance to improve. To show that this is not what we are looking for, not what the community wants.
If we only give spots to those who post well, others will never improve.
I get your point.
What we did was that, we gave them a chance to improve. To show that this is not what we are looking for, not what the community wants.
If we only give spots to those who post well, others will never improve.
Its a more educational approach, I like it.
Yes, we are slowly getting more strict on enrollment.. The change will be noticeable from next week.
Damn, now I gotta bring my A game
-snip-
I wouldn't call this discussion pointless mate, since there are very interesting thoughts popping up from the very same community we prefer to be part of our campaign. But I agree with certain points you made: i.e. to allow a constructive poster to participate, even if there are only 25 or 30 posts per week. Also our goal is to have permanent participants, with very few leaving. That will surely make it in the weeks to come hard to join, since there wouldn't be many free spots.
ndnhc and I are permanently discussing our campaign, trying to improve it! Also we feel it is essential to discuss the campaign with you guys, the participants, since you are the backbone of it - thus this thread.
Thank you all for being with us!
I wouldn't call this discussion pointless mate, since there are very interesting thoughts popping up from the very same community we prefer to be part of our campaign. But I agree with certain points you made: i.e. to allow a constructive poster to participate, even if there are only 25 or 30 posts per week. Also our goal is to have permanent participants, with very few leaving. That will surely make it in the weeks to come hard to join, since there wouldn't be many free spots.
ndnhc and I are permanently discussing our campaign, trying to improve it! Also we feel it is essential to discuss the campaign with you guys, the participants, since you are the backbone of it - thus this thread.
Thank you all for being with us!
I dont think you are doing it work honestly and the discussion is obviously not pointless. It was a bit provocative, but I stand by it that its not possible to define in a very clear way what a constructive post is.
I find it even more confusing now and I don't know if my posts are constructive or not. I don't post much in the Marketplace as I just find people out there posting on each newbie thread, use an escrow, you are selling fraudulent goods, nobody will go first and so on. I understand sometimes it is necessary to warn but if this gets repetitive, it appears as the member is spamming.
I have seen people get banned for those posts. Its fine to ask for escrow etc. if you want to trade, but if you just want to warn others use the trust system.
March 16, 2015, 03:45:29 PM
I find it even more confusing now and I don't know if my posts are constructive or not. I don't post much in the Marketplace as I just find people out there posting on each newbie thread, use an escrow, you are selling fraudulent goods, nobody will go first and so on. I understand sometimes it is necessary to warn but if this gets repetitive, it appears as the member is spamming.
March 16, 2015, 03:37:01 PM
If we review your overall post history and assign post count according to that, will it be acceptable to everyone?
Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.
If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?
Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.
Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.
If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?
Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.
I'd probably quit the campaign with uncertainty. I'm certain that I don't post crap for raising my amount of posts. I'm renting out my signature space because it's a nice way to rake in some coin, I wouldn't be hurt if I wouldn't get the payments, when I wouldn't rent it out at least.
But mainly, I want the payment to be fair. The effort to check up with rules, check payouts and also have to add the "perceived value"of the posts would start to be too much. Then I'd go for a lower paying campaign or just quit altogether.
See it like this:
If one would post in a certain thread, have a world shocking post, really have a lot of people thinking etc. 10 out of 10.
Let's say you accept 4 out of 10 as minimum post quality and this user would after his rocking the world post 3 posts that -to you- are a 3. See the example that i gave before, that post is (at least I think that is to the thread/readers) a 7. You could easily see it as a 3 because you don't take the time to read the context around the post. This user would get 1 out of his 4 posts paid. Another user that has 4 posts with quality 4 would get all 4 posts paid.
I don't think it's reasonable to keep these "high but unspecified" quality rules while you're not wanting to check the context of a post. In that sense I'm with some other posters in this thread, rules should be clear. Telling me that my posts are low-quality (as the Q in the spreadsheet suggests) annoys me because it's unspecific. I'm ok with wearing your company name on all the posts I make now including all the ones I've made on this forum before. Getting a "we accept X out of your Y posts, the rest is not up to our standards" notice isn't a way to go for me.
March 16, 2015, 02:31:47 PM
If we review your overall post history and assign post count according to that, will it be acceptable to everyone?
Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.
If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?
Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.
Example, xyz is seen as a constructive poster. 95% of the total posts made are counted.
abc doesn't make any real constructive posts. 45% are counted.
If we do the counting like this, by checking the details of a post and coming to a conclusion and assigning a percentage to the user, will it be okay?
Well, some of the posters will ask which posts you did not count, what is wrong with that post, did you include this one and will have to answer them. So wanted to know your opinion.
March 16, 2015, 02:26:32 PM
I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/constructive.png
http://xkcd.com/810/
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/constructive.png
http://xkcd.com/810/
I get your point.
What we did was that, we gave them a chance to improve. To show that this is not what we are looking for, not what the community wants.
If we only give spots to those who post well, others will never improve.
Yes, we are slowly getting more strict on enrollment.. The change will be noticeable from next week.
March 16, 2015, 02:23:35 PM
Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive. Then apply those rules.
One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post
Agree with both of this
Direct short answer could never be judged as non constructive, a short reply but if that is what the answer of the question will be then i will consider it as to be constructive
Ground rules, seems a good idea. Can you give me a few examples?
Like I can't say no +1 posts, etc.? It also depends on individual opinion. If I set down a rules, a few will like it, others won't. So, in the first weeks, I will not be so direct and precise. Constructive posts is a relative subject that varies from person to person. It is practically impossible to set down clear cut rules for that. But, you can certainly give some examples, and we will surely consider it.
The counting is not based on length. (I think I already said that a million times already, lol), if it was it is very easy to do the counting. It can be fully automated. That is not how it is done.
(But if you see all 20 posts in first page as one-liners and the ones are completely useless ones, what can you do?)
Simple and clear rules are the way to go. Right now they aren't because you said that you don't want people to post a lot in politics or news sections but on the other hand will count the posts if there's not a lot of them. How many are they allowed to make? 1, 5, or maybe it's counted as a percentage, so 5%? This is ambiguous to say the least. Either pick sections you want them to post in or let them to do it as they please.
I just mentioned it. It was not a rule, just a suggestion. As long as it is less than around 50%, it will be counted. I just added it since 2 of the prevoius week's participants had almost 90%+ of their posts there. And it didn't seem not very good to put them at the same level with those who posted good, constructive ones in the Maketplace boards.
It is just a mere suggestion, like we prefer posts in the marketplace section.
I wanted to change it, but I thought it is best to do so, when the net period starts. I don't want to make changes in the middle of the campaign and confuse people.
March 16, 2015, 12:18:57 PM
Simple and clear rules are the way to go. Right now they aren't because you said that you don't want people to post a lot in politics or news sections but on the other hand will count the posts if there's not a lot of them. How many are they allowed to make? 1, 5, or maybe it's counted as a percentage, so 5%? This is ambiguous to say the least. Either pick sections you want them to post in or let them to do it as they please.
March 16, 2015, 10:21:14 AM
Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive. Then apply those rules.
One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post
Agree with both of this
Direct short answer could never be judged as non constructive, a short reply but if that is what the answer of the question will be then i will consider it as to be constructive
March 16, 2015, 09:44:18 AM
Honestly, I think that if I were you, I'd try to work out ground rules for things that are clearly unconstructive. Then apply those rules. There's obviously going to be some gray area on this topic and I think if you shoot for getting rid of the clearly unconstructive then that will be basically as good as you can do without becoming very controversial.
One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post. If I'm asking something like "how do you start bitcoind so it's listening on a particular port for RPC commands?" then a really constructive reply might only be a few characters long "$ bitcoind -daemon ...". You could say that a longer reply would be even more constructive (explaining what the various command line options mean) however the simple, direct answer is really quite constructive.
I think this kind of thing illustrates what I mean about looking instead for clearly unconstructive posts and trying to rule them out.
Cheers!
One little addendum, I would definitely say that you can't judge based on length of post. If I'm asking something like "how do you start bitcoind so it's listening on a particular port for RPC commands?" then a really constructive reply might only be a few characters long "$ bitcoind -daemon ...". You could say that a longer reply would be even more constructive (explaining what the various command line options mean) however the simple, direct answer is really quite constructive.
I think this kind of thing illustrates what I mean about looking instead for clearly unconstructive posts and trying to rule them out.
Cheers!
March 16, 2015, 07:24:40 AM
I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://xkcd.com/810/
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://xkcd.com/810/
I wouldn't call this discussion pointless mate, since there are very interesting thoughts popping up from the very same community we prefer to be part of our campaign. But I agree with certain points you made: i.e. to allow a constructive poster to participate, even if there are only 25 or 30 posts per week. Also our goal is to have permanent participants, with very few leaving. That will surely make it in the weeks to come hard to join, since there wouldn't be many free spots.
ndnhc and I are permanently discussing our campaign, trying to improve it! Also we feel it is essential to discuss the campaign with you guys, the participants, since you are the backbone of it - thus this thread.
Thank you all for being with us!
March 16, 2015, 06:23:34 AM
I think this discussion is pointless, because IMHO you can not and do not want to define what a constructive post is. You are looking for people that post constructively, that are engaging in discussions and the community at large. A single post can not reflect that and it makes no sense to get picky over this post or that post. If you look at a few pages of someones post history you will know who they are.
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://xkcd.com/810/
There are certainly borderline cases and IMHO it makes sense to consider handpicking campaigners as a manager. Instead of allowing everyone to join and weed out the spammers later, take a lengthy look when someone is applying. Consider whether you want that person to respresent your business. This might even exclude constructive posters when their main section is not appealing for you to advertise in. Once they are in, payment might include all posts, because it is only natural to have a few weak ones. Should this the posting behaviour change exclusion is always an option. I also think its important to remove an minimum posting requirement, but I dont think its a big issue. Yes, I personally tend to have no problem to reach a certain limit, but I also would not want to think reaching it. Just pay a overal constructive poster for 45 posts even though 5 are of low quality and the minimum is 50. The alternative is that they either leave the campaign, feel pressured to post more - which will only lower the quality - or they dont care - which is probably rare.
I think the only thing that can improve the reputation of signature campaigns is when its hard to join. Hard as in you need a history of beeing constructive and engaged and not hard as in there is only a limited number of spots. If spammers start to fake engagement everyone profits.
http://xkcd.com/810/
March 16, 2015, 01:59:24 AM
Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.
--snip--
Speakers Percentage Speakers Percentage Speakers
1 Hindi languages[6] 422,048,642 41.03% 329,518,087 39.29% 366 M
2 Bengali 83,369,769 8.11% 69,595,738 8.30% 207 M
LOL! The main reason Hindi is considered to be our local language because of the Bollywood (Hindi Film Industry) and so Indian TV serials are also in Hindi langauges. "Hindi is the most widespread language of India" as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India
Bollywood is not the only film industry in India. You are ignoring Kollywood (lol, I like they way they put that 'ollywood') that is the Tamil film Industry which is also very famous. That is just one among many.
TV serials are also in any other language just as it is in Hindi. There are thousands of channels that are in other Indian languages, lol.
Hindi is prevalent mostly in north.
You're not wrong in saying Hindi is the most spoken language in India.
But most internet users in India are well versed in English and they use English as the main communication language on internet, regardless of their native tongue (unlike China, where most users use Chinese). Hindi is a pain in the butt to type on keyboard, too.
And especially the ones interested in Bitcoins - and part of this forum - come from well educated background and English is their main communication language on internet.
I'm not saying this to include the India forum in post count; if other local boards are excluded, India should be excluded too. I just wanted everyone to know the facts about Hindi and English in India when it comes to internet.
But most internet users in India are well versed in English and they use English as the main communication language on internet, regardless of their native tongue (unlike China, where most users use Chinese). Hindi is a pain in the butt to type on keyboard, too.
And especially the ones interested in Bitcoins - and part of this forum - come from well educated background and English is their main communication language on internet.
I'm not saying this to include the India forum in post count; if other local boards are excluded, India should be excluded too. I just wanted everyone to know the facts about Hindi and English in India when it comes to internet.
Yeah, Local boards (India) are excluded just like any other local boards are.
March 16, 2015, 12:03:06 AM
Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.
Rank Language 2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 ) 1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988) Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers Percentage Speakers Percentage Speakers
1 Hindi languages[6] 422,048,642 41.03% 329,518,087 39.29% 366 M
2 Bengali 83,369,769 8.11% 69,595,738 8.30% 207 M
3 Telugu 74,002,856 7.19% 66,017,615 7.87% 69.7 M
4 Marathi 71,936,894 6.99% 62,481,681 7.45% 68.0 M
5 Tamil 60,793,814 5.91% 53,006,368 6.32% 66.0 M
6 Urdu 51,536,111 5.01% 43,406,932 5.18% 60.3 M
7 Gujarati 46,091,617 4.48% 40,673,814 4.85% 46.1 M
8 Kannada 37,924,011 3.69% 32,753,676 3.91% 35.3 M
9 Malayalam 33,066,392 3.21% 30,377,176 3.62% 35.7 M
10 Oriya 33,017,446 3.21% 28,061,313 3.35% 32.3 M
11 Punjabi 29,102,477 2.83% 23,378,744 2.79% 57.1 M
12 Assamese 13,168,484 1.28% 13,079,696 1.56% 15.4 M
13 Maithili 12,179,122 1.18% 7,766,921 0.926% 24.2 M
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India
Rank Language 2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 ) 1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988) Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers Percentage Speakers Percentage Speakers
1 Hindi languages[6] 422,048,642 41.03% 329,518,087 39.29% 366 M
2 Bengali 83,369,769 8.11% 69,595,738 8.30% 207 M
3 Telugu 74,002,856 7.19% 66,017,615 7.87% 69.7 M
4 Marathi 71,936,894 6.99% 62,481,681 7.45% 68.0 M
5 Tamil 60,793,814 5.91% 53,006,368 6.32% 66.0 M
6 Urdu 51,536,111 5.01% 43,406,932 5.18% 60.3 M
7 Gujarati 46,091,617 4.48% 40,673,814 4.85% 46.1 M
8 Kannada 37,924,011 3.69% 32,753,676 3.91% 35.3 M
9 Malayalam 33,066,392 3.21% 30,377,176 3.62% 35.7 M
10 Oriya 33,017,446 3.21% 28,061,313 3.35% 32.3 M
11 Punjabi 29,102,477 2.83% 23,378,744 2.79% 57.1 M
12 Assamese 13,168,484 1.28% 13,079,696 1.56% 15.4 M
13 Maithili 12,179,122 1.18% 7,766,921 0.926% 24.2 M
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India
You're not wrong in saying Hindi is the most spoken language in India.
But most internet users in India are well versed in English and they use English as the main communication language on internet, regardless of their native tongue (unlike China, where most users use Chinese). Hindi is a pain in the butt to type on keyboard, too.
And especially the ones interested in Bitcoins - and part of this forum - come from well educated background and English is their main communication language on internet.
I'm not saying this to include the India forum in post count; if other local boards are excluded, India should be excluded too. I just wanted everyone to know the facts about Hindi and English in India when it comes to internet.
March 15, 2015, 04:11:47 PM
Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.
Rank Language 2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 ) 1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988) Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers Percentage Speakers Percentage Speakers
1 Hindi languages[6] 422,048,642 41.03% 329,518,087 39.29% 366 M
2 Bengali 83,369,769 8.11% 69,595,738 8.30% 207 M
3 Telugu 74,002,856 7.19% 66,017,615 7.87% 69.7 M
4 Marathi 71,936,894 6.99% 62,481,681 7.45% 68.0 M
5 Tamil 60,793,814 5.91% 53,006,368 6.32% 66.0 M
6 Urdu 51,536,111 5.01% 43,406,932 5.18% 60.3 M
7 Gujarati 46,091,617 4.48% 40,673,814 4.85% 46.1 M
8 Kannada 37,924,011 3.69% 32,753,676 3.91% 35.3 M
9 Malayalam 33,066,392 3.21% 30,377,176 3.62% 35.7 M
10 Oriya 33,017,446 3.21% 28,061,313 3.35% 32.3 M
11 Punjabi 29,102,477 2.83% 23,378,744 2.79% 57.1 M
12 Assamese 13,168,484 1.28% 13,079,696 1.56% 15.4 M
13 Maithili 12,179,122 1.18% 7,766,921 0.926% 24.2 M
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India
[/quote]
LOL! The main reason Hindi is considered to be our local language because of the Bollywood (Hindi Film Industry) and so Indian TV serials are also in Hindi langauges. "Hindi is the most widespread language of India" as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India
March 15, 2015, 04:06:30 PM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10772479
This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.
It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.
Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.
Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.
This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.
It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.
Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.
Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.
Okay, in a way what you said is right. But it is not practicable for us to go through each thread a user posted. Last week, we paid out 1300+ posts, lol, (that is just constructive ones). It is near impossible to do so.
Yes, signature is visible to all. But, if the user spams a lot, the user as well as the campaign looses credibility. Most importantly, it is our duty to keep the forum clean, useful, and constructive
They are included already. (bolded ones)
Thank you
March 15, 2015, 03:58:09 PM
I have already complained about this last week and I will again because I've seen a comment that it's bad to write "one liners". What is a one liner? I have a big screen and can fit over 35 words in a single line, so most of my posts are one liners. Short posts can be constructive, so either you as the manager will read every single post and decide if it is relevant to the topic, or just choose the easy way and pick a minimum number of characters or words (like Bitmixer does) and we'll try to comply.
I think that short sentences can be brilliant and genius sometimes. Lets not judge posts by their length. After all some of the best quotes in history are just 'one liners'.
Example, quote by Satoshi Nakamoto from Feb. 14, 2010:
"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."
By your standard ndnhc would you consider this post a spam and useless if it was post written by one of the users enrolled in DaDice campaign?
No, we don't consider one-liners as non-constructive. There seems to be a misunderstanding about this. It just happens that some of them had their entire posts just one sentence. (They got banned later). You can see we have counted one-liner posts if it provides something constructive to the topic.
Similarly, we don't consider a post constructive if it says simply 'Congrats on winning this', by just copying the above post probably.
Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
The fact is that Indian users should usually talk in Hindi (local language) in the Local boards section but they talk only in English for everyone to understand it. If that's the case in other Local sections where users make posts in English, it would be more relevant for the admin also to add that section.
Why? Hindi is only the language spoken by the majority.
Rank Language 2001 census[3]
(total population 1,028,610,328 ) 1991 census[4]
(total population 838,583,988) Encarta 2007 estimate[5]
(worldwide speakers)
Speakers Percentage Speakers Percentage Speakers
1 Hindi languages[6] 422,048,642 41.03% 329,518,087 39.29% 366 M
2 Bengali 83,369,769 8.11% 69,595,738 8.30% 207 M
3 Telugu 74,002,856 7.19% 66,017,615 7.87% 69.7 M
4 Marathi 71,936,894 6.99% 62,481,681 7.45% 68.0 M
5 Tamil 60,793,814 5.91% 53,006,368 6.32% 66.0 M
6 Urdu 51,536,111 5.01% 43,406,932 5.18% 60.3 M
7 Gujarati 46,091,617 4.48% 40,673,814 4.85% 46.1 M
8 Kannada 37,924,011 3.69% 32,753,676 3.91% 35.3 M
9 Malayalam 33,066,392 3.21% 30,377,176 3.62% 35.7 M
10 Oriya 33,017,446 3.21% 28,061,313 3.35% 32.3 M
11 Punjabi 29,102,477 2.83% 23,378,744 2.79% 57.1 M
12 Assamese 13,168,484 1.28% 13,079,696 1.56% 15.4 M
13 Maithili 12,179,122 1.18% 7,766,921 0.926% 24.2 M
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.
For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
Yeah, this is the reason why we decided to exclude the local board (India)
-snip-
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
I just included that since I saw two posters who posted almost 100% of their posts there If I made just a few posts there, it will be included as usual in full. But we don't want too many posts there, since the active members of that particular boards are not very likely to be interested in playing dice
March 15, 2015, 03:53:59 PM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10772479
This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.
It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.
Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.
Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.
This post, in itself is short. Someone claims that LTCGear (who's not paying out, for who's not up to speed, already since end of december) is selling again after a week of downtime. The site finally shows content again, changes have been made, hopefully in 18 hours it'll be possible to see payable amounts, I'm very close to switching from "still waiting" to "losing patience" but unlike others I'm not on the full retard OMGITSASCAM stance. Yet. That said, this specific thread explodes once several people start throwing around FUD. So although it's a short post, without much big news/insight in it, it's valuable to the thread as people won't start swearing/ranting since the claim "OMG OMG OMG HE'S SELLING AGAIN, HE'S A PONZI" is debunked with my post.
It's valuable to the thread, people who only read the thread will see this as balanced and relevant to the thread.
Another thing you shouldn't forgot though is that if you have a Sr member showing your signature, this signature is visible on -ALL- the posts of that member. In my case for example that's 861 links to you website throughout the whole forum. Anyone looking for information on the 5 chip Gridseeds will probably hit a few of my posts, I've been active in the Minera thread, I've talked a lot about group buys, any of those will show your signature. So besides the content of the current posts, you're advertising in a lot more places. I do see that stuff like off-topic and ponzi is easy to throw out, but for example altcoin or general bitcoin discussion, I do see as possible valuable.
Then again, +1, smileys and such are logic to be "unpaid", they don't add anything to the thread.
March 15, 2015, 03:09:45 PM
-snip-
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Is Bitcoins discussion section excluded? If so then I probably have made 0 posts till now
"Too many posts in Politics and Society, Press or related boards is not preferable."
Say if I hypothetically posted 100 posts during the week how many of these posts I can write in News or Politics? 10%, 20%, 30%? It is a thin line here.
March 15, 2015, 02:45:09 PM
-snip-
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world...Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Is Bitcoins discussion section excluded? If so then I probably have made 0 posts till now
March 15, 2015, 02:37:39 PM
-snip-
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
It is funny how in one week you exclude one section of the forum and then another section in next week. I have no problem with Off-topic section or games and rounds, and Ponzi section that is actually beneficial for everyone. But cutting off Politics and Society is weird, and now you don't even us to post in Bitcoin's News section? I never seen any campaign doing that. And I like, from time to time, post my comments about latest news from bitcoin's world... Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
March 15, 2015, 02:25:02 PM
Would it not be unfair to the other ethnic group and users of different language than english? It will make users from India more privileged than rest of us.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
The fact is that Indian users should usually talk in Hindi (local language) in the Local boards section but they talk only in English for everyone to understand it. If that's the case in other Local sections where users make posts in English, it would be more relevant for the admin also to add that section.
March 15, 2015, 01:53:03 PM
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.
For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
You are probably right.
But for a moderator whose native language is English, it is easy to eveluate quality of posts in English boards opposite to other local languages.
But it is a call that ndnhc needs to take after all.
March 15, 2015, 01:41:05 PM
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.
For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.
I wouldn't be able to write in my local board but Indian users will? I only post in english so I don't have problem with that but others may think that it is unfair.
March 15, 2015, 01:35:04 PM
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
I would like to suggest any local boards should be INCLUDED as fas as the language is English.
For example you'll see some quality discussion going on in Indian forum which is all in English and appeals global audience.
March 15, 2015, 01:13:54 PM
I have already complained about this last week and I will again because I've seen a comment that it's bad to write "one liners". What is a one liner? I have a big screen and can fit over 35 words in a single line, so most of my posts are one liners. Short posts can be constructive, so either you as the manager will read every single post and decide if it is relevant to the topic, or just choose the easy way and pick a minimum number of characters or words (like Bitmixer does) and we'll try to comply.
indeed short post can be constructive, i believe ndnhc wont be excluding your post just because only it is a one liner post
example of non constructive oneliner according to me is this
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10760136
how I see this being non constructive
because either that post is in the topic or not in the topic, it doesnt contribute anything
March 15, 2015, 01:11:02 PM
I have already complained about this last week and I will again because I've seen a comment that it's bad to write "one liners". What is a one liner? I have a big screen and can fit over 35 words in a single line, so most of my posts are one liners. Short posts can be constructive, so either you as the manager will read every single post and decide if it is relevant to the topic, or just choose the easy way and pick a minimum number of characters or words (like Bitmixer does) and we'll try to comply.
I think that short sentences can be brilliant and genius sometimes. Lets not judge posts by their length. After all some of the best quotes in history are just 'one liners'.
Example, quote by Satoshi Nakamoto from Feb. 14, 2010:
"I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume."
By your standard ndnhc would you consider this post a spam and useless if it was post written by one of the users enrolled in DaDice campaign?
March 15, 2015, 12:53:23 PM
I have already complained about this last week and I will again because I've seen a comment that it's bad to write "one liners". What is a one liner? I have a big screen and can fit over 35 words in a single line, so most of my posts are one liners. Short posts can be constructive, so either you as the manager will read every single post and decide if it is relevant to the topic, or just choose the easy way and pick a minimum number of characters or words (like Bitmixer does) and we'll try to comply.
March 15, 2015, 12:42:32 PM
Ndnhc, thanks for starting this discussion. It concerns me that a lot of very senior people on this forum feel the quality of the forum has declined due to the ad campaign posters. Additionally, I'm thrilled that ad campaigns exist so I (and others) can participate in the bitcoin community without having the money to buy bitcoin but through service, work. It's important for us as ad campaign participants to take responsibility for our work, presence, and impact with the forum. We can make change to improve ad campaigns or we can ignore change and watch ad campaigns get abolished.
Thanks to Ndnhc for taking a lead on fixing the issues and tension, particularly since he/she leads/admins a major ad campaign.
Thanks to Ndnhc for taking a lead on fixing the issues and tension, particularly since he/she leads/admins a major ad campaign.
Yeah I must say that ndnhc has taken the correct step here. People should not merely post for their post count and pay rate to be increased but should gain information and share their information on this forum. This way the forum also would benefit and the campaigns too
March 15, 2015, 12:37:29 PM
That is really a great explanation, lol
Thanks That is what exactly we are looking for..
Comparison:
shulio #20, 19, 17, 16, 15, 12, 4 and 3
Harry Hood #2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, and 20
lol, he made a few posts today. Now pretty confusing to know. (I will check the time of the post to get the real data)
Cheers
ndnhc
Thanks
That is what exactly we are looking for..Comparison:
shulio #20, 19, 17, 16, 15, 12, 4 and 3
Harry Hood #2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, and 20
lol, he made a few posts today. Now pretty confusing to know. (I will check the time of the post to get the real data)
Cheers
ndnhc
that is what I said, the meaning of constructive post can be different to each one another, since there is no actual definition of it , one person opinion about a post could be different, he could be thinking his post was constructive enough while the others dont see it to be constructive
March 15, 2015, 12:10:38 PM
Ndnhc, thanks for starting this discussion. It concerns me that a lot of very senior people on this forum feel the quality of the forum has declined due to the ad campaign posters. Additionally, I'm thrilled that ad campaigns exist so I (and others) can participate in the bitcoin community without having the money to buy bitcoin but through service, work. It's important for us as ad campaign participants to take responsibility for our work, presence, and impact with the forum. We can make change to improve ad campaigns or we can ignore change and watch ad campaigns get abolished.
Thanks to Ndnhc for taking a lead on fixing the issues and tension, particularly since he/she leads/admins a major ad campaign.
Thanks to Ndnhc for taking a lead on fixing the issues and tension, particularly since he/she leads/admins a major ad campaign.
March 15, 2015, 11:33:12 AM
From these i'd exclude #2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, and 20. (I know you ask for the count that are constructive, but the first person to respond to this above listed in terms of exclusions. I'll do the same for comparisons sake.)
Great discussion idea, this is what we need. There's been a lot of discussion among the Admin, Moderator, Staff folks but not much from the community of ad campaign participants. If we discuss it and understand what we as a community deem constructive (vs. not) I think we'll all be able to improve the posts and reduce the tension.
For me, a constructive post needs to:
1) Push the discussion further. This could be through offering additional insight or facts or by asking relevant questions that haven't been asked yet. (E.g., even easy questions to ask but appropriate for the discussion are constructive b/c there are a lot of newer forum members here, they have a right to learn (as much as we did when we were new))
2) Come across positively, attitude comes into play, being argumentative doesn't help any discussion (be it at the bar or over coffee or on this forum) so a positive, friendly attitude is also important to making the post constructive.
3) Not repeat what people who posted earlier have said, a lot of posters poach an easy newbie question to answer so they just reply quick without reading through to see if the question has been answered, this is a key indicator of post count boosting rather than reading and contributing to a thread.
I look forward to reading this discussion and I'd also welcome any feedback on my recent posts!
That is really a great explanation, lol
Thanks
That is what exactly we are looking for..Comparison:
shulio #20, 19, 17, 16, 15, 12, 4 and 3
Harry Hood #2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, and 20
lol, he made a few posts today. Now pretty confusing to know. (I will check the time of the post to get the real data)
Cheers
ndnhc
March 15, 2015, 10:14:34 AM
Thanks
Out of the last 20 posts here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/mishax1-125554 , for instance, (if you take all boards as included except the ones in the dadice campaign thread), how many posts will you consider as constructive?
From these i'd exclude #2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18, and 20. (I know you ask for the count that are constructive, but the first person to respond to this above listed in terms of exclusions. I'll do the same for comparisons sake.)
Great discussion idea, this is what we need. There's been a lot of discussion among the Admin, Moderator, Staff folks but not much from the community of ad campaign participants. If we discuss it and understand what we as a community deem constructive (vs. not) I think we'll all be able to improve the posts and reduce the tension.
For me, a constructive post needs to:
1) Push the discussion further. This could be through offering additional insight or facts or by asking relevant questions that haven't been asked yet. (E.g., even easy questions to ask but appropriate for the discussion are constructive b/c there are a lot of newer forum members here, they have a right to learn (as much as we did when we were new))
2) Come across positively, attitude comes into play, being argumentative doesn't help any discussion (be it at the bar or over coffee or on this forum) so a positive, friendly attitude is also important to making the post constructive.
3) Not repeat what people who posted earlier have said, a lot of posters poach an easy newbie question to answer so they just reply quick without reading through to see if the question has been answered, this is a key indicator of post count boosting rather than reading and contributing to a thread.
I look forward to reading this discussion and I'd also welcome any feedback on my recent posts!
March 15, 2015, 05:37:45 AM
Can you have a look at my posting as well? I would like to know if my posts are constructive or appearing spammy
I think most signature campaign managers obviously rule out posts like a smiley, +1, and one word posts. Apart from those they probably have a minimum word count and require the post to have some bearing on the thread's topic. I saw one post that was cut and pasted words from a song. That's the kind of thing that would get disqualified.
Well, I got to get more opinions so that we can improve our counting. lol, I couldn't find this and didn't know it was moved from Services section to Meta. Had to gt herre form recent posts. Will put a link in our campaign thread to get more opinions
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Maybe you should change the title to Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign)
If this is specific to the signature campaign, Marketplace --> Service Discussion would be the right place for this thread.
Yeah, I guess. Initially it was not intended to be relating to dadice campaign. Now I think, it is.
I will move it to Service Discussion and change the title.
Thanks
I think this should be directed to all signature campaigners, due to the recent events of alot of campaigners banned because of insubstantial post + sig adds, campaign manager on the other hands should be strict to this issue, there are quite some signature campaigns that dont check the post quality of their campaigner
Well, I got to get more opinions so that we can improve our counting. lol, I couldn't find this and didn't know it was moved from Services section to Meta. Had to gt herre form recent posts. Will put a link in our campaign thread to get more opinions
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Maybe you should change the title to Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign)
If this is specific to the signature campaign, Marketplace --> Service Discussion would be the right place for this thread.
Yeah, I guess. Initially it was not intended to be relating to dadice campaign. Now I think, it is.
I will move it to Service Discussion and change the title.
Thanks
Well, I got to get more opinions so that we can improve our counting. lol, I couldn't find this and didn't know it was moved from Services section to Meta. Had to gt herre form recent posts. Will put a link in our campaign thread to get more opinions
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
Maybe you should change the title to Let us define constructive posts (wrt DaDice signature campaign)
If this is specific to the signature campaign, Marketplace --> Service Discussion would be the right place for this thread.
--snip--
for me, constructive would be either your post give a contribution to the topic or not
in other words, we can just imagine, did our post actually give up worthy opinion for the discussion topic on the thread or answer up question related to the discussion topic
Thanks
Out of the last 20 posts here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/mishax1-125554 , for instance, (if you take all boards as included except the ones in the dadice campaign thread), how many posts will you consider as constructive?
Im not in a position to judge, since i mself consider that not all of my post can be considered constructive too and also the words "constructive post" in this forum cannot be define acutally , because it is due to the preference and judgement of some people are slighty different one another
I will personally exclude #20, 19, 17, 16, 15, 12, 4 and 3 as being not constructive enough, since im not in a position to judge as mine was not better than any top poster in this meta board
Thanks for your opinion
He had posted that he considers at least 90%+ of his posts to be constructive. That is why I just asked
Well, I got to get more opinions so that we can improve our counting. lol, I couldn't find this and didn't know it was moved from Services section to Meta. Had to gt herre form recent posts. Will put a link in our campaign thread to get more opinions
Edit: Would also like any suggestions on including and excluding boards.
--snip--
for me, constructive would be either your post give a contribution to the topic or not
in other words, we can just imagine, did our post actually give up worthy opinion for the discussion topic on the thread or answer up question related to the discussion topic
Thanks
Out of the last 20 posts here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/mishax1-125554 , for instance, (if you take all boards as included except the ones in the dadice campaign thread), how many posts will you consider as constructive?
Im not in a position to judge, since i mself consider that not all of my post can be considered constructive too and also the words "constructive post" in this forum cannot be define acutally , because it is due to the preference and judgement of some people are slighty different one another
I will personally exclude #20, 19, 17, 16, 15, 12, 4 and 3 as being not constructive enough, since im not in a position to judge as mine was not better than any top poster in this meta board
--snip--
for me, constructive would be either your post give a contribution to the topic or not
in other words, we can just imagine, did our post actually give up worthy opinion for the discussion topic on the thread or answer up question related to the discussion topic
Thanks
Out of the last 20 posts here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/mishax1-125554 , for instance, (if you take all boards as included except the ones in the dadice campaign thread), how many posts will you consider as constructive?
Constructive is a relative term and it differs from person to person. I am making this thread to get an idea (for me and for the readers) what posts are generally accepted as constructive and which are not.
While making the spreadsheet for the dadice campaign, I found a way to check the board of posting and also the number of characters in a post. But how can it know which is constructive, which is not?
I always wondered how bit-x bot uses differentiates between both. I think they merely check the number of characters and at the end of the period they check the recent posts of relevant pariticpants and take a percentage of their post count as not-constructive, deduct it and payout for the rest.
Any way to do this?
(We won't make the ultimate count automated, but it will be better if we show approximately how many posts will be counted in real time)
Let me know your thoughts
To post what you think as constructive and what as not, quote a post and say whether it is constructive, why/ why not you consider it so. Try not to quote your own posts.
(Please don't be offended if someone quotes your post as not constructive. It is just a chance to know what people think and how you can improve)
Thank you
While making the spreadsheet for the dadice campaign, I found a way to check the board of posting and also the number of characters in a post. But how can it know which is constructive, which is not?
I always wondered how bit-x bot uses differentiates between both. I think they merely check the number of characters and at the end of the period they check the recent posts of relevant pariticpants and take a percentage of their post count as not-constructive, deduct it and payout for the rest.
Any way to do this?
(We won't make the ultimate count automated, but it will be better if we show approximately how many posts will be counted in real time)
Let me know your thoughts
To post what you think as constructive and what as not, quote a post and say whether it is constructive, why/ why not you consider it so. Try not to quote your own posts.
(Please don't be offended if someone quotes your post as not constructive. It is just a chance to know what people think and how you can improve)
Thank you
for me, constructive would be either your post give a contribution to the topic or not
in other words, we can just imagine, did our post actually give up worthy opinion for the discussion topic on the thread or answer up question related to the discussion topic
Constructive is a relative term and it differs from person to person. I am making this thread to get an idea (for me and for the readers) what posts are generally accepted as constructive and which are not.
While making the spreadsheet for the dadice campaign, I found a way to check the board of posting and also the number of characters in a post. But how can it know which is constructive, which is not?
I always wondered how bit-x bot uses differentiates between both. I think they merely check the number of characters and at the end of the period they check the recent posts of relevant pariticpants and take a percentage of their post count as not-constructive, deduct it and payout for the rest.
Any way to do this?
(We won't make the ultimate count automated, but it will be better if we show approximately how many posts will be counted in real time)
Let me know your thoughts
To post what you think as constructive and what as not, quote a post and say whether it is constructive, why/ why not you consider it so. Try not to quote your own posts.
(Please don't be offended if someone quotes your post as not constructive. It is just a chance to know what people think and how you can improve)
Thank you
While making the spreadsheet for the dadice campaign, I found a way to check the board of posting and also the number of characters in a post. But how can it know which is constructive, which is not?
I always wondered how bit-x bot uses differentiates between both. I think they merely check the number of characters and at the end of the period they check the recent posts of relevant pariticpants and take a percentage of their post count as not-constructive, deduct it and payout for the rest.
Any way to do this?
(We won't make the ultimate count automated, but it will be better if we show approximately how many posts will be counted in real time)
Let me know your thoughts
To post what you think as constructive and what as not, quote a post and say whether it is constructive, why/ why not you consider it so. Try not to quote your own posts.
(Please don't be offended if someone quotes your post as not constructive. It is just a chance to know what people think and how you can improve)
Thank you
Jump to: