I know you have a good intention on your suggestion, but I don't think it's gonna solve the problem.
One of the reasons why this forum is popular is because of the signature campaign, people came here not just to learn and participate in discussions but mostly to earn at the same time.
Limiting shitpost is the job of the mods, and I think they are already doing a great job as what I've read here and outside forum, they already keep deleting non sense posts, and I can also experience that, and I won't complain.
Topic: Limit signature campaigns - page 6. (Read 1570 times)
legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 4265
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Don't get it, so why quote reply me? What does your statement have to do with mine?
Technically POA aren't spam but they can be used to spam and when you see such cases you do the needful, report the post and add an indication, it's an account used for thread bumping then the account would be nuked. The cases you mention is just a bump service which they could choose any mention to bump a thread but decided to use POA. You should suggest a solution to that problem instead punishing all junior rank members. Lol you edited your reply,
. The suggestion might not be enough but it might do the trick, we have to try it out before we conclude. 
Make bitcoin paid signature campaigns the only acceptable campaign on the forum and the spam level will reduce by 90% or make Bitcoin & Ethereum. (BTC for Bitcoin service section and ETH for Altcoin service section). Now to get a 99% reduction of spamming, implement a new rule that get your signature wearing privileges remove for 3-12months based on your level of spam, when you're caught shitposting (having a certain number of good spam reports against your account). I'm positive a decent number of users would change their posting habbit just to avoid getting banned from wearing signature ads.
The fact is, we're in a time, were people tend to earn from any social media platforms they're on. We shouldn't denial them that privilege unless they're caught abusing the privilege.
Since 2018, the forum has changed and become better, there are less shitposts, but shitposts still be here if we look at patrol.The fact is, we're in a time, were people tend to earn from any social media platforms they're on. We shouldn't denial them that privilege unless they're caught abusing the privilege.
Furthermore, the most common type of shitposts nowadays are proof of authentication posts
New restriction on airdrops / proof of authentication posts. Is it real?
Reporting Proof Of Authentication posts
Thousands of bounty participants repeatedly make their POA each week. If we randomly choose one user whom makes POA from patrol., then check that user post history, we will likely more than 90% of posts in post history is POA posts.
Additionally, I think issues will be improved better if restricting rights to join bounties, campaigns for only Junior Members and above; or only Members and above.
In patrol, we can see most of POAs made by Newbies.
Edit because don't want to make new posts
I don't think this suggested solution is enough
Quote
Make bitcoin paid signature campaigns the only acceptable campaign on the forum and the spam level will reduce by 90% or make Bitcoin & Ethereum.
legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 4265
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Make bitcoin paid signature campaigns the only acceptable campaign on the forum and the spam level will reduce by 90% or make Bitcoin & Ethereum. (BTC for Bitcoin service section and ETH for Altcoin service section). Now to get a 99% reduction of spamming, implement a new rule that get your signature wearing privileges remove for 3-12months based on your level of spam, when you're caught shitposting (having a certain number of good spam reports against your account). I'm positive a decent number of users would change their posting habbit just to avoid getting banned from wearing signature ads.
The fact is, we're in a time, were people tend to earn from any social media platforms they're on. We shouldn't denial them that privilege unless they're caught abusing the privilege.
The fact is, we're in a time, were people tend to earn from any social media platforms they're on. We shouldn't denial them that privilege unless they're caught abusing the privilege.
these limitations you are proposing will actually make things a lot worse.
for example if someone was earning $10 and you limit it to $5 then they will create 2 accounts and now they have to spam twice as much. if you ban account buys it will just migrate to somewhere else and because of that ban (less supply) the price of such accounts shoot up so there will be more incentive to do account sells and more people would start doing it (farming accounts and selling them). the result is more spam, more merit abuse,...
for example if someone was earning $10 and you limit it to $5 then they will create 2 accounts and now they have to spam twice as much. if you ban account buys it will just migrate to somewhere else and because of that ban (less supply) the price of such accounts shoot up so there will be more incentive to do account sells and more people would start doing it (farming accounts and selling them). the result is more spam, more merit abuse,...
Disable signatures for a month. Please.
Disable both signatures, avatars, and personal texts, because people can get payments from their avatars or personal texts. Forum will look purely clean without signatures and avatars. 
Disable signatures for a month. Please.
Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason <...>
How can anyone impose bans on account sales? Admins definitely don't have the time to investigate all of the 2 Million+ accounts here, and people sell these accounts all across the internet. <...>Over 70% of registered profiles have never even posted on the forum and more than 159,000 profiles are banned. So the number of accounts that could potentially be for sale is far less than 2 millions.
And in my opinion, trading of Bitcointalk accounts can be forbidden on the forum itself with no difficulty.
I mean it's no secret that people shitpost for sig campaigns. I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.
This is a forum where people are free to share their opinion whether it is consider a spam or shitpost or not and who the hell wants to stop posting if they know that they are earning thru it?? Its like "You don't like to have Gold". Who doesn't want money . They will do anything just for money 
Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason
I think the negative trust of the sellers is good enough to say that these persons are not trustworthy therefore, they must avoid them at all costs. At this moment I don't see any solution to this spam problem rather than removing the signature campaign itself but for sure, the number of posts will decrease if that happen.
The easy way to limit those who want to shitpost is report the shitposts they made, if you found someone selling or buying an account you can try to make a thread on reputation board for further reviewing so that other DT members will create a flag or put a negative trust on him. If you come across those don't hesitate to report or post a topic, that way we can somehow minimize the spam.
Firstly, bounty hunters should read this thread: Signature Campaign Guidelines (read this before starting or joining a campaign)
Secondly, bounty managers should restrict appropriate maximum posts per week for their campaigns (their campaigns can be paid per posts or paid per week, but eligible maximum posts per week should be chosen appropriately).
Thirdly, bounty participants should have ability to keep in mind that campaigns don't ask them to hit maximum post-quota. They should try to only make posts if necessary. Without constructive ideas, it is better to solely read other posts, collect knowledge, information, ideas, useful sources, all of those ones will help participants have better ideas for their future posts.
Especially, they should pay more attention and more time to read this part:
Lastly, the forum has its report button.
To conclude, I don't think forum should have unofficial rules on maximum posts per day, per week.
Secondly, bounty managers should restrict appropriate maximum posts per week for their campaigns (their campaigns can be paid per posts or paid per week, but eligible maximum posts per week should be chosen appropriately).
Thirdly, bounty participants should have ability to keep in mind that campaigns don't ask them to hit maximum post-quota. They should try to only make posts if necessary. Without constructive ideas, it is better to solely read other posts, collect knowledge, information, ideas, useful sources, all of those ones will help participants have better ideas for their future posts.
Especially, they should pay more attention and more time to read this part:
Quote
Helpful suggestions:
• Firstly, just put some actual thought into your posts. Actually read the thread and the replies already posted. Often-times people will just read the title of the thread and post without fully understanding the topic or issue and make either irrelevant posts or say the same thing that has been said numerous times before.
• If somebody asks a specific question and it gets answered adequately within the first post or two nobody needs to read another ten replies saying the same thing just reworded slightly. If you cannot offer any additional info or clarify/correct something then you probably don't need to post it.
• If you struggle with English it's probably best to try stick to your Local boards. Your English does not need to be anywhere near perfect and you will not be penalised for this but if people generally can't understand what you're saying then it will likely be considered unsubstantial or spam.
• Short replies are not always bad and long ones are not always good. Sometimes all that is required is a simple one word yes or no response, but stretching out an answer just to appear constructive usually has the opposite effect.
• Firstly, just put some actual thought into your posts. Actually read the thread and the replies already posted. Often-times people will just read the title of the thread and post without fully understanding the topic or issue and make either irrelevant posts or say the same thing that has been said numerous times before.
• If somebody asks a specific question and it gets answered adequately within the first post or two nobody needs to read another ten replies saying the same thing just reworded slightly. If you cannot offer any additional info or clarify/correct something then you probably don't need to post it.
• If you struggle with English it's probably best to try stick to your Local boards. Your English does not need to be anywhere near perfect and you will not be penalised for this but if people generally can't understand what you're saying then it will likely be considered unsubstantial or spam.
• Short replies are not always bad and long ones are not always good. Sometimes all that is required is a simple one word yes or no response, but stretching out an answer just to appear constructive usually has the opposite effect.
Lastly, the forum has its report button.
To conclude, I don't think forum should have unofficial rules on maximum posts per day, per week.
...
I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.
...
I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.
...
It's totally nonsense! - By introducing such a ban you would limit the posting of the top 60 posters of this forum (from the chipmixer campaign) to 0.5 post per week while allowing shitposter from weak campaigns (or none) to post 100+ posts per week...
BTW nice nick ;-)
The problem is people shitpost for a lot of reasons. Some are promoting off forum sites by linking to it in their shitpost, some do so just to read how great they are, some because they think this is facebook. We have seen action when things are bad enough this year with campaigns and participants receiving temp bans, I think that sent a decent message out to most as we've seen people be more cautious about signing up blindly.
It doesn't matter the monetary limit you impose to someone it could be a couple weeks salary so they would gladly fill as many spots with alts and turn out garbage all week. If you want to make a difference, go around reporting posts, if their quality is poor it will result in them not being paid and losing the incentive.
Account sales suck, but not much can be done. People are willing to sell entire packages of personal documents for cash. So I don't think there is any reasonable level of precautions the forum could take to prevent someone from trading in accounts. At least now there is a good hacked recovery system to prevent hacked account sales as best can be done.
It doesn't matter the monetary limit you impose to someone it could be a couple weeks salary so they would gladly fill as many spots with alts and turn out garbage all week. If you want to make a difference, go around reporting posts, if their quality is poor it will result in them not being paid and losing the incentive.
Account sales suck, but not much can be done. People are willing to sell entire packages of personal documents for cash. So I don't think there is any reasonable level of precautions the forum could take to prevent someone from trading in accounts. At least now there is a good hacked recovery system to prevent hacked account sales as best can be done.
I mean it's no secret that people shitpost for sig campaigns. I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.
This isn't a freelancing place where people will stop doing what they do once they get paid. Limiting someone to post eliminates the whole purpose of a forum intended for discussion, regardless of how gruesome and clusterfuck of a spamhole the forum is. If there were an actual way of stopping spam, there'd be also no trolls, no memes, no nothing.Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason
I mean, if you can buy higher ranked accounts, well that kinda defeats the point of having ranking systems now doesn't it?
Sorry, I'm gonna keep this brief. I know there's been plenty of talking on this issue already.
How can anyone impose bans on account sales? Admins definitely don't have the time to investigate all of the 2 Million+ accounts here, and people sell these accounts all across the internet. I mean, if you can buy higher ranked accounts, well that kinda defeats the point of having ranking systems now doesn't it?
Sorry, I'm gonna keep this brief. I know there's been plenty of talking on this issue already.
Sorry to break this down to you, none of this would actually work or help reduce spam. Its good that you're trying to find out possibilities to stop or reduce spam, but just know that if it were possible it wold have been in action by now.
I mean it's no secret that people shitpost for sig campaigns. I think if we put a cap on their earnings, for example, once you've earned $5, you need to stop posting.
Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason
I mean, if you can buy higher ranked accounts, well that kinda defeats the point of having ranking systems now doesn't it?
Sorry, I'm gonna keep this brief. I know there's been plenty of talking on this issue already.
Also, impose bans on account sales on Bitcointalk, so people don't buy accounts to bypass restrictions on Newbie users that are there for a freaking reason
I mean, if you can buy higher ranked accounts, well that kinda defeats the point of having ranking systems now doesn't it?
Sorry, I'm gonna keep this brief. I know there's been plenty of talking on this issue already.
Jump to: