Topic: [List]Gambling Board Spammers; Concerns, Solutions & Suggestions - page 8. (Read 3671 times)

There is nothing wrong with the number of posts requirement; I can write top 20+ top quality gambling posts weekly without issue; even if the managers reduce it to 2 gambling posts per week, a shitposter without game knowledge will still shitpost; a self-moderated thread will help the managers, moderators, and make discussion easier. Even worse is word spinning, copy and pasting from bogus sources in the same thread.

You stated that the managers are not blind to catch spammers on their own, so I gave you the "report to moderator button" as an example to drag you through the mud.

Report to moderator button is not made for managers 

I doubt you even think before you write, and I don't know how you can be moderator to anyone, I would never hire you for anything.
If you don't understand my words written in English language maybe you should hire some translator to explain better what I wanted to say.
Have a wonderful day.

It's not up to campaign manager all the time I think. Sometimes, project representative also mention some rules and among them, I have always seen they have a high number of post requirements in gambling sector. Personally, I don’t like to force users to post on any section but projects requires a minimum number. Campaign manager can recommend to lower it which I did too but sometimes, you can't follow your own. You have to hear the project owner.

Maybe some campaign managers feel pressured in to filling slots therefore allow many things to take place which they normally would not. It depends on the campaign manager and also on the business being promoted. I agree, lowering payment and bonuses will probably bring an even lower quality of post from spammers but there is no easy solution except to self-moderate threads in boards where signature spammers and scammers are running riot.

I would rather emphasize here the responsibility of campaign managers who tolerate this type of spam posting. Most campaigns are run by casinos and gambling sites and it is to be expected that they want their signatures in the gambling section, but various bonuses only encourage additional spam. A lower payment rate will bring the lower quality of signature posters, in the end, less effort from the manager himself to check every post from every participant.

The gambling board is starting to look more and more like the bounties section which is completely moderated by the campaign managers.

Only shitposters would avoid writing in a self-moderated thread, and I never forced anyone to do so; I only offered a solution that would reduce spam to a bare minimum; isn't that worth a shot?

how do a locked thread create more spams? Do you read before you write? I doubt.

Why is there a "Report to moderator" button when they are not blind? The moderators cant start looking for spam posts on their own; they still need the assistance of the community. The same applies to managers; it is impossible to keep track of all their participants; they are not blind, but there is no harm in assisting them. They can't see everything on their own.

You can also have access to a locked topic content, I don't know there your misunderstanding is coming from!

your effort is appreciated

I'm sure there must be a stopped to spammers if they never change and keep making really bad posts especially when a number of posts are reported and deleted by moderators then that user will get a warning. Moderators will ban spamming users especially after a large number of their posts are deleted and moderators usually give them a temporary ban before banning the user permanently.


If more and more self-moderation thread remove a large number of spam posts from spammers then it will only reduce spam without any meaningful change to the culprit unless a neutral or negative tag is given (negative tags probably shouldn't be), but by reporting the post then there are two benefits to be had is taken and it is less spam because it is removed and chances of stopping spammers due to temporary ban or permanent ban. But I can totally understand why the OP is starting to worry about the gambling board so far and that's why many merit source will ignore that board.

Very nice issue raised here Op.

I have to agree and disagree on some of the issues you raised.

• I was an active user in the gambling discussion thread. I am not a gambler but I am a football lover and analyst, that was why I liked the board. Though I posted much there because my first three campaigns were all gambling campaigns (Rollbit, Blackjack and FortuneJack). It is sad that some people that has zero knowledge of the game comfortably drop nonsense and unrelated posts
• I personally feel that updating this thread and calling the users out would be enough punishment.  Then managers would likely visit the thread before accepting users.
• I do not buy the idea of self moderating the topics or locking the threads. The threads give me the idea of how long the forum has been. When I'm less busy I do visit page 5, 6, 20, etc of those 1000+ pages to read what happened then and have fun. I don't wish it should be locked

The best is to report as many as you can and also call out the individuals periodically.

Thank you for bringing discussion on this topic to a wider audience.

I cannot speak for others but I am glad I created self-moderated threads for sports discussions. There is no right or wrong way to move forward, it is all about opinions. If someone creates a thread and does not self-moderate then that is their decision and they can weigh up the pros and cons. The same applies for those that wish to post and read posts in those threads.

For me, I do not regret deciding to take action against spammers and low quality posts hence the statistics you posted where I deleted many posts. Having certain self-moderated threads for specific reasons makes sense just as having not having them in order threads/topics makes equal sense.

Your contributions in my Premier League thread was substantial and having those types of posts with detailed information and quality being drowned out by signature spammers is something that I prefer to avoid. I will continue with self-moderating several threads as the football, tennis and boxing gets going soon.

I have a fairly substantial ignore list and distrust list but I will go through the names you listed and add them if it is warranted therefore thank you for your efforts. As and when I have time I will continue to contribute in my own way to the community too

You're definitely right there, but most of those announcements are for crap projects, and I think it's become standard for that section to be a spam-infested, zero-value trap for shitposters and paid shills.  The gambling section(s) shouldn't be that way.

I'm not a gambler and generally don't visit either of the gambling-related sections except for when I'm doing post history reviews for members on request.  When I've done that I've noticed that I'm visiting threads that are hundreds of pages long sometimes.  It's almost like there are multiple Wall Observer threads there!  But like OP mentioned, there are so many campaigns that require posts in the gambling section that it's inevitable that threads with so many pages are going to attract the worst posters, as they know nobody is going to read anything they write.

Not sure if any changes are going to be made, but I'd certainly support everything OP is proposing, especially having to lock threads after a certain period of time.  OTOH, I have a feeling that those shitposters in campaigns will invariably find a way to get around whatever restrictions/changes that are imposed, since they still have to meet their post quota (and you know nothing's going to stop them from doing that).

It's impossible for everyone to start creating self-moderated threads and you can't force people to do it, if they simply don't want to do the moderating job.
You can have many threads like this but this won't change a thing if creator is not active and deleting stuff all the time.
This can have more negative sides with many members avoiding to write in self-moderated topics.

This would only create more spam, and it's just bandage solution that fixes nothing.
Creators of many topics are not active members so that would create a mess of many duplicate topics in forum.

I will repeat again that you can't force someone to self moderate thread if he doesn't want to do it.

Good managers are not blind and they can see who the spammers are.
You can report all post you consider to be spam, that is how you can improve the forum.

Without any consideration? No, I don't agree that that's the end goal of the self-moderation thread. But I don't need to go into detail about what thread self-moderation is because most people here already know it well. You shouldn't delete other people's posts because of differences of opinion, and this sometimes creates problems for self-moderation threads because rating the quality of posts is so subjective.

Do you mean to ask the admin to remove the report to moderator feature in the self-moderation thread? And that means only the OP is 100% responsible for maintaining the thread without moderator involvement? I thought it was impossible. Moderators should not escape the responsibility of moderating any thread regardless of whether it is a self-moderation thread or not.

Permission to comment on this, I hope I get a chair to sit down and express my opinion.

Discussing football is speculation because everyone has a different point of view in describing what they see in the game. Sometimes it's true sometimes it's not, and sometimes it's confusing because football is not a final mathematical theory. For example:1+1 I'm sure everyone will answer 2. And if anyone answers 100 then he must be admitted to a mental hospital.

In football, people will have different understandings, different theories, have favorite clubs, thoughts, and strategies, and also can be considered irrelevant to the discussion because we don't understand what he understands because football is knowledge, unlike Mathematics. Even though he is considered spam, it is possible that he is a person who is very attached to his football soul so he uses football threads as a place to pour his thoughts.
Various free speech in the football section and reported to moderators I think thousands of spam reports occur every day. Will the report be effective? I'm not sure about dropping one or two for this.

Just expressing opinion

+1

I am a football lover, so i will use the footballing threads in the gambling discussion section as an example, most of those threads are peculiar to a particular football league and the Champions league all season long, and a season lasts from August till May, that is about 10 months span, imagine if mods have to lock each thread that gets to its 50th page, mind you that it will get there (50 pages) pretty quickly as football discussions go on endlessly there, if that happens we would prolly have new topics created, locked and another created again in the same day, everyday. That will make matters worse, and i would not want that cause i am active in that section.

As for signature campaigns, we can't dictate what their requirements should be, there are quite a lot of users making more than 20+ constructive posts in the gambling discussion section, it is very easy to do if you love football or the dedicated thread of the sport you are commenting in. There will always be spammers, just as there are in every section, so the 'reporting' method should still suffice.

I don't like self moderating threads, gambling boards are not reputation boards full of trolls and drama, spam can be tackled by reporting to mods, Regardless members bet on soccer league or not, know about football or not, sometimes people who actually bet don't post in league thread, if indeed they are unfamiliar with the football league and spam is detected, it can be reported.

I often see moderated threads, sometimes the answers given by other members make sense, because of the dislike factor for that member the post can be deleted, I'm sure this often happens in moderation threads.

Regarding this topic, Honestly, I tend to agree to be reported and marked as spam neutral, as @actmyname did, when it comes to spam, the campaign manager can check the user profile before accepting as a participant, of course the decision is in the hands of the manager, if it is still accepted, of course it is not the participant's fault.
the manager is wrong, they already know the member is spamming, why was it accepted, so when they do the same thing over and over again, they just get a problem, it's clear that the spamer's profile is written.

---

I agree on this point.

A good move, even if it seems hard, is enough to make them realize and change, from spam for the better.

You've got two of the most active staff users on that section, so while they might not patrol it, they're definitely around acting upon things. I don't know so much about Cyrus, as I'm not overly familiar with their duties, but I know they're very active at the very least.

I've reported a few posts over the gambling section earlier. Varying of different types, some which I'd expect to get handled, and then others which might be somewhat borderline, which I'm somewhat expected to remain unhandled. Though, I do think they're pretty much saying nothing. I'll see how they get handled.

Yeah, we tend to avoid locking threads. In my head, locking is usually useful in certain circumstances, which to be honest I haven't really come across in the years I've been here. If a thread is that bad, it would probably be just as good to remove it completely. However, in almost all cases I'd say its better to remove the problems within the thread, than the thread itself, and that goes for locking too. Others might have varying different levels, but we don't see threads getting locked much so I expect they have a similar interpretation on that.

Signature campaign managers can specify whatever they want in their rules, as long as it doesn't break forum guidelines. To be honest, even if they had a minimum of 20 posts a week, certain users could easily do that, without spamming. Some already do. It's the outliers which are willing to pretty much pump out anything, while still remaining somewhat borderline in terms of spam.

Maybe I'm not smart or stupid about this. but I will state my intention in this thread. first of all maybe the moderation step itself can be the second option for this problem. I think the meaning of moderation itself is purely an op's action and it's 100% his choice to delete the post without any consideration. And for what purpose the button under the post which this button directs to the purpose of the report to the moderator. self-moderation and accompanied by a report button to the moderator maybe these two items should be separated so that the function of self-moderation can be more meaningful.




And I support the steps presented by Trofo. give him a round of applause.

In the real sense of that expression, your first sentence as quoted should be enough reason to diffuse any doubt around having a self-moderated thread. Sadly, your last sentence is often why most users self moderate. It hurts when one finds one's post(s) deleted for differing to OP's opinion. It suppresses healthy cross-fertilization of ideas when that happens. My observation is that despite the spam in the gambling board, moderators are hesitant in deleting posts there unlike their swift deletion when it comes to other boards. Do we take it to mean that moderators don't patrol that board often like they do others?

My suggestion for controlling spam on that board will be for moderators to lock any thread exceeding 50 pages, no matter how interesting anyone thinks the discussions going on there is. Secondly, campaigns should reduce their weekly post count requirement on that board to just five posts instead of 10. That way, participants won't hastily populate those threads with unconstructive posts and make them redundant.

I hope this is good as a reason why a post deserves to be reported to a moderator as the problem is not with most people but with some people who don't quite understand what they are talking about. That has made their posts end up as spam and really deserve to be deleted.

I have nothing against if the OP wants to moderate the thread to prevent spammers from posting as they please, that's fine. But I would prefer if users are caught spamming just to get paid regardless of the quality of the post, then the post should be reported regardless of whether the moderators will deal with it quickly or not. I'm a football fan, I watch a lot of match and spend a lot of time reading and talking about them and I don't think that should make me spam various gambling discussion threads especially about leagues from different countries and other competitions. But if you find me spamming there, then please remind me.

Self moderation doesn't always have to mean that you're censoring users. You could just be removing off topic, and unsubstantial posts, rather than relying on the forum moderators. That's a perfectly legitimate reason to open one up. You don't have to delete posts you don't agree with. I know there's a negative stigma around self moderated threads, but I've seen them become more prominent, and more importantly more accepted among the community over the years.

We moderators definitely do appreciate it when we get reports, but I can understand a users point of view if they don't want to rely on us for certain things. Especially, when it specifically isn't bad enough to break our interpretation of the rules, whereas yours you think it should be removed. I guess that could be considered censorship, but it's not like you're actively shutting people's opinions down, simply because they're giving a different opinion, it's because you deem it unsubstantial. Thus, they kind of accept that upon entering the thread.

That's probably the reason it's best to start a new self moderated thread, and just lock the old one. Since, then those that didn't sign up to the idea of a self moderated thread, wouldn't find their posts deleted suddenly, because it has now been converted to a self moderated thread.