Topic: Merit source and signaturetalk.org - page 2. (Read 1045 times)

I have a question, does bitcointalk earn money from ads? If so, by removing signature campaigns you might get a high quailty board but then it will decrease the user visits and rewards which is helping run the forum, might not last.

I just mean we should keep a balance, than going a berserk.

@Vadi2323

While I agree that bad managed (mostly altcoin) signatures are causing also problems, I think your arguments are too short sighted:

I guess you didn't consider the other issues a removal of signature campaigns would have. Bitcointalk is still a very important place to advertise (new) services, including ANN, ads and signature campaign. If you want Bitcointalk losing ground on it's importance for new services / projects in the crypto space, removing signature campaigns would be a good start.
Managing the forum isn't for free; moderators and hosting need to be paid, implementing the new forum software is costly and the forum needs some funds for unexpected issues. The main revenues are coming from ads and their ad impressions. If there are less ad impressions, the advertised services will pay less for a slot or maybe stop advertising completely on Bitcointalk if services lose relevance here.

So, if you want to risk Bitcointalk's position as important place for services to advertise and hereby a lack of funds, go ahead and remove signatures campaigns from the forum.

Finally it's your bias again, that you have something against users collecting additional BTC here, not everyone had the opportunity to buy cheap BTC ages ago and for people from poor countries it's not a bad deal (if they are decent posters). If you don't want to be a Merit source anymore, I suggest Alex_Sr, he's waiting for more than a year now and would be much more grateful.

It was very early and I didn't have coffee yet , shows that his signature design does it's job.

Regarding to the signatures, it's up to the campaign manager to set a high standard. People will stop applying for signature campaigns if they can't meet the demands.

While it works, it certainly not best solution and theymos most likely won't stop it. There are other ways such as signature only enabled if you received x merit within last y days.

Besides, newbie account still can be used to bump threads (on few boards), shill certain altcoin/ICO and report bounty hunting activity.


Avatar? Shorter interval between posting? No PM limitation?

If we remove all the signatures then the ranks will become irrelevant because the newbie and hero members, both cannot have the
signatures.

I disagree, "if you want high-quality posts" :
- remove the low-quality posts;
- remove the low-quality users;
- educate instead of complaining.

By the way, low-quality or high-quality post is highly subjective.

Cryptotalk is the new signature talk.  

By the way there is so much focus on "signaturetalk.org" so I decided to check whom does it belong and it is still available for anyone to register.
Not a bad name though  

It has been discussed many times, you can promote signaturetalk.org instead of FBI.
I think we saw the impact of this on the forum "check the serious discussions board," the problem will not end but will reduce the number of posts.
Check better idea:

Generally, if the merit system does not work and the problem of low-quality posts is not resolved, signatures will be deleted.

Everyone has their views on it but theymos decision will be final.
The purpose is to keep the signature and reduce the spamming caused by it.

Remove signature, remove trust/flag and merit system infact disable the privilege to post on the forum so everyone can be happy 😁😁. Lets just login, read then logout.

The forum will become purer (significant less spam or spam-free) if signature disabled at all. In contrast, there are some adverse effects that the admin and we all don't expect (in my opinion, and I could be wrong). If it happens, most of projects will move to other forums, that usually have looser rules which in turn will trigger more scams. Generally, I only see bad things for crypto ecosystem, not only for the forum.

Massive scams (I don't mention about spams) over many low-quality, loosely managed forums will destroy reputation of crypto ecosystem and somehow will play as barriers for future growth of crypto ecosystem. Low-quality forums are abundantly around us, and they will do fastly take any chances to destroy general reputation of crypto currencies.

Merit system has denifitely worked (as it initially created for), so I think the left-over problems for now depends on managers of campaigns.

---

The forum is designed for text-based talk, so let's talk.
Talk does not equal to spam.

OP has a different agenda than what he posts here. He tried to have a user removed from a signature campaign, only because he doesn't like him. When that didn't work, he left negative feedback to yahoo62278.

In the past week, OP saw 9 (modlog archived) of his 42 posts deleted by Mods. Not many high ranking users can top that!

This is not a question of whether to see a member's signature or not, but the quality of the article is declining because most members only post for the required number of signatures in the signature campaign (?)
I don't think removing the signature campaign would make the forum more quality & clean, I don't have any idea, just wait for the initiative from the community.

You can always choose to not to show user signatures.



https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/vadi2323-399366


Here is the direct link for you. Then, if you can see anyone writing shitty posts, just report them.

Enough of the remove signature from the forum entirely! If you're tired of seeing paid signatures you can post more on the IT or SD boards, there you do not get to see the signatures that users have on.

This discussion has been going on for too long now, and honestly I do not think the effect of signature spam is so much on the forum right now, altcoins are so low right now unlike in the past, this has reduced participants of the altcoin signature campaigns and their spammy nature. And in the BTC campaigns most managers are strict with what their participants posts, checkmating their contents weekly. In addition to this the implementation of the new merit system also did it's bit.

Signature campaigns could also have it's good sides, for those who are not so good posters, if they get into campaigns, they try to increase their quality and make their posts sensible, so they do not get removed.
Now you cannot tell me that's not s little bit of an advantage.

There is an important difference between use of signatures for personal sites and projects, and their use for paid signature campaigns. Signatures are an important privilege - it's their abuse that is the problem.

Remove signature and bounty would clean spam from forum. But most likely forum will return back to 2009. Only couple of members you will find that who are active here only for discussion. There is few good poster as well who didn't wear signature, but they are not much active. Merit requirements on the campaign to evaluate quality. I can't see anything wrong with it. Spammers are unable to participate on btc campaign due to merit requirements. Most of spam posts are coming from altcoin bounty section and this is a big opportunity for spammer. That's why need ban altcoin bounty if you like clean forum. On the other hand you might say, signature campaign helping forum to keep emphatic. Every action have a positive and negative effect. So depends on you how will you take regarding signature campaign.

It seems to link to the fbi.gov site.

He is not wearing any paid signature. Its just a plagiarism signature for the chip mixer.
You should have seen this before posting ?

Did you forget to remove your own signature before making this post?