Pages:
Author

Topic: New sig campaign to end sig campaigns - page 2. (Read 2022 times)

legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
January 03, 2016, 08:05:50 AM
#14
IIRC CIYAM had a thread like that, not entirely sure what the topic was. I followed it for a while...

found it  -> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-no-ad-sigs-posters-allowed-topic-come-and-not-be-annoyed-by-rubbish-posts-957789
But that is bad IMO; that is a case of faulty generalization.
Yes, and signatures incentivize volume, not quality of posting, so targeting them specifically would seem a good way to improve the forum's overall quality of content. There's probably an interesting discussion to be had on whether we might be better off with more self-moderated threads in general - centralized vs. distributed moderation, essentially.
Distributed moderation? No. This is just bad because people would censor each other because of various idiotic reasons (e.g. personal dispute) regardless of how good someone's post is. "Centralized" moderation with a fixed set of rules produces the best results.
legendary
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1001
January 03, 2016, 07:03:16 AM
#13
The whole signature campaign stuff itself looks ridiculous/mess here.
Just do not understand if the very purpose of a campaign running is met or not.
What do you think the very primary/plain 'desired result' of the admins in starting their campaign programs?

newbie
Activity: 54
Merit: 0
January 03, 2016, 06:40:56 AM
#12
We should persuade the signature campaigners to allow posting fewer than 30 posts a week. That will reduce the number of bad posts.
legendary
Activity: 1615
Merit: 1000
January 03, 2016, 06:38:32 AM
#11
paid signature or not, people exist that will post crap regardless. it's possible a thread started with the intent to keep out people with a paid signature might just attract dedicated trolls without a signature and clog up whatever discussion all the same.
if anything, the self modded threads' goal should be to cut out all crap regardless of who posts it.

Yes, and signatures incentivize volume, not quality of posting, so targeting them specifically would seem a good way to improve the forum's overall quality of content. There's probably an interesting discussion to be had on whether we might be better off with more self-moderated threads in general - centralized vs. distributed moderation, essentially.

I'm just pointing out that for any users unhappy with moderation policy, as many seem to be in the case of the sig campaigns, the forum software does offer tools to use.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
January 03, 2016, 06:02:20 AM
#10
IIRC CIYAM had a thread like that, not entirely sure what the topic was. I followed it for a while...

found it  -> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-no-ad-sigs-posters-allowed-topic-come-and-not-be-annoyed-by-rubbish-posts-957789

BTT: Would this mean a post will be remove at any time later if the users changes their signature to a paid one? Will posts be restored if they remove the paid signature?

funny thing is that the thread was on the off-topic board, where most(if not all) of the sig campaign don't pay for it, so it was kind useless to do it in the first place
legendary
Activity: 1288
Merit: 1043
:^)
January 03, 2016, 05:17:06 AM
#9
Shorena: I don't think it's possible for a user to restore posts they delete from a self-mod thread. As for deleting old posts, I expect that would depend on the user doing the moderating. Probably they'd be left in place most of the time. Too much work to keep track of every post, plus the point is to remove the incentive to post crap, not to remove ads per se. Providing a clean environment for discussion as it's happening should be enough.
paid signature or not, people exist that will post crap regardless. it's possible a thread started with the intent to keep out people with a paid signature might just attract dedicated trolls without a signature and clog up whatever discussion all the same.
if anything, the self modded threads' goal should be to cut out all crap regardless of who posts it.
legendary
Activity: 1615
Merit: 1000
January 03, 2016, 05:11:35 AM
#8
Shorena: I don't think it's possible for a user to restore posts they delete from a self-mod thread. As for deleting old posts, I expect that would depend on the user doing the moderating. Probably they'd be left in place most of the time. Too much work to keep track of every post, plus the point is to remove the incentive to post crap, not to remove ads per se. Providing a clean environment for discussion as it's happening should be enough.
copper member
Activity: 1498
Merit: 1528
No I dont escrow anymore.
January 03, 2016, 05:01:10 AM
#7
IIRC CIYAM had a thread like that, not entirely sure what the topic was. I followed it for a while...

found it  -> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-no-ad-sigs-posters-allowed-topic-come-and-not-be-annoyed-by-rubbish-posts-957789

BTT: Would this mean a post will be remove at any time later if the users changes their signature to a paid one? Will posts be restored if they remove the paid signature?
legendary
Activity: 1615
Merit: 1000
January 03, 2016, 04:56:52 AM
#6
This a pretty stupid idea. A lot of people on this forum use a signature. This idea would be only for a small percentage of the people on this forum.

A pretty small precentage of the people on this forum actually contribute anything meaningful. And yes, I took a cursory look at your post history, you sig campaigner,  you.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
January 03, 2016, 04:52:41 AM
#5
This a pretty stupid idea. A lot of people on this forum use a signature. This idea would be only for a small percentage of the people on this forum.
legendary
Activity: 1615
Merit: 1000
January 03, 2016, 04:41:35 AM
#4
Yes, the extrapolate-ad-absurdum result might be a "moderation market", where people only post in threads started by people they trust to fairly moderate discussion...
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1005
4 Mana 7/7
January 03, 2016, 04:33:09 AM
#3
I believe Danny(Hamilton) was running something similar(except for the self-mod thread part).
I as well as many others already rarely post in and try avoid self-modded threads because people can just delete any posts they disagree with or don't like regardless of how constructive they are or whether they have a signature or not.
This pretty much sums it up
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
January 03, 2016, 04:28:45 AM
#2
You're free to do that but it'd be kinda redundant and likely just have the opposite effect. Once people realise that their posts will be deleted they'll either just not reply to your threads or create a new thread to respond to you in protest. I as well as many others already rarely post in and try avoid self-modded threads because people can just delete any posts they disagree with or don't like regardless of how constructive they are or whether they have a signature or not.
legendary
Activity: 1615
Merit: 1000
January 03, 2016, 03:54:06 AM
#1
Here's an idea:

How about those of us who don't appreciate what sig campaigns are doing to this forum decide to only start self-moderated threads, deleting any posts with sig campaign ads in them?

To get the idea to spread, we can use a sig of our own, come up with a slogan for it.

"END ADVERTISING SPAM - ONLY START SELF-MODERATED THREADS AND DELETE SIG CAMPAIGNER'S POSTS FROM THEM!"

Doesn't exactly roll of the tongue that way, but I'm sure we can work on that. How does it sound?

PS. I'd make this thread self-moderated but that's not possible on the meta subforum...
Pages:
Jump to: