Topic: PARTIAL ANSWER TO THE SIGNATURE SPAM PROBLEM !!! (Read 1388 times)

My thread was moved to meta.

It appears that I can no longer moderate the thread.

It appears that moderated threads are not allowed in meta.

So that is counterproductive to the whole idea.

And, I have no choice but to lock the thread because of spammers.

This is why we cannot have nice things.

I'll give you some hints;

Isis considers Assad as a spammer and trying to delete him.

Hitler considered Jews as spams so he decided to delete them.

Iran considers Israel a spam and tries to delete them.

US considers everyone else spams and tries to minimize their threats in any possible way.

Satan considered humans as spam and spammers, therefore he didn't kneel and trying to delete us ever since.

I got a headache after reading QS's post and if I could I would have deleted him.

Core calls BU spammers and BU calls blockstream toxic trolls and both trying to delete each other.

This is the story of us humans, nothing really new every one is trying to take control but a few take it with the responsibilities which comes with it.

The thing about self-moderated threads is that you need to trust the OP of the self-moderated thread to not censor posts critical of them and/or their viewpoint(s). There are a number of people (including some who have posted in this thread) who should not be trusted in this regard (this does not count scammers who create self moderated threads in the marketplace section in order to censor warnings about them.

OT - I think there is a good chance that there is a very good chance that civil forfeiture will either look very different (in a good way) or will not exist in the somewhat near future. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recent wrote a very critical opinion against civil forfeiture regarding a case that the Supreme Court declined to hear on procedural grounds, and the Supreme Court ruled in Nelson v. Colorado in a way that may hinder civil forfeiture in the future. Also both parties appear to be generally against civil forfeiture, so legislative action in regards to curtailing civil forfeiture in the future may not be all that unrealistic (there are actually a couple of bills pending, although they are in very early stages, and it is very hard to tell if they have any real chances of actually becoming law). 

I try not to post in moderated threads, because the OP has to give no reason to delete your post. A long, well thought out post may be deleted, because the OP disagrees with it.
Not all moderated threads are started by people trying to reduce spam. 

imho to fight spam just migrate to discourse

Yeah man, it's totally unreasonable for someone to care about something that they've spent thousands of hours on. How dare he want to make the forum a better place for everyone that actually matters. He should just leave the forum for the next generation of quality posters who care so much for the forum, right?

Fuck off.

The only reason I am enrolled in a signature campaign is because of posts like these. People should have the freedom to do business with whomever they please. Don't like it? Log out.


Stay mad.

Peace.

Meanwhile, I'm rolling in Bitcoin.

Your idea is good, but it will not solve signature spam problem. I will explain why. Take a look for example at Bitcoin Discussion threads. Many of threads are started by newbies who don't have knowledge about bitcoin, they don't know forum rules and they don't know anything about signature spam.
Another part of threads is started by casual members of forum who will not waste time to delete replies made by spammers. In mostly cases, member who started thread, later stops to follow topic and it's become perfect place for spammers, until someone from moderators locks the thread.

Campaign have rules. For example, recently it was discovered that a severe signature farmer was avoiding the SMAS list by enrolling with an alt account into Bitmixer (whilst having 1 account banned from there). This is a clear case of abuse which deserves negative ratings.

What if you've been a moderator for +- 1 year and have been reviewing hundreds of users/thousands of posts for several months by managing signature campaigns (as is in my case)? I'd say this makes you pretty qualified (probably more than a fair number of moderators). There are a few cases of DT members who have been signature campaign managers for long (e.g. Lutpin & Yahoo).

I usually can't find enough proof to bring myself to tag anyone for those 3 things, how do you determine abuse of a signature campaign?  Most of the posts I see can be considered "on topic" but are utterly useless posts or just repetitions of some other post in the thread, same content, different words. In my mind it is a tough thing for a DT user to come up with real proof or justification for leaving feedback. I believe moderators/admins have a better shot at mitigating it because they probably have more insight but I'm sure there is a good amount of work and time involved for them as well.... but aren't they the ones getting paid?   

Just put multiple captcha codes on every post, then you'd have to be really determined to post something. 

That's the bset thing that you can do. Harshly moderate your own threads and promote this kind of behavior to other users who are not spammers.

Thanks for sharing that. It's worth a read (the one that you've started).

This.

And this.

I have been tagging people who were either:
1) Selling accounts (retracted most of those).
2) Heavily account farming (once exposed via reasonable proof).
3) Abusing signature campaigns or SMAS in any way.

That said, your thinking aligns pretty much with mine. However, the last time a few people got tagged for this, there was strong opposition from shorena & Quickseller. I'll let you guess why.

Lauda tried this and they received a lot of backlash for doing so. I don't much understand why myself, perhaps it was because Lauda was doing it, but regardless.

You'd be wasting it reporting spam posts anyway. Unless these posts are copy and pasted from somewhere else there is a cat in hell's chance they would be removed.

DT Users could start tagging spammers but for a serious spam cleanup this type of moderation would have to happen on a higher level, from moderators. Tagging them at least removes their profit potential from most campaigns and would probably "burn" the account enough for them to stop using it. But I don't believe this is what the trust system is meant to be used for. I would report more spam posts if I could but my time is usually limited and I try to use it wisely... I'd spend more than half my time reporting posts and wouldn't have time to look or do much else.      

Some of the others here on this forum must not work or have a life because they seem to have way too much time on their hands.   

You should lock the thread very soon if you want it to stay that way. It's a matter of time before the cleanliness of this thread goes down the toilet.

This is also partly due to the section that the threads are in. Signature spammers don't go into the technical sub forums as they know they can't shitpost there easily. On the other hand, Bitcoin Discussion is possibly the easiest section to do so in.

Expect it to get much worse. I'm convinced that the majority of new active members only join here to post trash with shitty altcoin signatures.
theymos doesn't care; the staff don't care, not all signature managers care. It's a matter of time before the signal to noise ratio of this forum gets to unbearable levels for the majority.

Sad to hear. 

OK, I will just do what I can to make my own personal experience here better.  For me that is to do my own moderated threads on subjects I care about.  This thread is a great example.  Clean, easy to read, not choked by spammers.  Here is another perfect example:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1895455.0;all

The thread where we originally tried to discuss this became unbearable:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1891830.0;all

And this is nowhere even close to the worst thread where I have tried to participate.

This is no answer on a global level. This merely fixes it on a local, or per thread problem. I've been creating primarily self-moderated threads for whatever I do for months/years now in order to combat spam & trolls in them.

The latter would be nice, but that still does not solve anything. If you have e.g. 3 self-moderated threads and 17 non-moderated & spam threads in B. Discussion, the problem is very much relevant. The only real benefit is that spammers can't flood threads in which you truly are participating in (i.e. can't bury your responses).

This is not enough until >95% of the signature campaigns are either run by SMAS participants or run by people enforcing SMAS.

To "help" clean it up would imply that someone is actually cleaning it up already. Small hint: There is almost no actual moderation of spam since BadBear left besides some extreme cases (or generic spam bots/copy-paste bots).

Agreed, there is extra effort involved.  I plan to take on a few threads that interest me and see how it goes.

I have been here a long time.  I do not want to abandon this place - I want to help clean it up.  It is tempting though:  sell my account and leave.  I have the same quandary with respect to the United States.  I was born here and have spent a lot of time here however after my run in with the whole policing for profit "justice" system our family has often contemplated just leaving.  Instead, we all actively speak out against the abuses of power and, it appears, some progress is being slowly made (I have three talks scheduled this month).

I have started to report spammers when I see them.  I do not know if they get banned.  Do they?  Perm banning accounts for spamming is a great idea.  Maybe people who pay a pretty penny for a Hero account will be more careful to read threads and contribute if they fear losing their investment to a perm ban.

I understand the pitfalls of moderated threads.  Obviously some thread will need to remain un-moderated as you suggest.

I do not care about stupid threads started for the whole purpose of account mining.  I do not read those threads.  However, every once in a while, someone asks a legitimate question and we try to have a legitimate conversation and here come the spammers to pollute a perfectly good thread.  It is those threads that, from now on, I will moderate.  The spammers can have their circle jerk threads.  Do not care.

You know damn well most of the threads here are started by shitposting shiteaters who could care less about deleting anybody else's posts.  In fact, these people start stupid threads just so their alts can pile in and shitpost.  This is a forum where you should have to pass a literacy test before being allowed to sign up.  Too much of Asia and Africa is represented here, and culture mixing doesn't work on an English language forum.  Forget about humor and subtlety of language.   That flies over the heads of 80% of people here.

I agree Lauda and Lutpin are doing excellent job,you can do your share by reporting spam post,I don't trust moderated threads especially in the altcoin announcement,this is a sign that dev do not want to be transparent and will only answer questions that are easy and will not question the legitimacy of their project,it's one of the sign I'm looking for if the dev is running a good project.

Did you forget to mention ,'Start your Own forum' and Voilà  you never have to log onto bitcointalk ever again ? That seems like the most feasible solution if you only wanted to converse with 'like minded signature hating individuals'.

On a serious note : Concerned people are taking steps to reduce the forum spam. Lauda,Lutpin,(SMAS) to mention a few.