Topic: [POLL] Should Bitcointalk moderate what coins can be posted in the ANN section ? (Read 2356 times)

that is a REALLY good point !
The self moderated topic powers should be revoked on coin ANN topics i think !

and i can see how picking and choosing / rules for ANN's would be a nightmare i guess..
who would decide and based on what right ?

i don't think ANY of us like the idea of a council of sorts no matter Who is on it !
i dunno i'd like to say something should be done "rule wise" but in reality i have no idea what exactly or how :/
and i guess leaving it alone would be far better than putting in place bad rules right ?

BTCTalk should stay out of things unless a criminal act is taking place.
Elitecoin did that, as did Smartcoin (the latter actually stole its giveaways!).

BTCtalk should ban self-moderated threads. There is no need for them, and they are inevitably used to present an untrue perspective of a coin.

Although we strongly oppose all the scams going on, and the devs who are just keep making new coins under different accounts, we believe they should not. Cryptos are all about decentralization, and this is a free market. It is all up to investors and miners to choose the right choices, which can be very difficult.

power control ?

In my opinion, should be given the opportunity to develop new coins. After the coins will be popular enough, they become self-reliant. For example, DOGE have a great community, and they have to communicate only on reddit now.

Thank god people vote against moderation (which often leads to censorship).
Faith restored!

+1

I think this is something often overlooked and the majority of people will simply invest in things just because it's going up which in itself is a problem. To add to this you should also find out about the community itself, does it have long term plans and goals? How well does the community get along and are the leaders of the community readily accessible and can answer all your questions? How do they handle negative situations and conflict resolution?

Community in my opinion is the make or break of a currency, without strong leadership nothing can get done. Innovation is also a big key in long term viability as it is no longer about just making a coin and watching it go to the moon, if you can get the community behind you, there is no restrictions on the changes that can be made and with proper planning and testing, you are free of all restrictions that the code represents.

Gavin sums it up pretty good in this thread pinned to the top of the Alternate cryptocurrencies section.  The same common sense that applied in 2011 applies in 2014.

There is some validity to that argument. A simple thread detailing what new people should look out for, would suffice. Although I do question how useful it may be, seeing as everyone here has a different definition of a shitcoin/scam. Same goes for coin moderation ... what the moderators deem unworthy, others may deem acceptable.

And as for protecting newbies from these evil scams -- how long did it take you to spot worthless coins? Or scams? I started 3 months ago, and it's not like I'm getting ripped off anywhere... most scams are easy to spot. Most junkcoins are easy to spot. I should also add, a person can still make money from what you deem junkcoins, so long as you are smart and know when to get in, and when to get out.

If you see an IPO from a weird coin, with no assurances, it's probably not a great idea to give them any money. If someone puts up an ann for taxicoin, or some revolutionary coin based on a meme, it's probably not a great idea to invest your life savings. It's common sense. Having a select group of people choose which coins people can even read about, isn't the answer.

Again, the big scams are the shady exchanges.  And no amount of forum moderation will improve that. Although I do suggest that if enough exchanges pop up, perhaps a poll/rating on trustworthiness of specific exchanges could be useful to people.

Yes, let's give a small group of people advanced notice of promising coins.

Why should the majority of this Bitcoin forum care about the proliferation of garbage in this section of the forum? As BCX stated, this section just serves as a garbage collector to keep the latest shitclone propaganda out of the main Bitcoin discussion.  Besides, this isn't the only place on the entirety of the internet that the newest scam can be announced, and if this section does receive harsher moderation, the scam will move elsewhere.  I think iGotSpots stated the answer to this thread eloquently.

No.

Let us decide what coins we want to mine/buy/sell/hear about/blah blah blah.

Free market blah blah blah...

I get that the shitcoins create a lot of noise. It's a real pisser. But I'd rather have noise than a sanitized version that probably would end up throwing out a few babies with the bathwater.

Seriously?  OK, let's start at the beginning...

One (and many people would say the only) legitimate purpose of government is to protect freedom.  Rape victims do not choose to be raped.  Molested children do not choose to be molested.  Their rights -- their freedom -- is being taken away.  That is why there are laws against those things, and why those laws are a legitimate function of government.

Now, Spoetnik, how much have you been forced to invest in scam coins?  Zero.  No one is forcing you -- no one is forcing anyone -- to invest in these coins.  The investors are exercising their freedom of choice.

You want to take that freedom away.

Normally, the counter argument is that the authoritarians just want to "protect" the people from themselves.  The authoritarians are elitists who see themselves as superior to the masses, so they should be the ones deciding who deserves which freedom.

And in some cases, they actually believe they are serving the public good.

So what's the problem with that, if they actually are the experts in the market, and if they are trying to serve the public good?  Well, look back to the central tenant of capitalism: People act in their own self-interest.

The "review committee," in this case, will make decisions based on what is best for them personally.  This can't be solved by finding "good" people.  It's not a character defect.  It's simply human nature.  "Where you stand depends on where you sit."  Our point of view on any issue is ALWAYS colored by self-interest, even when we truly do not believe this is the case.

Politically, the elegant solution that the framers of the US Constitution came up with is to recognize that self-interest is going to be central to every decision and to pit interests against each other set up a system of checks and balances and oversight to protect the rights of the minority.  

But how are you possibly going to have any oversight in a situation like this forum?  It's not going to happen.  Oversight of the decision-making committee is not part of the proposal, and even if it were, it would be cumbersome, expensive, and very likely completely ineffective.  No one is going to be on the committee if it means they are subject to financial review.  But how else are you going to catch members cheating the system?  So the effects of self-interest are magnified.  For example, the people on this committee will receive lots of bribe offers.  What makes you think that they won't take them?  Blind trust?

Economically, Adam Smith postulated that the "invisible hand" of the market arises from competing self-interest.  "The theory for the Invisible Hand states that if each consumer is allowed to choose freely what to buy and each producer is allowed to choose freely what to sell and how to produce it, the market will settle on a product distribution and prices that are beneficial to all the individual members of a community, and hence to the community as a whole."

So what you are proposing is taking away freedom of the many for the benefit of a chosen few.  Is it any wonder that people aren't eager to go along with your plan?

Spoetnik wants Bitcointalk to turn into a fascist place

Good luck with that Spoetnik

I'm kinda new. I'd vote no, but I dont mine I just invest and learned how all this works (hype and smokes n screens) in maybe less than a few weeks

First of all Bitcointalk should ban Spoetnik for being a pathetic loser.

well said and thank you, few people show any concern at all for new guys.
i myself first came here and was overwhelmed with so much info to learn and read.
and my first experience was basically i tried to mine Litecoin and realized quick that i was getting nothing.
i then started looking around and seen FTC and i admit i just got here and their talk had me convinced..
so i started mining that because it was easier to get going and making something even if it wasn't much.
later i realized it's not just a clone of LTC but its not really going to go anywhere and the devs are good at hyping people up to make you think otherwise.

new users need to know how much deceptive smoke and mirrors activity goes on.
and how hard coin cloners want them to support their coin(s) ..they will say anything.
like the guy trying to scam me on Localbitcoins other day.. the guy fed me all kinds of bs trying to rip me off and failed of course lol

the longer you are involved in the altcoin the more you will in time how much people are completely full of shit around here..
from coin cloners hoping to sucker people into getting involved in their clone coin(s) to bagholders bullshitting you about their predictions.

I voted Yes, because lot of these new shit coins is acting like a deterrent for the newbies.
For the community to grow we need more adoption by new people and as a community we should do what we can
do to protect them from scammers.

Some obvious scam coin should be banned!!

I voted yes because I think there should be tougher rules in regards to the coins to be added. I do disagree with intentially causing damage to coins because you don't like the way it was set up.

Coins I would consider as a low quality coin would be POW only coins which are really just clones trying to pass themselves off as self sustainable coins. Other dangerous coins include extremely random rewards and extremely quick distributions.

If you want a real solution... Proof of Stake with sharing of transaction fees across the network. All transactions, buy or sell are charged a fee which goes to all the other holders of the coin.