Topic: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures - page 11. (Read 19045 times)

It's because of your member status.  From earlier in this thread:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5393088

- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed

Since you are of newbie status, you can't can only use 40 characters, that is why it keeps getting chopped off. Same goes for the color, you have to be a full member.

I have just now attempted to create a new sig.
It keeps getting chopped short.

I attempted to use blue and mysite

It won't let me create a sig.

I can use this

but not this

It appears to have a character length limit imposed on it.
Why?


Where are the instructions to new users on how to use BB codes for signatures on this forum?
I can't find them, despite searching.
Is someone fiddling with the sig code?

Its been a while but you should get a message something like this

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

I think you can appeal it forget the procedure, but the person who reported it gets to keep their privacy.

While I'm not really a fan of this, I can see why it's needed.  I liked the fact I could see my post so much easier when scrolling by my sig.

I've never understood why people do spam posts. I try to make my posts worth while and hope they add substance to the discussion.  It's a shame we all get punished because of the actions of others, but that's how society seems to work.

I do have a question regarding reporting posts.  If someone reports a post does the person got notified their post has been reported?

I favor this new improvement. I think this will greatly reduced the spam posts up to 90 percent.

"Spam cannot be totally eradicated it can only be minimized."

I report posts as I go, also, but even with a 100% accuracy (do they really keep track?) some threads/posts I've reported are untouched.

I was busy for the past few months in reporting spam posts. And it seems like I got 100% accuracy so far. Just hit on the "report to moderator" link and you'll see that useless post gone. If it's disallowed, there will be a plunge in activities.

This is a wonderful improvement. Especially in combination with the activity system, which imposes post and time minimums, this should clean the forums up quite a bit.

I believe so but not 100% Sure in regards to posting
You can't PM though if in that IP range unless you pay

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4615746
New users can now immediately start posting unless they are using suspicious IPs. Suspicious IPs are ones that have been banned previously, or are known proxies, or are near many banned/proxy IPs. If you register using a suspicious IP, you can use most forum features (watchlist, etc.), but you can't post or send PMs until you pay a small fee. In almost all cases, the fee is less than $1. People proxybanned in this way can also be whitelisted by the usual people who can do whitelisting. These IP bans apply only to registration: you can no longer get caught by random IP bans if you're using an established account.

That said if your ever in a bored mood and want to find spammers the patrol page is there
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=recent;patrol

I'm sorry, my post was unclear:

I meant to say that the plan of posting more garbage to qualify wouldn't work, as the more concentrated........

My bad

I think Theymos' solution is significantly better than doing nothing, don't get me wrong.

It may not get rid of spam completely, but it surely does reduce it a significant amount. The number of people who would do that are most likely less than the people who wouldn't bother. Either way, can't admins just IP ban?

EDIT: I also do not know what the best campaign setup would be. That's something that has to be thought into.

You can. Simply open an (or 10) account(s), and spam as you usually would. (The spam is divided between the accounts so you can increase the activity of all of them efficiently.) Eventually (after about two months) you will qualify for most ads and will be able to spam the forum for pay.

My favorite solution in this thread is to require advertisers to only pay users who make large posts.

First of all, I agree with this change. Second, how would this not work? It's not like you can spam your way through activity levels.

My thoughts exactly.  It won't work...the more concentrated your posts, the slower your activity rate goes up - but that's not gonna stop the newbs from trying...

This will just make people post more garbage so they can qualify to have ads in their sigs IMO.

More accurately: The negatives to paid signature advertising far outweigh to positives to you. And to others who think as you do.


Thus you use more moderators. I have never seen a forum such as this that has any shortage of people who would love some title and would do the work for free. Another option is a warning then a short ban, or a comment to the sponsor, instead of dumping individual posts. Agreed, I don't think that is worth the effort.


Actually, some of them are always going to get through no matter what you do. The easiest way to handle that is to mention it to Stunna. "Hey Stunna, Ned Flanders is spamming," and he stops paying them. Like I said, he has zero incentive to pay spammers, you have every incentive to point them out to him.


And for that, I do thank you. Not because I have a paid sig in my posts, but because I think the best communities online allow their members great latitude, both in what they post, and in whether they stay or not.

Great work theymos, But there should be at least a notice 2 weeks to 1 month before the implementation.

No, it is quite true actually. The negatives to paid signature advertising far outweigh to positives. Of course we understand that its nice for people to be able to earn a bit of coin while posting as usual, however the sheer volume of spam is almost uncomprehendable. You are correct, it takes maybe 30 seconds to 1 minute to properly moderate a post on average. That involves checking the post for prior context, etc. Now multiply that times a few thousand over a short period of time, and it quickly becomes something that is difficult to keep up with. Your points are valid on a  small scale, but we are talking about tens of thousands of posters. The forums has 255k members, taking into account that many are inactive, and many dont partake in signature advertising, we are still talking about hundreds of man hours per day to clean up and ban the many users that are causing the problem. The fact of the matter is that many of us have been moderating for years, we saw the report volume before signature advertising, and now after and have concluded that it is a generally negative.  I can speak for the sponsors of paid signature campaigns on this matter, because for the larger ones, for example primedice, it wouldn't be humanly possible for Stunna to sift through every affiliate's posts to judge what is worthy and what isnt. We spend a good chunk of time moderating and reviewing these posts, and thats with a 40+ person team. I'm sure if they see something fishy they will review an indviduals post history, but what about when that person makes another 30 accounts to spam with. Chances are some of them are going to get through.

The only reason paid signature advertising wasnt banned looong ago, is that we generally believe that punishing the whole for the missdeeds of the few (in this case far more than a few) isn't fair.

That you list my comment in bold, does not make it any less true. The prior statement remains false on its face simply because it expresses an erroneous conclusion, most simply because advertising in signatures has both positive and negative aspects for the community. It is not universally a negative, for reasons previously stated.

As far as what moderators do? That is what moderators do. As a moderator myself (not here), it truly takes very little time to moderate people, and if I was ever unsure (and about spammers, I never was) I would just ask someone else's opinion as well.


You cannot possibly hope to speak for any sponsor, you have no idea what time they do or do not have, let alone how much time they chose to spend reviewing their employees. By extension, they have every incentive to insure that their paid sig users are doing their best for the community. Similarly, they have zero incentive to pay people for posting idiocy. Much like moderating, it just doesn't take that long to scan through someone's post log, especially if they wish to better their business.

None of this, of course, is meant to downplay the negatives, but to suggest that some heavy-handed statement that all ad sigs are bad for the community is mindless hyperbole.