Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Damn. You broke the streak. If not for your two posts, I was going to have 100% ignored posts on page 14.
Topic: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures - page 2. (Read 19045 times)
Damn. You broke the streak. If not for your two posts, I was going to have 100% ignored posts on page 14.
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming?You seem to be the biggest spammer here. I've only been on this forum only a short while but i see u all over posting rubbish obviously just for your sig deal.
Havent you got anything better to do than spamming up this forum with your 1 word replies an quoting people without even responding? And I don't follow you around, i just see your rubbish everywhere. What am i jealous of exactly?
Stop replying to this thread to bump up your post count then. Funny how its now you care about being off topic. Doesn't seem to stop you everywhere else. And this thread is about why signatures should be banned and your a perfect case of why.
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming?You seem to be the biggest spammer here. I've only been on this forum only a short while but i see u all over posting rubbish obviously just for your sig deal.
Havent you got anything better to do than spamming up this forum with your 1 word replies an quoting people without even responding? And I don't follow you around, i just see your rubbish everywhere. What am i jealous of exactly?
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming?You seem to be the biggest spammer here. I've only been on this forum only a short while but i see u all over posting rubbish obviously just for your sig deal.
Havent you got anything better to do than spamming up this forum with your 1 word replies an quoting people without even responding? And I don't follow you around, i just see your rubbish everywhere. What am i jealous of exactly?
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming?You seem to be the biggest spammer here. I've only been on this forum only a short while but i see u all over posting rubbish obviously just for your sig deal.
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming?You seem to be the biggest spammer here. I've only been on this forum only a short while but i see u all over posting rubbish obviously just for your sig deal.
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
How is discussing the topic of the thread we're posting in spamming? 
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
That is not spam when we are actually discussing the topic raised in the OP. Which you currently aren't, just so you know. A long chain of quotes for discussion purposes is not spam.
Anyway, on-topic: There is no need to dis-allow everyone from having a signature. Just dis-allow signature ads or make people damn well know that if they spam for cash, they're going to be punished.
I consider all of you spammers. This is a forum, not a chatbox. 10 quoted posts are looking ridiculous. You are lucky other moderators don't think that way.
Of course it's because we're using the signatures ourselves. But we are doing that for a reason, probably ( in my case at least ) because I don't see why it should bother anyone. 
One word. Spam.
Of course it's because we're using the signatures ourselves. But we are doing that for a reason, probably ( in my case at least ) because I don't see why it should bother anyone.
One word. Spam.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
There is a slight difference but not big enough. Right now the people in this thread who are anti-ads are pretty pissed.
Not one persons. A lot of mods and even theymos wanted the change.
We both know the only reason that we are against this is because we are getting paid. If I wasnt I would def be against it.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
There is a slight difference but not big enough. Right now the people in this thread who are anti-ads are pretty pissed.
Not one persons. A lot of mods and even theymos wanted the change.
We both know the only reason that we are against this is because we are getting paid. If I wasnt I would def be against it.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
There is a slight difference but not big enough. Right now the people in this thread who are anti-ads are pretty pissed.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
There is a slight difference but not big enough. Right now the people in this thread who are anti-ads are pretty pissed.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
Those who will be pissed, will be pissed simply because they can't be paid to post? This is a forum for discussing Bitcoin, not for making profit, at the end of the day. If people quit because they can't make money by posting, good riddance I say.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Or maybe not allowed to have a link.
Truthfully there is no medium. Its either get half of the forum pissed, or get the other half.
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
I stopped putting ads in my signature when I realized it makes me look similar to those who just spam for money. Many people would complain that they can't spam for their $50/month that they get from signature ads, but in the long run it'd be much better for bitcointalk.
BTW I get more around $100-200.
The amount isn't the point nor the topic of this thread, it's the spam that it creates.
Why not only allow Full Members + to have a signature in the first place?
Why should Members and below be blocked from having a signature because people are spamming due to signature ads?
Jump to: