Topic: [Request] 1 Merit to become junior member and access to bounties sub - page 3. (Read 2631 times)

My thoughts exactly. I've already noticed an increase in useless post and plagiarism on the serious (tech) boards.

I wouldn't call it "good PR". But if page hits are the goal, the bounty board could be totally separated from the rest of the forum. Don't require anything for posting there, but instead raise the requirements for the rest of the forum. And don't count bounty posts for activity and post count anymore.

I have partially managed a few campaigns, and if I'd run one on my own, I'd like it to be self-moderated with zero-tolerance for spam. But that would mean my campaign is gone from the first page in minutes, and 25 pages down the next day. The reduced exposure would make the campaign a failure, which means there is no market for running clean campaigns.
I'd love to reject all spammers, but it's currently not feasible to do.
Unless a clean campaign would be able to buy a sticky in the bounty thread, that could actually work to earn the forum some income from campaigns that actively fight spammers.
I do think a clean bounty campaign where people promote with real accounts instead of Facebook and Twitter accounts with 5000 other bounty spammers as friends and followers would be a better way to promote something.

It's been suggested before (reinstate Newbie jail), but I doubt many reputable members will be willing to waste their time shifting through thousands of spampost just to find one post worth meriting. I certainly won't do it, every time I try to find a Newbie to merit, I end up reporting them to be banned.

Most people will just click "yes I've read the rules" instantly. Barely anybody reads EULAs, partially caused by the fact that they're too long and there are too many of them.

It gives a perverse incentive to everybody involved: it's cheaper to run, less work, more exposure, and as a bonus: nobody complains! Unlike when you reject spammers and cheaters, which means you spend many hours running the campaign, and as a result you can expect people complaining.

---

Another thought: charge amount X (say 100$) to open a thread on the bounty board. Use that money to pay moderators.
The thread owner will still be required to stop spam, and if Y (say 50) posts in his thread get deleted by moderators, his thread is closed.

How about just enforcing bounty managers to do their goddamn job. They literally just sit around doing nothing and get paid for that. Damn those lucky bastards. Isn't that something everybody wants? Everything is handled by bots,the post counting and calculation of stakes and all that stuff.

Theymos,would you actually consider making an Official set of rules,for literally every section,board and clear out the misunderstandings all at once? And force the quiz for both the possible paths. Rules need to be followed,be it for bounties,be it for discussion.

And force bounty managers and all the airdrop managers to fill out the application within google forms and avoid spamming the forum. 4000+ bots infested one airdrop thread and later on,the bots themselves made a own thread and started spamming.

If all of the Bounty Managers will grab this kind of rule, then it should be a great to decrease the number of spammers and bots that usually make this looks like a non moderated forum.  And if it will turn out to be like this, I smell more posts to be reported again when the time comes.


I once happened to be like this, someone thought me about this good earning forum but after being rejected so many times before I ended up getting more knowledge before making money into the bounties. I think some users will still be like me as the way I did before even if its wrong but still this will help them to eager to gain knowledge and experience through rejection.
Now, I spend my time on reading on many threads and this is kindly like my hobby now, especially if there is such an issue that makes me want to join the debate ^_^, I do loved hearing those millions of opinions ( I think I should take a BS on Psychology with this kind of perception )

I'm all for some sort of restrictions because at the moment anyone is free to create an unlimited amount of accounts and most people who sign up here just to claim bounties probably do so with more than one. As InvoKing mentioned, these can also be botted rather easily especially when often all that is required is posting your username or adding it to a spreadsheet. Requiring some sort of merit achievement would go a long way in curbing this behaviour. I'm also still in favour of removing signatures completely unless you pay for them through more donator ranks, though I doubt this is something theymos would do. I think at least we could experiment with another donator rank or two though alongside being able to rank up 'naturally'. People are going to continue to buy accounts anyway and most of them these days get scammed in the process so why not let them safely buy the benefits of ranks from the forum instead? It stops account farming, scammers, and people just spamming the forum for activity and/or begging for merit.



Well you are most likely the anomaly. The sad fact of the matter is that probably 99% of people who sign up here these days do so just to earn from bounties and even worse signature campaigns. A huge proportion of these users probably have little to no interest or knowledge of bitcoin either other than they just heard from their classmate/cousin/granny that you can make good money here hence why they're often completely clueless.


They probably don't care. All most of them care about is getting their ICO's name out there in whatever manner they can as quickly as they can. As long as people are bumping their thread and wearing their signature it's all promotion.


Can't hurt to try something like this. At the very least, upon sign-up users should be required to read the rules and linked to some helpful guides like the Activity FAQ and how to earn here etc so it'll stop the same old questions being asked time and time again (and usually in the wrong section).

Then the entire bounty section is against the rules as they require people to post their facebook shares and retweets.

The last invasion proved that the bounty section could easily be overcome by bots and if the guy(s) running them would have been less greedy and created only 10% of the accounts they would probably have gone undetected in that mess.

I really like the second tier as they will probably never get 10 Merits to rank up in the bounty/altcoin sections.  

The newbies are less problematic than the jr. members. Usually the minimum required rank (e.g. sig. campaign) is jr. member. Bounties often have Google forms, and this can get attacked/abused easily when applying. A recent case that I've reported to a moderator was ~50 jr. members applying within 30 minutes (all the classic spam accounts). Merit requirement needs to be added for this rank, and it should be a tad more than 1 merit.

I don't see reasons to take care too much attention on bounty topics/ threads. Personally, I only read OP of those ones, nothing more because as you all known, threads after OPs are dominantly by shit-shows.
Hate to say this, but bounties related to social media channels, like Facebook, Twitter are amongst the most spamming ones in the forum.

Another way is to use merit as a currency )
For example, somebody posted good relevant messages and got merit.
Now, each time the user posts in a few subforums (for example "Bounties") one merit is deducted.

That way, people who really contribute to the forum can use their merit to post ads.
It may be against the original forum idea, but when bitcointalk was created nobody imagined it would be hardly spammed by signature bounty hunters.

I hardly suggest to make it a 5 Merits Requirement.  

Only the non quality posters will do this kind of whining as I think.

Use the Merits as a requirement for Bounties? This should help but I think it still depends on the Bounty Managers.

I don't think so, even if they can't use bots on an early time, we can't be so sure that the bots will no longer be used if they actually have achieved the Merit Requirement.


This is what we need A path for users. Now, with this, we can determine if this forum is just being used for money making or not.

I  think everybody pick "I want to discuss things" because these spammer know they will require to become Jr. member before doing any signature bounty.
I do not want posting restrictions for newbies because sometime people just create account in this forum for the solution of their technical problem.
Best way is that we can ask everybody to clear the test within 7 days of joining to continue posting.

For controlling spam, temporary ban the user , disable the signature for a week  and award a black star  if 4 post of user is deleted by Moderators in a single week.
If user collect 5 black star in a calendar year , user will be permanently ban.

That's a great idea, but maybe it's a little bit too hard to be realized.
As an alternative, may I suggest to put every newbie (including me in a sandbox section of the forum?
Reputable members can enter that sandbox section and give merit to newbies who post reasonable things.
When newbies get enough merit and post enough messages, they will be able to gradually post more and more messages outside the sandbox.

I've noticed that a number of the bounties for 'better' (completely subjective assessment) ICOs/TGEs are now requiring full members in order to participate in the bounty for signatures on BCT. I would think that over time more campaigns would move to raise requirements as it (again in my opinion) shows the lesser campaigns by allowing anyone to enter. I wouldnt say this is a hard and fast rule and there are some really great bounties open to Jr members+.
While merit has had a bit impact on spam and user count, i cant remember where i saw it but there are some fantastic graphs posted recently that show this, the problem of bounty spam if tackled with the aid of bounty managers will be cleaned up quicker and smoother. The only thing that will be left are the posts asking how to get merit, asking for merit, and saying that merit is impossible to come by unless you are a hero or legend rank.

Mind-blanking 

They said 10 Merit to become Jr. Member, any advises for me?

What do the people who operate these bounties think of the newbie invasion? Also, people should not be required to post in order to get paid; that's already against the rules.

An idea I had in this vein was that upon registration you'd have to pick one of two paths:
 - "I want to discuss things"
     = Banned from all money-making/spam-hotbed sections until Jr Member
 - "I want to make money"
     = Banned from the more serious sections until Jr Member
     = You have to pass a quiz before posting which tries to inform you about basic forum rules, how not to get banned, maybe some basic English knowledge, etc. (Quizzes are pointless to stop dedicated spammers, since an answer key will quickly be compiled, but it may help in cases where clueless people are ending up here.)

Increase the difficulty a little bit and the number of spammers and especially bots will be reduced by half.
I post this topic before being fully aware of the amount of spam made in KanadeCoin topics (over 4000 posts in few hours).

Imo, trading merit is happening and may increase with this idea, but spotting the abuser isn't hard and may even lead to figure out some accounts promoting bots.
BTW, i don't think that they will spend a cent to enter to bounties.

This is a risky idea that can promote the sale of merit especially for accounts that already have redtrust. In my opinion it makes more sense to eliminate the newbie accounts from the bounties, I was newbie myself last year and for the first few weeks I did not even know what the bounties were. According to my experience, the newbie who sign up for the buonty are 99% alt abuser / ban evader. And if they learn what bounties are on the 1st week of their forum life, they can surly wait few more weeks to join bounties and wait the normal activity.
Sure this can be a problem for users that wants to open an ANN bounty but hey we have the Copper option and 20$ for a CEO of one ICO are nothing.

That is a question that only the signature campaign managers can answer.
Maybe it is some thing yo ro with inertia. Junior members were previously allowed to join campaigns because of links in their signature, and this has just continued.

Let days determine the success of the merit system or not.
I'm sure if this system managed to limit the spam to the whole forum, making such simple adjustments will not take long(theymos him self edit it many times).
The problem is that this rank "junior member " does not get linked signatures, Why they paid?

The forum gets a good PR for them, but if you stick to this system, then everyone who wants to participate in bounty projects on the forum, and not on other sites, must first study it and benefit, what you said. We sacrifice a quantity in favor of quality, which is good for some, but for others it's bad.

Isn't that good? I mean they're not adding to the community with anything.

Although, they are adding to the number of ad impressions on the site so...