They'll have to pay a fee to sockpuppet. It's not about catching them it's about attaching a cost to the practice so that it isn't free.
How high will you make it to deter the hardcore sock puppeteers (and thus also punish the innocent)?
Topic: Seeking a team to develop Bitcointalk 2.0 forums (apply within) - page 4. (Read 23508 times)
How high will you make it to deter the hardcore sock puppeteers (and thus also punish the innocent)?
Zach you are not getting the bigger picture. It's not about the method, it's about restricting the noise. Having a members only section where noobs cannot post (or perhaps even read) would provide a place where we could have quiet intelligent discussions. This forum, open to all, does not allow for that. It is impossible to have a meaningful conversation in a stadium full of people if everyone has a microphone.
Are we saying this forum is for the 'elite' of Bitcoin?
We've got many of the core requirements. Should we adopt an existing software or start from scratch?
Absolutely - existing software.
There should need to be no discussion about this - not because you should be a dictator but because it's a fools errand.
We all started at "Four legs good, two legs bad!"
Sort of like a two tier society where we can keep those who have and those who don't have, separated. An apartheid if you will. That way people who have Bitcoin can air their more valuable opinions.
The scammers that cause the most damage are the ones that are successful. I.e. the ones that already have Bitcoin or find it trivial to obtain some.
Your barrier to entry is going to hurt more people than it helps.
Yes, the rabble should have their own section.
A 'VIP' section would be ok as it's optional.
You're going to make it annoying for genuine users and only make the cost to a scammer $1? Downloading of Pirate Bay or ripping a DVD is simple too but you'll find most home users buy DVDs and sit through the FBI warning and adverts time and time again. To a determined scammer/spammer your barrier to entry is too low. To an ordinary user, the barrier to entry is too high.
Sure, you might have eliminated all but the most harmless of scammers (which aren't the ones you need to worry about) and a large chunk of new users who decided to go elsewhere.
You'll have a lot of issues like people currently do here where they want to participate in a discussion immediately but can't.
I don't have a problem with your suggestions - I just think it doesn't solve any problems. It just seems to exclude newbies and very low end scammers.
For certain discussions we should exclude people who don't really own any Bitcoins.
Sort of like a two tier society where we can keep those who have and those who don't have, separated. An apartheid if you will. That way people who have Bitcoin can air their more valuable opinions.
For certain threads it should be required that you have Bitcoins to participate at all. This keeps out the sort of people who are only involved with the community to try and sabotage it, or keep an eye on it, or spam/scam it. If the scammer/spammer has to actually have Bitcoins to sign up to the site then that is proof that they have faith in or believe in it enough to have purchased or have earned some.
The scammers that cause the most damage are the ones that are successful. I.e. the ones that already have Bitcoin or find it trivial to obtain some.
Your barrier to entry is going to hurt more people than it helps.
Also you're right not every thread should cost coins.
Yes, the rabble should have their own section.
There should be newbie sections of the site. I'm just saying the people who want to get to VIP sections should pay to access those sections and to register and not be restricted to the newbie section I think having to verify that you own Bitcoins, Litecoins or some other kind of coin worth beyond a minimum value is important.
A 'VIP' section would be ok as it's optional.
But I don't think it's hard to earn Bitcoins for anyone who is truly determined. When the person signs up they could be directed to websites to buy or work for Bitcoins which would completely remove all excuses for why someone couldn't have $1 worth in Bitcoin.
You're going to make it annoying for genuine users and only make the cost to a scammer $1? Downloading of Pirate Bay or ripping a DVD is simple too but you'll find most home users buy DVDs and sit through the FBI warning and adverts time and time again. To a determined scammer/spammer your barrier to entry is too low. To an ordinary user, the barrier to entry is too high.
Sure, you might have eliminated all but the most harmless of scammers (which aren't the ones you need to worry about) and a large chunk of new users who decided to go elsewhere.
It should go like this, you sign up for the site and prior to verifying your commitment you're stuck in the newbie section. The only way to get out of this section is to gain enough Bitcoin experience.
You can do this by either purchasing Bitcoins, or working for Bitcoins. You could be posting in the newbie section and someone can give you a tip and now you have Bitcoin experience. You can now use that tip money to buy a pass out of the newbie section.
But what if no one decides to tip you? Then you can actually go work for Bitcoins. There are sites which offer jobs which pay in Bitcoins and those sites will increasingly become more popular. The forum should be set up so that when you try to exit the newbie section without any Bitcoins then you get redirected to a page which lists various sites to buy Bitcoins from or work for Bitcoins. The point is to make people earn their way into the privileged parts of the site so that they are committed and value it more.
Let's say they decide to work for the Bitcoins and after 45 minutes they have $1. Now they can say they have Bitcoin experience and can exit the newbie section of the site. At the same time the site makes plenty of money if everyone pays $1 just to get out of the newbie section, and it's really equal to what they'd generate in ad revenue based on my calculations (actually it's possibly much more).
If someone cannot take the time to learn how to earn Bitcoins, will not take any bounty off a forum or go to the Bitcoin job sites or sign up at an exchange, or just make a good post and get tipped, then why would the forum want people who don't intend to contribute?
You can do this by either purchasing Bitcoins, or working for Bitcoins. You could be posting in the newbie section and someone can give you a tip and now you have Bitcoin experience. You can now use that tip money to buy a pass out of the newbie section.
But what if no one decides to tip you? Then you can actually go work for Bitcoins. There are sites which offer jobs which pay in Bitcoins and those sites will increasingly become more popular. The forum should be set up so that when you try to exit the newbie section without any Bitcoins then you get redirected to a page which lists various sites to buy Bitcoins from or work for Bitcoins. The point is to make people earn their way into the privileged parts of the site so that they are committed and value it more.
Let's say they decide to work for the Bitcoins and after 45 minutes they have $1. Now they can say they have Bitcoin experience and can exit the newbie section of the site. At the same time the site makes plenty of money if everyone pays $1 just to get out of the newbie section, and it's really equal to what they'd generate in ad revenue based on my calculations (actually it's possibly much more).
If someone cannot take the time to learn how to earn Bitcoins, will not take any bounty off a forum or go to the Bitcoin job sites or sign up at an exchange, or just make a good post and get tipped, then why would the forum want people who don't intend to contribute?
You'll have a lot of issues like people currently do here where they want to participate in a discussion immediately but can't.
I don't have a problem with your suggestions - I just think it doesn't solve any problems. It just seems to exclude newbies and very low end scammers.
I would say it is far, far more likely to have success with adding plugins/extensions to off-the-shelf software than to have new forum software programmed from scratch. I haven't seen any features yet that would require programming from scratch, so why reinvent the wheel?
This is my thought, exactly.
if you use the now version of smf there is not much you cant change 
do you think there is any chance of using an off-the shelf software platform?
I would say it is far, far more likely to have success with adding plugins/extensions to off-the-shelf software than to have new forum software programmed from scratch. I haven't seen any features yet that would require programming from scratch, so why reinvent the wheel?
do you think there is any chance of using an off-the shelf software platform?
Zach you are not getting the bigger picture. It's not about the method, it's about restricting the noise. Having a members only section where noobs cannot post (or perhaps even read) would provide a place where we could have quiet intelligent discussions. This forum, open to all, does not allow for that. It is impossible to have a meaningful conversation in a stadium full of people if everyone has a microphone.
Nottm28, I agree we can start to scope. I would not restrict the interested parties to coders and testers though. I think we need input from all types of users. You clearly have a handle on this, give us some specifics. Let's talk about scoping the project and see what it looks like (preliminary, with no regard for software or platform).
Nottm28, I agree we can start to scope. I would not restrict the interested parties to coders and testers though. I think we need input from all types of users. You clearly have a handle on this, give us some specifics. Let's talk about scoping the project and see what it looks like (preliminary, with no regard for software or platform).
Ok scope is ready imo. Invite people to add requirements and then choose top 10-20 requirements as the start to the scoping study. Phase 1. Items not in top 10-20 go to scoping phase 2.
E.g.
Must have ability to add trust to a user.
Would be nice to somehow stop multiple accounts.
etc
List of 20 most popular must have's = scope
Then onto assigning PM, design discussion, technology to use (I love jave but there's loads of younger kids in here who like php, perl etc etc - PM to decide).
Request for volunteers (given chosen tech).
Tasks assigned.
PM to manage progress.
Testing, testing and more testing. Then some more.
Go beta, go live
Zach you are not getting the bigger picture. It's not about the method, it's about restricting the noise. Having a members only section where noobs cannot post (or perhaps even read) would provide a place where we could have quiet intelligent discussions. This forum, open to all, does not allow for that. It is impossible to have a meaningful conversation in a stadium full of people if everyone has a microphone.
Nottm28, I agree we can start to scope. I would not restrict the interested parties to coders and testers though. I think we need input from all types of users. You clearly have a handle on this, give us some specifics. Let's talk about scoping the project and see what it looks like (preliminary, with no regard for software or platform).
Nottm28, I agree we can start to scope. I would not restrict the interested parties to coders and testers though. I think we need input from all types of users. You clearly have a handle on this, give us some specifics. Let's talk about scoping the project and see what it looks like (preliminary, with no regard for software or platform).
We've got many of the core requirements. Should we adopt an existing software or start from scratch?
We could start with a debate about the pros and cons of one of the action items... just a suggestion. I am not trying to dictate anything as if I had all the answers I'd have completed the project already. I do not have all the answers.
I am open to suggestions on next steps. I am also open to continuing to identify the major problems if we have not exhausted that issue. What I do not want to do is rush this. We need input from many people so that we do not miss important points.
note:
We also have a team in Germany working on the problem with us, so we'll solve the problem for English and German speakers in the first round.
We could start with a debate about the pros and cons of one of the action items... just a suggestion. I am not trying to dictate anything as if I had all the answers I'd have completed the project already. I do not have all the answers.
I am open to suggestions on next steps. I am also open to continuing to identify the major problems if we have not exhausted that issue. What I do not want to do is rush this. We need input from many people so that we do not miss important points.
note:
We also have a team in Germany working on the problem with us, so we'll solve the problem for English and German speakers in the first round.
People on board is always good.
I would suggest:
Gather interested parties (documentor, coders, testers, project manager).
Scoping study - a document (or list of requirements) signed off and agreed with all interested parties.
Allocation of tasks to interested parties by project manager.
Daily updates from PM as to the task progress.
Delivery to beta.
Delivery to prod.
That is from reading all the posts if you high grade the users it will never succeed you need all the newbies because there the ones that will be the future of bitcoin
If bitcoin becomes mainstream you will be on the frontline setting an example to all the new people if you stick them all in a newbie section and make them pay to join they will not support bitcoin as they will see it as a dictatorship
Is that what you really want from your forum ?
what I would suggest you do is think long and hard about what you are trying to achieve by making the forum
If you charge for anything what happens when the price of bitcoin goes up ?
If bitcoin doubles in price you cant just charge half the amount because all the users that paid more would be annoyed
For example on here when bitcoin was 10usd you could buy the vip tag for 50BTC ($500) now 50 BTC is ( $5,000) and now all the people that paid 50BTC will not let them lower it to 5BTC ($500) as they say 50BTC is 50BTC
I am not advertising my forum on you thread even if I was would it mater as it altcoins only
If bitcoin becomes mainstream you will be on the frontline setting an example to all the new people if you stick them all in a newbie section and make them pay to join they will not support bitcoin as they will see it as a dictatorship
Is that what you really want from your forum ?
what I would suggest you do is think long and hard about what you are trying to achieve by making the forum
If you charge for anything what happens when the price of bitcoin goes up ?
If bitcoin doubles in price you cant just charge half the amount because all the users that paid more would be annoyed
For example on here when bitcoin was 10usd you could buy the vip tag for 50BTC ($500) now 50 BTC is ( $5,000) and now all the people that paid 50BTC will not let them lower it to 5BTC ($500) as they say 50BTC is 50BTC
I am not advertising my forum on you thread even if I was would it mater as it altcoins only
We've got many of the core requirements. Should we adopt an existing software or start from scratch?
We could start with a debate about the pros and cons of one of the action items... just a suggestion. I am not trying to dictate anything as if I had all the answers I'd have completed the project already. I do not have all the answers.
I am open to suggestions on next steps. I am also open to continuing to identify the major problems if we have not exhausted that issue. What I do not want to do is rush this. We need input from many people so that we do not miss important points.
I am also available to fund this project. If needed I will personally sponsor any and all software licenses, server fees, etc to get this off the ground (advertiser free).
note:
We also have a team in Germany working on the problem with us, so we'll solve the problem for English and German speakers in the first round.
We could start with a debate about the pros and cons of one of the action items... just a suggestion. I am not trying to dictate anything as if I had all the answers I'd have completed the project already. I do not have all the answers.
I am open to suggestions on next steps. I am also open to continuing to identify the major problems if we have not exhausted that issue. What I do not want to do is rush this. We need input from many people so that we do not miss important points.
I am also available to fund this project. If needed I will personally sponsor any and all software licenses, server fees, etc to get this off the ground (advertiser free).
note:
We also have a team in Germany working on the problem with us, so we'll solve the problem for English and German speakers in the first round.
let the dictatorship begin
How is what he posted a dictatorship? Why are you posting here other than to promote your alt-coin forum, zach? How is your post of any value to this discussion?
Yeah I see this guy's post is OTT - but being in this thread early - where do we start Viceroy? You need to make a plan/timeline project manage it etc - I would be happy to help code wise but I think we all need to see an action plan...
[EDIT]
Overview
Requirements
Volunteers (to do the tasks)
Tasks (divvied out)
etc
let the dictatorship begin
How is what he posted a dictatorship? Why are you posting here other than to promote your alt-coin forum, zach? How is your post of any value to this discussion?
let the dictatorship begin
Here's another rather radical idea: Bitcoin addresses as usernames.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
This is similar to the idea I was promoting only more detailed and fleshed out. I endorse this.
By forcing a user to pay with bitcoin you eliminate all those who do not yet own bitcoin, which is a much larger group than those who do... it will hinder adoption of the forum. Perhaps if you want to create a thread you should need a bitcoin address but anyone can post in _______ section.
To the idea of not advertising, I don't see the benefit. Opportunities that ad dollars could provide include things like community events or even advertising the forum in a bigger forum... advertise the forum on google, for example. There are many possible benefits that ad dollars can help with and I do not see the downside to charging companies who want to advertise to do so assuming the money is used to benefit the community. Here's another thing money could/should be spent on: a political lobby toward the Dept of Treasury to benefit the community instead of letting big banks or the winklevoss twins run the exchanges.
Great contributions everyone thank you.
To the idea of not advertising, I don't see the benefit. Opportunities that ad dollars could provide include things like community events or even advertising the forum in a bigger forum... advertise the forum on google, for example. There are many possible benefits that ad dollars can help with and I do not see the downside to charging companies who want to advertise to do so assuming the money is used to benefit the community. Here's another thing money could/should be spent on: a political lobby toward the Dept of Treasury to benefit the community instead of letting big banks or the winklevoss twins run the exchanges.
Great contributions everyone thank you.
For certain discussions we should exclude people who don't really own any Bitcoins. For certain threads it should be required that you have Bitcoins to participate at all. This keeps out the sort of people who are only involved with the community to try and sabotage it, or keep an eye on it, or spam/scam it. If the scammer/spammer has to actually have Bitcoins to sign up to the site then that is proof that they have faith in or believe in it enough to have purchased or have earned some.
Also you're right not every thread should cost coins. There should be newbie sections of the site. I'm just saying the people who want to get to VIP sections should pay to access those sections and to register and not be restricted to the newbie section I think having to verify that you own Bitcoins, Litecoins or some other kind of coin worth beyond a minimum value is important.
I think it shouldn't be hard for newbies to acquire enough of these coins from being tipped, lotteries, bounties or from trade. After they have Bitcoin experience or cryptocurrency experience (proven by the fact that they own some), then they should gain access to the more trusted part of the forum.
These are just my opinions.
On ad dollars, if I'm willing to pay a via micropayments to not have ads on a per page basis then I shouldn't have to view any ads. If and when I'm not paying enough so that it's beyond what the forum would have made off me in ads then I should have to see ads. I think with transaction fees and micropayments you could easily get enough money to not have to worry about ads but I don't blame you if you keep ads because micropayments might not work well or might take a long time to work.
This is like Bitcoin eventually going from paying miners through coin generation and then the switch to transaction fees. I think at some point websites are going to switch to transaction fees. How would your forum compete with another forum which offers similar capabilities but paid for entirely in transaction fees? I think the best approach for short to medium term is to profit from ads and micropayments until we know which mechanism will power websites in the future (right now I don't think anyone knows how profitable micropayments could be).
I agree with the political organizing aspect. I have posted on that topic in the past. I think we'd need ad revenue, micropayment, all sorts of different methods of getting people to spend their coinage for access.
You misunderstood SgtSpike: you wouldn't have to pay to register/post, you would just have to sign a message with a signature whose corresponding address has at least 2BTC
I agree with this
Maybe not in all subforums though
I agree with this
Maybe not in all subforums though
That would make the forum extremely unfriendly to newbies and many others. A lot of people don't have btc due to their financial issues for example but the still believe in bitcoin and want to discuss it with the community.
Everyone starts as a newbie. I think right now because the perception is that it's still hard to get Bitcoins you have a point. But I don't think it's hard to earn Bitcoins for anyone who is truly determined. When the person signs up they could be directed to websites to buy or work for Bitcoins which would completely remove all excuses for why someone couldn't have $1 worth in Bitcoin.
They can either buy it, or work for it, but since the forum isn't free why shouldn't they be made to work for Bitcoin to access the better part of the forum? It also would act to prove they truly believe in Bitcoin because anyone who would buy or work for it is now invested in it and that in my opinion is essential for a community to thrive.
Here's another rather radical idea: Bitcoin addresses as usernames.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
So to participate at the peak, it could have cost $520?
What if someone wants to find out more about Bitcoin or is looking for investment but has no Bitcoin themselves?
So for them, no matter how small the amount of Bitcoin, they would need to have a bank account (not everyone does), they would then need to transfer fees to an exchange, then buy some Bitcoin.
Sounds like quite a barrier to entry.
It should go like this, you sign up for the site and prior to verifying your commitment you're stuck in the newbie section. The only way to get out of this section is to gain enough Bitcoin experience.
You can do this by either purchasing Bitcoins, or working for Bitcoins. You could be posting in the newbie section and someone can give you a tip and now you have Bitcoin experience. You can now use that tip money to buy a pass out of the newbie section.
But what if no one decides to tip you? Then you can actually go work for Bitcoins. There are sites which offer jobs which pay in Bitcoins and those sites will increasingly become more popular. The forum should be set up so that when you try to exit the newbie section without any Bitcoins then you get redirected to a page which lists various sites to buy Bitcoins from or work for Bitcoins. The point is to make people earn their way into the privileged parts of the site so that they are committed and value it more.
Let's say they decide to work for the Bitcoins and after 45 minutes they have $1. Now they can say they have Bitcoin experience and can exit the newbie section of the site. At the same time the site makes plenty of money if everyone pays $1 just to get out of the newbie section, and it's really equal to what they'd generate in ad revenue based on my calculations (actually it's possibly much more).
If someone cannot take the time to learn how to earn Bitcoins, will not take any bounty off a forum or go to the Bitcoin job sites or sign up at an exchange, or just make a good post and get tipped, then why would the forum want people who don't intend to contribute?
"If the fee is high enough then no one will ever sock puppet again."
Lol.
Let me tell you: it's going to be impossible to catch someone who knows what they're doing sockpuppeting.
Lol.
Let me tell you: it's going to be impossible to catch someone who knows what they're doing sockpuppeting.
They'll have to pay a fee to sockpuppet. It's not about catching them it's about attaching a cost to the practice so that it isn't free.
Im pretty new here, but here is my 2 cents:
OpenID, google, facebook auths
2fa
mobile theme
Mods that actually help when you are in need, im talking to you maged
privacy policy
terms of service
no sock puppet accounts
no selling of accounts
ban hammer
OpenID, google, facebook auths
2fa
mobile theme
Mods that actually help when you are in need, im talking to you maged
privacy policy
terms of service
no sock puppet accounts
no selling of accounts
ban hammer
You forgot, prevent scammers from offering bounties for work done
Adding:
Disallow the use of registration and posting via tor or other crap like that.
Disallow the use of registration and posting via tor or other crap like that.
Jump to: