sig campaign- what about "1merited post per week" instead of"25 post per week" - page 2.

TianaStam

member

Activity: 218

Merit: 12

Quote from: Taki on May 16, 2018, 11:42:19 AM

Interesting suggestion, but as a member who didn't get a merit last two months for sure I do not support it Roll Eyes

I do not know what is the reason, my poor English or poor ideas or both, but merit doesn't going well to me.

Obviously both.
Probably the reason why people stay less merit now is that they spent all of they had in the most beginning. How many people on the forum? As I see here there are much more low raked users who got few merits to share, so they simply spent it all in first few days.

Taki

hero member

Activity: 1078

Merit: 514

Interesting suggestion, but as a member who didn't get a merit last two months for sure I do not support it Roll Eyes

I do not know what is the reason, my poor English or poor ideas or both, but merit doesn't going well to me.
Backing to the OP I can say that the forum is the place where a user can stay his opinion openly and if you do not agree with that it doesn't mean that it is a shitpost. The problem is in bots which are counting the number of posts and characters without watching the post how it is. I am sure if managers would check every commentator the situation would became much better.

mdayonliner

copper member

Activity: 630

Merit: 420

We are Bitcoin!

Quote from: Welsh on May 15, 2018, 01:54:24 PM

Haha, no. You could probably offer some people a pack of freddos (25p!) and they would join all jelly legged. As long as there's money to be earned for both parties signature campaigns shall remain. Even, with heavier restrictions I still think they would exist, and not be such a burden to the general forum user.

I am running a campaign for self promotion (It's actually a bit different than the regular campaigns)

Even-though...
# I have escrowed my fund
# Transparent with the data I am receiving
# Responding the community whenever they are asking for anything
# Offering min 0.002BTC and maximum 0.0036 BTC for one time task.

I am not receiving much response from the community.

The reason I can identify is... It's not a guaranteed payment. One will win the bounty price. So, the hunters are not much motivated.

If the scenario was like this...

# Create a eye catching website
# Create a useless ERC20 token

and then create a twitter bounty to award these useless ERC20 token to people who will spam it on twitter then we would see these people will join the party.

People actually follow the crowd knowing nothing about the reason.

hilariousetc

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3061

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: Welsh on May 15, 2018, 12:02:09 PM

In a perfect world this would be great, but we don't live in a perfect world.

Exactly. Having merit requirements doesn't really work and I'm kinda against it, because people will just start buying merits, meriting their alts or just trading merit between themselves. What happens if you're making excellent posts but you just don't manage to receive any merits, whereas a generic shitposter has his friend merit one of his shitposts or he buys it or promises them he will merit them back and bingo he's getting paid. Campaign managers should just start doing their job properly and only accept quality posters in the first place.

TheUltraElite

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1253

So anyway, I applied as a merit source :)

Quote from: coinlocket$ on May 15, 2018, 01:29:06 PM

1- Very bad idea, the merit abusing is already from 20-40% weekly in this way you will increase even more(March)

2- Again you can't envaluate the merit gain while people are abusing without penalities, I'm not talking about 50+ merit (still unpunished) abuses but people even abuse/tradeback for 5-10 merits.

The only thing you can think about is merit abuse. Just accept the fact that merit trading if happening underground it cannot be prevented. But such cases if identified will be tagged accordingly. If you are not happy with this then please leave the forum rather than taking this tone/attitude or suggest some better method to weed out such sales.

Quote from: mdayonliner on May 15, 2018, 01:41:47 PM

I wonder if the sig campaign managers get worried about not having many participants for their campaigns.

Sarcastically speaking the 99.99% of the forum population is here for the signature campaigns and bounty hunting. Who cares about the forum or its discussions any more?
It is important that bounty managers apply strict merit rules on signature campaign participants.

Tyrantt

hero member

Activity: 1022

Merit: 564

Need some spare btc for a new PC

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

I think that if it were MY company, I would prefer to see my ad (signature) in one merited post per week instead of 25 shitposts per week.

I would like to hear campaign Managers and more veterans members here. Probably it's not possible for now, but maybe something similar in future?

Look at it as from the youtube ad system. They might not want their ads on racist youtubers, the ones who spread hatred,etc.. but they still want a larger viewer base. Advertisement is meant to be seen by as many people as it can.

If I were to own a business I'd probably prefer 20+ quality posts and a bonus for merited posts as a motivation.

HabBear

hero member

Activity: 1106

Merit: 638

Quote from: pugman on May 15, 2018, 05:25:40 PM

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

Only thing : Bounty managers don't give a rat's ass about it. And half or probably even more of the bounty managers are new to the forum and don't even care to check out the post quality.

More reason to hold them accountable for their campaign participant's actions, or kick them the fuck out! Those bounties are shit opportunities for people anyway, literally peddling rubbish.

But going as extreme as getting per merit doesn't help the companies trying to do the advertising and will lead to other cheating activities. Let's not try to complicate the system, let's just do a better job calling out and eliminating those that abuse it.

Quote from: pugman on May 15, 2018, 05:25:40 PM

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on May 15, 2018, 12:41:58 PM

I like what Yahoo62278 is doing better, which is to require a minimum amount of merits before even being accepted. That weeds out a lot of shitposters.

Not necessarily.

Yahoo's campaign participants [/url]were caught sending merits to one another just so that they could enter the campaign. Hilariousandco found a few of them but that's not the end.

As long as Yahoo and others are policing their campaign's people. Yahoo's been around a long time, I don't expect anything less from him.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

Quote from: Silent26 on May 15, 2018, 07:37:06 PM

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule.

The only solution that I can see to avoid these "shitposting" in Megathreads is, Delete all Megathreads. As we can see, these Megathreads are already worthless, they're just like a trashcan full of garbage and the only solution to clean up all the mess is to dispose it.

you can lock/delete them, but that doesn't solve the problem. many more similar threads will pop up in their place the next day. and it's a lot of work for mods to stay on top of.

these bounty spamming farms are quite mechanical; i think some of them are even employing bots now. i think they'll immediately build new megathreads in short order.

Quote from: Silent26 on May 15, 2018, 07:37:06 PM

Some people really hates spams usually to Megathreads, some people are just using it/posting tonit in order to increase their activity and not worrying about the quality of the posts. But why don't we kill the root? Which is these existing spam flooded threads.

the only scalable (read: automated) solution i see here is self-locking threads after a certain number of pages. but it's probably a bad idea, as it will arbitrarily cut off ongoing discussion in the case of non-spam threads. otherwise moderators need to address it manually, which probably isn't sustainable for any real length of time.

Silent26

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 327

Politeness: 1227: - 0 / +1

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule.

The only solution that I can see to avoid these "shitposting" in Megathreads is, Delete all Megathreads. As we can see, these Megathreads are already worthless, they're just like a trashcan full of garbage and the only solution to clean up all the mess is to dispose it.

Some people really hates spams usually to Megathreads, some people are just using it/posting on it in order to increase their activity and not worrying about the quality of the posts. But why don't we kill the root? Which is these existing spam flooded threads.

DarkStar_

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 3284

Quote from: figmentofmyass on May 15, 2018, 06:24:04 PM

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule. I don't count any megathread posts, guitarplinker didn't when Rollin.io's campaign was running, and I'm guessing some other managers do as well. If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

but how do you get all managers to do this?

The same way you get all managers to require 1 merited post per week. You don't, without theymos making some changes.

figmentofmyass

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1483

the bottom line is that merit is highly subjective. it's the prerogative of the advertisers how they want to incentivize posters, but i'd personally avoid any campaign that used merit instead of post quality to deny payment.

Quote from: Jet Cash on May 15, 2018, 12:12:49 PM

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

Google reads them.

indeed. i get the impression that some campaigns are mostly intended for google results, not forum impressions or clicks. dealing with that kind of motive is a whole different can of worms.

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule. I don't count any megathread posts, guitarplinker didn't when Rollin.io's campaign was running, and I'm guessing some other managers do as well. If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

but how do you get all managers to do this?

cryptothief

member

Activity: 350

Merit: 41

I like the merited post idea, and it would definitely encourage participants to up their game, just not sure it would have the reach that bounty managers need. Maybe a combination, so a minimum post count, plus a bonus of some sort depending on merited posts. I took part in a campaign recently where they gave reduced stakes for posts they deemed as below a certain quality level. While this is subjective, I think it had the desired effect of raising the quality of posts. I don't really consider the rank of a poster when (on the rare occasion) I click on a signature, so it raises the 'argument' that the quality of the post doesn't really matter as much as we might think. Minimum number of words and a post quality check by the bounty manager would seem to be the minimum requirements to maximise the advertising potential. Adding in a 'merit bonus' could be an additional measuring tool, although it could open the door for another avenue of abuse. Maybe a merit bonus with the post reviewed by the bounty manager before issuing it. Not an easy job though.

pugman

legendary

Activity: 2383

Merit: 1551

dogs are cute.

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

Only thing : Bounty managers don't give a rat's ass about it. And half or probably even more of the bounty managers are new to the forum and don't even care to check out the post quality.

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on May 15, 2018, 12:41:58 PM

I like what Yahoo62278 is doing better, which is to require a minimum amount of merits before even being accepted. That weeds out a lot of shitposters.

Not necessarily. Yahoo's campaign participants were caught sending merits to one another just so that they could enter the campaign. Hilariousandco found a few of them but that's not the end.

bitart

hero member

Activity: 1442

Merit: 629

Vires in Numeris

Quote from: DarkStar_ on May 15, 2018, 04:45:59 PM

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule. I don't count any megathread posts, guitarplinker didn't when Rollin.io's campaign was running, and I'm guessing some other managers do as well. If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

This would be the ideal solution, to somehow force bounty managers to 1) set some rules for quality 2) force enrolled members to post according to the rules.
But nobody can tell how we could force those bounty managers...
This is a free forum, it seems that everyone is allowed to manage his own campaign, if he wants to, or become a bounty manager and manage several bounty campagins... Signature campaigns are way better compared to bounty campaigns these days, so somehow we should regulate the bounties. I know that bounties (and ICOs) are good for the forum and generate traffic, which generates ad revenue, also it ranks the forum in the first place in a google search (the high volume of the current traffic), but somehow we need to find a balance between traffic and quality...

DarkStar_

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 3284

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

So kill the root of the problem, instead of adding some other rule. I don't count any megathread posts, guitarplinker didn't when Rollin.io's campaign was running, and I'm guessing some other managers do as well. If all managers do this, then things would be fine, without needing to heavily change up how campaigns work, and open up new avenues of abuse.

bitart

hero member

Activity: 1442

Merit: 629

Vires in Numeris

Quote from: HabBear on May 15, 2018, 01:39:37 PM

Quote from: bitmover on May 15, 2018, 11:57:31 AM

I was thinking about this possibility. What if in future sig campaign use "1 merited post per week" instead of"25 post per week" ?

Nobody read those shitposters in megathreads

I think that if it were MY company, I would prefer to see my ad (signature) in one merited post per week instead of 25 shitposts per week.

Correct, nobody reads those shitposts in megathreads, people scroll right past them, which allows the viewer (scroller) to see the advertisement in the signature that separates each post.

If you remove the incentive for people to make posts the company get's their advertisement shown on fewer and fewer threads.

The problem with megathreads, off-topic section, bounty section, etc that really nobody reads those topics but only writes them

So it's OK if someone runs thru a spam megathread he will see a lot of advertisement but as nobody reads them, there will be nobody to see the advertisements, only the bots, but bots are not the targeted audience...
If they spam in the Beginners board or in Bitcoin Discussion, your idea is correct.

jackg

copper member

Activity: 2856

Merit: 3071

https://bit.ly/387FXHi lightning theory

I have an issue regarding this.

1. I earn merits in bursts (no idea why) but some weeks I get nothing, and others I can get 10-20 merits in them. I think most of the merits in the places I post probably end up going to members who actually need them rather than members who no longer need to rank up (legendaries).

I know DarkStar_ came up with an idea a while ago to try to get users to get 10 merits in the first month on the chip mixer campaign (which most of the users did achieve - but it was considered the rule was too harsh and the idea was dropped).

2. What stops a signature campaign manager meriting their campaigners first post to make it look like the problem is solved (if they have enough alts, it's possible).

Emilyp

member

Activity: 546

Merit: 10

If this is to be put into effect, remember that it isn't all quality posts that gets merited nd also low quality posts gets merited as well. In such scenario where merit is the determining factor, don't you think it will even be more abused as people in a given campaign will do all that's within their power to get merit for each week.

Welsh

staff

Activity: 3304

Merit: 4115

Quote from: mdayonliner on May 15, 2018, 01:41:47 PM

I wonder if the sig campaign managers get worried about not having many participants for their campaigns.

Haha, no. You could probably offer some people a pack of freddos (25p!) and they would join all jelly legged. As long as there's money to be earned for both parties signature campaigns shall remain. Even, with heavier restrictions I still think they would exist, and not be such a burden to the general forum user.

mdayonliner

copper member

Activity: 630

Merit: 420

We are Bitcoin!

Signature campaigns will flop.

The number of signature campaigner will dramatically drop means not many shitposters will be joining in the forum.

Already exist shitposters will only post on the bounty threads to report their twitter and facebook bounty.

There will be only knowledge seekers in the forum.

May be the forum will lose large amount of traffic but it will be a better place.

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on May 15, 2018, 12:41:58 PM

I like what Yahoo62278 is doing better, which is to require a minimum amount of merits before even being accepted.

I personally like the idea too, I have seen Lauda is doing the same.

Quote from: TheUltraElite on May 15, 2018, 12:59:03 PM

1. A rule like - those who dont receive at least 5 merits during their posting period of the entire campaign will not eligible for payment - for those which are paying in bulk once campaign end.

2. Some campaign are having a minimum number of merits in order to enter them. It would be great if these people are also evaluated in future about their post quality by looking at the number of merits gained while participating in that campaign.

I wonder if the sig campaign managers get worried about not having many participants for their campaigns.

Topic: sig campaign- what about "1merited post per week" instead of"25 post per week" - page 2. (Read 970 times)