Topic: Signature campaign stats: users, bans, posts, deleted posts (Read 1341 times)

Great! Thank you for all what you do for the forum.

Unfortunately I'm up to my neck into some other work but maybe I'll find some time. Will try to refresh this thread as well.

Edit: this thread has been updated and the CryptoTalk list has been updated as well.

Hello suchmoon
Are you planning to generate a new list of Cryptotalk campaign participants soon?
I see the last one was in october. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cryptotalk-signature-campaign-participants-2019-10-25-5196008

 

ty

Thanks. I'll see if I can replace those with the correct links.

You realize that if suchmoon gives you that list, you're going to repay the favor by ignoring him in the future?  


If you plan any updates you might want to remove
is a short url service.

Pure coincidence is used by a bounty campaign that has just been bumped in the scam accusation

Most of the users of forum including the best users are using at least one of these signatures. If you put all of them in your ignore list, then you will see only the posts made by newbies. So if you want to ignore all of the posts made by these users, I suggest you to ignore the forum and logout now.

Any way, you can use the spreadsheets.

I have added avg and max number of users, as well as posts per day. Removed bitcoin.org and discord.gg sites.

---

That would be a lot of users so probably not. I'm not even sure if your ignore list could handle that.

would it be possible to generate a list of all the users in these campaigns? i would like to put them all on my ignore list.

I, and I'm sure everyone else, appreciates the work you are doing. I realize it's not going to be an instant fix and new spammers are joining all the time. But because of their ridiculous policy of accepting everyone* (which again I realize you have no control over) and then relying on you to ban the spammers, I can't help but feel you will never win. There is a near endless stream of spammer accounts who will want to sign up at some point. If they keep going like this, I would hope theymos would step in as he did before.

*The cynical side of me says they are doing this on purpose. People set their signature, you quickly ban them, they don't realise they are banned, and then YoBit benefit from free signature advertising.

I think everybody knows your situation with the Cryptotalk campaign and that you don't have the power to approve applications. So obviously when a shitposter joins and then you kick them out - by definition all that shit they posted makes the campaign look worse. Don't take this personally


I'm counting all users who ever had that signature over the course of the year. And it also includes those who don't remove signatures even if they're no longer paid by the campaign. I'm thinking of adding "max daily posters" or "average daily posters" or something like that, which would be a better reflection of the size of the campaign.

I skimmed through that thread and saw that most of the posts were being made by cryptotalk.org campaigners.  Some of them weren't exactly shitposts, but I'll take your word on the obviousness of some of the replies.  No doubt they're motivated primarily by their campaign. 

I have the whole altcoin section blocked now, as this seems to be where all the crap posters flock to.  Sometimes I find interesting threads there, but right now I don't feel like sifting through a mountain of manure either looking for a hidden gem to merit or to read something that catches my attention.  That entire section stinks to high hell--it always did, but now it's even worse. 

If that's the case, you ought to learn to lower your expectations.  Bring a shovel and a poopy bag next time you see a thread where the majority of the members are wearing a signature that has anything to do with Yobit or cryptotalk.org.  Lol. 

Anyone remember Secondstrade?  Their participants were just as bad as Yobit's, except I think they put a cap at how many they allowed in their campaign.  It makes a huge difference.  If cryptotalk.org would just accept maybe 50 or even 100 members, the problem might not be so bad.  Or if their manager had any say in the matter as to who gets into the campaign.  The automated process they use is crazy.  No post checking, no merit requirement, no nothing.

I am killing as many spammers as I can each day. Everyone can see that, only problem I have with the numbers is when I ban a user they're still wearing the sig. Even though they're kicked out, their deleted posts and all other stats count against the campaign. Not that the numbers wouldn't still be higher than all the other campaigns(probably 5x more members in the campaign then quite a few of the others, so you have to kinda expect that somewhat right?), but still not exact.

@suchmoon Just to verify a little info for you on the campaigns I manage. I know you posted you have not verified any of the info, just trying to help if this helps.

Windice - 45 currently active users
Bitsler - 16 active users
Bustadice - 16 active users
MintDice - 40 active users
Cryptotalk - 300+

I spoke with the yobit account and they're talking about implementing a merit requirement(no timetable). Agreed I wish i had more control so that users couldn't join and get paid for a few posts before i ban them.

Wow. Those numbers are even worse than I thought they would be. YoBit campaigns 1 and 2 coming in at 162 and 176 respectively, with the next closest campaign being Minter at only 28. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've been very aware of all the Minter spam over the last couple of weeks, but to think YoBit is 500% worse is astounding. Cryptotalk at a 176 is even more impressive when you think it has only been active for a few days, since not every spam post is deleted in good time. Seeing these numbers, despite Yahoo obviously trying his hardest to clean up this flood of trash posts, I can't help but feel (and hope) YoBit is heading for another ban.

LOL at the OP's post history, one of those quick language learners.

Sadly not the worst I've seen... I don't want this to become yet another Cryptotalk thread but yeah, we can expect more contrived discussions like that.

@suchmoon, what do you think about this nonsense? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5188843.0;topicseen

I mean......


Its soo borderline and non definitive... but, the obviousness in all of it is sickening.

True. I don't have a way to determine what is an "official" campaign and I stated as much in the OP. I have manually removed some frequent links that are not really campaigns (youtu.be, facebook.com, etc). If I don't forget, during the next update I'll do that with bitcoin.org and discord.gg as well. Binance and Freebitco.in I might just leave as is. If those users with referral links in their signatures are spamming we might want to know.

Yeah, and I'm not saying that their stats are good. I just thought that Yobit/Cryptotalk is the worst campaign. But seems there was even worse campaigns, just with less participants.
Let's hope that Yahoo will clean the house.

But I think Cryptotalk stats is awful.
Suchmoon has listed 100 campaigns and there are only 11 campaigns with a higher percentage of deleted posts than Cryptotalk.

Very interesting stats. Well, Yobit/Cryptotalk campaign stats isn't as bad as I expected. There was even worse campaigns. But notice mainly Yobit spammers, it's because this campaign have highest number of participants and it means highest number of spammers. It would be interesting to see some merits stats included to this table for comparison.
But not everything is 100% accurate here. Some websites are listed here without having signature campaign, for example Bitcoin.org - some users simply wear signatures with a link to Bitcoin.org. And there is websites which never had campaign here, like Binance or Freebitco.in - members simply promote their affiliate links in signature.