Topic: Since 2018, what did you contribute to prevent signature ads removed globally? - page 2. (Read 1431 times)

While I have not really done anything with the specific intent of "preventing signature campaign to be removed", I do have my own strategy of dealing with shit posts.
Shitposts come in all shapes and forms, but the ones that I tend to find most annoying, are the ones that are basically disguised as normal posts, but lack any real substance.

It's those replies that are somewhat on topic, but do not add anything to the discussion and the poster usually makes some kind of claim which isn't backed up by anything.
Even today I saw a post like that on a topic that talked about Bitcoin mining profitability.

The thing I do is just call it out, I quote the reply in question and basically correct them. Sometimes I'll use strong language, sometimes not, depends on the situation.
My main reason of doing it like that, is because I think that other people who might see my reply might be inclined not to copy that sort of behavior in the future.

If we want to raise the basic level of intelligent discussion on the forum, the best way to do it is to add intelligent discussion ourselves and try to call out bad behavior as much as possible.

I am against using merits as a punitive measure to curb spam rather than as an incentive to encourage quality posting, which it was originally designed for.
In my opinion it would be an overkill and would stimulate merit sales and bring about a cat race where members are forced to earn merit from other members. Regardless of their reasons for being on the forum.

I'll consider it one of the best ideas as, it's preferable than removing all airdrop merit. The old era-member who were quality contributors won't find it difficult to earn merit but the spammers will get trapped and they'll be the ones disturbing the forum with complains. This suggestion if implemented will also turnout to be an advantage to the airdropped users as, they won't be overlooked by campaigns managers when applying for a slots like they're currently been overlooked.

Here's another suggestion, all airdropped merit stays but smerits declays. Now when a user, get certain amount of good report against them for spamming, they get punished by removing some airdropped merit. Could be 15 merits per every 5 good report against them. This way, only the spammers get affected. The report used for this punishment has to be strictly spam related.

The numbers I provided were to enable us to see (roughly) the impact of your/a suggestion. Obviously there are plenty of cases amongst any rank that do not provide any meaningful content, a range that do, and a select reduced group that do and manage to be merited in the event to some meaningful extent.

I’m not one to vouch for maintaining ranks perpetually, but once given, it’s not easy to make the decision to revert it, from a social and psychological point of view. One has to view the reach of the numbers to understand the impact it would have, especially from the global perspective of the forum, the number of members and its traffic. That has to be balanced against changing the ranking system to a reward+punish one, based on the amount of earned merits, and finding the right equilibrium and the driving need to undergo the task is rather much a feat.

I'll put my guess.

— Signature bounties will be removed from bounties section.

— Some members will leave as they will not be able to make any earnings.

— A less number of new joiners, since most registrations happen because of earning matter involved.

— Post count will decrease significantly.

— There will be negligible spam.

— Less work for forum moderators.

The forum will become heaven for those who are here for discussions.

By mentioning about activity point, I meant actively posting. People can keep posting for their signature campaigns or bounties, and delete their past posts to maintain (nearly) constant activities over time. However, I don't think that is big issues and unsolvable because what LoyceV began to collect weeks ago might help, and forum can do it too (Viewing unedited posts and deleted posts)
It is fair if old Legendary maintains that rank over years if that account is inactive posting, but if that account makes 1000 posts and does not satisfy merits required (ie. 100 merits), that is very good indicator for shitposters.
They only should send their sMerits to good posts they see, but they must not do it.
So, there are 12955 users from Full members and above; and only 425 of them (about 3.3%) satisfy the proposed time-rolling merit requirements to maintain ranks (by DaveF). If that thing actually used, it will be another big change of forum, just after merit system in 2018. Personally, I think it will be the biggest change in forum rank system, because all ranks will be affected, no matter users are old-era (before) or new-era (after the birthday of merit system).
With legendary users who have been actively posting within last 6 months, and earned less then 60 merits; are they real legendary users? There are hundreds of users from Full Members to Hero Member ranks whom earned from 100 merits and above to rank up. They likely have higher values than those legendary (less than 60 earned merits) during the same period of last 6 months. I believe for those cases, their earned merits are much lower than 60.

How many of those 1602 are still active?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/otrkid70-183495 hacked
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/mellon-339752 dark over a year.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/maged-6347 Dark for 3.5 years
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/kwh-70535 Dark for 8 months
etc...

How many of those 1602 were legendary when merit came into existence and have provided no real content for over a year but just keep posting for the sig campaigns?

Edit a minute or 2 after after I posted this: Keep in mind the merit numbers I used I pulled out of my ass. More data points could give better numbers, it was an example.

-Dave

So if this temporary signature bans happens, how much should be the amount of time for this signature ban if we were to check who are posting for the bounties and who are posting because they want to post and if the aim is to resume the signatures regardless of whatever analysis come out, whats the benefit to  know all this ?

If that happened I could just imagine what Yobit has din when it attempted to re-enter Bitcointalk, a lot of inactive members woke up and when all the complaints broke in they are just trying to save Yobit's ass that its a good signature campaign that doesn't promote spam. I could imagine a temporary forum wide sig ban will just make a lot of members inactive and when it will be brought up back again then you will see that these members (or accounts) will be back being active again. You will really see the real members who will stay and won't stay just because of a sig ban.

That would have pretty drastic effects. Looking over a specific subset of profiles (those that have either merited or have been merited historically), I make it we’d get:
The first figure represents the number of profiles that meet the criteria. For example, 111 Legendries have earned over 60 merits in the last 6 months (meeting the "must get 10 every month on average per rolling 6 months" criteria), making it 6,93% of the Legendary profiles I’ve studied, and thus 93,07% of Legendries would be de-ranked to Full Member in your proposal (or whatever other rank).

The figures are really an overkill, and would really destroy pretty much the ranking system. If the merit requirements were to be high-ish (the above are not that high, but not many people make it), it could even give room to collude to not merit someone in order to de-rank them (a bit remote, but possible).

Note: In addition, there are other profiles I have not accounted for: those that have neither earned nor sent a single merit so far.  I'm also simplifying a bit, and omitting the added complexity of changing-conditions once ranked-up (i.e. a Full Member profile just turned Sr. Member with 30 earned merits in the last 6 months may be automatically demoted for not having the 42 required over the last 6 months to keep the Sr. Membership).

No point really. They would either spend them without giving it much though, or open a thread on Meta complaining for being de-ranked when they don’t care about the Merit System.

This will only make the merit thing more complicated. You know getting merit isn't an easy task as people are not generous in giving merits even to many good posts and dropping the rank level will make it more difficult to rank up.
A better approach is to demote the people who do not distribute the merit to others. Those who receive merit gets smerit too. They should spend it too.

This way merit will be more distributed and the deserving one will rank up quickly.

Users will then delete previous posts if they do not want to rank down. Easily circumvented.

I don't think so, DaveF, because you forgot about inactive users. Your suggested requirements should be combined with activity points.
I think it can be improved like this:

Brand new: Same
Newbie:   Same
Jr Member: Same
Member: 10 but must get at least 1 merit for each 100 activity points to maintain the rank, if not, user will drop to Jr. Member
Full Member: 75 but must get 5 merits for each 200 activity points to maintain the rank, if not, user will drop to Member
Sr. Member: 150 but must but must get 10 for each 400 activity points to maintain the rank, if not, user will drop to Full Member
Hero Member: 450 but must get 50 for each 800 activity points to maintain the rank, if not, user will drop to Senior Member
Legendary: 750 but must get 100 for each 1000-1200 activity points to maintain the rank, if not, user will drop to Hero Member

Thinking about it how about "rolling merit"

Instead of:

Brand new: 0
Newbie:   0
Jr Member: 1
Member: 10
Full Member: 100
Sr. Member: 250
Hero Member: 500
Legendary: 1000


You need:
Brand new: Same
Newbie:   Same
Jr Member: Same
Member: 10 but must get at least 1 every month or you drop to Jr. Member
Full Member: 75 but must get 5 every month on average per rolling 6 months or you drop to Member
Sr. Member: 150 but must but must get 7 every month on average per rolling 6 months or you drop to Full Memeber
Hero Member: 450 but must get 8 every month on average per rolling 6 months or you drop to Full Memeber
Legendary: 750 but must get 10 every month on average per rolling 6 months or you drop to Full Memeber


This way if you are off the forum for a bit due to work, life stuff, etc you are not dropped straight down to a lower member tank for months, BUT if have status you have to work to keep it with good posts.
And, even if you are legendary and you have an issue and have to leave for a year, in 6 months back of good posts your status is back

-Dave

I agreed that old users (before merit system) should have grand-father's rights, because they actually spent lots of time in the forum, and in more purely period of the forum, before spam attacks in 2017. Nevertheless, as lots of users complain, what is a fairness of old legendary, whom has been still very actively posting, but are unable to earn 100 merits (to compared with new era Full Member's requirements). They still think it is unfair.
After two, three or four years after merit system's birthday, such derank makes sense. It is unexplainable that you are good legendary if after four years, and with thousands of posts, you are not unable to earn 900 - 1000 merits. 

I think it's pretty unrealistic to expect that airdropped merits may be removed in the future, but this is up to admin to decide. Still, I understand some members who think differently on this, but old ranking up system is just upgraded with merits, and anyone who is ranked without merits is invest lot of time to reach Hero or Legendary rank.

Maybe airdropped merits could be assigned in a slightly different way, so that every member who hold any rank should prove itself by earning some extra merit.

For example every Legendary member could only get 900 merits and become Hero member, and every Hero member 400 merits. Maybe this is not best idea, but it is much better then take all airdropped merits.

Admin does not want to change seriously and make the forum unfriendly for good newbies. I don't think he will require more merits for the Junior Member rank.

Remove of airdropped merits will make old Senior Members, Hero Members and Legendary members feel paranoid, like what theymos said on misuse or too serious use of trust system months ago. Good old users can rank up again, even their airdropped merits removed and they will be deranked. They definitely don't have issue to move up again, just need a little bit time. Nevertheless, once again, I don't think airdropped merits will be removed because of probably paraniods.

Hmm. I think I've gotten so used to shitposts I kind of look through them.

I always report phishing stuff, blatant shilling of junk and necroposts.

When it's a 'Dear, bitcoin is a most excellent system of money for we can make profit' type post it's invisible to me.

As for merit my own views are - 3-5 to move up from newbie. Lower requirements for the middling ranks and the removal of all legacy ranks and airdropped merit.

It's been long enough now.

No need to upgrade anything anymore, now we just have to agree with the mods what and how to fight the HQ spam with its fake conversations giving 0 value to the projects, useless comments just for a post count which are hidden in just repeating the things already posted. That's all, for the rest the bots are doing their work.