Topic: [SMAS] Signature Managers against Spam (light version) (Read 100723 times)

While there will be an opportunity for them to parasitize on this forum 💰 - of course they will be active.

Lutpin and yahoo are still active members. If they wouldd consider this topic as being obsolete then they should lock it. Otherwise, the topic looks very useful to me, this being why I suggested to make it more popular and to try to convince other campaign managers to use it too.

You may not have noticed, but this thread was last posted in on 24 April 2020, 07:54:55 and the lack of a response from any of the participants shows they have probably "moved on" (wink wink)

Considering that Lauda retired from the forum I'd advise to remove her list from OP as it is impossible now for her to review the members listed there, in case they'd like to appeal the blacklist. Besides, I think it would be wise to make this topic more popular and to attract more campaign managers to use it. CryptopreneurBrainBoss also has a blacklist so maybe he would be interested in adhering to this topic.

You may be right - but you would need to look at how many have been members of SigCamps for an extended period of time and how emboldened they have become in more recent times since they have joined the most highest paid Campaigns.  I myself have only just joined SigCamps for the very first time just two months ago and in that time my merit count per 120 days has doubled to 100 per 120 days, so I guess I am going against the grain of actually being paid for high quality posts instead of descending into a cesspit because they are being paid big dollars to post..

    

And when there will no be campaigns you will write exactly the same amount of messages per week as you do now?

By the way, you have something brown on your chin. Tell me who it smells like? yahoo62278? 

In general, I'm glad that it was in this thread that the signa whore popped up. Very significant: [SMAS] Signature Managers against Spam (light version) and the signa whore from local board

If you are going to start saying stupid things, please check your facts first

Maybe it's just about optics; you see Bitcoin as something technical and want to talk in a superior language with the few people that would understand what you are saying. For others, Bitcoin is an investment, for some others, a new way to see how the world can work. Each Bitcoin user has it's own reasons, and that is something that should be respected.

In fact, I left this forum, now I'm only interested in the irreversible process of degradation, which I occasionally observe.


This forum is not about Bitcoin, I already wrote above, read it before writing your own at least 100 characters

If you dislike the forum and what "it's become" so much, why don't you just simply leave it?

This is a forum about Bitcoin, where you can learn about it while getting to know people that share some interests with you. It may not be perfect, but it fulfills both its informative and social functions.

I do not know what you are doing on the forum, but judging by the dialogue, nothing useful. In any case, I do not remember any benefit from you. And the conversation is not about you personally, you are not interesting to anyone here and are nothing. Therefore, I will not support this option of offtopic. The topic of supposedly "fighters" with spammers, I expressed an opinion, I did not see an adequate refutation.

Blockchain specialists on this forum you can go to discuss in the link. They are there "the fuck blockchain experts" as you rightly called

Have I been wasting my time in this forum?

I have not learned about bitcoin through forum resources?

What have I been missing?

Are there some better forums out there?  or are you trying to create some kind of elite status but without any kind of reference and maybe even without any kind of attempt to relate to how different people might interact with information?  There are millions of forum members, but surely only a few thousand are really active in the forum on a regular basis, but where does that get us?

By the way, what the fuck is "blockchain experts"?  Are you talking about bitcoin, or do you have some other amorphous term in which you would like to direct us?   I will concede that bitcoin does not really need advertising, but I still don't see what the fuck problem there is from allowing advertising, as if the whole forum is being destroyed from you seemingly ongoing preposterous and quasi-incoherent presentation of the matter.

I am also NOT asserting that signature campaigns are ONLY good.  If you learned how to read (or at least to attempt to get the idea), I am asserting that there is a bit more balance and nuance that you seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge with your ongoingly extreme point of view that really hardly achieves anything beyond just pushing buttons and stirring shit rather than contributing any kind of actual value.

This forum does not bring any benefit in obtaining information. Blockchain experts have long left here. In the best case, someone will quote a third-party resource. If it is mentioned on third-party resources, it rarely and grimaced, reluctantly, with a slight share of ridicule. But you can continue to repeat your prayer, how much good the sig messages for money bring

You have a right to your opinion and theory, but it seems to be arrive at conclusions that are way too broad based on very little evidence, and especially problematic to conclude that members who ongoingly are both prolific and contribute great substance to the forum are motivated in any kind of substantial way by signature campaigns. 

Sure, members are allowed to carry signatures and they make some money from those signatures, but there are a large number of those same signature bearing members who would still be contributing to the forum on a regular and substantive basis whether they were wearing signatures or not, and by the way, it seems to be a good thing that allows some members to get paid a bit on the side - and in some places, the money from signature campaigns gives them enough on the side to improve their own circumstances (and perhaps their families).

Some members might not cash out their BTC on a regular basis, but instead just allow the BTC to accumulate and to stack that BTC aside, so in that case, if they are able to make sure that their accumulated BTC is safe, they may go back to that BTC in 6-10 years or even longer and find that the value that they had accumulated in a kind long term DCA kind of way has caused them to have become quite well off, just from amounts that had seemed insignificant while they were earning them.

Of course, there is going to be some truth in any myth, just as there is some truth in the various points that you make, but you assertions seem to largely be exaggerating into a kind of absurdity that maniacally focuses on the negative of an ongoing forum culture that has both ups and downs, and largely admin has considered that the ups outweigh the downs and has tried to figure out ways to temper some of the downs, too (whether all of this is experimental or not, signatures have been allowed for a decent amount of time on the forum.. and seems to overall be a good thing, rather than your bullshittingly spouting out in regards to the glass-half-full aspects)...

In fact, yes, signature carriers produce verbal garbage in 99% of cases. Derivatively generating discussion of each other who is the worst shitposter, who merits not right as have to, who has too many accounts, etc. I do not believe that no one sees this. There are just so many spammers that any attempts to identify this problem will immediately sink into the garbage streams from the "dissenting" financially interested signatured participants. In the end, this forum is anything: signatalk or watchotheruserstalk, but certainly not bitcointalk


Merit source and signaturetalk.org

And yes, you can parasitize with verbal garbage, and you can parasitize on the "fight" with shitposters (Parasite). And in both cases it is nothing more than a cycle of shit that does not bring any benefit to the crypto community. Remove subscription campaigns and all these shitposters and “fighters” aganst them will instantly disappear into the dust themselves.

The irony being you're wearing a very high profile / paying Signature yourself. [1a] [1b]  (Glass houses) And yes I can see you've modified it for your own notoriety.

Yeah right... so much lol in your comment.   


You seem to have all of this figured out, so now the standard (according to you) is that any member who wears a signature is spamming? 

LoyceV  is a sig spammer itself. What is happening here is some kind of anecdote about how more advanced spammers catch less promoted colleagues. They themselves wear signatures and do not even blush doing that.

LOL

Where is Lutpin anyway?

The OP was last edited at the end of October, 2017.  The last post in this thread was *almost* three months ago and many of the campaigns listed in the OP are now a distant memory.  Some of the names listed by the three users in the OP's group have been, or are still active participants in, Signature Campaigns to this day.  (I won't say who they are so that I don't retroactively jeopardise their participation in those campaigns).

Is there really any need for this thread to continue? @theymos has given clearer directions on the use of the Trust Feedbacks and much has been discussed about it's abuse. (irony)  Likewise @LoyceV has written clear and concise guidelines on the trust feedback and default trust settings and their application.

In my country, one of the biggest betting houses has his own clinic for gambling addicts. 

That made me laugh.

Though I'd say it's more like doctors vs addiction since signature managers both provide the incentive to spam (signature campaigns), like how doctors prescribe drugs, but they also threaten to penalize those abusing the rules (e.g. cut off their drugs).