Topic: [SUGGESTION] Campaigns Should Be Self Moderated - Edited (Read 563 times)

I do not see any big problem is fact that some users post their applications even though the title say campaign is closed / full. In this way they only show their ignorance, respectively showing campaign manager how quality candidates they are, and in that way disqualify themselves from participating in the campaign.

Campaign managers can report (or not) such posts to moderators if they want to keep their threads clean. I also do not see problem in creating self-moderated threads if campaign manager is trusted, and one of the examples was signature campaign for CoinPayments managed by Lauda.

The problem is that if members can't see or want to see that a campaign is full they are not going to read the local rules either and just apply anyways.

The campaign manager is the one making the decision who will be accepted so doing that in a self-moderated thread or a normal thread will not increase anyone's chances to enter the campaign.
The only problem of having a self-moderator thread is like some people suggested it can be used to delete posts you don't like for whatever reason, like scam accusations or problems with payments.
But in terms of user applications it makes no difference. If I apply for a campaign and the manager doesn't like the quality of my posting he is not going to accept me, be it in a self-moderated thread (where he can delete my post) or in a normal thread where he can just ignore it and pick someone else. 

It really does not hurt much if a couple of people apply on an already full campaign without reading the rules. It would be much of a bigger issue to lock up threads of open campaigns and only allow comments when you have an announcement.
It's much easier, but not ideal especially when you are trying to portray transparency and accountability.
There are other issues to be treated on the thread, payments, et all.
Self moderated threads is also not advisable

It's quite obvious that the total new accounts getting created in a month would drop. Before the merit system was launched, users just needed sufficient activity points to rank up which wasn't a big deal.
Just making some posts time to time would rank up any user and hence people used to create multiple accounts for obvious reasons. Merit system has changed everything now.
It's not so easy to earn a merit and hence it has become even more tough for users to rank up and only the users whose posts are constructive and worthy are getting ranked up these days.
People have realized this fact and hence they don't create multiple accounts  since getting ranked up on one account itself is such a big deal these days.

I think as long as the campaign manager is trustworthy, a self moderated thread isn't necessary since people believe in the campaign managers (like Yahoo, Hhampuz etc..)
They have been doing their job pretty decently and I have never seen any user arguing with them for getting selected in the campaign.

Spam has been definitely reduced dramatically.
However, if someone can give me data points per month, I can draw a time series plot for total intra-month posts of the forum.
I actually did it, but from arbitrarily data dumps by @theymos, and forum available data (but it stopped update since last year).

From forum data update:

From theymos' arbitrary data dump weeks ago:
Total new accounts dropped deeply, I am not sure about total new posts made.

Every manager has different style, normally for yahoo he has a lot of participants in single campaign so he will prioritize those who are wearing signature already. For Hhampuz, I observed that he accepts applicants even without wearing the signature, so with knowing these pointers, participants will be aware, and I wish they will see this thread here.

I agree with you tranthidung that the merit system has help this forum improve, we don't see lots of spam anymore these days, and manager did a good job for that as they will only select applicants with great posting habit and good numbers of merit and these will discourage the spammers.

I like the changes of forum.
In the last two months, there are more and more self-made users, Full Member and above ranks.
I seriously thought that the forum has jumped into new era, in which self-made users will dominate campaigns (quality campaigns, I meant).
Such luckily high rank users who are not able to earn only singly merit years after merit system born won't have chance to join.
I don't agree with this.
Sometimes, applicants have been on other campaigns, but yours give higher payment rates, so they want to switch to yours.
In addition, they need to get your acceptance before officially switching to your campaign.
The approach depends on each manager, but I don't support the approach.

I get all sorts applying in campaign threads as do all the other managers who open a topic. What gets me is these users who are obvious farmers and have made 1 post in the last 4 months applying to a campaign that they have 0.0000000000% chance of being accepted to. At least if managed by me.

I look at all profiles and check the activity of an account period before accepting anyone. I'm also checking earned merits and use this as a deciding factor if it comes down to 1 spot open with multiple applicants. Bottom line, users who are more popular are better for a campaign.

There is a positive to users applying for a campaign even though it is full though. Since most users know I will skip the application if a signature is not worn when applying, (certain situations like already in a sig campaign and waiting for payment before leaving can be overlooked as long as a user lets me know when applying) it is free advertising for the company they apply for if they post while wearing the signature.

Some would argue that its shady to ask users to wear sig before applying saying a company is just looking for free advertisement, but I would argue that if you don't like the application process, do not apply. I post when a campaign is full, so users should read the title.

As far as self moderated threads or telling users the campaign is full all of the time, I have decided just to add all farmers and users who obviously cannot or do not care to read on the SMAS blacklist. The new policy goes into effect as of now.

Link to my Blacklist https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16680971

Therefore, managers tend to avoid to delete posts in their campaigns' topics to avoid such pseudo-accusations.
Furthermore, some managers usually quote accepted applications to avoid complaints later (wrong addresses, wrong start posts, and so on).

another downside of doing something like this is that next thing you know are people who will start complaining that the campaign manager deleted their posts so that he can have his own alt accounts enter in his own campaign without any competition... they are already accusing lots of campaign managers of something like that, self moderation will give them a stronger case to complain!

OP, I tend to agree with this except I don't think most managers care all that much if their thread gets spammed.  The good managers might (Yahoo62278, Hhampuz, etc.), but I've rarely seen calls from them for idiots to stop applying when the campaign is closed, to not make off-topic posts, and things like that.  Ultimately, even if they made a self-moderated thread I'm not confident the managers would delete any unnecessary posts.

I put the Services section on ignore a while ago because of crap like you describe.  It drives me nuts when people put their application in when a campaign is obviously not taking new members or has a waiting list.  I don't know what these jokers are thinking or how they'd even keep track if they got accepted (which they never do).

Spammers should not be tagged for spamming these days.  We're moving past that.

This is actually good idea,just make them into signature campaigns black list then they will know how to make applications on the signature campaign thread but atleast with one warning will be better.

I think leaving it unmoderated and allowing member who don't even bother to check if there's open slot or not is not really bad per se. In fact, manager can simply add those who apply without looking if there's any open spot or not to their ignore list and therefore prohibiting them from joining any future campaign that they'll ever manage.

Anyway, this is not a forum problem imo. It's between manager decision whether they leave their thread self-moderated or not.

Like those cases:

Joinable ranks:

Latest announcements:

Then, brand new and newbies came, spammed, and asked for joining.

---

Or those cases:

manager announced the campaign was full
Then, one applicant below this post of manager

---

In short, self-modoration might be a necessary management in bounty topics.
To be honest, I have never been a bounty manager, so I am not sure the self moderation might lead to complaints from candidates, participants or not.

---

I think set some local rules are appropriate:
- Applications from brandnew, newbies or unjoinable ranks (depends on each campaign) will be deleted without announcement.
- Applications when no open slots announced will be deleted too (but I doubt that managers will spend their time to deleted such applications).

There's no need to lock or make it a self moderated one as that will not promote transparency IMO.

If  they are good managers, they will care for the forum and they will be watching spammers and they can add them in their blacklist.
For me this is good a measure to avoid spamming as usually those who spam the campaign thread are applicants.

Self Moderated ,Bounty thread and on top managed by Newbie Cooper Member, that will be the last thread in which I will ever comment and apply.
If spamming is problem , then report the spammer. Not recommend but obvious spammer can be neg trusted also.

The goal of a signature campaign is to analyze the highest amount of advertising at the lowest possible cost, leaving open topics with the possibility of applying to members without a reply gives them a greater opportunity to appear and thus more members who wear signatures without being paid.

Maybe a marketing trick but to make the forum clean, the campaign manager will be more careful to prevent the spam from simply achieving a higher return for that campaign.

There are better ways to prevent this without having to create a self-moderated topic, but as I told you, it may be a Marketing trick.

doing thins like locking, self moderating,... the topics that involved some sort of business deal (money changing hands) which includes signature campaigns, bounty crap, selling goods, auctions, services,... will only make that topic look shady as if the starter has something to hide and  don't want anybody to speak against them in their topic.

Self-moderation in bounty topics is a good option
However, in short, for bounty hunters, why not simply follow the last posts of campaign managers to find what they wanted?
It is my favorite approach when I hunt for bounties. 

I don't think a Self Moderated thread would affect here. Yes, it would help in deleting unwanted applications by campaign manager, but an application to the campings remains as an record for the user activity for future reference even though the user is accepted or not. Also, everyone is eligible as per the criteria of the bounty to apply for the camping if they meet the requirements.

There are some ill-effects of using a self Moderated thread for campaign. There is a risk of manager deleting the posts which contain something abusing about the campaign which could be true and alarming to the community. Anyone could report the campaign activity on the thread and also alert others about not participating in it due to some reasons like fradunt manager, escrow not used, scam promotion and much more. This activity should remain on the campaign thread so that other participants should know about it and if the thread is Self Moderated all this warning could be deleted by the manager easily which helps in hiding the scam.

---

Enjoy your day too cabalism13. It was pretty eye straining text under the post.

If it's full and the manager doesn't update the thread then it is his own discretion and fault to begin with, sometimes it depends on the diligince of every managers. But if the thread is updated and it clearly says that it's full and no longer accepting participants then the manager has the authority to reject them, put them on their respective ignore list or just like what yahoo did that if they don't pay attention to details sometimes he gets some trust feedback or blacklisted AFAIK.

Lazy people who don't bother to read that campaign is full isn't a reason to lock thread. As long as campaign is active, it's thread should be open. Active threadvis needed to discuss ongoing issues with campaign, like there was big payment delays in campaigns managed by Lutpin and people discussed what they need to do. As said above, campaign managers simply can make self-moderated topic and delete these applications themselves.

They are not paying any attention to the subject of the thread and maybe they only focus on the payment rate or they just don’t know the meaning of “FULL” or “CLOSE FOR NEW PARTICIPANTS” at all. For sure they will not be accepted into the future campaign especially with sir yahoo who usually skip those who don’t know how to follow the rules. But there is no need to lock the thread, there are some better ways to punish the user and managers knows the best for their campaign thread.

I don't know if those members you mention are already wearing a signature when they try to apply in different signature campaign for a spot, but it's possible that they don't really want a spot, but they just growing their post count for their current signature campaing.
Ignoring these posts would be the easiest solution.
Another solution could be to report them to the mods, so those posts are deleted sooner or later, so those people will stop doing this because no post, no money...

Why need locked thread to avoid this kind of situation? Is self moderated thread isn't enough? If someone don't bother to read rules then managers are free to delete their post. Lock thread will be prevent constructive discussion if need. I don't think any managers will accept if someone apply before announce for open slot especially on btc signature. So self moderated thread would be better solution. I am not supporting your lock suggestion.

This is really only a problem for the users who are applying. Again it's people who come here and don't bother reading rules or seeking information before jumping face first into a shallow pool searching for coins. The locking of the threads while the campaign is ongoing can be problematic. Some users may wish to leave the campaign and post there as opposed to PM. Some may want to ask questions about the campaign in general, or just want a clarification on the rules.

These people are really only hurting themselves. One they are likely to get skipped over by these managers in the future if they do it consistently enough to become recognizable. Then as you pointed out they are wasting their time.

These are also not posts I would bother reporting, since they shouldn't count for any Sig payments. It's not spamming up informative or conversational threads. They also aren't necessarily going off-topic, they're just being ignorant.

Locking those threads will make suspicious thinking about the manager or the project which everyone promoting unless there is a manager like Yahoo is managing it.

People need to know what is the meaning of Closed,Open and CFNP on the title of campaign threads to solve this issue.

I don't know these kind of unnecessary applications will be deleted if it gets reported.

I do have a habit on watching every active campaign, if you'll gonna ask me why, I can't answer that for I really don't know why.

And now here is the thing, as we have been seeing it clearly many users are killing their time applying on some campaigns even if its still closed ( I also once one of the scumbags ) Though Managers aren't now looking behind of their announcements (mostly) they're still being disturb and some what irritated by those unnecessary applications just like this 👇


So, I think it's better for the Managers to make their threads locked if they already get the spots reserved. And will just open it again if there is something to announce or a vacant position has been opened. Self-Moderated, even though some users doesn't like SMTs (Self-Moderated Threads --- To avoid and DELETE unnecessary applications of lazy non-reading thread users )

It may be a hassle thing to do, but I think it is way more effective rather than ignoring the applications or anything else

JM2C
Thanks Coolcryptovator

JUST ADDED SOME MISLEADING LINK FOR YOU TO ENJOY YOUR DAY (WELL, HOPEFULLY)