The 1.5 million dollar (5067 bitcoin) new bitcoin talk forum. - page 2.

Bitcoin_BOy$

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 503

|| Web developer ||

Quote from: nahtnam on May 10, 2015, 08:14:25 PM

Quote from: Coinshot on May 10, 2015, 08:12:32 PM

I don't get it, didn't someone say that the demo/beta version of the new forum was going to be released "very very soon" in February? Has there any updates since then? I'm pretty bad at searching so I would appreciate it if someone could send me a direct link if there is a topic specifically for updates.

You could always build the source.

https://github.com/epochtalk

Hello , I think its still not well designed , and some links are not working , they still developing it
and will prefer not to install it , its very complicated and take a lot of time , but I will be ready to
help anyone installing it .

Bitcoin Boy .

nahtnam

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

nahtnam.com

Quote from: Coinshot on May 10, 2015, 08:12:32 PM

I don't get it, didn't someone say that the demo/beta version of the new forum was going to be released "very very soon" in February? Has there any updates since then? I'm pretty bad at searching so I would appreciate it if someone could send me a direct link if there is a topic specifically for updates.

You could always build the source.

https://github.com/epochtalk

Coinshot

hero member

Activity: 521

Merit: 500

I don't get it, didn't someone say that the demo/beta version of the new forum was going to be released "very very soon" in February? Has there any updates since then? I'm pretty bad at searching so I would appreciate it if someone could send me a direct link if there is a topic specifically for updates.

Snagglebone

member

Activity: 87

Merit: 10

Quote from: Mikestang on May 03, 2015, 10:16:10 PM

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 09:14:45 PM

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 03, 2015, 12:58:57 PM

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 12:26:18 PM

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

I'm not denying that people put useful things in their signatures. But there's no need to enable them by default. You can view a persons signature from their profile page. There's absolutely no information in a signature that is needed to be displayed every post. It's purely a vanity move (or advertising). Any information that is important in a signature can be viewed from the profile page when it's needed.

For those people that like to see signatures, they could enable them. There's no reason to have signatures enabled by default and it would solve the divide between those who don't want advertising in signatures and those who do... that way, you can have whatever you want in a signature and only those people that decide they want to be subjected to them will be.

But how many advertisers are going to pay for signature space on a forum that defaults to not displaying signatures? I think that would effectively kill signature ads.

So what? It's not the forums job to subject every single person to annoying signature ads. It's the difference between opt-in and opt-out advertising. If you are for opt-out advertising, you are likely a spammer or just an asshole. All advertising should be opt-in, which is what making signatures default to off would be.

I don't want to constantly be advertised to, which is why I turn off signatures. I shouldn't have to turn off signatures to prevent that. I should have to turn ON signatures if I want to receive that kind of junk mail. Otherwise, any important information that might be found in the signature, I can find on the users profile page just as easily, when and if I need it.

nahtnam

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1000

nahtnam.com

1.5 million is overkill. You could spend maybe 200k and fully upgrade an existing open source forum software.

Mikestang

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 09:14:45 PM

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 03, 2015, 12:58:57 PM

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 12:26:18 PM

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

I'm not denying that people put useful things in their signatures. But there's no need to enable them by default. You can view a persons signature from their profile page. There's absolutely no information in a signature that is needed to be displayed every post. It's purely a vanity move (or advertising). Any information that is important in a signature can be viewed from the profile page when it's needed.

For those people that like to see signatures, they could enable them. There's no reason to have signatures enabled by default and it would solve the divide between those who don't want advertising in signatures and those who do... that way, you can have whatever you want in a signature and only those people that decide they want to be subjected to them will be.

But how many advertisers are going to pay for signature space on a forum that defaults to not displaying signatures? I think that would effectively kill signature ads.

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

It would be much easier to just make a rule that forum signatures cannot include trade or promotion, or something like that.

Now people are starting to spam using their avatars as well. Undecided

Snagglebone

member

Activity: 87

Merit: 10

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on May 03, 2015, 12:58:57 PM

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 12:26:18 PM

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

I'm not denying that people put useful things in their signatures. But there's no need to enable them by default. You can view a persons signature from their profile page. There's absolutely no information in a signature that is needed to be displayed every post. It's purely a vanity move (or advertising). Any information that is important in a signature can be viewed from the profile page when it's needed.

For those people that like to see signatures, they could enable them. There's no reason to have signatures enabled by default and it would solve the divide between those who don't want advertising in signatures and those who do... that way, you can have whatever you want in a signature and only those people that decide they want to be subjected to them will be.

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: Snagglebone on May 03, 2015, 12:26:18 PM

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

I disagree. People put useful things in their signatures too like PGP key, Bitcoin address etc... Signature should be enabled by default. If you don't like specific signatures, hopefully, what BadBear suggested will be added.

Snagglebone

member

Activity: 87

Merit: 10

It's better to have signatures turned off by default and the user would have to explicitly turn them on if they wanted to see all that junk.

First thing I do when I sign up for a forum is turn off signatures.

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: koelen3 on May 03, 2015, 01:37:00 AM

I wouldn't mind if the signature campaigns are banned in the new upcoming forum. Though i've one in my profile too but it's because it's good earning something than nothing . But some people really go overboard with these. I think if new forum has it , there should be a limit of like 100 posts maximum allowed to be paid by a campaign manager or so . IT will decrease the spam rate .

Better to enforce rules on campaign managers.

koelen3

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1007

Sooner or later, a man who wears two faces forgets

I wouldn't mind if the signature campaigns are banned in the new upcoming forum. Though i've one in my profile too but it's because it's good earning something than nothing . But some people really go overboard with these. I think if new forum has it , there should be a limit of like 100 posts maximum allowed to be paid by a campaign manager or so . IT will decrease the spam rate .

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: TerminatorXL on April 29, 2015, 04:38:38 PM

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 03:35:47 PM

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust. Trust must be earned, not purchased. I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more. New change?

Trust is only shown in some of the subs (where trading between members happens, I think). As far as account sales, yeah, that's a jaw-dropper, but not likely to change. I started a thread about it in the Meta section, and quickly got some red trust (later removed) from an account dealer who happens to be on default trust. <- obligatory dig.

Bitcointalk is a forum about money and anonymity, without an official set of rules. A recipe for banana republic-style corruption, and the reason why law became a thing in the first place.

Oh, don't talk about the rule of law here. These people like to imagine a world of anarchy where they can run naked in the streets smoking a joint (Until they get ripped off, of course. Then they run to the SEC, FTC or police like a bunch of conservative republicans at a country club.)

TerminatorXL

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 03:35:47 PM

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust. Trust must be earned, not purchased. I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more. New change?

Trust is only shown in some of the subs (where trading between members happens, I think). As far as account sales, yeah, that's a jaw-dropper, but not likely to change. I started a thread about it in the Meta section, and quickly got some red trust (later removed) from an account dealer who happens to be on default trust. <- obligatory dig.

Bitcointalk is a forum about money and anonymity, without an official set of rules. A recipe for banana republic-style corruption, and the reason why law became a thing in the first place.

SaltySpitoon

legendary

Activity: 2590

Merit: 2156

Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 03:35:47 PM

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust. Trust must be earned, not purchased. I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more. New change?

TerminatorXL and I discussed this in length, I'd recommend reading: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/contribute-to-bitcoin-economy-1038547

the last couple pages especially, some misunderstandings made the first couple pages a bit confrontational.

Mikestang

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

Then it seems to me the obvious solution is to ban account sales, not advertising campaigns.

I have wondered why accounts are permitted to be sold since I joined here, especially ones with trust. Trust must be earned, not purchased. I would support banning account sales 100%, I do not see how that contributes to our community at all.

Speaking of trust, as of this post I do not see trust ratings displayed any more. New change?

TerminatorXL

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 01:00:35 PM

...
I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation. There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

No need to wonder, Mikestang, I'll tell you.
Accounts are being farmed by budding bitcoin entrepreneurs. These accounts have to make a certain number of posts, over a certain period of time, before they become "Full Member Accounts."
Needles to say, account farmers generate some volume.

Once these accounts are ready for the market, they are sold, right on this forum, in Auctions or Digital Goods sections, to their proud new owners.
"Why would anyone buy an account, when they could make one for free?" you must be asking right about now. Lolno, you're not. You know why it's done - to make money from ad campaigns. Yeah, those farmed accounts just keep on giving.

So now you don't have to wonder about where all the spam comes from - it's bought and paid for

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 01:00:35 PM

Quote from: Snagglebone on April 29, 2015, 12:46:43 PM

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 11:24:18 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 29, 2015, 10:22:42 AM

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are. Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting. This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it. I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation. There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

The posts you're talking about are all in altcoins, mining, marketplace and gambling. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=unread

Those sections are almost not moderated at all. The altcoin section is a little better now than it used to be. A couple of years ago there were death threats and all kinds of shit happening in altcoins.

Mikestang

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Snagglebone on April 29, 2015, 12:46:43 PM

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 11:24:18 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 29, 2015, 10:22:42 AM

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are. Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting. This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it. I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

I have to wonder if the sheer volume of posts this forum receives has something to do with the level of moderation. There's like 20+ pages of new posts every 30 minutes, it must be difficult to review every thread, not to mention every individual post.

Snagglebone

member

Activity: 87

Merit: 10

Quote from: Mikestang on April 29, 2015, 11:24:18 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on April 29, 2015, 10:22:42 AM

Members that I've talked to for years have either vaporized or post very infrequently.

That's the way most online forums are. Rarely do you see users who maintain a high level of involvement year after year after year; either they tire of the forum or of whatever hobby that forum is supporting. This is hardly the fault of signature campaigns.

I would say my opinion is biased as well, since I participate in a sig campaign, but it's no more biased that those who don't participate and don't like it. I actually see more spammy posts/posts that make no sense/bad google translation posts from people without ad signatures than those with.

Support the little guy, both advertiser and avertisee, keep paid signature campaigns around.

When a forum is properly curated and moderated, you see people sticking around for a long time. When you have a free-for-all like you have here, the trolls and other anti-social people are allowed to run rampant and it chases away the intelligent people that are here for proper discourse. It's not a surprise and happens all the time with unmoderated or lightly moderated forums. Without moderation, a forum will decend to the lowest common denominator, which is that of the trolls and anti-social element and that's exactly what we've seen here.

The problem is keeping a good moderator staff that has the ability to fairly and more importantly CONSITENTLY moderate a forum. Right now, this forum lacks any sort of real moderation and the moderation staff are inconsistent in their applications of what few rules there actually are. So if you want a forum that's useful and maintains users for a length of time, you need to a) start moderating heavily and properly and b) get a good moderation staff. Both of those things are incredibly difficult to do, unfortunately and even money can't buy a good, consistent staff. That takes time to build.

Topic: The 1.5 million dollar (5067 bitcoin) new bitcoin talk forum. - page 2. (Read 8971 times)