Topic: The Definition of a Low Quality Post - page 2. (Read 2967 times)

Corruption? You've got to be kidding. If you think that I'd not delete someones post just because of their position, trust or whatever then think twice. I do not care who the person is. If they break a rule then I'm going to act accordingly. Unfortunately I can not moderate such people at the moment (aside from 1 section). I can't say the same for others as I can't be sure and I've never checked for this.
You're wrong. I never said that a moderator is going to delete anything because of personal views. A moderator might let something slide, while the other one might delete it. This has nothing to do with personal views, but their interpretation of rules and how the act towards people who break them.

I've been wondering the same. I take it low-quality posts, in principle, should be reported and deleted by mods?

Here's a random sampling of different kinds of posts I, personally would consider low quality. Should I start reporting these (there would be a lot):

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/they-are-pissed-with-me-1221975  (Off-topic for pretty much any section)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12776639 (Adds nothing to discussion)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10666566 (Seems to be posting just for the sake of posting)


In general a number of threads like "Where's satoshi" and "how do you use Bitcoin" seem to mainly serve as forums for sig campaigners to up their post counts. You'd have to try really hard to be off-topic in a thread like that. Not really something for mods to take action on, just an observation.

however nothing can exist without corruption and so OP's short posts may not be deleted even after being reported as he tends to be a trusted and vouched member of the forum and on the other hand some lengthy normal quality post might be deleted by some strict moderator as said by LAUDA because of personal views.

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["low quality posts"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it...

Absolutely, totally wrong. If, let's say, SebastianJu posted a meaningless reply that was necessary to be deleted (like most of the posts we see today around the forum), then I'm pretty sure none of the mods would hesitate to delete it simply because of his trust status.

I'm pretty sure that marco checks on a few posts on campaign users (not 100% sure though) to make sure that no posts are really "spam". I think I remember him excluding a few posts on certain members for being spam. Also, secondstrade isn't an automated signature campaign, but quite a number of their users are pretty spammy (IMHO).

however nothing can exist without corruption and so OP's short posts may not be deleted even after being reported as he tends to be a trusted and vouched member of the forum

this issue is mostly because of Bit-x and yo bit campaign i would say , cause the other fixed campaign users dont have the reason to spam.

A important thing here would say it that it also doesn't really matter how users see it. It matters how the moderator who is judging the post sees it. There are people who are much softer and people who are stricter like me and Mitchell. I never understood why people complain about only a few of their posts being deleted.

I can see your point, but in the cases that I'm trying to point out is like comparing a stickman drawn in MSPaint with a watercolour piece on a canvas. One is obviously significantly lower quality than the other.
That makes sense, thanks for clarifying. This is simply due to seeing staff such as hilariousandco talk about the sheer amount of spam pots, and wondered which type I should be trying to report and which to leave.
I didn't think it was, just being sure though. My apologies

Here's a comparable example. How would you define an artwork that is good? Obviously you can't really make a general rule but you'd have to go on a case by case basis.

That's my opinion and I doubt that anything would be done about this, due to the lesser importance of it. I'm pretty sure that most users are aware when they make a post of very low quality.

I was just making a statement because this is what I tend to see from time to time. It wasn't really directed towards you (that part).

I don't think this should be the case. The rules and guidelines for a post should be defined to stop confusion throughout members and help keep the forum cleaner.
For example, let's say that one of the nicer moderators leaves a post which is something along the lines of "Thanks for the guide!" or something similar. Personally I think that this post is spam and does nothing but clutter the forum, however it is likely that said post will stay until it is reported again as another moderator will not evaluate it. If the nicer moderator leaves several posts like this, it can quickly clutter the forum. In addition the reporter's percentage will likely go down, but that isn't the main problem.
It seems that the (granted, small selection) of the community seem to have come to a standpoint on the posts that they do not wish to see, and yet I still see a lot of long yet vague posts cluttering up threads in sections like Micro Earnings and others, created for nothing but the signature reward. Should this still be happening?

AFAIK neither of those posts have been deleted, nor would I complain if the one that I posted was. I'm just curious on which sorts of posts to report and which to leave, and what the staff consider a low quality post.

Also, not trying to bash the staff in any way.

However, you can not define a low quality post and thus this thread is obsolete. This is all subjective. One moderator might not delete your post while the other one might.

I never understood why people complain about only a few of their posts being deleted.

i will define low quality posts as <40 characters and out-of-topic...... if someone continues posting a low quality posts again and again they are handed a ban saying "insubstantial posts and signature campaign" for 14 days

Alright, I believe that this is something that needs to be addressed. It seems that the norm of a low quality post is something that is short, usually in Off Topic or somewhere similar. However, there are several posts which I see to be low quality/unsubstantial and I am wondering if it is just me being overly picky.

Here's a few examples of posts which I question:
Let's start with a post from myself. This post is very short and is in a section which is spam ridden (Micro Earnings). This makes it fit in the definition I posted earlier. However, since I am helping someone with a problem they are having, is it still counted as low quality or with no substance? I am part of a signature campaign, would these sort of posts have me 'abusing' the system, even if they were not added to my overall paid posts for the period?

Another example, a different type of post:
This post is longer, which is obvious. It is in the same section as the previous post, however this one is significantly worse in my (may be it, slightly biased) opinion. This post achieves absolutely nothing in helping anyone or adding to the topic in any way. In my opinion, this longer post is much worse than the short post I quoted earlier. This user is also in a signature campaign, and is obviously just posting for the reward. However, I have been guilty of doing this in the past.

So, what is considered a low quality post? I see a lot of shorter posts removed, however longer posts like this tend to stay and clutter up the thread. Are they still reportable or am I simply overstepping the mark?

GhanaGamboy  hacked.
Giving neg trust on my profile with no proof saying I am (Still a ponzi promoter)

Where am I promoting, where? please remove this unfounded lie.