bump
Bump!! 
Whatever you have written, is undoubtedly Good Step For Bitcointalk But
Actually Theymos Sir is so busy person. Its expected That, He Will Not Gonna Response
But I support your idea. Lets see What Theymos does....
Topic: Theymos help us fight against scam ICO's (Read 485 times)
Whatever you have written, is undoubtedly Good Step For Bitcointalk But
Actually Theymos Sir is so busy person. Its expected That, He Will Not Gonna Response
But I support your idea. Lets see What Theymos does....
Again boy! Not all of bounties are scams
Good to know. Now please stop promoting the ones that are scams.
and I know what is Ponzi; even bitcoin is a kind of Ponzi too.
No.
But if life is only black and white then Theymos might have closed the bounty section.
He should. But since he won't we have to do something else. Sadly, asking bounty hunters to take some responsibility doesn't seem to be working.
Glad you see it. Truth is this forum is benefited a lot from those bounties and bounty doers. But the above Mr. Merit Source "suchmoon" can not even distinguish between bounty doers and shitposters. He treated me with angriness and arrogance. What a shame for him!
I'm very ashamed. Now let's get back to the topic, shall we?
Glad you see it. Truth is this forum is benefited a lot from those bounties and bounty doers.
No it hasnt. It has only gone downhill since the time bounties got introduced. People started to farm accounts to join and shitpost across teh forum filling it up with a load of vomited out half-English posts just to get paid. Quote
But the above Mr. Merit Source "suchmoon" can not even distinguish between bounty doers and shitposters.
All "bounty does" are not shitposters. But in general they are. Unless they show some extraordinary contribution to the forum they will be treated like that.Quote
He treated me with angriness and arrogance. What a shame for him!
The internet is not the place for emotions. Keep them to real life. If you get pissed of at anybody on the internet then you need to stop coming there since you might be suffering from a short-fuse. This is a nice suggestion but it should be implemented only after merits in circulation are increased. Current merits are not sufficient for allowed ranks itself.
Stop shitposting for the sake of this forum.I know what is Ponzi;
You dont. If you did you would not say this : Quote
even bitcoin is a kind of Ponzi too.
Quote
But if life is only black and white then Theymos might have closed the bounty section.
I would like that to happen. That section of the forum is the treasure chest all the bottoomfeeding lowlifes in this forum are after. 1% of the people actually care about the forum and make posts worth reading. Everything else is irrelevant.But then it wont happen. Because its the biggest source of traffic to the forum as well.
Restrict all members under rank member to see altcoin bounty and to post in altcoin bounty board
OR
Restrict all members under rank junior member to see altcoin bounty, but in that case add merit requirement to reach junior member rank to 5.
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
OR
Restrict all members under rank junior member to see altcoin bounty, but in that case add merit requirement to reach junior member rank to 5.
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
This is a nice suggestion but it should be implemented only after merits in circulation are increased. Current merits are not sufficient for allowed ranks itself.
Well, then do the only other thing that makes sense - stop promoting scams.
I'm promoting potential projects, which bring meaning to block chain technology. They pay my contribution by their tokens. Be calm boy, you're so angry & arrogant to people who against your idea.
I've seen better ad hominems, you gotta try harder.
You have attempted to make money from scams that bring no useful "meaning to block chain technology". I think you should be more responsible and stop doing that. If you think that's angry try shilling a ponzi, you'll see angry.
Restrict all members under rank member to see altcoin bounty and to post in altcoin bounty board
OR
Restrict all members under rank junior member to see altcoin bounty, but in that case add merit requirement to reach junior member rank to 5.
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
OR
Restrict all members under rank junior member to see altcoin bounty, but in that case add merit requirement to reach junior member rank to 5.
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
Thanks for make post this thread to pay attention. We have discussed many time regarding that issue. Day by day increasing spam & scam. But I can see theymos always ignore this kind of post. People just create new account to bump service and multiple account creation for participate bounty. I mostly like to merit required implement jr member's rank. Not only for future account. Thoes are existing jr.members they should also earn merit to keep their rank. Because there are lot of alt account with jr. Members so they will get also 5 merit by default. So avoid default merit for Jr. Member. For me it's the best thing to reduce spam and scam both. Theymos should consider this asap.
Do not expect a lot from him. (Not because he does not care but he has a lot of work to handle)
I have seen him already taking care of this aspect on all important fronts. For instance, he often rejects some advertisers if they appear suspicious. Believe me, it is not easy to reject such tempting advertisements (read money) when you are managing a big forum like this with lot of recurring expenses.
Something that involves users for this will be more effective just like merit system.
I have seen him already taking care of this aspect on all important fronts. For instance, he often rejects some advertisers if they appear suspicious. Believe me, it is not easy to reject such tempting advertisements (read money) when you are managing a big forum like this with lot of recurring expenses.
Something that involves users for this will be more effective just like merit system.
My personal belief is that scamming is easy than building a really good product. Even you put the entry cost it will not deter scammer. They have very short term goal, they will pay the entry fees and will fled. But a real developer who is looking for investor and doing development will find the entry fees a kind of barrier.
Real developers already have a huge barrier - their projects are drowning in a sea of spam caused by shady ICOs that don't play by the rules and use bots, alts, bounty spammers, etc to bump their threads. Adding a little cost may add 5% to legitimate projects and 500% to scams. Which is more likely to be deterred?
Thief will still find a way to break in the house.
Does it mean we should leave the door open with a neon sign saying "take whatever you want"?
Let's face it, the ICOs are already in your house, drank all your beer, ate all your chips, smeared salsa all over your walls (at least I think that's salsa), and now are fighting over your TV remote. You're still not sure that perhaps we should close the front door?
I've joined the forum for a couple of months and have done a number of bounties. Some of them are from Token Suite - a highly anticipated campaign manager group with high ranked account (Olcaytu2005 - https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/olcaytu2005-401363) and are scams. Of course, costs to pay Token Suite for leading those campaigns are not cheap. Those scammers even pay money to get high score on ICO rating site such as ICObench, so it doesn't make sense that higher cost will result in less scam.
Well, then do the only other thing that makes sense - stop promoting scams.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
Just confused that these words actually come from a Legendary, DT member (Probable Merit source too.)
Scam is Scam. No payment/No (increase) cost can justify the scam.
Did any of DT member accepted any kind of payment for removing the -ve tag.
User awareness is most necessary , instead of banning members to post there , turn them to the forum advantage that report scams.
Reporting scams is good (although I doubt you can turn blind bounty hunters into "reporters") but at the time you're reporting it the scam has already started and may have victims.
What I'm saying is that if there is a higher cost (direct or indirect) to announce an ICO here on the forum then many cheap scams wouldn't even start. Not sure what this has to do with my "titles" but you're wrong in your interpretation. Prevention is better than cure is what I mean.
Ok, I also said "Just confused".
My personal belief is that scamming is easy than building a really good product. Even you put the entry cost it will not deter scammer. They have very short term goal, they will pay the entry fees and will fled.
But a real developer who is looking for investor and doing development will find the entry fees a kind of barrier.
My father used to tell me a saying (I have no idea from where he heard)
Grill on windows are for gentleman
Thief will still find a way to break in the house.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
Just confused that these words actually come from a Legendary, DT member (Probable Merit source too.)
Scam is Scam. No payment/No (increase) cost can justify the scam.
Did any of DT member accepted any kind of payment for removing the -ve tag.
User awareness is most necessary , instead of banning members to post there , turn them to the forum advantage that report scams.
Reporting scams is good (although I doubt you can turn blind bounty hunters into "reporters") but at the time you're reporting it the scam has already started and may have victims.
What I'm saying is that if there is a higher cost (direct or indirect) to announce an ICO here on the forum then many cheap scams wouldn't even start. Not sure what this has to do with my "titles" but you're wrong in your interpretation. Prevention is better than cure is what I mean.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
Just confused that these words actually come from a Legendary, DT member (Probable Merit source too.)
Scam is Scam. No payment/No (increase) cost can justify the scam.
Did any of DT member accepted any kind of payment for removing the -ve tag.
User awareness is most necessary , instead of banning members to post there , turn them to the forum advantage that report scams.
We can clearly see that theymos wants to leave the things like they are.
That's why we have to take the things in our hands. I'm about to make a team/club of volunteers to fight the spam together more efficient.
I'm sure that it's gonna work and you gonna like the idea.
That's why we have to take the things in our hands. I'm about to make a team/club of volunteers to fight the spam together more efficient.
I'm sure that it's gonna work and you gonna like the idea.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
~
Perhaps imposing a fee for ANN would be enough of a deterrent.
I am not sure about charging fee because whoever pays fee will look legit and it might cause counter effect, besides, with or without fee they will still have an army of shills and hundreds ignorant newbies/junior member/bots? accounts for advertising. ~
Perhaps imposing a fee for ANN would be enough of a deterrent.
I'm worried though that this would cause an avalanche of shitposters into other parts of the forum trying to earn merits, as well as begging, hacking, and other unsavory actions.
That won't last long, a month perhaps two...i think...I would imagine that most cheap scams simply won't bother to announce on Bitcointalk if there is a fee. Right now you can run a scam for maybe $100 (website with a fake team + barely English whitepaper). Make it 1 BTC and it will cut the noise significantly allowing us to focus on the more elaborate ones.
I don't know about the false sense of legitimacy though. Some people think that "Legendary" means "trustworthy" so perhaps you're right.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
~
Perhaps imposing a fee for ANN would be enough of a deterrent.
I am not sure about charging fee because whoever pays fee will look legit and it might cause counter effect, besides, with or without fee they will still have an army of shills and hundreds ignorant newbies/junior member/bots? accounts for advertising. ~
Perhaps imposing a fee for ANN would be enough of a deterrent.
I'm worried though that this would cause an avalanche of shitposters into other parts of the forum trying to earn merits, as well as begging, hacking, and other unsavory actions.
That won't last long, a month perhaps two...i think... Restrict junior or member ranks to post in bounties = less promotion for scam ICO's = less work for whoever is working to stop scam ICO's in any possible way = less ICO bumping misleading services = less work for moderators in general = less people scammed.
... or increase the cost of running a scam ICO - also a welcome outcome.
I'm worried though that this would cause an avalanche of shitposters into other parts of the forum trying to earn merits, as well as begging, hacking, and other unsavory actions.
Perhaps imposing a fee for ANN would be enough of a deterrent.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
What the fuck is misleading here?
Restrict junior or member ranks to post in bounties = less promotion for scam ICO's = less work for whoever is working to stop scam ICO's in any possible way = less ICO bumping misleading services = less work for moderators in general = less people scammed.
Restrict junior or member ranks to post in bounties = less promotion for scam ICO's = less work for whoever is working to stop scam ICO's in any possible way = less ICO bumping misleading services = less work for moderators in general = less people scammed.
Very clear now what you meant. Sorry about that. When I read the title I was thinking about this:
ICO shill bumping is another thing but the scam ICO which are scams from the very beginning cannot be stopped by these methods.
Restrict all members under rank member to see altcoin bounty and to post in altcoin bounty board
What about the accounts that change hands and then start posting ICO scam ANNs? Although they will be marked red but majority of the people who come to visit the forum without any account will not be able to see that mark.Quote
Restrict all members under rank junior member to see altcoin bounty, but in that case add merit requirement to reach junior member rank to 5.
I would say dont even show them that section till they turn "Member" 
Quote
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
ICO shill bumping is another thing but the scam ICO which are scams from the very beginning cannot be stopped by these methods. People will fall prey of them and lose money - that on them because they took that decisions. Even if Shill Bumpers get banned from the site, more will come in....well these are all the routine problems in this forum which are not getting resolved at all.
I don’t know if it is because I’m not a native speaker because it seems to me that the title is misleading. You are talking about shitposters joining ICOs whereas the title seems (to me) to talk about scam ICOs, like the project, the coin, not the shitposters who join.
What the fuck is misleading here?
Restrict junior or member ranks to post in bounties = less promotion for scam ICO's = less work for whoever is working to stop scam ICO's in any possible way = less ICO bumping misleading services = less work for moderators in general = less people scammed.
On top of the arguments mentioned already: the spammers increase demand for their tokens, and thus increase demand for altcoin Ethereum at the expense of Bitcoin. That shouldn't be something facilitated by a Bitcoin forum.
This will help not only to fight against scumbags, this will also help moderators to fight against "joined bounty" "good project sir" posts and ICO bumping services which are very shady.
I know theymos doesn't like imposing restrictions, but I think it's the only way to really end most of the spam. Jump to: