Topic: What would the Bitcointalk Forum be like without Signature Campaigns? (Read 398 times)

Users stay active to be able to participate in the signature campaign, and the advertiser can benefit from such advertising, so there is a benefit for all parties. Users want to be useful for this forum and try to fill it with the right content, support certain topics, so this forum is qualitatively different from the others forums, and this is what makes it interesting. Perhaps without signature campaigns, the activity on this forum would be much lower, but why think about it if everything is different here.

I think there was a time when the forum never had signature campaigns and people were still actively involved.
I rely don't know what the forum will look like because I haven't ever thought of that.
On the contrary,  I think signature campaigns are one of the reasons people are making positive impacts on the forum because they have to work really hard to join a campaign and most times, your post quality and other factors are put into consideration  before accepting  one in a signature campaign, hence, one must have strived so hard to be in a signature campaign and without signature campaigns,  I think the forum might be more of a social media than a forum.

Truth be told, I bet you without a signature campaign and bounty, the forum will be as dry as any other online forum where people just come to discuss once in a long while, and not active as it is today, and that would have really affected both the adoption of Bitcoin drastically and the use of crypto casinos for gambling, since this forum has got the highest number of people who patronize and advertised to the public through blogging or Youtubing both the use of this two mentioned above.

There are other platforms that doesn't have any signature on them and guess what? They still has some problem and I don't think it's the signature is the problem here it's in the users and since there's an incentives when wearing signature and/or avatar of course, you'll see a bunch of them wanted to take part if there's a reward. That's why there are certain rules that are unofficially implemented for such thing thus, having rules broken will result in a different types of consequences.

I think you have to experience it for yourself to know exactly what would it be like by trying different forums.

We have /r/Bitcoin - a forum with nearly 5 million users who don't get paid to post. The number of posts per day is comparable and maybe a bit lower than this forum. The quality isn't much better, it's still full of "Bitcoin to the moon" shitposts that provide no valuable information and just show beliefs and emotions of the posters. Sometimes there are good posts, but they don't generate as much discussion as the shitposts. Just like on this forum.

I don't see reduction in the number of forum users, rather more people would join the forum and strategize a personal means of earning money from the forum. Regarding the monthly traffic of the forum its a great mine for marketers to utilize the forum. Your question should be what if they weren't any signature space not signature campaign. Once they is signature space available they'll be signature campaign. If not people can still use their signature space to promote personal businesses or rent it out. So, the forum will keep moving, signature campaign must have chased some top tech developers away from the forum, making the forum filled with garbage contents that is not adding any value to bitcoin.

The development section is not active like before and discussion is all filled with padded contents so that members could be eligible to earn. Top bitcoin early birds wouldn't enjoy the forum because of the low quality contents that keeps popping up and the lesser amount of tech related contents. In a nutshell, a big forum remains big regardless of signature campaign members must figure out a way to earn, even the marketplace section has made some members more money than signature campaign has made them in their entire participation. I see signature campaign as a byproduct and not a reason why someone will leave the forum if it doesn't exist. That's lame to see such responses.

Even if this assumption is not entirely preferable, but I would probably say the same.
Without signature campaigns, forum would become ghost towns and be dominated only by regular users who contribute to the development of their project or something like that. Technical users can be active and post regularly regardless of signature campaign, so can developers, traders and investors.

Of course, the real users will stay, but users who expect some incentives from their contributions will look for other platform that give them the opportunity to earn money. I don't think the signature campaign will be removed as long as the forum and the admin still trust and believe that there is a positive impact from the signature campaign instead of just a negative impact.

I don't have any additional ideas to say something different from the others, but the most obvious impact of having forum without signature campaign is a drop in traffic. I think signature campaign are forum's way of rewarding the majority of its contributors, but in the end some managers may choose lot of posters who don't really care about the quality of their posts which then becomes a problem.

Some managers care deeply about suggested signature campaign guidelines, some may not, and the worst are signature campaigns that pay participants in tokens or coins form project under development. You can differentiate the quality between participants paid in bitcoin and participants paid in token/coin, most of them are never the same. I agree that many campaigns that pay their participants in bitcoin are required to post something of high quality even if there are many participants who may have lower quality posts.

I mean, look at two feedback on your profile.


Are you talk about yourself because you're the spammer and create low quality posts in order to reach the weekly quota? your alt account wasn't active anymore, maybe it's because it's not full member and you can't join most of campaign in this forum.

There would also be scums trying to still post futile random loan request in the Lending section as well as just creating new services in the Service section even if they were already got tagged before (tag evading). I feel like bounties removal would significantly reduce more of the traffic rather than the SCs alone although I can see SCs still in Bounties, but considering we're seeing a lot of POA posts from people, surely that would affect more.

I also agree with your "signature space" point there. Users are forgetting that signature in our profile pertain on whatever we're trying to show to other users just like those email signatures that we see.

Yeah, they just count the posts of their participants into stakes from my experience like 3 years ago. This is why it's kinda worse in the Bounties section rather than the Services section. I am not saying that all are really bad posters in the Bounties section and all good posters are in the Services section though. There are just way many users posting in Bounties rather than in Services section.

This is an interesting question, we all have here different goals why we are here in this forum, there are who joined to gain knowledge and also there are who wants to earn some money here.

A lot of spam messages and low quality posts will be gone in this forum because most of the users are just creating posts and replying to messages just to reach the weekly quota and get paid, but then it will also lessen the number of topics we have here, there would be less communication and less active members.

It can be affect in good and bad terms for sure, but I dont think that it will happen in the future.

When you are in a good signature campaign, you are left with just two obligations: 1 to meet your weekly target post and 2 to make sure those posts are meaningful, which I believe anyone can contribute constructively to if accepted, unless the person doesn't actually have areas of specialization.

Reverse could also be the case, when users join signature campaigns that the managers are not paying weekly, that's signatures that are under the bounty section. If you check very well, you will realize that's the best place all these shitposters' feet are in (I'm not saying all those are shitposters), and those are exactly the kind of campaigns they hide in. The reasons are that: 1 they can't meet up to most of the signature manager merit requirement on the last 120 days; 2 weekly paid campaigns are manager check post quality before they accept participants.

The case is different for signatures under bounties and altcoins because the manager doesn't usually remove participants for underperforming or even look at the number of merits earned. Some managers actually warn their participants regarding post quality, but it doesn't give them enough reason to remove them. Which makes the participants continue doing their sh*t posting, provided that they count it.

One can argue that the reverse will be the case.
People in the signature campaigns have a required quality of a post for that particular post to be counted for that week.
In every signature campaign, they have a requirement that your post should be constructive and have a minimum amount of characters before a post qualifies for the week. If these signature campaigns were not there, people have no target, whether the quality of post or quantity, so they can post whatever and however they like.

In the campaign I'm in, the campaign manager removed six or so people from the campaign because, according to him, the quality of posts was low and they don't really interact meaningfully in the forum. 
So I could argue that signature campaigns helps to police what and how people post and reduce shitposting.

A lot of people came here due to various reasons such as learning more about Bitcoin, sharing their own knowledge to others, while some joined as a result that they don't have job and joining the forum has given them the opportunity to earn some money.
    In reality people pay much attention to something when there's a benefit that is attached to it, so in the absence of that, I guess there's definitely gonna be a drastic drop in the activities of some members in the forum, Where the members that would still remain active is those that do not mainly focus their attention only on the benefits of joining campaign but learning and contribution to the forum.

This would beneficial in Bitcointalk favor but But not without loss. If signature Compaigns would full ban in Bitcointalk we can expect

Benefits:
1: End of Shit posts, New unnecessary thread, burst posting
2: End of Alternative accounts of higher rank (Member-legendary)
3: Quality engagement of users
4: Sharing more skills and technique to earn(trading)

Loss:
1: Less number of new registration who has skills to rankup
2: Very less Engagement from old users having knowledge of Btc and trading.
3: Less number of scam accusation and reputation (Forum will not clean from scammers as it now)
4: loss of Poor needy members including Legendary, Hero, Senior (working on other platform to fullfil financial need)

I've mentioned most of what you said, It will surely drop down the forum activity as well as users but it's better to have a low organic discussion than having a lot of discussion that is just some nonsense discussions. I mean you know what I mean most of the discussions on the thread don't make sense, repetition, or just sht posting.

Merits somehow work on making some high-quality posts on the forum since most of the users are spamming to make a lot of posts because back then you just need a certain amount of posts to rank up. At some point signature campaign actually is a great motivation because it can be a part-time job, but still has bad effects at the same time.

The general belief in this forum is that we are all here to discuss and learn about Bitcoin. But the financial benefit serves as a motivation to be more active. Also, some of the abnormalities that are recorded in the forum are a result of the financial benefits. So I agree that all the consequences OP listed above will be the case. There will be fewer posts and activities which will reduce the amount of spam and creation of more accounts.

It will also be an opportunity to see those that are interested in Bitcoin and people that don't rely on the campaign reward for a living. Those that have little or no interest in Bitcoin will quietly bow out. Most people that depend on the campaign fund will leave and seek other sources if income. While those that are independent of the forum earning will remain.

Contrary to what other people believe, I believe that the forum would still be active but instead of it being active in the current way (being that people are getting paid to post content) that it would be active economically. If people were not incentivized to post, people would be finding other ways to monetize their use of the forum. The marketplace might be more active, escrows would have more business and users would be coming up with new ways to earn bitcoin to make up for what a signature campaign would.

Signature campaigns probably reduce innovation in ventures, unique ways to create bitcoin income, maybe reduce the amount of services available because users simply don't have to do these things to earn an income, thanks (and no thanks) to signature campaigns.

I do believe that signature campaigns could co-exist with a stimulated economy if some work was put into restructuring parts of the forum to separate the content from the economic activity. I don't think this kind of change would come any time soon (if at all) though.

Yes there are other means to earn sats on the forum but none of them requires people to be active on the forum or make quality posts like signature campaign does. A newbie can participate and win art contests, but the art contests are also sponsored by casinos who are advertising on the forum. Removing signature campaign would also affect those who design avatars and signature codes.
Apart from 1xbit, I don’t really see other campaigns that pay low quality posts. I think campaigns that pay per post and do not have a maximum amount of eligible posts encourages spam because people will want to make more money and not care about the post quality.

Well, the forum would be a little less from a ghost town. I have no doubt in my mind that we would have some very active users here still. There are those of us whom have built our lives around here for it's resourcefulness and that is something that can't be taken away from the forum.

Beside signature campaigns, there are other ways to incentives work on the forum an that is from offering needed services. We would have people sourcing out the technical aspects to the forum like working as developers and something of note, Hhampuz and his series of art contest has turned some people to artists on the forum. Users would find a way to stay but, there would be less bullshit from shitposters and spammers for real.