Topic: Why do these accounts have the right to wear a clickable signature on the forum? (Read 663 times)

That happened already, after the introduction of Merit restrictions for Newbies. We're now at 48,000 posts per week, that used to be 280,000 posts per week. It dropped by more than 80%! The crypto bear market might have had something to do with that too, but even in last year's bull market the maximum I've seen was still less than 80,000 posts per week (if I remember correctly, I didn't check this data too often).

Sooner or later, that 1x campaign will end and the casino might get tired of throwing money on people who aren't capable of reading and writing properly. The consequence is that no other reputable project, campaign manager, or forum member will want to do business with them anymore. Of all the streets in the city, they can only walk on one while you can walk on all of them.

Well, I commented earlier in the thread that I don't think theymos will do anything because you can see that he likes to think things through very well and from what you comment.

But I have the right to expose the problem and open a debate.


What consequences do they face?

A legendary member in the 1xCrap campaign with 0 merit earned, a person who would not be able to wear a signature if he had registered in the forum post-merit system earns at the level of the second highest paid campaigns of the forum, $100 per week. The only thing he gets is a red tag that does not prevent him from receiving a good salary if he lives in a third world country and a good extra income if he lives in a first world country, for writing garbage.

If theymos wants a 70-80% decrease in forum activity, banning signatures and removing the altcoin boards altogether is a great way to achieve that. But I doubt that is something that is being considered.

But the admins obviously don't care about who wears what signature or if they wear one at all. Generally speaking, the interest of the forum is not to restrict people from doing anything. Do what you want but you have to be willing to face the consequences. 

Of course, there are always solutions, but the question is whether the administration of the forum considers it a problem, and consequently does it have the slightest intention to do something about it? I have only listed two possible solutions that would automatically disable such members from having signatures no matter how much I find it impossible for that to happen.

I have been on the forum since 2015 and believe me I have witnessed a dozen similar threads discussing how to prevent bad people from doing bad things on the forum - the only thing that has happened in 7 years is the merit system which has in some ways made it difficult for future spammers to thrive, but it did not solve the problem of old spammers who retained the benefits of the pre-merit system.

It is not technically difficult to remove signatures from individual profiles because even global mods can do this, which we have seen in the case of plagiarism penalties. The question is who and on the basis of which criteria will make an assessment that someone will be punished in this way, will the removal of the signature be permanent or temporary...?

That's not the point Lucius. Or at least not the point I am trying to make.

My point is that those morons shouldn't have the right to wear a clickable signature just because they registered on a certain date, and I think that on that we agree.

If theymos wants to put a solution to this, there are solutions. Some have been discussed and there may be others but let's not focus the debate on how supposedly difficult it is to remove the clickable signature to these morons because it is not.

I doubt that there would be at least 1% of active members who would support such a move even if such a proposal were put to the vote. People are basically very reluctant to be deprived of something they got and I have no doubt that a real rebellion would break out if something like that happened. In addition, if things get out of hand - an option that is already on the table is a complete ban on signature campaigns.

---

There is no doubt that these are members who are completely worthless to the forum in every sense, and they should be prevented from having signatures. The question is how to do it if removing airdropped merits is not a realistic option and the scam is not moderated by the forum?

Let's update this thread with the bunch of morons who are applying for the new 1xCrap signature campaign:

Sweminer777 0 merit earned.

crunck 2 merits earned.

MoonOfLife 0 merit earned.

Party24*7 0 merit earned.

ipanks 7 merits earned.

watergold 1 merit earned.

Nanbaka 11 merits earned.

pieppiep 2 merits earned.

gabriela1999 10 merits earned.

SamboNZ 3 merits earned.

lulumiya 4 merits earned.

tazmantasik 6 merits earned.

(o)(o)ilikeboobs(o)(o) 5 merits earned.

Jasad 0 merits earned.

muratsink 6 merits earned.

vvikkass 0 merits earned.

mrongoz_imut 0 merits earned.

Roidz 0 merits earned.

We clearly see that the vast majority of them would not have been able to reach full member if the same rules had been applied to them since the merit system came into force.

And this is only on page 1 of the campaign thread, so there are a lot of accounts that are taking advantage of this.

I am against this proposal of removing airdropped merits. It doesn't affect me personally, just as it doesn't affect you, but that's not the point. If a decision was made to introduce this system, which also entails airdropped merits, it seems a bit unserious to make changes to it now. The system works, it is not perfect because perfect doesn't exist.

And hopefully it stays that way. I would rather have more people come to the forum, than finding ways to drive those who are here away. If they break rules, use the ban hammer.

The merit system and trust system are two completely different systems and they do not complement one another in any way i can think of, let me quote Theymos' post regarding sending of merits
A member with a legitimate negative tag can make high quality posts and deserves to be merited, it should not put them in a different position from another member that has no negative tag. It is yours to decide how you give your merit, what i am just bringing to the fore is that negative feedbacks is not and should not be a criteria when sending merits, you would be better of looking at the quality, helpfulness, effort, post history and other things, but not negative feedbacks. A member you should not merit is one that posts spam.
Tag them and warn other members about their bad reputation; but if you see a post of them that is worth meriting, you should merit it, but well like you said it doesn't matter, your merit is yours to use in a manner of your choosing.

We are approaching the issue from different angles. While you are focusing on theory, I am speaking from the practical aspect of the matter. No matter how independent the trust system is with the merit system, they compliment each other.
No matter how quality your post is, once I see negative tags and check the reasons for the tag. If they are legitimate, I'll not send a merit to you. I believe other members of the forum does same, no matter how good you are, immediately you have legitimate red tag from reputable members of the forum, your chances of receiving merits are slim.

Since scam is not moderated, which means a notorious scammer would not be banned, that's my own means of paying back scammers. Well, it doesn't actually matter because I'm not a merit sourece.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if someone took 1000 merits from me, I didn't ask for them or invent the merit system, and I had already reached Legendary rank before the system came to life. However, I do not think that we should go to such drastic measures to punish some individual cases that behave like leeches on the forum, but that airdropped merits could be taken away from those who really proved to be members who have no contribution to the forum.

Yet if you consider that the issue of removing airdropped merits has been the subject of debate many times, and that there has been no concrete response from the admin (as far as I personally remember) - I think such a move is very unlikely.

---

Don’t confuse loyalty with the fact that before the merit system, every (literally) spammer and shitppster could get hold of any rank without writing at least one quality and meaningful post. The member listed in the OP is a classic example of someone who would never become a Full Member in today’s system, so we can’t say that his airdropped merits are a reward for loyalty.


Most of the new members who started from scratch are not in any danger of being deprived of something, and most of the active members have collected several times more merits over the years than they received based on the rank they had when the merits system was introduced.

It was a reward for loyalty, and you want it taken away? It wouldn't solve anything, and I'm not sure how many of you would be active if the merits and signature campaign is taken away from the forum.

The majority of those spamming the forum are newbies and those who don't care about the merit system; you'll see a lot of them if you go to WO and P&S.

Such users would not make it into majority of the campaigns around as the managers have some sort of entry check in place to select the participants that get into their campaigns.
Luckily for them, and unfortunately for the forum; once in a while scam campaign or one which does not care about the users that promote them comes around and pays them to spam the forum. It's not ideal, but there's little that can be done about it.

Removing airdropped merits would surely help to an extent to curb how such users apply for campaigns, it only ejld have a bit of effect to other regular users who contributed to the forum.

It seems we have a lot of users who only focus on making money on forum just by sending spam. Most of them are bounty hunters and they don't get any merit as long as they are active in the forum regardless of their rank. I got some high ranking users ^{[Sr-Legendary]} who just take advantage of any contest to get merit and try their luck joining the signature campaign, luckily they got accepted although I believe they are spammers who have filled my reporting history to the moderators.

I don't really know if the campaign manager is aware of that but I can confirm if they post anything other than on the gambling board then it's likely that the post will be removed as it's of bad quality.

OP, I completely share your frustration with jokers like S A KHAIR (and I'm labeling him such not because he's in the 1xbit campaign but because I've looked at his post history).  This is the first post I saw when I pulled it up:


This is the typical bloated shitpost written in vague generalities that satisfies character quota without actually saying anything interesting, novel, or important--or adding to the thread which it was in, in any way.  Not surprising he hasn't earned any merits, because his posts probably don't even get read.

Sadly, if you asked this fuck what his job was, he'd probably tell you he's a writer, and I'd find that very sad because technically it's true.  It's just the lowest form of writing imaginable and done for the wrong reasons to boot.

As far as his rank goes, this is one of the members who got lucky--and also one of the lucky ones who stuck around until now to continue shitposting for money.  The bright side is that unless accounts like his get sold, they're going to drop off as time goes on simply by attrition.  At least I'm hoping that's the case.  And by the way, the suggestions you made, OP, I'd support them in a heartbeat.  There's still a shitposting problem that hasn't been entirely alleviated by the merit system, and just a little bit more tightening as far as restrictions for newbies and members like S A CaCa here would be well-received by those of us who care about the forum.

Same feelings here. I think the airdropped merits should be taken away. Even though people usually don’t rate airdrop merits as merits earned, hence the self congratulatory posts for new ranks and merits achieved.  

Majority of the campaign participants are accounts that woke up recently. The accounts could have been hacked or bought by them to participate in campaign, nothing more. It will be difficult to make posts that deserve merits when your intent is to spam your way to complete signature post requirements

I am in the know that you are only attempting to drive home your point by comparing these two (dissimilar) situations, but even at that, this example is wrong and inapplicable, Bitcoin transactions once signed by the sender, broadcasted to the network and validated by a miner who gets the mathematical problem correctly, cannot be reversed. So even if we make an imaginal situation like you have done, it is not feasible as a result of Bitcoins irreversible nature; airdropped merits on the other hand is incomparable to Bitcoin transactions, it can be removed or reversed by Theymos if he feels the need to do so, or when he feels it is being of more harm that good, it is reversible unlike Bitcoin transactions, making it easier to achieve.
Members with legitimate red tag can also make quality posts and deserve merits. The trust system and merit system are independent of each other, the trust system is for warnings and information about how trustworthy or untrustworthy a member is, leaning more on matters of trade and commerce. The merit system is for quality posts, and i have read some members say you must not even agree with these quality posts to give merits to them. So an untrustworthy user (in trade and commerce) can make quality posts and should be merited for them, no less that other members, only users that post spam should be deprived of merits.

Well, after the merit system was implemented, Jr. Member can also wear a signature and needs only one merit. Anyways I agree with your point of view but then it will just create things more complicated. Why not we report these spam posts and their account will be automatic ban after extensive deletion of posts.



This should have been implemented when the merit system was introduced. Don't think it will be wise to implement this at this moment 

Airdrop is a reward given to early adopters, either for doing some jobs or for believing the system at it's early stage. Let's assume that some people recieved bitcoin airdrop 10yrs ago, but because the persosn are unable to recieve more bitcoins, then the airdropped bitcoin will be retrieved from them. It doesn't go well to my view.

Speaking about the account in question. It could be that it was dormant for 3 to 4years until 1xbit came and it resurrected and joined the campaign. Since it joined the campaign, most of them spams alot and doesn't have the chances of receiving merits.
I do not send out merit to anyone with legitimate red tag, no matter how quality it is. I believe some persons are together with me on this. So anyone promoting 1xbit has a very slim chance of receiving merits.