Signature campaigns thread comment

[mu_enrico]

The one that I mentioned intervain is because like a case in stake signature campaign on bitcointalk, there was a time where the community call out the rules of the campaign and which brings much spam on the forum and despite strong defense the manager yielded to the pressure and changed some rules in the campaign.

Although the manager has every right as we have observed with a few managers, not every one of them likes comments aside from applications on the signature campaign page, whatever discussion or requests are better entertained via PM.

Yeah, it isn't very pleasant since the thread got bumped, thus giving a false sign about new slots opening (or whatever) like on the BTCT chipxxxxx campaign. At the same time, if users cannot freely post, then there's concern about the legitimacy of the campaign. Many times, users have tried to give a heads-up about a campaign being a scam, fake, forum abuse, etc. IIRC Stake is one of the good examples I think (about abusing forum), not a bad one.

1. Make it self-moderated. I don't see any reason for the campaign managers to delete application, but in deleting some posts that would clog the overall thread is.

Self-mod isn't applicable to signature ANN IMHO since it can be abused by scam campaigns or any problems that arise about payment.

[Igebotz]

Yeah, it isn't very pleasant since the thread got bumped, thus giving a false sign about new slots opening (or whatever) like on the BTCT chipxxxxx campaign. At the same time, if users cannot freely post, then there's concern about the legitimacy of the campaign. Many times, users have tried to give a heads-up about a campaign being a scam, fake, forum abuse, etc. IIRC Stake is one of the good examples I think (about abusing forum), not a bad one.

How is Stake abusing the Forum? You should stay on topic and stop spreading false narrative about one of the oldest signature campaign.

[Asiska02]

For every signature campaign launched on the forum, they are always guided by rules and regulations for everyone to abide by, been you a participant or a forum member on the forum the campaign is posted. It looks well organised and duly informations passed to members in the campaigns when it’s not full of unnecessary discussions.

Campaign members can miss vital information about the campaign if the thread is full of irrelevant discussions that will not allow members to want to go through the thread if they already know the type of discussion always going on there. They can also lose vital information when it’s hidden within the many discussions on such threads.

I think the best thing is to say it out in the rules of not posting anything asides from application/relevant information to the campaigns on the thread or campaigns manager having the ability to delete unwanted discussions on the thread (self moderated topics). That’s the best way to keep the thread clean.

[mu_enrico]

How is Stake abusing the Forum? You should stay on topic and stop spreading false narrative about one of the oldest signature campaign.

Oh, we have "The Stake Sherrif" over here... Are you new to Bitcointalk/Altcoinstalks so you don't know about this case?

Here are some history lessons of the case I mentioned:
Stake.com (SteveStake) is encouraging spam.
Re: Report a Signature Campaign Spammer!

AND I'm still on-topic about why people should be free to sound their opinion even in the campaign thread:

Many times, users have tried to give a heads-up about a campaign being a scam, fake, forum abuse, etc. IIRC Stake is one of the good examples I think (about abusing forum), not a bad one.

Do you want me to post more links about Stake's unethical behavior in the past? Or do we shake hands, knowing that you, the "The Stake Sherrif," are just lacking knowledge?

[Faisal2202]

I don't want to contribute to further draining of the thread that is why I created a separate thread for this discussion.

So I decided to create this poll to let us know the opinions of forum members regarding signature campaign threads and how forum members engage and what they engage on in such a thread.

I think there is nothing bad in making comments because once the applicants will apply and the week starts, the information about the project will be shared on the same thread despite the discussion about the project because that will occur on the ANN. The information needed for the applicants will be shared only.

So I think if a participant has some serious questions, then making posts in the thread is not wrong. If managers don't like it they can also make it part of their rule and must create a separate thread for questions and queries about any campaign on that one thread if that suits them best as I don't know their needs and how they work. But this can save them this mess.

[Igebotz]

How is Stake abusing the Forum? You should stay on topic and stop spreading false narrative about one of the oldest signature campaign.

Do you want me to post more links about Stake's unethical behavior in the past? Or do we shake hands, knowing that you, the "The Stake Sherrif," are just lacking knowledge?

How about you concentrate on the present? I don't care what stuff they did in the past; all I care about is what happened after I joined, and the effort I've done to clean up those messes should not be overlooked. We can't stop spam; there will always be one or two users who do the wrong thing, but we ensure that those spams are not paid for and finally throw them out.

We're already in 2025 and you're bringing a case of 2019 on a 2024 thread.