For users who are in a hurry to participate in signature campaigns

[examplens]

I think I was involved in exposing both cases that the OP refers to.
As I assumed, writing a large number of posts in a short time is not often aimed at rank upgrades, so I would suggest implementing a solution similar to the one on Bitcointalk at least when it comes to promotion by rank.
In fact, there the activity (necessary for rank upgrade) is calculated every two weeks. And the maximum you can improve the activity is 14 points. Even if you write 100 posts for that period.
I don't know how feasible it is to do something like that here, it's a matter of administration and a question for the admin, but certainly, restrictions in that sense would discourage excessive spam.

[Lucius]

~snip~
May I ask, is there a tool to check if they are using AI to post?
And how to identify them using AI (like robots) in making posts?

There are tools that analyze the text and try to determine if it was generated and in what percentage with the help of AI. Fortunately, AI is still not so perfect that it can faithfully imitate a human, and it uses some kind of patterns with which it can be detected.

However, you should know that this detection is not perfect and that it is not wise to accuse someone of using AI only on the basis of one positive detection, and that is why it is a kind of standard that we use (at least on the BTT forum) to check such suspicious posts with at least 3 detectors.

I personally use these three ->

https://gptzero.me/
https://www.zerogpt.com
https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector

[Freemind]

Oh My God, this is too much and this can indeed be called Spammers. 

May I ask, is there a tool to check if they are using AI to post?
And how to identify them using AI (like robots) in making posts?

There are many tools available to do the job you say. With a simple search on your favorite search engine you will find hundreds (or more).

I think I was involved in exposing both cases that the OP refers to.
As I assumed, writing a large number of posts in a short time is not often aimed at rank upgrades, so I would suggest implementing a solution similar to the one on Bitcointalk at least when it comes to promotion by rank.
In fact, there the activity (necessary for rank upgrade) is calculated every two weeks. And the maximum you can improve the activity is 14 points. Even if you write 100 posts for that period.
I don't know how feasible it is to do something like that here, it's a matter of administration and a question for the admin, but certainly, restrictions in that sense would discourage excessive spam.

What you say seems like a possible solution to me. What I don't know is if it would be possible in the technical part of the forum. But that's something the administrator can tell us, and also whether it would require too much work to make it possible. I guess since these are SMF based forums there shouldn't be any problems, but I'll tell the admin to take a look at this thread (if he hasn't already) and let us know if possible.

[rdluffy]

Is there actually a rule of how many number of posts are expected of a user in a day? It's not that I support someone making 60 posts a day, because I even find it difficult to complete 30 posts a week. But I have this question;

• If a user makes 60 posts a day;
• Gives atleast 15mins difference between the posts;
• Not using AI;
• And the posts are on point;

Should that be considered as a spam?

There is no rule, but I believe that common sense is enough in this case

Are these 60 posts totally necessary and useful?
Even if it's not necessarily spam, maybe the content is too poor and it's not necessary or it's something that's already been said in the thread

In some cases it may be justifiable, but I confess that I don't remember users making so many posts in one day that it was necessary

In any case, if this user applies for a signature campaign, it will probably be detected by the manager

[Freemind]

I think badged should be used for good contributions and achievements, not punishment.

IMO, the user should receive some red tag or some red text below his user name (like "monitored") or something like that...

Well, I proposed a badge because it is one of the things that we can see the most and that we have also talked about for other things, but a red text, as you say, that makes it very clear why the user has it, It can also serve perfectly for that are easily identifiable. I don't think the visual aspect itself is the most important thing, the important thing is that it is functional. Anyway, we will see what the administrator says about this matter.

[Jokers]

Well, I proposed a badge because it is one of the things that we can see the most and that we have also talked about for other things, but a red text, as you say, that makes it very clear why the user has it, It can also serve perfectly for that are easily identifiable. I don't think the visual aspect itself is the most important thing, the important thing is that it is functional. Anyway, we will see what the administrator says about this matter.

I think we should look on this situation is case by case way: we have the Low Quality Posts badge and if someone leaves too many posts of really low quality in a very short period of time we can give him this badge immediately not making any new badges. If his posts are not so bad... well, there are some other criteria in ranking up which prevent someone from being too fast in that.

[dragononcrypto]

Well, I proposed a badge because it is one of the things that we can see the most and that we have also talked about for other things, but a red text, as you say, that makes it very clear why the user has it, It can also serve perfectly for that are easily identifiable. I don't think the visual aspect itself is the most important thing, the important thing is that it is functional. Anyway, we will see what the administrator says about this matter.

I think we should look on this situation is case by case way: we have the Low Quality Posts badge and if someone leaves too many posts of really low quality in a very short period of time we can give him this badge immediately not making any new badges. If his posts are not so bad... well, there are some other criteria in ranking up which prevent someone from being too fast in that.

Agreed LQP more or less covers this, at least if they are not plagiarising or using AI etc. Both of you should get permissions to put users in that group then you could just use that when needed...

[alltalk]

-snip-

I think we should look on this situation is case by case way: we have the Low Quality Posts badge and if someone leaves too many posts of really low quality in a very short period of time we can give him this badge immediately not making any new badges. If his posts are not so bad... well, there are some other criteria in ranking up which prevent someone from being too fast in that.

Agree. If it is not really necessary, it is no need for a new badge. We have quite a lot badges.
IMO, the real problem isn't on the number of posts, it is about the quality of the posts. Yep, the badge LQP is enough for the user.


Regarding to the signature, I'm very sure the bounty managers are smart enough to select the participants. Even, all bounty managers of current active signatures are experienced bounty managers. They know well how to select proper participants.

[Freemind]

Got it guys, it was just another one of my stupid ideas to try to make the managers job easier. But looking at it from the angles you've shown, it makes all the sense in the world. The LQP  badge will be more useful then.

[examplens]

When we are already talking about signature campaigns and participation in them, let's also open the topic of the quality of writing posts. That is, what "stings my eyes" is that I often see posts from high-ranking members that seem like an obvious shill.  Although I'm sure the manager never asked for it, I'm even pretty sure that it's considered undesirable.