Allow the community to negatively flag a thread

[Freemind]

We've all seen threads that are clearly scams. For example, the last case is this.: How to withdraw money from wallet correctly.

Although we all know that it is a scam, and that by adding that recovery phrase we will see funds that we will never be able to withdraw, there are users who do not know it, those who have less experience and only see the funds.

I deleted 2 threads from that user, but I decided to leave that thread precisely as an example of one of the things not to do.

I know that some users (those who are not registered in the forum, who only come to look for some type of information) would not read the rest of the thread, where many of us warned about the danger. I think it's also a fact that there are people who don't pay attention to the user profile who write fraudulent threads like this.

That's why I write this suggestion for the administrator. Would it be possible (as long as it was technically possible and did not represent a risk to the proper functioning of the forum) to allow the community to somehow flag threads that are clearly scams?. I think it would be a good option, since the Trust system caused some problems on the forum.

If anyone wants to add anything else, I'll read you.

[hugeblack]

deleting these topics would be a good idea. Unfortunately, many beginners believe everything. If the "send $10 to my wallet and you will get $100" scam still works, it is better to delete the obvious scam cases and treat them exactly as phishing links.
In cases where there may be significant risks, it is better to simply issue a warning in large print.

[Freemind]

hugeblack using common sense, I know that the best thing would be to delete them completely and leave no trace of those posts, but on the other hand I think that an example is always useful, precisely for people with less experience. As I said, not everyone (unfortunately) reads the entire threads, and only reads the OP, if people are inexperienced and want to make a lot of money quickly, it's the perfect scenario to fall into the trap.

But logically I am open to knowing what users think, and if they don't like this suggestion, no problem, we can always go back to the classic manual deletion.

[Findingnemo]

But logically I am open to knowing what users think, and if they don't like this suggestion, no problem, we can always go back to the classic manual deletion.

They should not be taken very lightly, I am against the censorship of the forum but in this case it's needed. I feel like editing out the necessary part of scam by the respective moderator may not be a bad idea if the intention is to stop the people from falling for it.

[KingsDen]

@Freemind, no matter the level of efforts you invest trying to make everyone safe from scam, there are people who are even willing to offer themselves cheap to scammers.
Going by your suggestions will make moderation very tedious. Imagine that a scammer creates 10 scam threads daily, it means moderators will have to locate the 10 threads in order to flag them all.  That's obviously alot of work to do.

The simple and most effective way is to flag the user or give the user a scam badge. If anyone will do business with some strange person in the forum without checking their profile, maybe the victim is a kind of idiot.

[Freemind]

They should not be taken very lightly, I am against the censorship of the forum but in this case it's needed. I feel like editing out the necessary part of scam by the respective moderator may not be a bad idea if the intention is to stop the people from falling for it.

Of course, the intention is to prevent users from falling into the trap, but also to know how scammers will try to scam people using different ways to scam. It would be something like learning with practical examples.

However, I don't know to what extent this would be possible and whether users would pay much attention, and I also don't know if something like this can be technically implemented on the forum. For now I will leave the thread open so that users can contribute their ideas and give their opinions, at least until I come up with something else that gives more strength to the proposal.

@Freemind, no matter the level of efforts you invest trying to make everyone safe from scam, there are people who are even willing to offer themselves cheap to scammers.
Going by your suggestions will make moderation very tedious. Imagine that a scammer creates 10 scam threads daily, it means moderators will have to locate the 10 threads in order to flag them all.  That's obviously alot of work to do.

The simple and most effective way is to flag the user or give the user a scam badge. If anyone will do business with some strange person in the forum without checking their profile, maybe the victim is a kind of idiot.

I do not intend to save everyone from scams, that is impossible and I am aware of that. My intention is to somehow “educate” with examples, since it is very clear that every day more scams are committed due to lack of knowledge.

From what I see, probably the most effective way is to simply tag users/projects, as several users say.

[Findingnemo]

However, I don't know to what extent this would be possible and whether users would pay much attention, and I also don't know if something like this can be technically implemented on the forum. For now I will leave the thread open so that users can contribute their ideas and give their opinions, at least until I come up with something else that gives more strength to the proposal.

Moderators has the power to edit the posts already if I am not wrong so the only confirmation should be from the admin or presidents about implementing censorship against scam posts. That kind of moderation is common in reddit but on Bitcointalk it's completely unmoderated unless it violates any forum rules.

[Freemind]

Moderators has the power to edit the posts already if I am not wrong so the only confirmation should be from the admin or presidents about implementing censorship against scam posts. That kind of moderation is common in reddit but on Bitcointalk it's completely unmoderated unless it violates any forum rules.

Exactly, moderators can edit any post, that's something I've started doing recently (in addition to locking the thread) to always make it clear that it's a scam. It is an option that can also work, although it was not my idea as I had thought at the time.

I will leave this thread open for a few days (2 or 3) in case anyone wants to add anything else, after that time I will lock it.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

This overall is a good suggestion, but just incase the feature doesnt work or causes some problems on the forum, or maybe will take alot of time to develop, I would ask why don't we use the Negative Karma as a way to flag inappropriate posts which as well affects the poster's profit and reputation?

Like I did suggest that the admin add a feature where if a user gets like 5 negative Karma or a bit more in a roll, his profile information on every post/comment on this entire forum turns red, as a way of warning other users that that user can't be trusted, this can be a good way  and simple way to flag users who are suspected to want to carry out a scam through their post.

[Lucius]

There is a system on BTT that does exactly that - basically, anyone can open a flag against any user they reasonably consider to be a danger to the forum members. If multiple users support that flag, a warning will appear above every topic opened by that user, and such a warning can also be seen by forum guests.

Since there is no DT system here, such a flag could be started by moderators or any of the staff, and if it is supported by more than 50% of those members, a warning would be displayed above every topic opened by such a user.