Community Constitution

[the hare]

Yes, we know that. There is nobody else who goes around tossing coins and hoping for a magical outcome.

I think you'd surprised at how many of us there are.

I don't physically toss coins, these days we are a bit more high Tech

Hope plays no part at all.

There's nothing magical about the outcome either.

 

[the hare]

But, rather like yourself, egging the pudding is part of the weaponry isn't it

If claiming 4/103 when in reality its 3/19 isn't over egging the pudding then I really don't know what is.

15% of his posts on this thread have been deleted, there's a factor of FOUR between your claims and reality. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black !

 

[scose-no-doubt]

this place is only ever going to be a "jack of all trades, master of none" forum. For whatever aspect of trading you can think of, there will be somewhere else to go that covers it in much greater depth, and the opportunity exists to exchange with people much more experienced/knowledgable than here.

That should be a strength of trade to win. The problem, IMO, is that there is not a broad spread of material or content. It is pretty much all people talking about or using technical trading strategies, and that's where it loses it's appeal.

Yip

 

[barjon]

If claiming 4/103 when in reality its 3/19 isn't over egging the pudding then I really don't know what is.

15% of his posts on this thread have been deleted, there's a factor of FOUR between your claims and reality. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black !

touche mon brave

 

[neil]

Yes, we know that. There is nobody else who goes around tossing coins and hoping for a magical outcome.

I give up...........look at the rising number of new posters hurriedly building up posts for some(no doubt scammy purpose) and wrecking the new post reading order for those of us trying to follow new content. From now on I give up reporting possible scam threads - I can't keep up with the deluge, follow the order of new posts that haven't been disrupted by the insertion of old or dead posts brought to the front of the queue by scammers building up post counts, and trade.
Thank goodness the live trading threads (ftse etc) arn't infected yet. These few threads of live trades and a couple of other good trading related threads are all that keep some here I believe, albeit this site has lost a good few good traders whose posts were always welcomed.
I spend more time at FF reading a couple of threads such as James16 thread of free stuff. It may well be,hopefully, that the likes of the ftse thread, Lord Flash heart etc, live trading threads, on T2W will remain spam free and dedicated to trades;if so then I have a small but important universe of trading related material dedicated to improving a persons trading ability and act as a social forum of trading related discussion whilst doing so.
Upon reflection, I feel that the future of both sites lies in the direction of live trading threads and price action discussion threads at the heart of their reason for being.
Just my opinion of course and, naturally I wont be bothered if you disagree.

 

[Liquid validity]

I give up...........look at the rising number of new posters hurriedly building up posts for some(no doubt scammy purpose) and wrecking the new post reading order for those of us trying to follow new content. From now on I give up reporting possible scam threads - I can't keep up with the deluge, follow the order of new posts that haven't been disrupted by the insertion of old or dead posts brought to the front of the queue by scammers building up post counts

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/ceo-exchange/161278-community-constitution-23.html#post2013370

I agree, something needs to be done.
Rapidly...

The new posts link is pretty much broken at the moment:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/search.php?searchid=10550790

 

[Steve]

Time to own up from me. When I was making the recent vendor changes (links, PM's etc) I also made a change to the minimum post numbers before a thread could be started.

I then forget to tell anyone. No excuses, except advancing years of course!

Anyway, it seems the reason for doing it (to deter some of the spammers) has created more problems than the original one.

I was told FF do this and set it at 50, I wonder if they have the same problem.

Anyway, it is set at 25.

What do you want me to do?

 

[Liquid validity]

Time to own up from me. When I was making the recent vendor changes (links, PM's etc) I also made a change to the minimum post numbers before a thread could be started.

I then forget to tell anyone. No excuses, except advancing years of course!

Anyway, it seems the reason for doing it (to deter some of the spammers) has created more problems than the original one.

I was told FF do this and set it at 50, I wonder if they have the same problem.

Anyway, it is set at 25.

What do you want me to do?

Obviously its your call.
If it was me, I'd do this:

How about new posters waiting 2-3 mins between posts,
with 10 daily post limit.
If they go over 10 per day, thread creation revoked.
Wouldn't restrict new posters too much (if at all).

Instead limit to 1 thread creation per day, maybe 2?
At least that would reduce the cleanup needed.
All restrictions lifted after 50-75 posts?

I can't see a problem with that.

 

[Steve]

Thanks LV, appreciate that. Any other ideas so I can get this done tomorrow?

 

[Liquid validity]

Nothing else I can think of
Maybe someone else has other ideas,
or can see a flaw I've missed?

 

[Splitlink]

On the surface it seems like a good idea except that they may mess up someone else's thread. That would bring in the anti-spammers and a lot of unwanted posts. They could be removed, of course.

As it is, now, a new thread can be seen for what it is and deleted in a very short time by a moderator. I have reported one, or two, and they do not last very long.

 

[Liquid validity]

On the surface it seems like a good idea except that they may mess up someone else's thread. That would bring in the anti-spammers and a lot of unwanted posts. They could be removed, of course.

As it is, now, a new thread can be seen for what it is and deleted in a very short time by a moderator. I have reported one, or two, and they do not last very long.

Thats the thing though, split,
new posters would be able to create 1 thread per day.
Go over 10 posts per day and that right is pulled.
Only outright spammers would fall foul most of the time,
they would be banned pretty quick anyway.

 

[Shakone]

If a thread hasn't been posted in longer than 6 months (a year?), then new posters shouldn't be able to post on that without mod approval. I don't mind old threads coming back, if someone wants to add something considerable, or and old hat bump an old thread for consideration, but it seems like several old threads have been resurrected just so someone new can post a one or two line empty statement.

This is in addition to Liq Valid suggestion.

 

[Hakuna Matata]

On the surface it seems like a good idea except that they may mess up someone else's thread. That would bring in the anti-spammers and a lot of unwanted posts. They could be removed, of course.

As it is, now, a new thread can be seen for what it is and deleted in a very short time by a moderator. I have reported one, or two, and they do not last very long.

agree. It'll just serve to have threads clogged up with posts for the sake of them. Isn't it easier to see their intentions from the off and nip 'em in the bud? If each spammer starts 5 threads before getting killed off, you're increasing the workload 5 fold.

 

[Liquid validity]

agree. It'll just serve to have threads clogged up with posts for the sake of them. Isn't it easier to see their intentions from the off and nip 'em in the bud? If each spammer starts 5 threads before getting killed off, you're increasing the workload 5 fold.

They would only have the right for 1 thread per day.
Reason I suggested 1 is so a genuine scam victim can post,
or someone else who genuinely wanted some info quick.

Anyway, they are already messing up threads,
resurrecting old ones and messing up the new post link
as we stand.

 

[Hakuna Matata]

missed that

 

[Liquid validity]

If a thread hasn't been posted in longer than 6 months (a year?), then new posters shouldn't be able to post on that without mod approval. I don't mind old threads coming back, if someone wants to add something considerable, or and old hat bump an old thread for consideration, but it seems like several old threads have been resurrected just so someone new can post a one or two line empty statement.

This is in addition to Liq Valid suggestion.

I can see where you're coming from, and I agree in principle.
TBH, the number of old threads surfacing makes me think its
their way of flying under the radar.
Old thread, nobody will notice if you do one in each forum category.
They obviously overlooked the new posts link (which I did until recently ).

Thats my guess anyway.
Remove the incentive, problem goes away.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

Time to own up from me. When I was making the recent vendor changes (links, PM's etc) I also made a change to the minimum post numbers before a thread could be started.

I then forget to tell anyone. No excuses, except advancing years of course!

Anyway, it seems the reason for doing it (to deter some of the spammers) has created more problems than the original one.

I was told FF do this and set it at 50, I wonder if they have the same problem.

Anyway, it is set at 25.

What do you want me to do?

i thought it was set at 15?

i say this because of this mornings outing by some chap, here's how it went with some examples for those that didn't see it.

Hi,
I've been wondering over this for a long long time, thanks for all the clarifications.

Thanks for all the inputs guys, really appreciate it.

This is an amazing intiative, Thanks

I don't understand this stuff.

Thank you.

somewhere in the rush to post we get -

Or, you could simply post like this until you have 15 posts and then talk to the people you really want to

post count of 15 swiftly arrives @ 07:36

then straight to pm @ 07:36

...but wait, 25 posts? ok then maybe a current member on the post padding quest maybe thought it was 25?

and filling the boards with postings that are annoying the membership at large.

Interesting stuff, thanks

interesting thread, thanks

good advice

sound advice, thanks

 

[BeginnerJoe]

Well, there wasn't this kind of problem before. The easiest thing is to put everything back to how it was.

There isn't going to be an automated system/formula to counter spammers. It's a waste of effort even to try coming up with one. You are not dealing with dummies here. They are on a mission and they will get through however you try to stop them. So just let them through and delete as soon as possible like before.

I have no idea what the turn around time is for dealing with spam reports. If it's quick and people know it's quick, they would be more inclined to use it. Then spam really wouldn't be a problem. If there are time gaps in the coverage for dealing with spam reports, that would dissuade people because they make a report and nothing happens for hours and their effort seem wasted.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

amazingly these clowns are still live !!!

post padding allowed now is it?

it's not as though they are hiding and are easily spotted. why are they being allowed to post so many 2 or 3 word posts unchallenged??