The LTB Network Forum

LTBCoin for SPAM

Back to LTBcoin Talk

Comments

• adam

  

  Offline
  Posts: 1980
  Location: California, USA

  @belltown I haven't seen spam as a big problem here. Maybe because nobody replies to spam so these messages go down the list quick?

  But I would love to get LTBCoins for up/down votes. You vote - you get coins

  I've deleted two spam posts, thats about it.

  And yeah, it's coming :)

  Posted on July 15, 2014 at 5:01 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• bcohen

  

  Offline
  Posts: 260

  @spengler I have made a short post myself which just said, "I concur", but I wasn't trying to spam. Perhaps a user's average length of >post could be used as a metric, but this seems draconian.

  using the like button would seem like a good alternative if we were able to see a list of users who have "liked" a post

  also we aren't able to currently send personal messages which would declutter the board

  Perhaps some kind of "Haiku standard" can eventually be developed

  Posted on July 15, 2014 at 7:31 PM
  Last Edited: July 15, 2014 at 7:31 PM
  Permalink
  1 like
• Doogy

  

  Offline
  Posts: 80
  Location: New Jersey, USA

  I must be one naive SOB. I wouldn't even think of this as a possible problem in the future and ask myself why would anyone even want to do that? I'm glad you guys are on it, keep up the good work! please :)

  Posted on July 15, 2014 at 8:01 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• knircky

  

  Offline
  Posts: 90
  Location: Philadelphia PA

  It might also make sense to think about how to increase quality overall.

  Instead of only punishing the bad, how about rating content.

  I.e. Comments could be rated as: Objective: Supports the essence of the thread/question/article Form: is well written and easy to understand Length: Is to the point, without noise but covers all critical aspect of the appropriate content.

  These are just examples, but if we could rate everyone like this instead of clicking like buttons we could now determine quality much better. With appropriate rewards (i.e. LTBCOINS) this could lead to a quality based community very quickly.

  We would also not have to punish idiots as they would flush out automatically. Of course the whole spam stuff can happen still. I think of this more in addition not in place of the great comments here about how to handle spam.

  Posted on July 15, 2014 at 8:12 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• irnhnve

  

  Offline
  Posts: 228

  This is a great idea but I think it would need to work in conjunction with a reputation system. Users known to provide quality content would be more likely to provide legitimate 'spam' flagging vs someone flagging actual content just to get rewarded. There would need to be a balance so that multiple new accounts couldnt be created to to flag things that others posted or to flag things that they had posted from other spam accounts.

  Posted on July 15, 2014 at 8:44 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• spacebat

  

  Offline
  Posts: 7
  Location: Adelaide, South Australia

  @adam The ideal system IMO is not automated. It is threefold

  1 - A solid set of easy to understand rules defining inappropriate behavior within our community

  2 - Allowing people to bet if a given post/comment/whatever does or does not comply with the rules. There is no advantage to betting it does follow the rules unless you think other people are incorrectly identifying it as a rule-breaker when it is not.

  3 - Have non-controversial ones be settled automatically

  Settled as in no tokens change hands and the incentive is reddit-like content weeding?

  4 - Have controversial ones flag a moderator who then does a rules-judgement, losing side donates their tokens to the winning side.

  It does seem a sound approach, but I am reminded of an anecdote about a child daycare facility that, because parents often picked up their kids late, started charging for children staying over time. The response of the parents was to treat it as a service they could buy more of, which was not the intent of the administrators. Abolishing the fee didn't improve things either since the parents now valued the service monetarily and were getting it for zero marginal cost.

  If moral/community obligation is mixed with monetary incentive, the latter could wreck the perception of the good that underlies the former. Just an observation that may have only limited applicability to this situation - I think it will be an interesting experiment.

  Cheers

  Posted on July 16, 2014 at 2:23 AM
  Permalink
  0 likes

Post Reply