To prevent raids, opinion manipulation, etc. A good start would be one week old account before able to post proposals.
To prevent raids, opinion manipulation, etc. A good start would be one week old account before able to post proposals.
We only 27 more members to hit 200!
Subscribe here: https://collectorvision.com/shop/colecovision/collectorvision-experience-club-membership-2021/
Toby just told me at 200 members (or more) he will included the Intellivision rom files Ah, and the official count is: 159 members
We only 27 more members to hit 200!
Subscribe here: https://collectorvision.com/shop/colecovision/collectorvision-experience-club-membership-2021/
Toby just told me at 200 members (or more) he will included the Intellivision rom files Ah, and the official count is: 159 members
Yes, the 2nd game has never been ported to the ColecoVision It's not an arcade game, but it could easily be one for sure You'll understand once you see what the game is ![;)]
I think that site's moderators and Discourse's built-in community moderation systems (for example if a member flags a new user's post it's automatically hidden) should be enough to moderate the forum.
Hi everybody. Have a good day all.
Being proactive is a bad thing??
exactly, all someone has to do is wait out the qualifying period and carry on
We only 27 more members to hit 200!
Subscribe here: https://collectorvision.com/shop/colecovision/collectorvision-experience-club-membership-2021/
Toby just told me at 200 members (or more) he will included the Intellivision rom files Ah, and the official count is: 159 members
We only 27 more members to hit 200!
Subscribe here: https://collectorvision.com/shop/colecovision/collectorvision-experience-club-membership-2021/
Toby just told me at 200 members (or more) he will included the Intellivision rom files Ah, and the official count is: 159 members
Yes, the 2nd game has never been ported to the ColecoVision It's not an arcade game, but it could easily be one for sure You'll understand once you see what the game is ![;)]
I think that site's moderators and Discourse's built-in community moderation systems (for example if a member flags a new user's post it's automatically hidden) should be enough to moderate the forum.
Hi everybody. Have a good day all.
Being proactive is a bad thing??
exactly, all someone has to do is wait out the qualifying period and carry on
Wow, a feudalism proposal?! I don't like it but I'm with you on harmful, abusive comments or scams and spammers. The tiered system is dangerous, its kinda why we needed this tech today
nope, at least it is not working in hong kong, we have a forum lihkg.com, that use similar method (only allow to like/push post for 1 year old account), still the "red army" is able to flood comment and push post that they aimed to
actually this is happening all over the world and seem no method can really stop it, even by your method
Actually this forum is based on the discourse open source software and the way it works is that it actually kind of handles the vetting system on its own. I don't know exactly how the people here in uniswap set it up but there are several categories that users fall into which prevents a lot of spam and what not.
I think more than being worried about bad actors, what we have to focus on is in making this an active community that people want to join. I am much more worried about low participation than bad participation..
Yeah it's an issue but I think it more important to get a middle ground otherwise thing could potentially turn in the other direction would be my worry, with no one reporting anything and the forum becoming littered with spam and non governnace related topics.
I think personally admins laying out clearer governance rules could help in a way regarding what should and shouldn't be put on the forums, although I am aware they do already have rules out but i fear not many people are reading them.
Yeah it's an issue but I think it more important to get a middle ground otherwise thing could potentially turn in the other direction would be my worry, with no one reporting anything and the forum becoming littered with spam and non governnace related topics.
I think personally admins laying out clearer governance rules could help in a way regarding what should and shouldn't be put on the forums, although I am aware they do already have rules out but i fear not many people are reading them.
I also think a lot of moderator time is being wasted cleaning out multiple posts of the same topic if people on here start to help moderators by not creating multiple threads on the same topic unless the topic is vastly different then moderators might be able to spend more time moderating and less time going around closing/locking repeat posts and redirecting people to the correct posts.
Either way admins are looking at posts I agree though less false flagging would mean falsely flagged posts would get unflagged faster but again if it's been flagged twice then admins are notified and for first flags a simple edit lifts the flag anyway
Nothing wrong with new accounts, as I stated my problem is the comments that are flagged that are clearly not violating any rules and are being flagged out of manipulation. Not that its going to work anyway, Striesand effect.
And I'm sure admins are watching them, the fact that Marco posted what he did I would suspect must mean he and the other admins have seen a substantial increase of notifications coming into their inboxes for post requiring review and so has felt the need to issue a general warning that abusing the flagging system simply wont be tolerated and could result in action being taken on offenders accounts.
Yes I would agree there has been a very large influx of new accounts which I have notice myself aswell but I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt that these are really new people interested in Unisap governance and not a single person making multiple account to try to manipulate/abuse the system and or peoples thoughts/views
Mods can see who's abusing the flagging system and take action if they need to. I have seen an account get a 4 day ban for abusing the flagging system on here already.
That being said it's not really something I would label as one of upmost importance as someone can make as many fake accounts as they wish they're not the ones voting unless they are holding uni.
Mods can see who's abusing the flagging system and take action if they need to. I have seen an account get a 4 day ban for abusing the flagging system on here already.
That being said it's not really something I would label as one of upmost importance as someone can make as many fake accounts as they wish they're not the ones voting unless they are holding uni.
Also to note the admins can see who is flagging and abusing flagging. When a post is flagged once it is hidden it can be edited and is automatically unflagged after which if its flagged again it has to be reviewed by an admin before being unflagged.
That being said if a post isnt unflagged it probably means it is more than likely going against Governance Rules and was deemed to be flagged correctly. I think shaming people and making people scared to use the flag button in fear of using it wrong and being seen to be "abusing the flag button" is wrong here
flagging is good but as you commented we have tons of users abusing the report system because they dont like the opinion, not because it violates a rule. There's no point in even having this forum if it can easily be abused and manipulated. As I stated before flagged posts need to be manually reviewed every so often by senior admins or mods.
Its going to be much much harder for users to abuse the flag system with new accounts now that they implemented a trust system. Their is still tons of posts that are opinions and do not violate a rule they are still flagged.
Flagging comments helps a lot, the system picks up most of them and hides them. The community can combat new (duplicate) accounts voting/commenting this way.
well it is just the second day of this forum open?? LOL
How about we do something like what the bitcoin forums have which is merit and that it is rewarded to the person from the community. I don't know very much about this method but from what I saw I knew who is new and who has been around and helped others.
Not sure why people are worried as mentioned above this isn't actually where people vote, more than likely 99% of the people commenting on these forums wouldn't have the 1% to even put forward a proposal
would say its not something to get overly worked up about as most people probably won't even be able to get further than an idea yet alone officially propose them unless the team brings the price for proposals down (which I personally don't see happening any time soon)
Lol what. A tiered system on a forum just prevents you from making certain posts until after a certain time limit or comment amount. Its purely to prevent spammers, raids , and manipulation.
Wow, a feudalism proposal?! I don't like it but I'm with you on harmful, abusive comments or scams and spammers. The tiered system is dangerous, its kinda why we needed this tech today
nope, at least it is not working in hong kong, we have a forum lihkg.com, that use similar method (only allow to like/push post for 1 year old account), still the "red army" is able to flood comment and push post that they aimed to
actually this is happening all over the world and seem no method can really stop it, even by your method
Actually this forum is based on the discourse open source software and the way it works is that it actually kind of handles the vetting system on its own. I don't know exactly how the people here in uniswap set it up but there are several categories that users fall into which prevents a lot of spam and what not.
I think more than being worried about bad actors, what we have to focus on is in making this an active community that people want to join. I am much more worried about low participation than bad participation..
Yeah it's an issue but I think it more important to get a middle ground otherwise thing could potentially turn in the other direction would be my worry, with no one reporting anything and the forum becoming littered with spam and non governnace related topics.
I think personally admins laying out clearer governance rules could help in a way regarding what should and shouldn't be put on the forums, although I am aware they do already have rules out but i fear not many people are reading them.
Yeah it's an issue but I think it more important to get a middle ground otherwise thing could potentially turn in the other direction would be my worry, with no one reporting anything and the forum becoming littered with spam and non governnace related topics.
I think personally admins laying out clearer governance rules could help in a way regarding what should and shouldn't be put on the forums, although I am aware they do already have rules out but i fear not many people are reading them.
I also think a lot of moderator time is being wasted cleaning out multiple posts of the same topic if people on here start to help moderators by not creating multiple threads on the same topic unless the topic is vastly different then moderators might be able to spend more time moderating and less time going around closing/locking repeat posts and redirecting people to the correct posts.
Either way admins are looking at posts I agree though less false flagging would mean falsely flagged posts would get unflagged faster but again if it's been flagged twice then admins are notified and for first flags a simple edit lifts the flag anyway
Nothing wrong with new accounts, as I stated my problem is the comments that are flagged that are clearly not violating any rules and are being flagged out of manipulation. Not that its going to work anyway, Striesand effect.
And I'm sure admins are watching them, the fact that Marco posted what he did I would suspect must mean he and the other admins have seen a substantial increase of notifications coming into their inboxes for post requiring review and so has felt the need to issue a general warning that abusing the flagging system simply wont be tolerated and could result in action being taken on offenders accounts.
Yes I would agree there has been a very large influx of new accounts which I have notice myself aswell but I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt that these are really new people interested in Unisap governance and not a single person making multiple account to try to manipulate/abuse the system and or peoples thoughts/views
Mods can see who's abusing the flagging system and take action if they need to. I have seen an account get a 4 day ban for abusing the flagging system on here already.
That being said it's not really something I would label as one of upmost importance as someone can make as many fake accounts as they wish they're not the ones voting unless they are holding uni.
Mods can see who's abusing the flagging system and take action if they need to. I have seen an account get a 4 day ban for abusing the flagging system on here already.
That being said it's not really something I would label as one of upmost importance as someone can make as many fake accounts as they wish they're not the ones voting unless they are holding uni.
Also to note the admins can see who is flagging and abusing flagging. When a post is flagged once it is hidden it can be edited and is automatically unflagged after which if its flagged again it has to be reviewed by an admin before being unflagged.
That being said if a post isnt unflagged it probably means it is more than likely going against Governance Rules and was deemed to be flagged correctly. I think shaming people and making people scared to use the flag button in fear of using it wrong and being seen to be "abusing the flag button" is wrong here
flagging is good but as you commented we have tons of users abusing the report system because they dont like the opinion, not because it violates a rule. There's no point in even having this forum if it can easily be abused and manipulated. As I stated before flagged posts need to be manually reviewed every so often by senior admins or mods.
Its going to be much much harder for users to abuse the flag system with new accounts now that they implemented a trust system. Their is still tons of posts that are opinions and do not violate a rule they are still flagged.
Flagging comments helps a lot, the system picks up most of them and hides them. The community can combat new (duplicate) accounts voting/commenting this way.
well it is just the second day of this forum open?? LOL
How about we do something like what the bitcoin forums have which is merit and that it is rewarded to the person from the community. I don't know very much about this method but from what I saw I knew who is new and who has been around and helped others.
Not sure why people are worried as mentioned above this isn't actually where people vote, more than likely 99% of the people commenting on these forums wouldn't have the 1% to even put forward a proposal
would say its not something to get overly worked up about as most people probably won't even be able to get further than an idea yet alone officially propose them unless the team brings the price for proposals down (which I personally don't see happening any time soon)
Lol what. A tiered system on a forum just prevents you from making certain posts until after a certain time limit or comment amount. Its purely to prevent spammers, raids , and manipulation.
I assume thats a state actor youre talking about. Thats quite a different thing.
A system that is tiered works very well actually.
Yeah your right, lemme go sign up for 100 accounts and give this comment 100 likes.
I assume thats a state actor youre talking about. Thats quite a different thing.
A system that is tiered works very well actually.
Yeah your right, lemme go sign up for 100 accounts and give this comment 100 likes.
Yeah and we are already being raided by one second old accounts lol
Yeah and we are already being raided by one second old accounts lol
That still won't likely influence anyone or effect the results of a proposal.
And bots could be weeded out other ways like with Captchas or just looked at manually if there is a noticeable jump in new accounts.
Don't think this is necessary. Proposals aren't even formally voted on or actually proposed here, just a place to discuss proposals before they are created.
That still won't likely influence anyone or effect the results of a proposal.
And bots could be weeded out other ways like with Captchas or just looked at manually if there is a noticeable jump in new accounts.
Don't think this is necessary. Proposals aren't even formally voted on or actually proposed here, just a place to discuss proposals before they are created.
