I think [...] should allow [...] signature (campaign) only for xx ranking
I think this would only drive up the price of these ranking accounts, and drive down the price of accounts. I don't think this would do very much in terms of reducing signature spam, nor would it do very much to address the issue of low quality posts.
You can't know that. You're just speculating about potential cons. Every single solution to this problem is going to have cons and there are going to be people complaining because they're losing their opportunity to spam and earn money by breaking the rules. I'd rather we try-out some solutions that seem good enough, than infinitely discuss how to tackle this problem.
To post this kind of stuff?
-snip-
I think a general thread used to report spammers (& copy-paste spammers) wouldn't be a bad idea. We've had a lot of these threads occasionally pop-up (sometimes singular and sometimes bulk reports). Since this is already happening, it wouldn't be bad to streamline it into a singular one. I'll talk to theymos.
Lauda, it is fairly probable that account prices will increase if signatures are not enabled for the lower ranks.
More farming would also take place and may produce more spam. However, there may be more accounts of the higher ranks and that may reduce their value (say if there are now around 1000 legendary accounts, if there were 10000 legendary accounts, the value would fall as more may be sold).
If there's a thread for reporting spam, unless it's self moderated and posts are archived and moved on that thread after the report is resolved, then that second idea would be open to spam and hard for forum staff and moderators to navigate through.
I also like the idea of a minimum rank rule in order to enter signature campaigns. If you up the level requirement to be at least senior member before you can join a signature campaign, then it's much easier to keep track of those who are still spamming and filling the forum with broken English clutter that doesn't make any sense. Signature campaigns are nice for people to earn some bits and to spend them again. I don't want to see them be gone because of some rookies looking to earn dust. Till this day it still amazes me that people don't come to sense that if you get paid for posting, that you at least deliver a decent post in good English. Also, look at Yobit, they allow you to make 20 posts per day, and yes, there are a lot people racing to reach this daily 20 posts. 7 days x 20 posts = 140 posts per week, x 4 weeks = 560 posts per month! If they somehow lower their maximum posts to just 10 per day instead of 20, then it will also drastically decrease the amount of spam since people don't have to come up with nonsense in order to reach 20 daily posts.
You can't really differentiate between a signature campaign and say a signature worn to promote referral links. Signature campaigns would just move underground.
You should remove signatures for lower ranks, not restrict them from joining signature campaigns.
Underground
where? And I agree with 1Referee, there is no practical difference. If you can't advertise in your signature, there's no incentive to use your signature space at all.
They'd move uderground (as in to other forums or sites).
It's hard to tell the difference, for example, some users promote their sites with the same signature used for the signature campaigns. (Like lightlord from bitvest and 777coin - he looks like a regular signature campaign user unless you know he's the admin of that site, the yobit.net account will also wear their yobit signature and bitcointm's account wears their signature).