Quote from: hilariousetc on March 29, 2018, 02:00:33 PM

Quote from: TheQuin on March 29, 2018, 01:53:14 PM

Quote from: hilariousetc on March 29, 2018, 01:40:42 PM

Poorly run campaigns were meant to have their signatures blacklisted/blocked from the forum by theymos to stop this from happening. Several poorly run campaigns were suggested but it never happened.

If that is technically feasible then I think it's a good idea. Getting someone like you to monitor campaigns and zap their signatures sounds like a great way to go.

It should be because theymos suggested it. As far as I recall he even agreed to it. It was at the same time we created the signature campaign guidelines and it was meant that those that didn't follow it even after warnings were supposed to have their signatures blacklisted for x amount of time if not permanent. Only theymos can blacklist them though and he probably doesn't have time to do that right now. The merit system alone isn't going to work and punishment for lazy campaigns who do little to nothing still needs to happen otherwise nothing will change.

That old chestnut. A manager needs to be able to delegate to successfully run any enterprise. The same story with the hacked account recovery. If he could have delegated moderating signature campaigns then this would have been solved a long time ago.

Anyway, thanks for sharing a bit of forum history I didn't know about. I just assumed it hadn't happened because it couldn't happen.