About the spam trols
-
Me too - I haven't noticed much spam. Seems under control…
On a seperate note, please click the links below for great savings (-:
www.buymyjunk-itssuperawesome.com
-
Seems legit….. :P
Steve
-
Me too - I haven't noticed much spam. Seems under control…
On a seperate note, please click the links below for great savings (-:
www.buymyjunk-itssuperawesome.com
I know you have a lot of (maybe not super-awesome) junk. So disappointed that the URL does not resolve :(
-
I'm actually penniless and junk-less. I was hacked and had my identity stolen once… After a short time, they returned it. Thats how bad it is.
But yes - I don't think spam is such a problem now. I think seeking perfection is a fools errand. For great expense you could perhaps do a little better but its not worth it.
-
I think seeking perfection is a fools errand.
I know at least 3 people (2 on this forum and 1 in my personal life), 1 company and 1 country who'd disagree with you ;D
-
Its like an arms race. You can't win. Its best to not compete but rather to seek a happy medium.
-
@Mr.:
I think seeking perfection is a fools errand.
I know at least 3 people (2 on this forum and 1 in my personal life), 1 company and 1 country who'd disagree with you ;D
Fool reporting for duty ;D
Didn't see anything about discourse before. Thanks for pointing that out. Seems like a pretty good option. The mobile (phones/tablets) focus is important IMHO, since there might be a lot of people that are reading up on the forums on phones/tablets when they mess something up and they are trying to fix it. Having an easier read would be helpful.
My vote is for whatever lets us edit old posts :P
Any chance of herding the offending IPs using a blocklist?
-
Its like an arms race. You can't win.
;D
We economists have graphs and difficult formulas on both, as well as huge databases with empirical data. Our preliminary hypothesis is that he who aims at the top might actually get there, while he who aims at the bottom most certainly gets there :P
( ;D )
-
OK - So what exactly (not generally) will fix the spam once and for all? Since you have the data…
-
OK - So what exactly (not generally) will fix the spam once and for all? Since you have the data…
That is the exact same question a spammer would ask… just sayin.
-
Well - Sort of. I just think that if someone is proposing to leave the current system there should be a better system to move on to. Thats all. And if you are a proponent of dumping the old system, you should have a new system in mind. So, by this point I'd expect to see a list of better solutions.
-
Well - Sort of. I just think that if someone is proposing to leave the current system there should be a better system to move on to. Thats all. And if you are a proponent of dumping the old system, you should have a new system in mind. So, by this point I'd expect to see a list of better solutions.
Crap. I was only kidding. Can't you read facial expressions? :P
I agree though. I haven't seen any spam myself though and honestly, unless the spam takes up a few pages, I just ignore it. Spam is unavoidable.
-
OK - So what exactly (not generally) will fix the spam once and for all? Since you have the data…
Oh that's easy. Pull the plug. ;)
Kind of like killing a virus is easy too. Keeping the patient alive through the ordeal is the difficulty.
But seriously the current measures seem to be within reason. Don't notice much SPAM.
Saw CMB's note about not liking new account post limit. But what about a rate limit so that if a new account starts spamming it can be detected and dealt with before it becomes a flood. Yet it would still allow new "legit" accounts to participate. Just at a little lower post rate. Also maybe make it multifaceted by only applying it to high risk addresses, and/or other criteria.
-
Most spam we kill by hand is only a single post per account.
So a rate-limit won't help. -
Spam at the moment seems to be at most mildly annoying. Where it becomes a problem is if spammers get better and post links to places where bad things happen. I would be in favour of preventing people posting clickable links for the first, say, 10 posts. New users with real problems can still post links but they won't be directly clickable. Of course I don't know if that's possible. ;)
Steve
-
I would be in favour of preventing people posting clickable links for the first, say, 10 posts. New users with real problems can still post links but they won't be directly clickable. Of course I don't know if that's possible. ;)
They wise up to that and post X+Y spam posts where X=# of posts before links are allowed. It may help stop a couple, but not the bad ones… We get some that drop between 20-50 spam posts in a very short time span.
-
Most spam we kill by hand is only a single post per account.
So a rate-limit won't help.A rate limit is not intended for those accounts. It's intended for the ones jimp mentiontions below.
They wise up to that and post X+Y spam posts where X=# of posts before links are allowed. It may help stop a couple, but not the bad ones… We get some that drop between 20-50 spam posts in a very short time span.
