Crazy idea to fight spam

[EmileH]

So, as I see it, there has not been much opposition to this proposal. Would it be possible for some mods and people with more technical experience than I to chime in on the feasibility of the plan?

[Seth Mallory]

The problem that I see is when someone with a low count needs help. During the season new users ask for help with problems and this could delay responses with information that could help their team.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by Seth Mallory

The problem that I see is when someone with a low count needs help. During the season new users ask for help with problems and this could delay responses with information that could help their team.

I've often been treated as though I speak for all of FRC11 even when I clearly note I do not always do so.

If you make an external system to scrape this forum, could put in a user registration system where a team can designate a user whom can vouch for the other users and avoid the delay by vetting the users before they need help in a pinch.

This seems like a big headache to integrate into this forum's software. Probably easier to write it and test it as an external system then figure out a way to connect the systems together. In theory you'll end up with a list of high probability spam to show that the system works.

[Sperkowsky]

What about a subforum for posts from users with under 5 posts which can only be posted in once a post is approved by any member with 50+ posts.

[logank013]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

What about a subforum for posts from users with under 5 posts which can only be posted in once a post is approved by any member with 50+ posts.

This is a great idea. Pretty much every newer user (50+ posts as you said) can tell if it is spam or not. Plus it will allow me and many others like me who are on all the time to do a "mod-like" task when no mods are on.

[euhlmann]

Currently a lot of the spam seems to link to genglobal.org

As a temporary fix, could a ban on genglobal.org links be implemented? I don't think anyone legitimately needs to link there.

[JustinCAD]

Originally Posted by euhlmann

Currently a lot of the spam seems to link to genglobal.org

As a temporary fix, could a ban on genglobal.org links be implemented? I don't think anyone legitimately needs to link there.

Most of these links do lead to genglobal.org, but not all. Obviously as you stated, it would be a temporary fix, due to the fact that it would only filter those links.

It is possible. I don't know if CD has it, but vBulletin has a plugin that blocks links stemming from one link.

I like this idea, and until a long term fix can be found, this would work.

[Hitchhiker 42]

Originally Posted by JustinCAD

Most of these links do lead to genglobal.org, but not all. Obviously as you stated, it would be a temporary fix, due to the fact that it would only filter those links.

It is possible. I don't know if CD has it, but vBulletin has a plugin that blocks links stemming from one link.

I like this idea, and until a long term fix can be found, this would work.

Oh noes! You actually clicked on the links!?

Seriously though, I like this proposal.

[euhlmann]

As a more general / effective temporary fix, CD could have a whitelist for websites that actually will generate links. Eg, FIRST website, TBA, Github, etc would be allowed as links, while other links would simply display URLs without actually being a link.

Example:
link to github (whitelisted, displayed as link)
ht​tp://g​englobal.o​rg/some-spam (not whitelisted, displayed as plain url)

On other forums this type of system is effective at preventing spam from new users (in fairness, other forums have other measures as well), since spammers know people aren't going to copy and paste their spam. I'm not sure how effective it'll be on our resident spammer here, but I think it's worth a try.

[Ty Tremblay]

Has anyone suggested a captcha on account creation?

[bdaroz]

Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay

Has anyone suggested a captcha on account creation?

Pretty sure there is one... and they'd get around it anyway.

[Gravity]

To take the strain off the mods from patrolling every single post, why not restrict a thread (unviewable) if the OP receives a certain amount of negative rep from it. The thread can then be removed when a moderator sees it is in the restricted section.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Gravity

To take the strain off the mods from patrolling every single post, why not restrict a thread (unviewable) if the OP receives a certain amount of negative rep from it. The thread can then be removed when a moderator sees it is in the restricted section.

But, but... what about our favorite "controversial" threads? This would kill those, too!


Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but it would contribute to the perception of non-transparent moderating that seems to have developed.

The other factor is that you'd have to deal with "rep clicks" vs. "rep score". One rep click from someone with a lot of rep points can dish out an awful lot of rep score in a hurry--one reason I'm generally cautious with rep--but the same score can also be picked up from a lot of people with not as many rep points all firing off one rep click apiece.

[EmileH]

Originally Posted by Ty Tremblay

Has anyone suggested a captcha on account creation?

There is a captcha on account creation. It is worth noting that it is not a modern captcha service like Google's ReCaptcha, and probably easier to circumvent.