Constant Spam Threads

[JustinCAD]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

One possible solution would be to prevent users with less than some small number of posts (5? 10?) from editing posts. These threads are made by users posting a thread with some nonsense text but no link, then going back and editing the thread to include the link.

I think the problem isn't just preventing the links edited in, but the nonsense threads in general. If it's possible to prevent these threads altogether, we don't have to worry about just the hyperlinks.

I like your idea though! Maybe if there was a way to tie that into a long-term solution, I'd be game for it.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by JustinCAD

I think the problem isn't just preventing the links edited in, but the nonsense threads in general.

The problem is entirely the links; the only reason you see nonsense text at all is as a mechanism to get links on the page. If they cannot put links in threads, spammers have no incentive to spam, and won't do it. It is the entire reason they are doing this in the first place.

If it's possible to prevent these threads altogether, we don't have to worry about just the hyperlinks.

It's just really difficult to prevent "nonsense threads", but still allow a legitimate poster to create an account and post a thread right away. It is difficult to balance accessibility for legitimate new users with blocking spammers.

Also mentioned: CAPTCHA - one problem with this is that spammers are sometimes humans.

[frcguy]

How about a recaptcha or something similar when editing a post before it will let you submit it? If it would be an annoyance we can have it go away after a certain amount of posts (maybe 20?). What does everyone think?

[JustinCAD]

I want to mention that I've gone back and looked at some different spam accounts that I had reported in the past: They have team numbers and cities already entered.

The accounts I looked at had #0000 as a team number, but one account has it's location as Las Vegas, and another as San Francisco. So either the spam bot is able to enter this in, or the two accounts I looked at were run by humans. This proves that they have the ability to enter things into these fields. After all, it is required.

[bdaroz]

I'm going to repeat my earlier comments here for sake of continuity.

The spammers are here not because they think there's a chance in hell we're going to click those links, but because CD has very good page rankings at Google, et al, and the Google crawler is often here picking up new threads. Thus the links that come from these pages confer a substantial (for a spammer) amount of pagerank to the linked page.

If we cut off that page rank flow (eg force links to contain "rel='nofollow'" - details here) their incentive will dry up quick.... The bad part is they might not notice it right away, and the links that we DO want to give credibility to, eg team pages and resources, won't have that.

Hence my suggestion was to rel="nofollow" any link for anyone below a certain post count, something substantial, like 25-50+.

[jaredhk]

Originally Posted by frcguy

I'm not sure. For me it didn't apply and my first post was immediate.

Same. I fairly recently and never have had any kind of warning like that.

It is a vBulletin option (creating a promotion for all new users into a usergroup and then moderate all posts from the usergroup) so it probably used to be enabled on this forum. I don't think the vBulletin feature was depleted which would mean it was just disabled from CD...

[ATannahill]

I really think there should be something to handle pictures being posted in spam threads instead of just links. That makes it a bit crazy.

[frcguy]

Originally Posted by rtfgnow

I really think there should be something to handle pictures being posted in spam threads instead of just links. That makes it a bit crazy.

More moderators? I feel that that's a need in general. For example, there are plenty of current moderators that haven't signed on since 2015 and even earlier.

[Hitchhiker 42]

Originally Posted by rtfgnow

I really think there should be something to handle pictures being posted in spam threads instead of just links. That makes it a bit crazy.

No pictures until moderator permission or X number of posts. Simple.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Hitchhiker 42

No pictures until moderator permission or X number of posts. Simple.

Not quite.

How the spam posters operate:

-Post thread with semi-random content.
-Edit content of post with links to what they're trying to get you to look at.


So... maybe I've got something that could work:

No links/pictures in posts until a certain post count (let's call it 10) is reached, or without moderator approval, and no editing of posts until a certain post count is reached (call it 10 as well). And, if it can be done, a "greenlight" button that would allow the moderators to bypass the requirements on a user-by-user basis.

And more mods.

[Sperkowsky]

Something now really does not to be done. Earlier today one of the posts had a pornographic image. Its one thing with links but that... is bad.

[Philip Arola]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Something now really does not to be done. Earlier today one of the posts had a pornographic image. Its one thing with links but that... is bad.

Agreed. It's been getting really bad lately.
Moderator applications time?

[frcguy]

Originally Posted by Philip Arola

Agreed. It's been getting really bad lately.
Moderator applications time?

Yep.

Just a thought: What do people think about students serving as moderators or maybe in a position like a moderator but with less power?

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Something now really does not to be done. Earlier today one of the posts had a pornographic image. Its one thing with links but that... is bad.

It seems strange for that to be lumped in with the "spam" it has no link to some other website.

In general that's the purpose of spam, to generate views/interest in a specific service in which whoever is offering that service makes money. 90% of the spam at least is some live stream to a sport. This specific post doesn't follow this trend at all.

(disturbingly) An image that is uploaded to a free and public image hosting website is almost definitely a member of the website who posted that image in order to get a reaction/some ulterior motive.

Pretty saddening if you ask me.

[Hitchhiker 42]

Originally Posted by frcguy

Yep.

Just a thought: What do people think about students serving as moderators or maybe in a position like a moderator but with less power?

Personally, as a student - against. I don't think that students will have the responsibility to do it properly. Granted, even some adults aren't great moderators, but the chance that a student does not-so-good things is higher.