Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

An idea that gets brought up on a regular basis is not allowing new members to start threads if they're under a certain number of posts. I've always been against the idea because it's harsh on new users. Never thought it would be very effective either. Having to take another look at custom usergroup promotions in vB did gave me an idea, though.

New users can post, but for their first 15 any thread they start will need to be approved by a mod or admin. 5 posts and under would require that we approve replies.

I think any extra effort on our part would end up being pretty minimal with those numbers, and we would quickly gain more control over the worst stuff. What do you think? I wouldn't want to do it if a majority of you weren't behind the idea. Also, Mason and Mat haven't approved this yet. Just throwing it out there.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

dig the idea

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

I do not want to have to approve 5 replies from every new poster who comes through micro. The NL and OT guys would probably be even more inundated.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

oh haha.. let me be clearer. i dig it as long as i'm not the one sifting through and clearing posts.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
I do not want to have to approve 5 replies from every new poster who comes through micro.

[/ QUOTE ]

How often would you say this happens in just your forum with normal users? Serious question.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

5 replies could be tough. Like the other idea though. Also, I dig daryn's updated avatar, although that cartoon crap always seems too soft for his rugged demeanor.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

I like it, but I can see it being taxing on the mods of the high-volume forums.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Well, for a while, Micro was THE first post forum. Now, NL has taken over from limit, so they'll get more. I'd say we get a couple a month. Maybe I'm a lazy bastard, but I wouldn't really want to deal w/ this.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

this is a great idea in theory and will slow down spammers, but wow we have enough to do as mods already

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Yea, I really, raelly dont wanna have to do this. There will be a ton of work for me/ama/orange/aj.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

What I'm seeing with those numbers is that it would mostly catch spam and such. So instead of the post going up and you possibly having to delete and mess with anything that's been quoted, it stays off the forum and one of us dismisses it one way or the other. I'll present some specifics for the if the idea isn't totally shot down right away.

I asked about how often it comes up for normal posts because that's the only thing that could make it a pain. I know we get new regular members all the time, but I'm not seeing it being so much that it would be a large number.

Still, it could always be tried with lower limits or only for starting threads. Even that would be pretty good.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Hi Ryan - [ QUOTE ]
I've always been against the idea because it's harsh on new users. Never thought it would be very effective either.

[/ QUOTE ]Exactly.

But not a bad idea in some ways.

However, some of us would end up trying to make helpful suggestions to each new poster - and that would keep us from thinking about other matters that might better occupy our time.

And new posters would have to wait until the appropriate mod was on line. We probably all try to check in at least once every day, but some days, that's all it's going to be - just once, and sometimes we'll be pressed and not have a lot of time to deal properly with the new poster.

And after a while, it would be a drag.

Buzz

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Daryn

Nice lid.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

what if we start by just approving the 1st two posts. you and i can do it easily. it would be a quick scan for spam and complete idiocy/offensiveness. we sign up less than 100 people per day. and not all of them post.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
what if we start by just approving the 1st two posts. you and i can do it easily. it would be a quick scan for spam and complete idiocy/offensiveness. we sign up less than 100 people per day. and not all of them post.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, and in all seriousness, being cosigned by one of you two guys would be pretty sweet to a noob, particularly if they lurked prior (which is likely). Just a thought...

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Sounds good to me. I'll set it up that way on the test forum.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

There's no way to make sure new users can't post LINKS, is there?

I suppose it'd be easily circumvented, but putting "www" and "http" in the curse filter for the new users would be pretty nice.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yea, I really, raelly dont wanna have to do this. There will be a ton of work for me/ama/orange/aj.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.

and, as far as uNL goes, if admins are gonna approve a post just cuz it's not spam, what happens for the noob threads that we don't allow in uNL that you guys will let thru because you don't know any better?

It'll be coming in with your approval and then we lock it cuz it's a bad beat post, winrate, kk preflop fold, where should I play, etc etc etc. Might be sending mixed messages with an admin approval, mod lock.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
and, as far as uNL goes, if admins are gonna approve a post just cuz it's not spam, what happens for the noob threads that we don't allow in uNL that you guys will let thru because you don't know any better?

[/ QUOTE ]

We'll be targeting the worst stuff to prevent system abuse, not just spam. But if you're concerned about how it would work without your participation you can choose to participate. You'll have the option anyway.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

The biggest problem I see regarding the approval of threads by new posters is the timing issue. If the user is posting something time-sensitive, it would suck if the mod of that forum was unavailable for enough hours for the thread to become obsolete.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
An idea that gets brought up on a regular basis is not allowing new members to start threads if they're under a certain number of posts. I've always been against the idea because it's harsh on new users.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your sollution is just as harsh on new users, and will turn off some potentially long-term users if their threads are not approved.

Sorry guys, I have to say although RB's proposal sounds good, it will backfire. I think its better for public relations to continue as is.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
your sollution is just as harsh on new users

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about all that. The other method that's been suggested before doesn't let them post new threads at all until an arbitrary limit is reached, which would be greater than two.

This would be so worth it, and I can't imagine it being a real problem for users who only want to participate. I also don't see how it does damage to our relations with the public to say we're trying to give everyone a better board. You'll be past the suggested two posts in no time if you're a legit user. Additionally, we will be able to limit zero post PM spammers through that usergroup's permissions. And if there really is an issue of people misinterpreting things, we could say only Mat and I can do it. I doubt that's necessary.

I can understand mods not wanting to have to do much extra. That's completely ok. But this will cut down on a lot of what people have been complaining about for what seems like forever without you guys having to do anything. I guess that's all I can say.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

This sounds like it might be less work than cleaning upafter a spammer.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

Makes no difference to me. If you don't have someone around 24/7 to approve posts you risk alienating certain new users (which is what I think TT was saying).

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

it's not too hard to convince me to work less.

let's drop it for now.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Daryn

Nice lid.

[/ QUOTE ]

gotta support the team

http://www.siyumhaseinfeld.com/images/chars/puddy.jpg

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

if we are approving posts anyway, how about just do it for first post only and if the post is ok then we approve the entire account

why wouldn't one post be good enough?

another possibility is more than one post but if they regd a certain amount of time in the past they wouldn't have to be approved at all

another idea is to make sending PMs require at least 25 posts or something (no approval, just post #)

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]
I also don't see how it does damage to our relations with the public to say we're trying to give everyone a better board.

[/ QUOTE ]

I realize it doesn't matter since Mat decided to pass for now, but perhaps this better explains what I was thinking.

2+2'ers love to whine about everything. They whine when spammers come to the board, they whine about newbies, etc. But these whiners are already existing users, the chances of them leaving are historically slim. What we don't need are people who we never get to hear whine because they are turned off by a system of restricting posts when they first join, IMHO any forum-wide solution which restricts a new user would eventually reduce the number of new users who become active members. There are already countless people who bad-mouth 2+2 on the outside, people who refuse to join for whatever dumb reason they can justify in their brains. We are often accused improperly of being elitist, I just think that a forum-wide restricted post policy would increase the elitist accusations and in turn affect new membership.

Re: Limiting low count spam and trolling
 

[ QUOTE ]


I realize it doesn't matter

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right.

Better idea?
 

[ QUOTE ]
How does it identify the spam?
All of the posts for users with a post count of less than 10 (configurable) have their posts checked against a number of rules. Each rule has a different "score". If the total score for the post exceeds a specified limit then the post is deemed to be spam.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=155242

I have a feeling this is going to get more support. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: Better idea?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How does it identify the spam?
All of the posts for users with a post count of less than 10 (configurable) have their posts checked against a number of rules. Each rule has a different "score". If the total score for the post exceeds a specified limit then the post is deemed to be spam.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=155242

I have a feeling this is going to get more support. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

this looks pretty sweet

Re: Better idea?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How does it identify the spam?
All of the posts for users with a post count of less than 10 (configurable) have their posts checked against a number of rules. Each rule has a different "score". If the total score for the post exceeds a specified limit then the post is deemed to be spam.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=155242

I have a feeling this is going to get more support. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Much better solution.

Re: Better idea?
 

Automation FTW

Re: Better idea?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How does it identify the spam?
All of the posts for users with a post count of less than 10 (configurable) have their posts checked against a number of rules. Each rule has a different "score". If the total score for the post exceeds a specified limit then the post is deemed to be spam.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=155242

I have a feeling this is going to get more support. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

this looks pretty sweet

[/ QUOTE ]