Suggestions and Feedback

**haasta** · 03-13-2007, 03:06 PM

i think, you guys should dont show users signature until they have at least about 20 or maybe 50 forum posts.

look at new suers category, the spam bots or whatever just send hi, then second post is i agree with you. i dont really care their posts, but dont want to stay at the same site with the spammer bots.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-13-2007, 03:39 PM

I don't think that would make a lot of difference, unless they weren't allowed to post a link period until they reached the same level.

A lot of them just go, "hi, I discovered a wonderful new service at http://www.someuselesspieceofspam.com and i think that other webmasters might have used before, plz to tell me if u used and wat u think?"

**haasta** · 03-13-2007, 03:46 PM

they dont want to spend their time on this board to post ~50 post to be able to show their signature. there are millions of forums instead.

i would rather to disable signature feature for all users, or as i mention before, for the users who post lesser than ~50. if they post ~50 message which means they spend their useless time on this page, then they are welcome to spam at all lol.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-13-2007, 04:02 PM

I don't think you got what I meant. My bad for not explaining it clearly though.

Some of the spammers don't actually have signatures. They link drop in the body of posts, much in the manner I posted above.

Don't get me wrong...it's a good idea on your part. I just think it needs to be added to. I'm with you at any rate...die spammers!

There is, however, a small flaw in your idea. You aren't at the required number of posts (20-50 yourself) so you'd lose your siggy.

**haasta** · 03-13-2007, 04:17 PM

heh dont worry about my signature. forget about it.

here is one more additional way then, if user doesnt have good post count, then their post should be filtered, and links shouldnt be visible with a simple regex equation..

i mean like; "hey i found a great site: <link filtered>". i know it seems bad for all of us, but i am always thinking about quality

**Learning Newbie** · 03-13-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

A lot of them just go, "hi, I discovered a wonderful new service at http://www.someuselesspieceofspam.com and i think that other webmasters might have used before, plz to tell me if u used and wat u think?"

Why is it spammers always seem to suggest something for u, or ask if any1 could plz test this? Seriously, where is it written spammers have to use the broken English of a 14 year old special-ed student on some instant messenger? You could almost just use a spell checker to stop spam.

**ADAM Web Design** · 03-13-2007, 06:13 PM

LMAO! Spell check + Flesch-Kincaid could well be the end of forum spam. I love it!

**Learning Newbie** · 03-14-2007, 04:24 PM

I read this interesting article about new spam filters, for email, and contextual text and all this great stuff. But it used this wonderful example: pen1s. Any email that has any word like s3x, pen1s, v1agra, anything like that, is clearly spam. Every now and then you might send a real email about "One of the people I work with, the guy must be taking viagra, he just won't stop talking about women." So you can't say any message with the word goes in the circular file, but when you start substituting numbers for letters, that's an obvious attempt to get around the spam filters. They were talking about matching the whole text of a message against the rest of a person's inbox to let through the stuff they generally talk about, but block things they don't show any interest in.

Spell check sounds like another great example of a simple filter.

**mgraphic** · 03-17-2007, 04:35 PM

... And good old fanshioned moderation!

**domainhunter** · 04-01-2007, 01:31 PM

show signature only for registered members

**damien_ls** · 04-01-2007, 01:58 PM

Not sure if it's already disabled, but one thing that annoys me is PM spam - and a simple way to cut it out is disable PM totally (don't believe that it's useful).

However, if that's just too radical (and I'm sure some disagree about usefulness of PM) then certainly stop new members using PM until they've hit a reasonable number of posts (e.g. 50).

An alternative to posts btw would be to base it on talkupation, since the idea is that's some indication of positive/useful posts rather than just spam.

**ForrestCroce** · 04-02-2007, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

A lot of them just go, "hi, I discovered a wonderful new service at http://www.someuselesspieceofspam.com and i think that other webmasters might have used before, plz to tell me if u used and wat u think?"

Server not found

Firefox can't find the server at www.someuselesspieceofspam.com.

* Check the address for typing errors such as ww.example.com instead of www.example.com

* If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer's network connection.

* If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

Damnit. Why can't people at least drop links that work?

I'm surprised no domain squatters managed to predict the value in that one?

**timbre** · 04-02-2007, 06:17 AM

Hello. I though that signatures must be moderated.

**damien_ls** · 04-04-2007, 01:33 PM

Maybe prevent new users from starting new threads? - scratch that... moderator preview for new user's threads. (e.g. up to x talkupation).

You could even do it for mod. preview on users with less than 10 posts or something like that.

I know this means more work for mods, but I guess it would be possible to have more "content reviewer" mods if needed?

**Republikin** · 04-05-2007, 12:38 PM

Ooh, how about we create a subscription level and only those premium members are allowed to put links in their signatures. I'd be willing to pay $50 a year or something for the benefit of knowing that this type of spam technique will at least cost the spammer the same.

**ADAM Web Design** · 04-05-2007, 12:45 PM

I don't like that idea. Why should someone who can't afford the $50 (I'm not that person, but there are a number of them out there) not have the same privilege as someone who can?

The other problem is that it would lead to more link dropping in the forums. "Hi, I'm Bob, and I work for http://www.thisismypieceofcrapsiteanditsucks.com , its nice to meet you all!"

**damien_ls** · 04-06-2007, 05:01 PM

Disable auto-hyperlinks for new users? (posts and sigs)

That way they can still post URLs for problems they're describing, but at least they're not filling the place with links. I know it doesn't really cure the problem, but it's a partial solution?

**Republikin** · 04-06-2007, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

I don't like that idea. Why should someone who can't afford the $50 (I'm not that person, but there are a number of them out there) not have the same privilege as someone who can?

I was being sarcastic. I think Tim had looked into the idea of creating a premium membership in the past but ultimately decided against it; I support that decision.