Can we get a better way to fight spam threads? And what does reporting do?

[Muhammad]

I saw a system once where any new members 1st post would not show until it was reiewed and approved.

Yeah we could do that if we had a few more volunteer moderators.

 

[scootr]

Yeah we could do that if we had a few more volunteer moderators.

I could look at some posts daily and look for spam. I'm basically at the PC 8-10 hours a day 5 days a week and 1/2 that on weekends anyway.
Posters would get an email telling them their post was waiting for review. Could be frustrating for some - like for the emergency help needed posts.

 

[Muhammad]

I could look at some posts daily and look for spam. I'm basically at the PC 8-10 hours a day 5 days a week and 1/2 that on weekends anyway.
Posters would get an email telling them thier post was waiting for review. Could be frustrating for some - like for the emergency help needed posts.

The topic of spam has been around since the beginning of this forum and we've gone through periods where we had it mostly eliminated, and then periods where we were overrun. We already reject thousands of spammers per month automatically and manually reject another 500+ but still some gets through.

I think manual approval of the first post only would be sensible and not too inconvenient for new members.

 

[Jstpssng]

The topic of spam has been around since the beginning of this forum and we've gone through periods where we had it mostly eliminated, and then periods where we were overrun. We already reject thousands of spammers per month automatically and manually reject another 500+ but still some gets through.

I think manual approval of the first post only would be sensible and not too inconvenient for new members.

Just out of curiosity, how many new members are joining per day? I understand if that's a number you would prefer not to post.

 

[Muhammad]

Just out of curiosity, how many new members are joining per day? I understand if that's a number you would prefer not to post.

It's about 40 per day average real users. About 300 spam registrations per day are rejected automatically and then a handful get through.

 

[MossRoad]

It's about 40 per day average real users. About 300 spam registrations per day are rejected automatically and then a handful get through.

Hey, how about a new website venture for you:

SBN

SpamByNet

 

[Egon]

If it’s spam ignore it. Without a reaction it’s soon history.

 

[BryceSteiner]

If it’s spam ignore it. Without a reaction it’s soon history.

i don't think that's how spam works. i've ignored spam for 25 years in my email and it's only increased. I don't respond, I delete to keep my inbox clear, but more and more keep coming in.
The worst part about the spam filters is they flag good conversations and allow the junk through. Very frustrating.

 

[scootr]

One forum I frequent bans the username of the spammer. Now bots create username registration by the dozen !? So now they ban the IP# but there are ways around that now too. Fighting spam is full time job on a forum. Thank you all for what you do.

 

[SPYDERLK]

One minor problem with the current method of reporting is that you need to click and load the spam post. The spammers images are downloaded, including tracking images, and therefore counts as a click as the image is loaded. So the spammer gets a plus as they got a click and can report that to their advertiser of the product. Mostly one can tell from the title that a post is spam. What would be nice would be the ability to report it as spam without clicking the topic so nothing is loaded.

Mike

Uhh, well somebody is going to have to click on it to actually judge that it is spam. What about suspending the post immediately after the 1st spam report until an administrator has assessed it? That way there are only 2 clicks. It strikes me that may be doable in the system.
DANGER that this could be used abusively by a member for anything they dont agree with.

 

[Jstpssng]

DANGER that this could be used abusively by a member for anything they dont agree with.

I actually had somebody doing that years ao, when I used to comment on articles in the local newspaper. They only allowed comments for two days, and it often took 24 hours or longer for somebody to review a "flagged" post. She didn't like my viewpoints so found that she could control any discussion by simply flagging my posts out of the conversation until it was closed. No doubt she was doing the same to others as well.

 

[JasperFrank]

I notice that spam will fill out the entire title field. Anything that first posts this way could be an automatic flag to a moderator? Obviously a link shouldn't be embedded in a title. So any title with an @ or a back slash or *.com would be suspect. I think TNB has done a fantastic job of quickly getting rid of spam. The harder thing is determining if a member is including links just because they think the link is useful, or if they are using the vast reach of this site to sneak in a link to a spam site.

 

[MF243RedTop]

To fight spam with first post approvals and not deter new members, requires committed mods that visit the site 24/7...
If not, you have new members sitting in first post approvals waiting..sometimes too long for them to return. Just saying been there done this ..
Mods have to be here...

 

[Jstpssng]

I thought that the current status quo was a part of doing business. Sure, the spam is a pain but it doesn't take long to recognize it and once I've done that it takes even less effort to ignore it.

 

[oosik]

The current system works just fine for me. They come - they go - they are forgotten.

 

[Oaktree]

The current system works just fine for me. They come - they go - they are forgotten.

Agree. I see very few posts I'd consider spam, so the moderators must be doing a good job.
Even the members who leaned towards being trolls seem to be gone for the most part. Dunno if they were banned or just lost interest but no big loss.

 

[IndyJay]

I've thought about an auto hide system that would hide posts after two members report them.

For new members only or have penalties for abuse.