Recent prolific spammer

[designgeek]

Well played, sir.
And I knew what you meant. I was remarking I can see someone deleting a non-spam thread just because they can. RE: Me.

Perhaps they could be wastelanded or put somewhere similar to the spam folder on Gmail where people could request that a full blown Mod (not just anyone) reinstate the thread, otherwise after a few days or however long they're automatically deleted. I doubt a spammer is going to spend the time to request that his ads be reposted. Just a thought.

 

[Unspoken Demise]

Perhaps they could be wastelanded or put somewhere similar to the spam folder on Gmail where people could request that a full blown Mod (not just anyone) reinstate the thread, otherwise after a few days or however long they're automatically deleted. I doubt a spammer is going to spend the time to request that his ads be reposted. Just a thought.

Its a good thought. So you're saying remove them from Spy and new posts, to a que for deletion? This way threads deleted vengefully mistakenly can be reinstated, while spam will be deleted as mods do normally?

 

[GoCubsGo]

Its a good thought. So you're saying remove them from Spy and new posts, to a que for deletion? This way threads deleted vengefully mistakenly can be reinstated, while spam will be deleted as mods do normally?

I would not worry too much about this to be honest. We are in similar boats and I believe mod privileges, even small ones, will never be granted to us on these forums. If I am wrong then I implore an admin to prove it.

 

[Unspoken Demise]

I would not worry too much about this to be honest. We are in similar boats and I believe mod privileges, even small ones, will never be granted to us on these forums. If I am wrong then I implore an admin to prove it.

But I would come down on TheSpaz/ InTheNet/Full of Fail spam with an iron fist!
*waits patiently for post deletion*

 

[-aggie-]

I think the mods know which demis not to give deletion privileges (for example, starts with U, ends with e).

 

[edesignuk]

I think the mods know which demis not to give deletion privileges (for example, starts with U, ends with e).

yeah, nightmare.

 

[Unspoken Demise]

I think the mods know which demis not to give deletion privileges (for example, starts with U, ends with e).

yeah, nightmare.

You guys are mean.
(You will be the first ones to go).

 

[edesignuk]

You guys are mean.
(You will be the first ones to go).

I knew it!

 

[designgeek]

You guys are mean.
(You will be the first ones to go).

See, then you could delete this thread out of anger and it would be sent to "Death Row" (working title) and then someone with sense like Blue Velvet or Silent Panda could correct your folly and all would be well.

 

[Unspoken Demise]

I knew it!

You are on the way to destruction.
You have no chance to survive make your time.

See, then you could delete this thread out of anger and it would be sent to "Death Row" (working title) and then someone with sense like Blue Velvet or Silent Panda could correct your folly and all would be well.

Not if they are the 3rd and 4th to go.
MAUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[-aggie-]

See, then you could delete this thread out of anger and it would be sent to "Death Row" (working title) and then someone with sense like Blue Velvet or Silent Panda could correct your folly and all would be well.

And then the "deleter" (or should I say "demiser") would get a TO and all would be well.

 

[Unspoken Demise]

And then the "deleter" (or should I say "demiser") would get a TO and all would be well.

:middlefingeremoticon:

 

[GGJstudios]

I'm sure that if this was implemented, anyone who abused their privileges would be subject to Time-Out or banning.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

What if you just made it so that any newbie who posts the same message twice is automatically blocked from posting anything else for a little while.

*thinks a minute* Then the spammer will get another account. Maybe it's better to just let them spam the board, then click their username, and delete everything they've done. Hmmm....

 

[-aggie-]

I think there are plenty of volunteers for the job. It appears the process is not as easy as we wish. See following thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/685099/

I got tired of reading through the linked thread, but it looked like e made some observations and a mod shot down everything that was said by others due to a supposed long process to pick a mod. Note the dates of that thread are from April 2009. Nothing's changed.

 

[Gav2k]

There is a quick and simple way to stop the bots and that's manual user authenticition. That way every new user has to be vetted first. New users will offen search whilst there waiting and bots stand out like a sore thumb.

 

[flopticalcube]

I don't think more moderation is the key. When there are sufficient mods available, this bot gets shutdown very quickly. Its when there are no/few mods around the bot runs amok. A few rule changes might work without much disruption to genuine users while discouraging or at least slowing down the bots.

 

[WildCowboy]

I've missed a lot of the flurry of spammer activity since I'm not nearly as active in the forums as I used to be, but we're certainly aware of the issue and taking steps to deal with it. It hasn't been any fun dealing with it from our side either.

Our goal as always is to keep the forums as clean as possible while also putting as few barriers as possible in front of legitimate users looking to join the community. Restricting new threads pushes spammers into existing threads whether their mess is harder to clean-up. Manual approval of new accounts and/or moderation queues would certainly be a daunting task (and an everyday one instead of temporary bursts of spam activity) for our mods given the level of activity on the forums. So there's downside to everything.

We've already taken a couple of steps to address the issue, and while they certainly won't put a stop to it entirely, they should help. We'll continue to monitor things and do what we can to keep on top of it.

 

[flopticalcube]

Thanks for the reply WildCowboy. I know placing a greater burden on the mods is probably not the answer. Looking forward to your solutions in staying one step ahead of the spambots.

 

[MacNut]

Manually activating accounts won't always work, some spammers will make a post or 2 that are normal and then a week later start spamming.

 

[flopticalcube]

Whatever you a doing appears to be highly effective. Congrats! One post and they are gone.

 

[iBlue]

Yes, the mods are on top of it today. http://upc.*************/uploads/smilies/thumbup.png

 

[Unspoken Demise]

http://upc.*************/uploads/smilies/thumbup.png

Is this where I bend over?

(Nice job on reducing spam Mods. Keep up the great work.)

 

[yg17]

Maybe I missed the part where someone recommended to use a captcha that actually asked a question instead of those ones where normal people **** with the letters and computers can decode that crap in seconds. Why isn't that being implemented?

I'm thinking at the rate this is coming even if all of the mods were around they couldn't keep up. Something needs to be done server side.

I think that's the best idea. I've seen it implemented on other forums and it works very well. All you do is create a few extremely easy questions that any human can answer, and on the registration form, one of those will be randomly selected and they'll have to provide the correct answer.

 

[xUKHCx]

It is still an issue and one that is being worked on, thanks for all the reports and helping us with this issue.