I fully support this idea, I think it would help alot and I'd be glad to volunteer in my spare time
.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spam reduction: restricting hyperlinks to a minimum post count?
- Thread starter Blue Velvet
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I fully support this idea, I think it would help alot and I'd be glad to volunteer in my spare time
.
The only other thing you could do, which may not be a great idea, is to give "Moderator Nano" positions, to those who could be trusted so they could delete spam posts themselves as they appeared, they would only be able to delete posts belonging to people with under 5 posts or something...
One of the problems encountered on MacOSXHints.com with this system is the typical problem of people not RTFMing. At least 20% of the time people post their thread/responses and then follow up with posts of "why aren't my posts showing up?". No one ever reads the rules.
One of the problems encountered on MacOSXHints.com with this system is the typical problem of people not RTFMing. At least 20% of the time people post their thread/responses and then follow up with posts of "why aren't my posts showing up?". No one ever reads the rules.
Yeah I almost did that myself.. Actually, I almost gave up on that site entirely when I posted my 2nd post, and it didn't show up. I didn't read the rules close enough
.I run a VB forum too, I have thought about implementing SPAM reduction tactics in the past prior to VB, but so far I have less SPAM attempts than before !
... until the overhead of coordinating a team effort outweighs the benefits. That's the reason we've kept the number of moderators pretty stable, with only slow growth over the years.You can never have to many volunteers.
Taking best advantage of volunteer moderators across multiple time zones takes a bit of coordination. If done right, it's equivalent to having one single moderator on duty 24/7, with no time off for eating, sleeping, work, school, or holidays!
Would it be feasible to have security guard type moderator that only have editing power of posts but don't have the ability to ban or close threads. That way the Moderators do the police work and have the guards just patrol the halls. Would that ever be considered to take some of the load off the Mods while still not stepping on their toes.
I guess I just still don't see what all the fuss is about. I don't notice much of a moderation problem at all, and the mods are always fantastic about responding to the few minor issues I do come across. It would be one thing to consider a change in the moderation procedures if there were a lot of problems, but I'm just not seeing. And if the current mod load was too high, I'd imagine the mods would be the ones who would recognize it and would start to think about adding a new mod or two.
mod nano.... i would feel so diminished!
I really have not seen that much spam on here aside from a few instances. For the most part, newbie questions tend to be: MB v.s. MBP, convince me that iTV is really worth it, and the ever classic soooo there is this noise that I hear.... I have actually not seen many newbie posts with links, let alone spam. But, I clearly recognize the point here. Two possible ideas, that I have been meaning to bring up anyway, that build off of the macosxhints suggestion.
1. it would be a nice addition to forumspy to have either the actual post count or the user post title of the person posting listed right under their name. I recognize that the forum structure might not be able to do this, but if it is possible it would be a nice addition.
1a. is there a way to add the first few lines of someone's reply under the title of the thread when viewing forumspy, this could be something users can opt into if they have an interest?
2. is there any interest in reworking the post title designation levels. specifically, the difference between 100-500 i think is too large to cover one title, and the jump from 68010 => 2000 posts, 68020 => 2005 post, 68030 => 2500 posts is odd in light of the fact that a five post jump results in "apparently" the same suffix change as the 495 posts required to get to 68030. Also, I am guessing the answer is no to this latter question, but any interest in really revamping these titles so they are better understood by new and regular users alike. Perhaps something that is relevant to a broader set of forum posters and a bit more fun? the reason i note this is because one of the goals of this site is to attract and sustain a strong user base. remember the convo many of us had about how many users are really still on here and reasons we would want to keep or clean out the database?
Just some of my thoughts to try and improve upon a website that I love.
I really have not seen that much spam on here aside from a few instances. For the most part, newbie questions tend to be: MB v.s. MBP, convince me that iTV is really worth it, and the ever classic soooo there is this noise that I hear.... I have actually not seen many newbie posts with links, let alone spam. But, I clearly recognize the point here. Two possible ideas, that I have been meaning to bring up anyway, that build off of the macosxhints suggestion.
1. it would be a nice addition to forumspy to have either the actual post count or the user post title of the person posting listed right under their name. I recognize that the forum structure might not be able to do this, but if it is possible it would be a nice addition.
1a. is there a way to add the first few lines of someone's reply under the title of the thread when viewing forumspy, this could be something users can opt into if they have an interest?
2. is there any interest in reworking the post title designation levels. specifically, the difference between 100-500 i think is too large to cover one title, and the jump from 68010 => 2000 posts, 68020 => 2005 post, 68030 => 2500 posts is odd in light of the fact that a five post jump results in "apparently" the same suffix change as the 495 posts required to get to 68030. Also, I am guessing the answer is no to this latter question, but any interest in really revamping these titles so they are better understood by new and regular users alike. Perhaps something that is relevant to a broader set of forum posters and a bit more fun? the reason i note this is because one of the goals of this site is to attract and sustain a strong user base. remember the convo many of us had about how many users are really still on here and reasons we would want to keep or clean out the database?
Just some of my thoughts to try and improve upon a website that I love.
I don't think you will see any changes to the titles as those have been there since the beginning and it brings character to the site.
If Apple didn't keep changing its product line, we could switch to products instead of processors, e.g., new members would be iPod shuffle, then iPod nano, then iPod, then Mac mini, iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, and maybe then an Xserve.
Then again, if Apple didn't keep changing its product line, they'd wouldn't stay competitive!
Then again, if Apple didn't keep changing its product line, they'd wouldn't stay competitive!
MacNut: I don't think you will see any changes to the titles as those have been there since the beginning and it brings character to the site.
I mean I don't dispute the character adding component, but that does not mean other options could not similarly add character without diminishing the overall feel. The point is a change is not antithetical to maintaining the great quality of this site. All I am saying is I think this is an important conversation to have for all the reasons I listed above and tend to be resistant to arguments based upon "that's the way it's always been." I'm a lawyer and it brings me back to first year law school where we explored the constitutional rationales provided for segregation. Anyway back on point, I hope it is a discussion we engage in, along with some of the ideas I and others have posed here.
I mean I don't dispute the character adding component, but that does not mean other options could not similarly add character without diminishing the overall feel. The point is a change is not antithetical to maintaining the great quality of this site. All I am saying is I think this is an important conversation to have for all the reasons I listed above and tend to be resistant to arguments based upon "that's the way it's always been." I'm a lawyer and it brings me back to first year law school where we explored the constitutional rationales provided for segregation. Anyway back on point, I hope it is a discussion we engage in, along with some of the ideas I and others have posed here.
I think this is a question we should ask Arn as he can better answer it.
The problem I see with it is that over the past 6 years people have agreed to the post counts and I wonder if some would get upset if the stats change and it becomes easier.
edit:I dunno if this thread might help.https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/47493/
The problem I see with it is that over the past 6 years people have agreed to the post counts and I wonder if some would get upset if the stats change and it becomes easier.
edit:I dunno if this thread might help.https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/47493/
I agree we should ask arn and others who are interested such as all of those who have posted to this thread.
Your point about it "getting easier" does not make any sense as the raw number of posts has always determined what title you hold. Now, different from this is the inclusion of additional titles that recognize milestones in some places that currently remain commingled such as the between 100-500 example. This does not make it easier if you recognize the fact that the raw post count is the source of this title. Rather it simply provides an additional title or recognition, but this is not easier. Furthermore, remember the point about incentives for people to stay on here and keep posting.The problem is that to get from 100-500 is a lot and people can lose interest. I also recognize the importance of balancing this concern against the desire, one which I share, to reflect the contributions of longtime members with numerous posts.
(in relation to conveying to arn and whomever else, I think until we decide or hear otherwise it would be beneficial to maintain a public discussion so other points of view and suggestions can be included.)
What I mean by easier is that right now there is a gap of about 500-1000 posts between changes, If we add to many titles it might take away from the achievement. The further up the chain you go the longer it takes, so I wonder if adding more goals will somewhat add to the spam count to reach those new titles so fast.
1. Thanks for the link you added of the old school convo. How awesome was that to see by the way? hilarious and interesting. I will note though it is just a general discussion, no one at all posed any opposition to title changes.
2. I am not talking about making it something like you get a title for every 50 or 100 posts, but more in the couple areas we have already noted.
3. In terms of spam, that depends on how you define spam. Specifically, I thought we were referring to spam, for purposes of this thread, as people posting links that are wither scams, bogus, or just don't belong for any one of many reasons. I did not think we were calling people simply posting, even posting for the sake of getting numbers up, spam.
4. I purposefully bifurcated the "number it takes to get to the next title issue" and the "should we update the titles issue." Lets try and keep them separated so that it is clear what people are interested or opposed to.
5. I am a lawyer and cannot help but number things
6....
oh yea, and in relation to the convo in the link you posted, notice how our convo is having the same post count consequence as the one noted in the thread haha
kinda funny how things repeat themselves.
It's funny how a 10 second decision 5 years ago becomes such a topic of discussion.
The odd 68010 (and 65832) progression is discussed in this thread from 2004. Specificly this post touches on it best.
As for changing the titles/progression, I'm not sure I see the benefit, and not sure I understand what exactly you want to be changed.
arn
The incentive for people to stay here are that it's a great community with lots of interesting people with interesting things to say, nothing more.
Anyway, I have nothing further to contribute to this thread as it's wandered from the original topic which was merely a suggestion thrown out there to help reduce the effectiveness of spam (particularly in the early hours), not intended as a springboard for unnecessarily nitpicking about titles and post-counts.
It seems like a good idea. Either that or vB needs a Bayesian spam filter?
I read the meaning of "Bayesian" about 10 times, and I still do't understand what it means
Anyway, I think it's a good idea, although those types of threads get deleted very quickly. As soon as I click on one of those "original leather handbag" threads, it just says "you have followed an invalid link" or something like that.