hhplace needs an amendment to its TOS. - Page 2

kneehighs · 28th January 2006, 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shafted

I'm guessing that "spam-to-delete" is actually a forum member who is trying to mark those threads for easy deletion by the mods.

You are right. hehe, I don't know too much about forum phpbb stuff...oh well, I tend to be activist oriented in anything I believe in. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Dawn HH · 29th January 2006, 03:16

Mickey and I have addressed this problem a few times before and it doesn't seem like anyone is listening. I, like Dr. Shoe, are sick and tired of what is going on. SOMETHING MUST BE DONE about this NOW!!! If not, we are just going around in circles and nothing is being accomplished. (Steps down from soap-box and takes a deep breathe).
Cheers---

Dawn HH

dr1819 · 23rd April 2006, 06:27

I agree wholeheartedly that one should have to log in to post.

This is the modus operandii of most boards these days, particularly given the spammers taste for finding other outlets than e-mail.

Furthermore, phpBB includes a tool to highlight messages as spam - instant flags for the system administrator. If they're not already enabled, now might be a good time!

Guy N. Heels · 13th May 2006, 06:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by jo

Spammers do not read the ToS. You can write all the rules that you like, but they will not be read.

Spammers posting here probably aren't typing in the messages at all, but rather have an automated system that seeks out PHPbb and vBulletin forum systems from search engine results and then simply automatically posts the spam to each one found...

One of the sites mentioned has spammed more than a thousand forums.

It's unfortunate but true, the really professional spammers not only don't read or care about the TOS, they also have automated ways to inject a fantastic amount of spam into a forum. The problem is not the TOS, it's how to enforce it? Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply naive.

dr1819 · 5th August 2006, 15:47

It's easy to enforce it by:

1. Requring registration before posting.

2. Requiring the user to enter a distorted, but still legible, code during the registration process.

3. Requiring the user to submit a valid e-mail address.

4. Validating that address by sending the user an unlock link containing a unique number (that only works for that user).

5. Requiring the user to click on the link before the account is activated.

6. Enclosing the user's first password in a separate e-mail AFTER they activate the account by clicking on the unlock link.

7. Requiring the user to change their password when they first log on.

The only kind of spam this doesn't prevent is manual spam. However, given the fact that automated spam outnumbers manual spam by about a Billion to 1, this method is highly effective at eliminating nearly all spam.

Another board I belong to, and on which I'm a moderator, employs this practice. We get thousands of posts a day, yet about one piece of manual spam a week - which we report to the manual spammer's ISP who takes it from there, as manual spamming is against most ISP's terms of service. Manual spammers who persist usually loose their service for a month, then as long as six months, then forever.

Not fun! Which is why it's such a good deterrant and so effective.

Dr. Shoe · 6th August 2006, 10:02

If a manual spammer has to go through all that rigmarole just to find his spam delete within a couple of minutes is going to deter them pretty quickly.

We should be logging on at the start of every session.

dr1819 · 6th August 2006, 11:45

BINGO!

This is why this procedure, which is readily available with phpBB, the software on which this board runs, is so effective!

Hey - if I need to be a moderator/sysadmin, please nominate me. I've had more than 20 years in the business.

I don't have the time to police the discussions, but I'd be happy to manage the underpinnings that would eliminate spam and increase board uptime.