Spammers

[Rushmore]

Perhaps this thread is the place to suggest this: I've joined a couple forums where new members need to have one or more posts approved by a moderator before they can post freely. (On CriterionForum.org it's five posts, but one is probably enough.) Seems like a good way to avoid spam without raising the barrier to entry too high.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Rushmore

[Peter T Chattaway]

http://artsandfaith.com/index.php?/topic/31293-family-and-politics/&do=findComment&comment=331803

[Rushmore]

michaeljames advertising a plagiarism service

[kenmorefield]

Thanks Rushomre,

I'm working with Image to get the site transferred over. Once it is, working through this thread to clean up some of the spam is a priority. 

[Rushmore]

Big problem in the music forum.

Is it easy to adjust the board settings so that new users need some kind of manual approval, or perhaps a few posts, before starting new topics?

[Joel Mayward]

14 minutes ago, Rushmore said:

Big problem in the music forum.

Saw it. I deleted the threads, but Ken as Administrator may need to explore the suggestion about new users and new threads.

[kenmorefield]

On 12/9/2018 at 3:30 AM, Joel Mayward said:

Saw it. I deleted the threads, but Ken as Administrator may need to explore the suggestion about new users and new threads.

I am not opposed to such an idea, though I'd like to try  some less intrusive fixes first. The board software seems good at identifying those who have spammed other boards and flagging them when they register, so the requirement to make people respond to a validating follow up may be sufficient. 

[kenmorefield]

If I understand the control panel correctly, I haven't figured out how to prevent new user from posting yet, but I did change the automatic moderation settings so that if *any* member flags content as spam it is hidden pending review. This works only if the person reported has less than 10 posts. I'll set up a separate response is reported for something other than spam. 

Edit: I created a rule that would temporarily hide content if it is reported as Offensive -- Inflammatory. This doesn't delete it, just hides it pending review. Question, how many reports should it take to temporarily hide an offensive post? 

[Andrew]

10 hours ago, kenmorefield said:

 Edit: I created a rule that would temporarily hide content if it is reported as Offensive -- Inflammatory. This doesn't delete it, just hides it pending review. Question, how many reports should it take to temporarily hide an offensive post? 

Two reports would seem reasonable, just to prevent a single person from wreaking havoc.

[John Drew]

In Science & Technology - pretty sure this may be spam.  

 

[kenmorefield]

Thanks John.,

It's worth mentioning that the board settings have been changed so that if any member flags a post from spam that is from a "new* member (first message), the board will make it invisible until it is reviewed.

This was to address porn spam...so it wouldn't remain visible until one of the moderators logged on. But it doesn't actually ban the member until one of the moderators reviews it and confirms it is spam (so someone couldn't, theoretically) flag a post from someone they don't like to get them auto-banned as a spammer.