okay so, right now we're getting hammered by hello13124, posting a keylogger in every forum, multiple times.

 

 

 

this is [cabbage].

 

 

 

I suggest that new users have a limitation of posting one topic per 10 minutes.

 

 

 

no new player should have to post that many topics in such a short time. If they have multiple questions, they should have a single topic in help and advice containing all their questions. perhaps when they reach 100 posts or so, the limitation can be removed.

 

 

 

note, this wouldn't effect topic replies, just new topic creation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

another thing,

 

 

 

the time limit on reporting topics is annoying, and it should be decreased when a forum user is identified as being a very good topic reporter, by which i mean they have reported a lot of topics, and 90% of the reports are legitimate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please.

Wayyyyy tooooo longggggg. All I got to say. So what if you post a bank sale, later you need to ask a question, 10 minutes!!!!! Make it like 1-2 minutes, as by this time, the spammer is neutralized...

Wayyyyy tooooo longggggg. All I got to say. So what if you post a bank sale, later you need to ask a question, 10 minutes!!!!! Make it like 1-2 minutes, as by this time, the spammer is neutralized...

 

 

 

obviously you aren't seeing this guy spamming. go search his posts, "hello13124"

 

 

 

he's been at it for like half an hour, and no mods have shown up.

 

 

 

as i said, i'm talking about newbies to the forum, people that have just joined. If you joined the forums just to make selling posts, I don't think these forums are right for you.

Mods will take care of it. I and a couple of others took care of this guy and now there is nothing to worry about.

 

 

 

Anyways, has already been suggested...

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?t=700633

 

 

 

In there, you will see why it is not probable to implement something such as this. Just report the post and move on. Mod's will take care of it and appropriate action will be taken.

Would it be possible to stop people from posting links until they have a certain post count, maybe 15-50? It's enough to delay spammers, and most genuine new members shouldn't be needing to link to stuff. (They can still post images and quote text to show what they mean.)

Don't limit people on what they can do, just because of the minority doesn't mean the majority overall should have to be affected.

 

 

 

This should be locked, sicne it relates to the topic devoted posted.

Would it be possible to stop people from posting links until they have a certain post count, maybe 15-50? It's enough to delay spammers, and most genuine new members shouldn't be needing to link to stuff. (They can still post images and quote text to show what they mean.)

 

 

 

Preventing people from posting links really isn't a plausable option. People can always find ways to get around the censor that would prevent people from posting links. Also, disabling BBCode or HTML for one specific group of people isn't possible as far as I know. The best you can do is report these posters and the first moderator to get around to it will handle it.

Don't limit people on what they can do, just because of the minority doesn't mean the majority overall should have to be affected.

 

If only the American Government could be based on that.

Don't limit people on what they can do, just because of the minority doesn't mean the majority overall should have to be affected.

 

If only the American Government could be based on that.

 

 

 

There's a little difference here. Making a change so that people can't lose access to a piece of data isn't quite of as much importance as would be a change that would help save millions of lives. Data can be replaced; Lives can't.

Don't limit people on what they can do, just because of the minority doesn't mean the majority overall should have to be affected.

 

If only the American Government could be based on that.

 

I could go into the finer irony of that comment, but I won't. :?

 

 

 

As -devoted- said, mods can deal with things like this pretty well as it is. There's no need to place sanctions on everyone for an annoyance so small being commited by such a minute group of people.

Would it be possible to stop people from posting links until they have a certain post count, maybe 15-50? It's enough to delay spammers, and most genuine new members shouldn't be needing to link to stuff. (They can still post images and quote text to show what they mean.)

 

 

 

Preventing people from posting links really isn't a plausable option. People can always find ways to get around the censor that would prevent people from posting links. Also, disabling BBCode or HTML for one specific group of people isn't possible as far as I know. The best you can do is report these posters and the first moderator to get around to it will handle it.

 

 

 

Okay, I didn't know what is and isn't possible to do on phpBB. I just thought I'd throw the idea out there.

Also, disabling BBCode or HTML for one specific group of people isn't possible as far as I know. The best you can do is report these posters and the first moderator to get around to it will handle it.

 

It's possible as far as my knowledge goes? Though I don't know enough of php yet to actually confirm that. :-#

While I don't agree entirely on the subject of your post, I did remember an issue that should be looked at. I don't know if it's possible, but I don't think people should be able to edit in new links after making their first thread post. Someone could easily link to one thing, people could reply saying it's fine and everything, then the original thread creator can edit the original link a day later with a keylogger link, and nobody would know the difference until it was too late. Anything doable about that? Could just not be an issue with pursuing.

Myabe I'm just crazy , but our log of it shows that particular user starting his link spamming at 3:08pm and two global mods starting removing the posts at 3:20pm and the user was banned at 3:32pm.

 

 

 

 

 

24 minute response and cleanup time is pretty damn good for a bunch of volunteers I would think. :-k

Forget it. I'm just saying the American Government has a couple flaws in our system.

 

 

 

Anyways, I havn't seen any of those keylogger spammers in a while.

the time limit on reporting topics is annoying, and it should be decreased when a forum user is identified as being a very good topic reporter, by which i mean they have reported a lot of topics, and 90% of the reports are legitimate.

 

 

 

With a spammer like this, you really don't need to go through their history and report every single one of their threads. Report one and say, "THey have more, they're spamming." Then the moderator knows that they should look through the user's history and remove all of their threads. Makes things a lot easier on you ;)

Myabe I'm just crazy , but our log of it shows that particular user starting his link spamming at 3:08pm and two global mods starting removing the posts at 3:20pm and the user was banned at 3:32pm.

 

 

 

 

 

24 minute response and cleanup time is pretty damn good for a bunch of volunteers I would think. :-k

 

 

 

Tip.it staff > keyloggers :)

 

 

 

While I don't agree entirely on the subject of your post, I did remember an issue that should be looked at. I don't know if it's possible, but I don't think people should be able to edit in new links after making their first thread post. Someone could easily link to one thing, people could reply saying it's fine and everything, then the original thread creator can edit the original link a day later with a keylogger link, and nobody would know the difference until it was too late. Anything doable about that? Could just not be an issue with pursuing.

 

 

 

It's a nice idea, but what if you're *not* a keylogger and you accidentally put the wrong link in your post to say, a youtube video? Obviously you'd want to edit it and put in the good link.

 

 

 

Although people seem to be opposed to the "low posters should not be able to do this... blah blah blah" this could be something to consider. Perhaps users with less than 100 posts could not edit their links? By 100 posts I think we can confirm most of them are not keyloggers(keyloggers would be frustrated getting in 100 non-rule breaking posts just to post a keylogger link).

By putting post count limitations on people, it would encourage spamming. Someone could go to one of the lesser used boards towards the bottom of the page, spam to high heaven until they have 100 posts, and then go link spamming. Given, there's a better chance they'll be caught first, there's still the chance.

Maybe its time to blacklist post count requirement suggestions? :

 

Although people seem to be opposed to the "low posters should not be able to do this... blah blah blah" this could be something to consider. Perhaps users with less than 100 posts could not edit their links? By 100 posts I think we can confirm most of them are not keyloggers(keyloggers would be frustrated getting in 100 non-rule breaking posts just to post a keylogger link).

 

So they get 100 posts, then they post a keylogger, I'm sure 60% of the users will trust the link if its professional looking since the user has 100 posts.

 

 

 

Limitations don't work out, and I don't see how they ever could

Maybe its time to blacklist post count requirement suggestions? :

 

Although people seem to be opposed to the "low posters should not be able to do this... blah blah blah" this could be something to consider. Perhaps users with less than 100 posts could not edit their links? By 100 posts I think we can confirm most of them are not keyloggers(keyloggers would be frustrated getting in 100 non-rule breaking posts just to post a keylogger link).

 

So they get 100 posts, then they post a keylogger, I'm sure 60% of the users will trust the link if its professional looking since the user has 100 posts.

 

 

 

Limitations don't work out, and I don't see how they ever could

 

 

 

I was expecting this answer; very well.

Maybe an announcement on this issue could raise public awareness for the time being, reducing cases of users falling victim to it.

Until we can come up with a better solution use the Report Button "!" as soon as you see a new one of these. That will get our attention the fastest.

 

 

 

=D>

 

McGuff1

 

tip.it Super Moderator

In order to read most forums, you need an account, right?

 

Having a minimum post-requirement wouldn't work because it would increase spam, but why not have an time-requirement to start a thread?

New users unable to use bbcode for 24 hours

 

New users unable to post links for 72 hours (3 days) + post count of 25 (posts are added to a moderation queue perhaps)

 

New users younger than 72 hours or less than 25 posts only able to post one new topic thread an hour. This still allows the new user to post whatever question they perhaps signed up for to ask and also to make an introductory thread or even to create a post in the market boards.

 

 

 

Not sure how possible those modifications are, I know they are not available in vanilla phpbb.

 

 

 

This is likely to prevent immediate signup and spamming. Also it acts as a deterrant in that the spammer may not be bothered waiting for days and spending time posting legitamate posts before they are able to post their spam.

New users unable to use bbcode for 24 hours

 

New users unable to post links for 72 hours (3 days) + post count of 25 (posts are added to a moderation queue perhaps)

 

New users younger than 72 hours or less than 25 posts only able to post one new topic thread an hour. This still allows the new user to post whatever question they perhaps signed up for to ask and also to make an introductory thread or even to create a post in the market boards.

 

 

 

Not sure how possible those modifications are, I know they are not available in vanilla phpbb.

 

 

 

This is likely to prevent immediate signup and spamming. Also it acts as a deterrant in that the spammer may not be bothered waiting for days and spending time posting legitamate posts before they are able to post their spam.

 

 

 

Good ideas Merc. I can't see any flaws in them and I'd be happy to see any of these implemented. :)