RevengeFNF Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 I think you should limit the number of topics a new member can open to 2 or 3 at most. Everyday im seeing here new spam bots opening several topics a a question of minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry - AKA Dumbledore Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 I think you should limit the number of topics a new member can open to 2 or 3 at most. Everyday im seeing here new spam bots opening several topics a a question of minutes.I concur, I watched 10+ new users last night post more that 5 pages of spam in the pre sales. In my opinion I think one of two options are needed, new users have a time limit prior to them being able to post, and then in the forum that they appear to be abusing a full moderation of post , both starter and replies. I know that it would require more staff, but I think IPS can vette clients that can be first level mods if only board wise. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitori Bocchi Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 Surrender to the bots, start fighting users which use these possibilitys in good ways instead. They are easier targets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripp★ Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I disagree with this. There are better ways of preventing spam that doesn't affect legitimate users. Some kind of CAPTCHA or something if you make over X threads would be better than absolutely no threads. I certainly wouldn't want something like this included as part of the package by default at all. Also this is the first time I've seen something like this on the IPS Forums. This kind of reaction for something like this is heavy handed and unjustified, it's clear something went wrong and by the spammers doing it on their forums (which unless they were trying to "Help" by proof of concept or something, was a stupid thing to do) they can find out what went wrong and make corrective measures without resorting to draconian measures that could affect legitimate users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevengeFNF Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 They can be creating accounts with real people, and then launch a script. Im also not saying to hard code this rule, just activate it for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 It would be the same thing as flood control for posts. Only for topics. x topics in a 15 min. period for instance, or x topics in a hour, etc. I dont see any problem as long as it is setup correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripp★ Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 It would be the same thing as flood control for posts. Only for topics. x topics in a 15 min. period for instance, or x topics in a hour, etc. I dont see any problem as long as it is setup correctly.Until it starts blocking legitimate people as it would on my site - for example. Again an obstacle rather than a full on block would be much better at this for this incident. Of course that's assuming there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Spam Monitor/Filtering system that's already there in the first place. For all we know it could have been bugged which could have been fixed or is in the process of being fixed by IPS staff. As I said previously; this kind of reaction for something that happens so rarely on these forums* is heavy handed and unnecessary. Now if what you're proposing is some kind of "Condition Level" where 1 = No protection, 2 = Force CAPTCHA for 3 topics within X minutes, 3 = Force CAPTCHA for 3 topics/posts within X Minutes, 4 = Block Topic Creation within X minutes and 5 = Block Topic/Post Creation within X minutes, I can understand that. What I'm saying is blocking actual content creation (which would affect legitimate users too) for this specific incident is grossly heavy handed. Although I somewhat understand the point your making, and can see where you're coming from but this is an over-reaction*...I don't suppose that makes any sense at all, does it? I'm not really sure if this something you want done just for this site or the entire IPSuite, I know for a fact that I wouldn't endorse or use such a feature as the amount of spam we get is pretty much zero; just like these forums. If this is something people want in their IPSuites could it not be a hook/modification or at the very least optional? * - By my opinion based on my observations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry - AKA Dumbledore Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Until it starts blocking legitimate people as it would on my site - for example. Again an obstacle rather than a full on block would be much better at this for this incident. Of course that's assuming there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Spam Monitor/Filtering system that's already there in the first place. For all we know it could have been bugged which could have been fixed or is in the process of being fixed by IPS staff. As I said previously; this kind of reaction for something that happens so rarely on these forums* is heavy handed and unnecessary. Now if what you're proposing is some kind of "Condition Level" where 1 = No protection, 2 = Force CAPTCHA for 3 topics within X minutes, 3 = Force CAPTCHA for 3 topics/posts within X Minutes, 4 = Block Topic Creation within X minutes and 5 = Block Topic/Post Creation within X minutes, I can understand that. What I'm saying is blocking actual content creation (which would affect legitimate users too) for this specific incident is grossly heavy handed. Although I somewhat understand the point your making, and can see where you're coming from but this is an over-reaction*...I don't suppose that makes any sense at all, does it?* - By my opinion based on my observations.My original post was intended for the operation this board only. Being that this site is more amenable to attacks only due to it prominence. The suggestedmediation processes would be good for the end users in as much they are user controlled (site administrator) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripp★ Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 My original post was intended for the operation this board only. Being that this site is more amenable to attacks only due to it prominence. The suggested mediation processes would be good for the end users in as much they are user controlled (site administrator) Well then I'm sure that's up to the IPS staff. Another thing I didn't think of during my reply is instead of blocking, why not Moderation Controlled after making X posts within Y minutes? That way the user (if legitimate) can see their post went through and just needs to be approved by staff once confirmed that it's not spam. I'm just thinking about sales here now, if you tried posting some things and then you make a thread that has a lot of questions about the product for the pre-sales forum and you find yourself blocked from making that post for another Y minutes, would you be too happy about that? Do you think that the average - can't wait five minutes person will hang around that long? I (personally) don't think so. Then again I've grown quite cynical of people in general lately. Thank you for your explanation though! It definitely ironed out my worries, Mr. Dumbledore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.