Suggested post count requirement for status updates

[Kloplop321]

Well, I've noticed that we're getting spammy status updates on the right side.

Would it be possible that the permission is not granted to regular users, but only those with say 50+ post count?

[Alpha]

I'm going to look into it... they left quite a mess though and just got done cleaning it up. Seems like they posted the answer to our anti-spam question worldwide as they all came in the last 2 days...

[Kloplop321]

still a mess to clean up..

I know why, but WHY is someone taking the time to answer the security/bot question and publishing it on the web?

[Robert]

I've had this trouble on other forums. The best thing is to ban entire countries: Poland, Russia, and the former members of the Soviet Union. Nothing good ever comes from those places; only spammers and hackers.

[Kloplop321]

Would this include Latvia?

I learned of its existence because someone there tried to sign up with a spam account on my private dev forums before I put up impossible inside-joke questions.

[miskie]

Sadly, it has been my determination that the only real deterrent is manual account approval. Ive also noticed that once the spammers figure out that a human has the final say on signing up, they stop trying. Granted, the bots still try, but they are scripts running on a machine, and they know nothing.

 

So, the questions stop the bots, the manual approval stops the humans. Done and done.

[Kloplop321]

(Yes, the bots will still try)

Eh, but how does the admin know that the person is real or not?

Its easy when you're a dev forum for a group working secretly to make something, but for a public forum like this...

[emsley]

(Yes, the bots will still try)

Eh, but how does the admin know that the person is real or not?

Its easy when you're a dev forum f

 

or a group working secretly to make something, but for a public forum like this...

 

I have had this, I was a genuine user and 3 weeks later - was approved after I sent an email asking what was up.

[miskie]

Sadly, it has been my determination that the only real deterrent is manual account approval. Ive also noticed that once the spammers figure out that a human has the final say on signing up, they stop trying. Granted, the bots still try, but they are scripts running on a machine, and they know nothing.

 

So, the questions stop the bots, the manual approval stops the humans. Done and done.

 

My technique is simple - While the applicant is waiting for final approval, I enter the given username and IP address into Google. if on the first page I see a reference to a site dedicated to logging Spmmer's IP addresses, I immediately delete the account. If instead, I discover that the user has signed up for a dozen or so forums in the last few days, all of which are unrelated --especially if the user signed up to forums in several different languages, I delete the account immediately. If I find references to the user that show actual posts being made in other places, or no reference at all, I approve the registration. It takes about 5 minutes or so to make a determination on a registrant at most.

[Agozer]

Sadly, it has been my determination that the only real deterrent is manual account approval. Ive also noticed that once the spammers figure out that a human has the final say on signing up, they stop trying. Granted, the bots still try, but they are scripts running on a machine, and they know nothing.

 

So, the questions stop the bots, the manual approval stops the humans. Done and done.

 

My technique is simple - While the applicant is waiting for final approval, I enter the given username and IP address into Google. if on the first page I see a reference to a site dedicated to logging Spmmer's IP addresses, I immediately delete the account. If instead, I discover that the user has signed up for a dozen or so forums in the last few days, all of which are unrelated --especially if the user signed up to forums in several different languages, I delete the account immediately. If I find references to the user that show actual posts being made in other places, or no reference at all, I approve the registration. It takes about 5 minutes or so to make a determination on a registrant at most.

I do this same thing on a few boards, with the exception that I don't manually approve all member accounts. I just go through the member list like once a day. Spammers and bots aren't exactly known for their impeccable ability to choose decent usernames, either.

[Rag]

Sadly, it has been my determination that the only real deterrent is manual account approval. Ive also noticed that once the spammers figure out that a human has the final say on signing up, they stop trying. Granted, the bots still try, but they are scripts running on a machine, and they know nothing.

 

So, the questions stop the bots, the manual approval stops the humans. Done and done.

 

My technique is simple - While the applicant is waiting for final approval, I enter the given username and IP address into Google. if on the first page I see a reference to a site dedicated to logging Spmmer's IP addresses, I immediately delete the account. If instead, I discover that the user has signed up for a dozen or so forums in the last few days, all of which are unrelated --especially if the user signed up to forums in several different languages, I delete the account immediately. If I find references to the user that show actual posts being made in other places, or no reference at all, I approve the registration. It takes about 5 minutes or so to make a determination on a registrant at most.

I do this same thing on a few boards, with the exception that I don't manually approve all member accounts. I just go through the member list like once a day. Spammers and bots aren't exactly known for their impeccable ability to choose decent usernames, either.

 

This is late and a little unrelated but do you remember when your post per day count was like 52 when you first joined? That was flippin awesome.