With All The Latest Spam

[SPLiSH]

I've seen maybe 2 or 3 spam posts in the past 2 weeks. I wouldn't really call that a problem... as long as someone reports them they will be removed quickly.

You obviously didn't see the 30 or so posted in only a few hours the other day. Heaps and heaps of posts with links to dozens of twisted sites.

 

[Bignose]

Would it be possible to limit the number of posts a user can make to maybe 1 per minute? This would at least slow down and frustrate the spammers, and I think that most real people could wait a single minute. It should take at least 60 seconds to read a thread, put together an intelligent reply, and then spell & grammar check their reply before posting.

 

[SirMinion]

Would it be possible to limit the number of posts a user can make to maybe 1 per minute? This would at least slow down and frustrate the spammers, and I think that most real people could wait a single minute. It should take at least 60 seconds to read a thread, put together an intelligent reply, and then spell & grammar check their reply before posting.

It certainly would slow them down and frustrate them!
We currently have a 30 second flood limit and it frustates the hell out of me when I'm in full flow, especially when it stops me re-posting an edited post when I've corrected my appaling spelling!

 

[voo]

The 30 second limit gets me too sometimes, usually just after posting and then seeing a new thread appear, which doesnt take long to read.
I personally liked the idea of only being able to post urls after reaching a certain post count. Why would new users need to be posting urls anyway? It's usually the people that have been here a while that post urls to help the new people.

Having said that, i'm sure spammers would get around it by posting a load of rubbish first, then posting urls once they've reached the post count. Just means even more posts to be deleted.

 

[Fishkeeper2004]

Having said that, i'm sure spammers would get around it by posting a load of rubbish first, then posting urls once they've reached the post count. Just means even more posts to be deleted.

I doubt they would continue spamming if they could post links right away. Time is money for them, and it would be much easier for them to find another large forum to spam, which doesn't have such restrictions.

 

[Torrean]

urls requiring approval sounds like the best solution...time consuming though. One option might be if the same url is posted more than say 3 times in a day the 4th time requires approval.

 

[Miss Wiggle]

yeah the flood control riles me enough as it is. I've a really quick typing speed and I'm often sat here looking at the bloomin flood control screen.

I think the idea of no url's until after you've x post count would be good though. or even if you can't post them until you've been validated so the mods would get a chance to look at each profile before they're allowed to post up links.

 

[Bloo]

yeah the flood control riles me enough as it is. I've a really quick typing speed and I'm often sat here looking at the bloomin flood control screen.

Snap!

 

[vancouver]

The 30 second thing gets me too..

thats why I like the quick reply.. at least I can type a message out and waste maybe 10 of the 30 seconds..

I did not see the links.. guess I missed out on that edition of spam

 

[pica_nuttalli]

Would it be possible to limit the number of posts a user can make to maybe 1 per minute? This would at least slow down and frustrate the spammers, and I think that most real people could wait a single minute. It should take at least 60 seconds to read a thread, put together an intelligent reply, and then spell & grammar check their reply before posting.

It certainly would slow them down and frustrate them!
We currently have a 30 second flood limit and it frustates the hell out of me when I'm in full flow, especially when it stops me re-posting an edited post when I've corrected my appaling spelling!

appalling (i just couldn't resist such a golden opportunity.)