spam annoy me now to much here ...

[Supergirl]

I think I suggested it once before ... to @Sora and if I am right he also liked it ...

WHY not to restrict the allowed new threads per member to 5 in 30 minutes ?
Problem solved   
The spam accounts post 20 in 10 minutes or even faster.
No "normal" member/person post more than 5 new threads in 30 minutes   

AND if you say, ok but they also spam new accounts and post with new account every minute ...

WHY not restrict making new accounts (from same IP) to 1 ?
Problem solved   
Alt-accounts are not allowed anyways   

Please code this @Sora   
I have no clue about coding, but I am pretty sure it cannot be that hard, even emoji are restricted to 10 per post  



Current example:
@boacoolboa123 posted 13 new threads last 14 minutes so far 

[Supergirl]

Current examples :

@nsw7514 posted 24 new threads in 8 minutes  

@bdai5803 posted 58 new threads in 21 minutes  

@xtizbr6199 posted 13 new threads in 5 minutes  

@hznry6489 posted 32 new threads in 21 minutes  

@neqefix5105 posted 43 new threads in 16 minutes  

Around 10 pages of spam / threads, what would not be with a simple limit of threads/time 

Please @Sora implement that limit now 

And some wrote, it would not really help, I think my shown list tells something other 

[™ Chronic]

(03-15-2017, 09:48 AM)Supergirl Wrote: I think I suggested it once before ... to @Sora and if I am right he also liked it ...

WHY not to restrict the allowed new threads per member to 5 in 30 minutes ?
Problem solved   
The spam accounts post 20 in 10 minutes or even faster.
No "normal" member/person post more than 5 new threads in 30 minutes   

AND if you say, ok but they also spam new accounts and post with new account every minute ...

WHY not restrict making new accounts (from same IP) to 1 ?
Problem solved   
Alt-accounts are not allowed anyways   

Please code this @Sora   
I have no clue about coding, but I am pretty sure it cannot be that hard, even emoji are restricted to 10 per post  



Current example:
@boacoolboa123 posted 13 new threads last 14 minutes so far 

Kevin isn't here anymore. Hes was banned so I think specifically mentioning his name in your thread titles is the same as flaming or baiting, but I think you know that,. Just saying ;  @Supergirl

[Voakie]

(03-21-2017, 12:19 PM)TM Soloist Wrote:

(03-15-2017, 09:48 AM)Supergirl Wrote: I think I suggested it once before ... to @Sora and if I am right he also liked it ...

WHY not to restrict the allowed new threads per member to 5 in 30 minutes ?
Problem solved   
The spam accounts post 20 in 10 minutes or even faster.
No "normal" member/person post more than 5 new threads in 30 minutes   

AND if you say, ok but they also spam new accounts and post with new account every minute ...

WHY not restrict making new accounts (from same IP) to 1 ?
Problem solved   
Alt-accounts are not allowed anyways   

Please code this @Sora   
I have no clue about coding, but I am pretty sure it cannot be that hard, even emoji are restricted to 10 per post  



Current example:
@boacoolboa123 posted 13 new threads last 14 minutes so far 

Kevin isn't here anymore. Hes was banned so I think specifically mentioning his name in your thread titles is the same as flaming or baiting, but I think you know that,. Just saying ;  @Supergirl

taken care of

[Breakfast]

what if first 5 posts have to be confirmed by an admin? then after they can post when they like

[Squirrel]

(03-15-2017, 09:48 AM)Supergirl Wrote: I think I suggested it once before ... to @Sora and if I am right he also liked it ...
~snipped the rest because, as you said, you've said it before~

Since we the users cannot do coding for the Forums... we have to make do with the Chinese spam for now.

I suspect they will stop again fairly soon.

In the meantime... here's a very simple thing you can do, if you see nothing but spam.


BROWSE TO THE LAST PAGE OF MESSAGES

Most of the new messages will be there.

Don't use the 'New Posts' link, but use 'Today's Posts'.

That way, so long as you're logging in more than once a day, you can see ALL the new messages...

Just don't bother with the spam.

Go straight to the last page.

If all of the messages in that last page are valid, go to the 2nd last page, until you've seen all the new messages.

And if someone wants to convince me to dig through my basement for my C++ books, go for it... maybe my brain can still code. As you said... it really shouldn't be too difficult. It might, however, require a brand new "user record" (the information that is stored and saved for each user), and require a conversion program to run as well, to convert the old data to new data... or you'd have to start again. (No messages, possibly even no users.)

By then, those guys will likely have moved on anyways.

But if anyone wants to convince me, I'm listening! A part of me would love to know how much of my brain still works......

(Psst! @Voakie , ya got da source, doooood?!)

[Voakie]

(03-21-2017, 03:15 PM)Squirrel Wrote: ~schnip schnap~
(Psst! @Voakie , ya got da source, doooood?!)

Well, I don't have the source for this forum... but, I have a plan a)! (we had no other plan so i called it a))

a) I'll set up a forum to play around with so we can engineer a plugin that'll keep the spammers away.

~voakie is now executing plan a)~

[Squirrel]

(03-21-2017, 03:42 PM)Voakie Wrote:

(03-21-2017, 03:15 PM)Squirrel Wrote: ~schnip schnap~
(Psst! @Voakie , ya got da source, doooood?!)

Well, I don't have the source for this forum... but, I have a plan a)! (we had no other plan so i called it a))

a) I'll set up a forum to play around with so we can engineer a plugin that'll keep the spammers away.

~voakie is now executing plan a)~

A.... plug-in?!

In my programming world, granted, that was several generations ago, we dealt with the code directly, not indirectly... But I guess you'll have to explain what's spinning around in that mind of yours?

I should have read this before I read my mail. ~face palms~

---

(03-21-2017, 10:11 PM)Relax Wrote: I feel like email verification is a simple first step.

It's a valid point... I myself, if I ran a system, I would like to have at least a valid e-mail address for everyine, but....

Really, that Idea would only slow them down, since you have Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail and a host of other places where you can script-create a valid address.

And I would be in shock, if they didn't already have that available to them.

So it might only stop them for a few hours. (Although, you can't know for sure until you try.)

[Supergirl]

(03-21-2017, 12:19 PM)TM Soloist Wrote: Kevin isn't here anymore. Hes was banned so I think specifically mentioning his name in your thread titles is the same as flaming or baiting, but I think you know that,. Just saying ;  @Supergirl

HOW can mentioning a name being flaming or baiting ???
I mentioned Kevin, because he made around 20 or more accounts (spaming), same as the Chinese do (spaming).
A fact 
Not more, not less 

[Squirrel]

(03-21-2017, 12:19 PM)TM Soloist Wrote: Kevin isn't here anymore. Hes was banned so I think specifically mentioning his name in your thread titles is the same as flaming or baiting, but I think you know that,. Just saying ;  @Supergirl

Sure, he's here!

Didn't you see the thread where we've been discussing him, and he gave a nice apologetic message about a bunch of his actions? (He's, apparently, temporarily unbanned so he can post in that one thread?)

I was expecting you to post there, so maybe you missed it?

And I don't agree that mentioning him in the thread is flaming... He probably did make some of those accounts. I think he confessed in his thread, even. (Not that I think it was that big a deal.)

So some spam? Sure... but obviously, not all the Chinese ones. (lol)

---

(03-22-2017, 07:19 AM)Supergirl Wrote:

HOW can mentioning a name being flaming or baiting ???
I mentioned Kevin, because he made around 20 or more accounts (spaming), same as the Chinese do (spaming).
A fact 
Not more, not less 

But come on, you don't think he's as bad as the Chinese dudes, do you? They've made hundreds!

I think you just like to tease anything that moves!