Stop Spammers with rel=nofollow in URLs!

[kall]

In the first cooperative move for nearly ten years, the major search engines have unveiled a new indexing command for web authors that they all recognize, one that they hope will help reduce the link and comment spam that plagues many web sites....due to removing the point of doing it in the first place.

The new "nofollow" attribute that can be associated with links was originated as an idea by Google in late 2004 and MSN and Yahoo, as well as major blogging vendors have jumped onboard.

The Nofollow Attribute

The new attribute is called "nofollow" with rel="nofollow" being the format inserted within an anchor tag.
When added to any link, it will effectively serve as a flag to tell the search engines that the link has not been explictly approved by the site owner, and therefore "not follow" it, or not use the referring page's (on your site) Page Rank in any way.

For example, this is how the HTML markup for an ordinary link might look:

<a href="http://www.somedomain.com/page.html">My forums are the best lol lol lol click here!!</a>

This is how the link would look after the nofollow attribute has been added, with the attribute portion shown in bold

<a href="http://www.somedomain.com/page.html" rel="nofollow">My forums are the best lol lol lol click here!!</a>

This would also be acceptable, as order of elements within the anchor tag makes no difference:

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.site.com/page.html" >Visit My Page</a>

Once added, the search engines supporting the attribute will understand that the link has not been approved in some way by the site owner.

Think of it as a way to flag to them, "I didn't post this link -- someone else did."


If Google sees nofollow as part of a link, it will:

1. NOT follow through to that page.
2. NOT count the link in calculating PageRank link popularity scores.
3. NOT count the anchor text in determining what terms the page being linked to is relevant for.


The site that is being linked to will gain nothing from the link, so the whole point of doing it in the first place is removed.

WHAT WILL THIS DO, IN ESSENCE?

This will affect URLs in posts, as well as signatures...anything that goes through the bbcodeparse function as far as I can tell/guess, and will work recursively, or whatever the word is that means 'it will affect all existing posts and signatures'...or it did for me anyway.

Update:

Thanks to Michael Morris (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/member.php?u=44649) and natez0rz (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/member.php?u=63124) for pointing out that using the $post global would be a much better idea.

To change the conditional number of posts, alter OR $post['posts'] > 50) to whatever you like.

It should work with all vB 3.0.x versions, but was tested on 3.0.6.

File to modify: 1

1/ Open your includes/functions_bbcodeparse.php file

Find:
if ($type == 'url')
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
// email hyperlink (mailto:)

Replace with:
if ($type == 'url')
{
global $post;

if (is_member_of($post, 6) //Admins are exempt
OR is_member_of($post, 5) //Mods are exempt
OR is_member_of($post, 7) //SuperMods are exempt
OR $post['posts'] > 50) // People with over 50 posts are exempt
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
}
else
{
// email hyperlink (mailto:)


2/ Save and Upload.

3/ Relax, safe in the knowledge that spammers linking from your site are doing so for no reason whatsoever. :)

4/ Edit: exclude staff usergroups and members with over 50 posts.

[kaotic]

Very interesting. Thanks for the news and the modification instructions.

[yoyoyoyo]

excellent, thanks!

[alkatraz]

it will serve as a flag that the link has not been explicitly approved by the site owner.
what's the advantage with this?

edit: found this which explains it all
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/050118-204728
If Google sees nofollow as part of a link, it will:

1. NOT follow through to that page.
2. NOT count the link in calculating PageRank link popularity scores.
3. NOT count the anchor text in determining what terms the page being linked to is relevant for.


thx for the hack, sounds like it could be useful

[kall]

what's the advantage with this?

edit: found this which explains it all
http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/050118-204728


thx for the hack, sounds like it could be useful
The idea is that if there is no point in spamming their links, the spammers will stop spamming their links.

[Oblivion Knight]

Nice little mod this, thank you.. :)

[reteep]

Very interesting! Thanks!

[kall]

Nice little mod this, thank you.. :)
The process of this mod went like this:

1. I read about it on slashdot
2. I search for it here
3. I open includes/functions_bbcodeparse.php and insert a very small amount of data
4. I astound myself by discovering it works
5. I upload it to this thread.

:)

A nice easy install for something that took about 10 minutes from conception to release. :D

[j_86]

Nice hack :)

[neocorteqz]

thanks.

one small question.

How do we verify it's working?

[kall]

thanks.

one small question.

How do we verify it's working?
View the source of any page with a posted URL or a signature.

CTRL-F for nofollow. :)

[neocorteqz]

View the source of any page with a posted URL or a signature.

CTRL-F for nofollow. :) thanks.

[yoyoyoyo]

ADDON "HACK":You can also add the "no index and no follow" rule to each page header as well as the URL.

Go to your admin control panel, and open the style manager, and choose to edit the headinclude template and look for:

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=$stylevar[charset]" />
and add the following AFTER:
<meta name="robots" content="no index, no follow" />
if you want to have the page indexed, but still have the no follow rule stay in effect use this instead:
<meta name="robots" content="no follow" />

[Erwin]

Interesting. :)

[Dean C]

Not to criticise your modification but I'd say this was a poor way of implementing this. As soon as you put no follow on the links it'll:


1. NOT follow through to that page.
2. NOT count the link in calculating PageRank link popularity scores.
3. NOT count the anchor text in determining what terms the page being linked to is relevant for.



Also your addon will mean google will not try to index the page. Maybe I'm missing something here but why on earth would you not want the search engines to index your page. The only usage for this will be on blog comment pages. Just because a spambot sees your link having rel="no follow" inside of it will not mean it won't spam the email.

[kall]

Not to criticise your modification but I'd say this was a poor way of implementing this. As soon as you put no follow on the links it'll:



Also your addon will mean google will not try to index the page. Maybe I'm missing something here but why on earth would you not want the search engines to index your page. The only usage for this will be on blog comment pages. Just because a spambot sees your link having rel="no follow" inside of it will not mean it won't spam the email.
*seethes at criticism* :)

But seriously...it's not spambots that are 'targeted' by this hack, it's the Spammers that send them out.

The theory goes that if people were to implement this idea, there would be no reason for the Spammers to send out the bots in the first place. At least, it removes the advantage of having PR from the sites they are spamming be added to their site.

How would you go about implementing this?

regarding the addon: I don't know why he is suggesting to have noindex in the header of each page...not something I would do myself.

[yoyoyoyo]

Also your addon will mean google will not try to index the page. Maybe I'm missing something here but why on earth would you not want the search engines to index your page. The only usage for this will be on blog comment pages. Just because a spambot sees your link having rel="no follow" inside of it will not mean it won't spam the email.
Regarding the addon: I don't know why he is suggesting to have noindex in the header of each page...not something I would do myself.
Not to hijack the thread, but there are many good reasons not to be indexed, but it is up to each person to decide if they want to or not. That is why I gave the alternate of only including the "no follow" meta tag instead of having both the no index and no follow. It seems to me that doing one without doing the other (including the no follow in the URL, but not in the meta) is only half of the solution.

You can also tell the spider to ignore only specific parts of your site in a few different ways. One way is to use a "robots.txt" file. The robots.txt is a TEXT file (not HTML!) which has a section for each robot to be controlled. Each section has a user-agent line which names the robot to be controlled and has a list of "disallows" and "allows". Each disallow will prevent any address that starts with the disallowed string from being accessed. Similarly, each allow will permit any address that starts with the allowed string from being accessed. The (dis)allows are scanned in order, with the last match encountered determining whether an address is allowed to be used or not. If there are no matches at all then the address will be used.

Using a robots.txt file is easy. If your site is located at:
http://domain.com/mysite/index.html
you will need to be able to create a file located here:
http://domain.com/robots.txt

Here's an example:

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow: /mysite/test/
disallow: /mysite/cgi-bin/post.cgi?action=reply
disallow: /a

In this example the following addresses would be ignored by the spider:

http://domain.com/mysite/test/index.html
http://domain.com/mysite/cgi-bin/post.cgi?action=reply&id=1
http://domain.com/mysite/cgi-bin/post.cgi?action=replytome
http://domain.com/abc.html

and the following ones would be allowed:

http://domain.com/mysite/test.html
http://domain.com/mysite/cgi-bin/post.cgi?action=edit
http://domain.com/mysite/cgi-bin/post.cgi
http://domain.com/bbc.html

It is also possible to use an "allow" in addition to disallows. For example:

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow: /cgi-bin/
allow: /cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi
allow: /cgi-bin/forumdisplay.cgi

This robots.txt file prevents the spider from accessing every cgi-bin address from being accessed except Ultimate.cgi and forumdisplay.cgi.

Using allows can often simplify your robots.txt file.

Here's another example which shows a robots.txt with two sections in it. One for "all" robots, and one for the FreeFind spider:

user-agent: *
disallow: /cgi-bin/

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow:

In this example all robots except the FreeFind spider will be prevented from accessing files in the cgi-bin directory. FreeFind will be able to access all files (a disallow with nothing after it means "allow everything").

Examples:

To prevent FreeFind from indexing your site at all:

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow: /

To prevent FreeFind from indexing common Front Page image map junk:

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow: /_vti_bin/shtml.exe/

To prevent FreeFind from indexing a test directory and a private file:

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow: /test/
disallow: private.html

To allow let FreeFind index everything but prevent other robots from accessing certain files:

user-agent: *
disallow: /cgi-bin/
disallow: this.html
disallow: and.html
disallow: that.html

user-agent: FreeFind
disallow:

Here are some more examples:

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/ignore.html
prevents that file from being included in the index.

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/archive/*
prevents everything in the "archive" directory from being included in the index.

The exclusion:
/archive/*
prevents everything in any "archive" directory from being included in the index regardless of the site it's on.

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/*.txt
prevents files on "mysite.com" that end with the extension ".txt" from being included in the index.

The exclusion:
*.txt
prevents all files that end with the extension ".txt" from being included in the index regardless of what site they're on.

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/alphaindex/?.html
prevents a file like "http://mysite.com/alphaindex/a.html" from being indexed, but would allow a file "http://mysite.com/alphaindex/aardvark.html" to be indexed.

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/alphaindex/?.html index=no follow=yes
prevents a file like "http://mysite.com/alphaindex/a.html" from being added to the index but would allow the spider to find and follow the links in that page.

The exclusion:
http://mysite.com/endwiththis.html index=yes follow=no
allows that file to be added to the index but prevents the spider from following any of the links in that file.

[yoyoyoyo]

If you don't mind my saying: "no kidding" or "so?"
you could say that about alot of the mods here, but each little addon or mod is like a lesson in the workings of php and vbulletin, so I find it interesting. I am sorry if it bothers you, but hopefully some other people will find it interesting or helpful.
I can't think of a reason why I would want to block Legit spiders (those that respect robots.txt restrictions), and a spambot spider is likely as not to ignore meta tags and robots.txt anyway.
well, maybe you can't but obviously others can, and desire that function, thus the "rules." I did not invent the meta tags. You are correct that bots don't always play by the rules, but some do, and these are the ones that this hack was addressing.

Actually....ya know what - forget about the "no index" option... forget I even mentioned it- this hack was about the "no follow" so if you are planning on implementing the first hack I suggest adding the meta in the header, and I apologize for trying to toss in more info than was needed.

[Princeton]

The "rel" attribute has been around since HTML 3.2.

It's getting a lot of attention these days because of the "junk" pages that are being indexed by the major search engines. Most notably caused by individuals who comment (spam) a blog, wicki, or forum site. The search engines are looking for a way to conserve resources (use it where it counts) and prevent indexing of sites with no relative content.

So they are asking the community to start using the rel="nofollow" attribute to help them stop-- at the very least slow -- the "spamming".

When an individual spams a site they leave links on the post hoping that the search engines will "follow" the link back to their site. When they (the spammers) do this they are hoping to increase their "popularity" with search engines.

The rel="nofollow" does not prevent the search engines from indexing your pages. Nor, does it prevent the other site from being indexed when search engines do it directly.

It will simply tell the search engine not to follow the link that was posted on your page (thread/post) -- that was NOT created by you.

ABOUT THE HACK
If you are worried about your PAGERANK than use this.

If you want to prevent spammers from posting in your forum than this hack will not help. Spammers will continue doing what they do ... the best route is to remove post and ban user. Most will not even know you are using rel="nofollow" and some will not even understand it.

SOME CONTROLS ARE NEEDED
I think there should be some controls.

For example, converting all posted links with rel="nofollow" also punishes those who are loyal to the site.

Why not help your loyal members with their site "popularity"? Do not convert links posted by loyal users. Allow the search engines to follow these links. Some sites can even list this as a membership benefit. -- just throwing ideas

Anyway, what I'm trying to get to is that the ADMIN should have some control over what links get rel="nofollow".

As it is now, all "in-house" links are tagged with rel="nofollow" which may hurt your "popularity".

[kall]

SOME CONTROLS ARE NEEDED
I think there should be some controls.

For example, converting all posted links with rel="nofollow" also punishes those who are loyal to the site.

Why not help your loyal members with their site "popularity"? Do not convert links posted by loyal users. Allow the search engines to follow these links. Some sites can even list this as a membership benefit. -- just throwing ideas

Anyway, what I'm trying to get to is that the ADMIN should have some control over what links get rel="nofollow".

As it is now, all "in-house" links are tagged with rel="nofollow" which may hurt your "popularity".

Alrighty then, try this:


if ($type == 'url')
{
global $bbuserinfo;

if (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, 6))
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
}
else

This will make it so anyone who is an admin (group 6 - change this to whatever you want) will not have their links tagged with the nofollow attribute.

The syntax for multiple groups escapes me at present, but if someone can remind me, I will change it.

[neocorteqz]

Alrighty then, try this:


if ($type == 'url')
{
global $bbuserinfo;

if (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, 6))
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
}
else

This will make it so anyone who is an admin (group 6 - change this to whatever you want) will not have their links tagged with the nofollow attribute.

The syntax for multiple groups escapes me at present, but if someone can remind me, I will change it.
if (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, 6)) or (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, X))


I believe that would be the correct syntax. Replacing X with the group you want. Don't quote me on that, thats just what I normally use in templates, but then again you are editing a php file and I don't know php all that well.

edit, actually I believe it would be

if (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, 6)) || (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, X))


http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_operators.asp

[phlogiston]

this hack was about the "no follow" so if you are planning on implementing the first hack I suggest adding the meta in the headersurely the two do different things?

This hack adds the "no follow" attribute to links which have gone through vB's bbcode parser (posts, sigs, etc) and will stop spiders following them
but the links in your templates (almost all probably pointing to other pages on your own site) won't be affected and so will be followed.

The "no follow" in the header meta will tell spiders to not follow any links at all, including to the rest of your own site.

[yoyoyoyo]

surely the two do different things?

This hack adds the "no follow" attribute to links which have gone through vB's bbcode parser (posts, sigs, etc) and will stop spiders following them
but the links in your templates (almost all probably pointing to other pages on your own site) won't be affected and so will be followed.

The "no follow" in the header meta will tell spiders to not follow any links at all, including to the rest of your own site.
true. they are different. I run a private forum that has no interest in being indexed or spammed or followed, so that is why I added those, but I see your point, and this was not the intent of this hack, and I apologize. Feel free to delete my posts on this topic and the whole "no follow" discussion.

[ttlgDaveh]

Nice hack.

I made a modification to it so that only new members (in my case, those with less than 30 posts) have rel="nofollow" attached to their posts. Established members are not penalised and the searchbots will still follow and index their links.

Replace
global $bbuserinfo;

if (is_member_of($bbuserinfo, 6))

With

global $post;
if ($post[posts]>30)

[Soto]

Not to criticise your modification but I'd say this was a poor way of implementing this. As soon as you put no follow on the links it'll:



Also your addon will mean google will not try to index the page. Maybe I'm missing something here but why on earth would you not want the search engines to index your page. The only usage for this will be on blog comment pages. Just because a spambot sees your link having rel="no follow" inside of it will not mean it won't spam the email.

The point of this hack has been missed. The code does not stop spiders from indexing your pages, only from following links that posted on the pages.

Cretins get high ranking by using loopholes in the way that search engines rank sites/pages. Essentially if a search engine "sees" a url that has numerous other pages linking to it it thinks that that site is popular. This may be the case, but if I were to visit every single one of the users sites from this forum alone and posted a link to my board on each one suddenly my sites ranking will increase as the bots "see" lots of links to my site. This is the essence of "google bombing" (like search on Feeling Lucky for WMD in google for example).

By making it so that links POSTED IN THREADS have no follow means that the search engine bots IGNORE links in posts but will index your pages and follow all the other links in your pages unless you've messed with robots.txt or put the nofollow elsewhere.

I think that explains it....


*INSTALLED*

[kall]

The point of this hack has been missed. The code does not stop spiders from indexing your pages, only from following links that posted on the pages.

Cretins get high ranking by using loopholes in the way that search engines rank sites/pages. Essentially if a search engine "sees" a url that has numerous other pages linking to it it thinks that that site is popular. This may be the case, but if I were to visit every single one of the users sites from this forum alone and posted a link to my board on each one suddenly my sites ranking will increase as the bots "see" lots of links to my site. This is the essence of "google bombing" (like search on Feeling Lucky for WMD in google for example).

By making it so that links POSTED IN THREADS have no follow means that the search engine bots IGNORE links in posts but will index your pages and follow all the other links in your pages unless you've messed with robots.txt or put the nofollow elsewhere.

I think that explains it....


*INSTALLED*
Thank you. :)

I kinda thought that was obvious, but thank you for spelling it out so well for those people who seem to think this is some kind of 'Stop Spiders from indexing your site' hack, which..quite frankly, would be a retarded idea.

[ricker]

Installed, however, is there a way this can be implemented into signatures as well? It seems as if it's taking no effect there. *edit* Errr, maybe it is. It should work everywhere, right? Profile pages don't seem to include it, maybe my browser is cached.

[dwh]

Although I think yoyo's post needed to be clarified, I think people arebeing hard on him. There are many boards out there with many goals. Aslong as people understand what he's doing and implement it tofurthertheir goals, his posts have been very helpful AND he clearlyknows whathe's talking about.

Thanks for the hack Kall and the additions. I like the one basedonnumber of posts. It will be cool if the addons can be mentioned inthefirst thread for new people coming onto this thread. This willprobablygrow into a big thread until vb supports the tag....WHICH Isuggestthey do right away so that they can boost their pagerank bygettingmentioned in Google's blog which announced this ;)

(just kidding, they are using a redirect anyway.)

[mindbuster]

Couldnt get this to work, followed instructions but no "nofollow" showed when viewing source.

[nintendo]

I made a modification to it so that only new members (in my case, those with less than 30 posts) have rel="nofollow" attached to their posts. Established members are not penalised and the searchbots will still follow and index their links.


Now that's a MUCH better version. With the way it is by default, this is one STUPID hack, punishing the 99% that arn't spammers! At this rate it won't be long before a STUPID signiture version of the hack is created!

[BamaStangGuy]

Now that's a MUCH better version. With the way it is by default, this is one STUPID hack, punishing the 99% that arn't spammers! At this rate it won't be long before a STUPID signiture version of the hack is created!
Calm down dude it is not like you have to install it. They put their time into making this hack. Show some respect to the author

[kall]

Calm down dude it is not like you have to install it. They put their time into making this hack. Show some respect to the author
Stoopid is as stoopid does. :)

[Michael Morris]

Stoopid is as stoopid does. :)
Ignore the little troll kall.

:clicks ignore:

Now, might I recommend the following. Your conditional references $bbuserinfo. That will only affect the viewing user - so spiders still see no links in posts regardless of the user. To pull up the post user data, use $post. You'll have to global it. Further, instead of using a set usergroup, I recommend using a post count threshhold of 50. I doubt many spammers will reach that threshold, while most of your regulars will. Hence


global $post;

if ($post['posts'] < 50)
{
//put the no follow stuff in
}
else
{
//don't
}


:clicks install:

[natez0rz]

Now, might I recommend the following. Your conditional references $bbuserinfo. That will only affect the viewing user - so spiders still see no links in posts regardless of the user. To pull up the post user data, use $post.You're right, but $post also has the usergroupid. Here's the code I'm using--it's working great. It allows normal links for moderators, supermoderators, administrators and users with more than 100 posts.

global $post;

if (is_member_of($post, 6)
OR is_member_of($post, 5)
OR is_member_of($post, 7)
OR $post['posts'] > 100)
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}

[venomx]

I tried to do what natez0rz did in the post above me but I get an error.. :(


Parse error: parse error, unexpected T_ELSE in /home/forum/public_html/forums/includes/functions_bbcodeparse.php on line 1523


The else giving the error is the one right before the mailto part :(


if ($type == 'url')
{
global $post;

if (is_member_of($post, 6)
OR is_member_of($post, 5)
OR is_member_of($post, 7)
OR $post['posts'] > 100)
{
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
// email hyperlink (mailto:)

[kall]

Ignore the little troll kall.

:clicks ignore:

Now, might I recommend the following. Your conditional references $bbuserinfo. That will only affect the viewing user - so spiders still see no links in posts regardless of the user. To pull up the post user data, use $post. You'll have to global it. Further, instead of using a set usergroup, I recommend using a post count threshhold of 50. I doubt many spammers will reach that threshold, while most of your regulars will. Hence


global $post;

if ($post['posts'] < 50)
{
//put the no follow stuff in
}
else
{
//don't
}


:clicks install:
Good call, both of you.

*updates hack*

Now it will affect users with under 50 posts only.

[kyrnel]

Works great, clicks install.

I modified it a bit for simplification.
If the user IS a member of New Members usergroup, then it posts the modified URL.

[I, Brian]

I just thought I'd point out that in the SEO community the use of nofollow has been suggested as a way to devalue pages.

The purpose of a nofollow tag is not simply indicate a link should be ignored, but also that the page content is subject to third party interference.

Therefore if people think that implementing this hack could be a great way to "horde PageRank" or other such strategy, then they may find what they actually achieve is simply a way of telling search engines that the forum itself is nothing but a collection of "free for all" pages and should be devalued.

Webmasters should consider very carefully why they wish to use nofollow, because if it's for SEO purposes then there is a real possibility that the plan could backfire on you.

[kall]

Therefore if people think that implementing this hack could be a great way to "horde PageRank" or other such strategy, then they may find what they actually achieve is simply a way of telling search engines that the forum itself is nothing but a collection of "free for all" pages and should be devalued.


Well, anyone adding the nofollow link to every single link in their site is a little silly regardless really.

This hack applies the attribute to links posted by (and in the signatures of) members of Usergroups defined by the admin. It does not affect board-wide links or template links or anything else.

How that would tell the engines that the forum is nothing but a collection of free-for-all pages is beyond me. Please explain.

Or did you totally miss the point of this hack?

[ChrisLM2001]

Anyone with before and after SEO stats with this mod installed?

That'll explain to everyone if this mod hurts rankings and put the second guessing to rest.

Something is needed to keep the spammers at bay. If it's true that the bots are reading images via OCR, even image verification won't help. :(

Chris

[wirewolf]

This is a great little hack!
First, you are only excluding new members, with under a certain post count, from having a link that they put in a post, or in a signature, from being indexed by a search engine. It does not affect any other links in your forum, only those. If you have spammers dropping urls in posts, then the urls they drop, will not be indexed.

I recently had a user join my forum, and I could tell right away that he was nothing more than a "link dropper" (or, you could call, a "name dropper"). He posted short, little one sentence messages and reply's in all of my sub-forums with little meaning to the related subject matter. In other words, he was trying to 'fake' it. The one thing that he did manage to include was a link to his website, or other sites (commercial sites, loosely related to our forum) in both his posts, and in his signature. He only made about ten posts and was never heard from again. Little does he know that, with this hack installed, it was all for nothing.

After installing this hack, I check the source code of various posts made by members that are under the post thresh-hold and those that are over the thresh-hold. I only found the "nofollow" in posted urls that were under the thresh-hold.

My forum deals with ship/boat modeling. A some what limited subject to most Internet users. I and my fellow hobbyists can tell pretty quickly if a new member like the one above knows what the hell they are talking about or not. I set my new poster thresh-hold to 25 for now. So any llegitimate link that a legitimate member puts in a post will be indexed soon enough.

This hack, for me any way, takes care of those links that are in that 'gray' area. Ones that are kind of related to our site, but until the new member has "proven himself", his posted links won't be indexed.

Great hack kall, :) , John 'clicks install'

[kall]

*salutes*

Thank you John. Your story illustrates EXACTLY what the point of this hack was to achieve.

I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy now.

[wirewolf]

*salutes*

Thank you John. Your story illustrates EXACTLY what the point of this hack was to achieve.

I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy now.Your quite welcome kall. This hack is exactly what I've been looking for.

BTW, I was looking at this part of the code:
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}, and was wondering if it could be edited with some conditionals related to my post here (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost.php?p=636247&postcount=5).
I'll have to play around with it, and see if something can work.
John

PS; I forgot to add, I have V-3.0.7 and this hack works fine.

[Caveman2k2]

Very nice hack.
/me clicks install

[kall]

Your quite welcome kall. This hack is exactly what I've been looking for.

BTW, I was looking at this part of the code:
// standard URL hyperlink
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}
else
{
return "<a href=\"$rightlink\" rel=\"nofollow\" target=\"_blank\">$text</a>";
}, and was wondering if it could be edited with some conditionals related to my post here (https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost.php?p=636247&postcount=5).
I'll have to play around with it, and see if something can work.
John

PS; I forgot to add, I have V-3.0.7 and this hack works fine.
I think that would involve some way of defining a link as being internal or external...

Something that is outside my scope I am afraid. If someone else could give us some pointers? :)

[Lexserv]

Has anyone noticed an increase in their site's PageRank after installing the mod???

[Zero Tolerance]

Just a little question, but does this extra attribute added to the anchor tag show up as invalid on XHTML validators?

- Zero Tolerance

[kall]

Just a little question, but does this extra attribute added to the anchor tag show up as invalid on XHTML validators?

- Zero Tolerance
Nope, the validator doesn't choke on it at all.

[David_R]

Questions:
1. Can I only add this addon to my forums posts ? as well archive posts ?
2. Will this help anyway in SEO ?
3. I have some paid sponsorers on forums footers and archive footers, will this hack ignore those links if only added for forums posts ?
4. Can I exclude some urls from getting ignored ?

Thanks.

[kall]

Questions:
1. Can I only add this addon to my forums posts ? as well archive posts ?
2. Will this help anyway in SEO ?
3. I have some paid sponsorers on forums footers and archive footers, will this hack ignore those links if only added for forums posts ?
4. Can I exclude some urls from getting ignored ?
Thanks.

1. This will affect URLs in posts, as well as signatures...anything that goes through the bbcodeparse function as far as I can tell/guess, and will work recursively, or whatever the word is that means 'it will affect all existing posts and signatures'...or it did for me anyway.

2. If you subscribe to the theory that PR is wasted if spread out to unwanted pages, using this hack will help focus your PR to wanted pages by stopping the robots from applying it to those links that are affected. (see Answer 1.)

3. See Answer 1.

4. That should be doable, but is a little complicated for me this time of night. Would involve an extra conditional under OR $posts=50..but I dunno what. OR $rightlink=='excludedlink' is the basic psuedocode I think.

[zylstra]

kall,
Regarding "recursively", I think you're looking for retroactively. :-)
z

[clasione]

What about the member info page? Now I have people signing up for accounts only to crerate a homepage link in their member page... The no follow seems to be working only oon the posts....

[olivercookson]

What about the member info page? Now I have people signing up for accounts only to crerate a homepage link in their member page... The no follow seems to be working only oon the posts....

Does this hack work for 3.5.x?

[lisa@TrainSigna]

What if I don't have a includes/functions_bbcodeparse.php file?

[Alfa1]

I have a rel=nofollow hack installed for a long time now, but that surely doesn't stop spam bots from posting links.

[jmke]

works on vB 3.6+ too, thanks!

@Alfa1: it does help your search page ranking as your site it no longer pointing to "bad" sites.

[fireflyz]

What about the member info page? Now I have people signing up for accounts only to crerate a homepage link in their member page... The no follow seems to be working only oon the posts....

I'm looking for the same thing. How about completely removing the "hompage" link from contact info?