Spam out of control: Q&A ineffective

[vijayninel]

Originally Posted by Lancerforhire

Well, any ranting from you past this is pointless; you just don't want that spam gone badly enough, eh?

He is not ranting and he is being sensible. Most visitors will never pay for membership of a forum. And while your mod will surely keep away spammers but it will also keep away most visitors from joining the forum even though they may be potentially great forum members.

It a very drastic measure and is like throwing the baby with the bath water. It will also work in only certain rare niche forums where people are willing to pay for membership otherwise it can do more damage than spam by deterring members from joining.

Acceptable anti-spam measures should not just be effective but also not cost anyone anything and cause the least inconvenience to members or forum staff.

[vbresults]

Originally Posted by vijayninel

He is not ranting and he is being sensible. Most visitors will never pay for membership of a forum. And while your mod will surely keep away spammers but it will also keep away most visitors from joining the forum even though they may be potentially great forum members.

It a very drastic measure and is like throwing the baby with the bath water. It will also work in only certain rare niche forums where people are willing to pay for membership otherwise it can do more damage than spam by deterring members from joining.

Acceptable anti-spam measures should not just be effective but also not cost anyone anything and cause the least inconvenience to members or forum staff.

Call it ranting, voicing discontent, or complaining. They mean the same thing and there is nothing wrong with doing so until there is a solution to the problem. Then, it is "pointless" ranting because you have found a solution, maybe not one you are fully familiar with but a solution nonetheless, yet continue complaining. Implementing a registration fee, even 49 cents, adds value to your forum: it places worth on membership and adds demand; it must be worth something if you have to pay for it, no? Also, do you have any data to back up your seemingly speculative statements about visitors being kept away?

You seem to be omitting the registration amount for some reason. If your forum is not worth paying 49 cents to register on, you have bigger issues, wouldn't you agree?

World peace should not just be effective, but also not cost anyone anything or make anyone uncomfortable and cause the least inconvenience to everyone in the world. ...What you speak of is a fantasy solution. It does not exist. Any more questions?

[kh99]

It depends on the forum of course. I might pay to join something I really need, but probably not just to discuss something given the number of free sites there are. I won't even bother registering unless I'm pretty sure there's something I want. And it's not the amount, it's providing a payment method that's the problem. So while I don't have any data to back up the idea that it would discourage potential members, I think I can safely assume that some percentage feel like I do. I know a lot of people who are a lot more paranoid about their privacy than I am.

That said, it is an excellent way to discourage spammers.

[Zachery]

Originally Posted by Panzer Max

You would think security Q & A would slow it down, but with the vB Q&A and a NoSpam! Q&A together, we still get 12~15 spammers a day who make it through the reg process. That's with StopForumSpam too.

If bots cannot solve Q&A, then there are people out there daily registering? Is that likely?

The vB Q&A goes something like this: What does a ship sail on? With the answers being waves, ocean, sea.

The NoSpam! question is more difficult:



Come on, no one can answer that question without spending 30 seconds googling, you mean to tell me there are Philippinos in a warehouse somewhere actually going to that much effort to spam our forums?

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

The fact that your second question doesn't change hurts you, there is only one answer and once you have that, you might as well not have the second question.

The first question it looks like you have 4-5 questions, all moderately general knowlege, or at the very least some basic world history/WW2 history would get you past.

[Simon Lloyd]

Originally Posted by Panzer Max

Well, that's true, but we are not really looking for another Q&A, where a precise answer is required. We already have 2 Q&A, this is just a custom profile field to see if the answer makes sense. They could answer "I dunno" or ""Not sure" and still be ok. With the two Q&A as mentioned above, I think it's enough of a hurdle for real new members to jump

Actually i meant having the regex for the profile field but i understand what you're saying about making things lengthy for users, but i guess it's a fine balance between being sensible and killing your forum either through spam or making the hurdles to high

[vbresults]

Originally Posted by kh99

It depends on the forum of course. I might pay to join something I really need, but probably not just to discuss something given the number of free sites there are. I won't even bother registering unless I'm pretty sure there's something I want. And it's not the amount, it's providing a payment method that's the problem. So while I don't have any data to back up the idea that it would discourage potential members, I think I can safely assume that some percentage feel like I do. I know a lot of people who are a lot more paranoid about their privacy than I am.

That said, it is an excellent way to discourage spammers.

You bring us to the topic of forum quality. If there isn't something you want, why would you register?

If a handful of people are paranoid, it's ok; the forum will continue working without them. Do you disagree?

And yes, it is an excellent way to prevent spam.

[Panzer Max]

Originally Posted by Lancerforhire

Thanks for sharing that. Even if it cost 49 cents [only once] for visitors to register and put money in your pocket, you still would not implement an extremely effective anti-spam measure? Well, any ranting from you past this is pointless; you just don't want that spam gone badly enough, eh?

Wow, dude, just because I politely decline the mod you're pimping doesn't mean to have to switch full-auto to jerk mode. I'm sure it's very effective against spam, probably equally effective against new legit members

Originally Posted by Zachery

The fact that your second question doesn't change hurts you, there is only one answer and once you have that, you might as well not have the second question.

The first question it looks like you have 4-5 questions, all moderately general knowlege, or at the very least some basic world history/WW2 history would get you past.

Yeah, you're right, I've added 5 similar questions for the first one, no way anyone will answer that without google The easy question is justa first hurdle to stop bots.

Originally Posted by Simon Lloyd

Actually i meant having the regex for the profile field but i understand what you're saying about making things lengthy for users, but i guess it's a fine balance between being sensible and killing your forum either through spam or making the hurdles to high

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for that :up: Yeah, I think we are at the max inconvenience point for new members. We are still getting about the same number each day (25~35) and around 5 spammers make it past SFS, the two Q&A and the required custom field. After that, the moderators have to rely on the Spam Check page.

[kh99]

Originally Posted by Lancerforhire

You bring us to the topic of forum quality. If there isn't something you want, why would you register?

If a handful of people are paranoid, it's ok; the forum will continue working without them. Do you disagree?

And yes, it is an excellent way to prevent spam.

Well, I think forums work by "critical mass", so you'd want to make it as easy as possible if you're starting. I can't believe that if you were trying to start up a forum and have some of the costs paid for by ads that you'd want to make it any more difficult than necessary to join. On the forum I help out on, we have plenty (probably too many) volunteer moderators so spam isn't really a problem - it gets removed immediately. In fact we get very few spam posts, and we take turns removing the few sig spammers we get every day.

In any case, you're obviously trying to help people fight spam and promote yourself and your mods, so more power to ya. And if you have a site that's so valuable that people pay to join, that's great. But I guess we'll just have to disagree on whether paid registration would be right for everyone.

[Simon Lloyd]

FWIW, why not have a newly registered usergroup who have no rights to change their profile and can only post in one place like an introductions forum, this way they cannot modify their sig, their post spam or not will only appear in one forum maiking it easier to weed them out, you, your admins and mods will only ever need visit one forum to find them

[Adrian Schneider]

Charging members so they can have a spam-free experience is ass-backwards, IMO. It's your responsibility as the board owner NOT the members' responsibility.

Also, there are major privacy/security concerns with people paying, depending on the industry.