Due to time constraints in running and maintaining it, Plime is for sale.
Please contact avi[a]worth1000.com if you are seriously interested in buying it.
Discussion: Should We Raise The User Level For Starting Forum Threads - Voting Results Included
< 1 2 3 4 >
1
 newtech1...
4 months ago
I say it would be worth it. I'd say go for it!
quote #2
23
 heymrp
4 months ago
Getting to three is a pretty darn easy thing to do, so it is not like it is going to make it hard for newbies to get involved. Raising the level may or may not raise the spambusting quotient, but we just don't know. We must use science and logic to solve this dilemma!

We don't have any real numbers to establish a baseline for how much spam we get. I suggest starting a thread to track busted spam threads and we'll keep track from Monday to Friday. If someone DVs a spam thread they should record it in the spambuster thread. At the end count how many spam threads were actually created.

Next, change the user level requirement and repeat the test. This time track spam comments in existing threads.

If spam drops to acceptable levels within existing threads compared to amount of spam threads that were created then it is a good plan. If no real quantifiable difference can be measured then leave it alone.

This needs a scientific formula!
quote #3
25
 Ankabout
4 months ago
How many legit threads has anyone seen in the last 2 months coming from new users?

I don't remember any. So we don't hurt new users (as they can still comment). But we do hurt the spammers. I don't see the downside.

So I say Yes at level 3, same as news.
quote #4
15
 zebulor
4 months ago
Wait, what was the old level? I was under the impression that it was even higher as it is. I must have missed something.
quote #5
About Plime
Plime is an editable wiki community where users can add and edit weird and interesting links. Users earn karma when other users vote on their actions. The more karma you have, the more power you have at Plime.

14
 nikneven
4 months ago
« suckersklub :  The spam will inevitably be redirected into existing threads, where it can't really be taken care of, if that's the only place where new users can post. With the current, relatively moderate amount of forum spam, and our current inability to delete comments, I strongly advise against a userlevel threshold for creating threads.
I concur.
quote #6
1
 meimeime...
4 months ago
spam
quote #7
39
 suckersk...
4 months ago
At the risk of repeating myself: We should not raise the user level for starting forum threads.

Hoosk-Man and I just cleaned up a huge mess of forum comment spam, and it took like forever and was a real pain in the ass to edit everything. Someone made an account and posted in like 30 threads, then made another one and continued posting while we were still dealing with the first wave.
It didn't look scripted to me though, since they were trying out different link embedding formats as they went on, and it also took them about 5-10 minutes for those 30 threads, so I assume they were just copy-pasting. However, those comments cannot be deleted ever. I'd really prefer my spam in deletable threads.

If we take that opportunity away from spammers, comment spam will increase. Try to look at it this way: A deleted thread won't bother anyone, so let them make as many as they want, most of you are unlikely to ever come across one because they disappear so quickly. Think honeypot.
quote #8
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« suckersklub : At the risk of repeating myself: We should not raise the user level for starting forum threads.

Hoosk-Man and I just cleaned up a huge mess of forum comment spam, and it took like forever and was a real pain in the ass to edit everything. Someone made an account and posted in like 30 threads, then made another one and continued posting while we were still dealing with the first wave.
It didn't look scripted to me though, since they were trying out different link embedding formats as they went on, and it also took them about 5-10 minutes for those 30 threads, so I assume they were just copy-pasting. However, those comments cannot be deleted ever. I'd really prefer my spam in deletable threads.

If we take that opportunity away from spammers, comment spam will increase. Try to look at it this way: A deleted thread won't bother anyone, so let them make as many as they want, most of you are unlikely to ever come across one because they disappear so quickly. Think honeypot.
We shouldn't raise the limit because spammers are posting in existing threads? Some application of logic would help here.

I was pretty certain someone would bring those up as I was clearing them out, but I didn't think it would be you.
quote #9
39
 suckersk...
4 months ago
« pocksucket:We shouldn't raise the limit because spammers are posting in existing threads? Some application of logic would help here.

I was pretty certain someone would bring those up as I was clearing them out, but I didn't think it would be you.
OK, more simple version:

Scenario A - no limit for creating threads

=> vast majority of spammers will start thread instead of posting comments in existing threads

=> spam can be deleted with one click and will disappear forever

=> good


Scenario B - limit for creating threads

=> all spammers will post comments in existing threads

=> each comment has to be edited, will remain visible forever

=> bad

_______________________________________________________

Today's flood was an example of what will happen all the time once there's a limit for opening new threads.
quote #10
39
 hoosker
4 months ago
« pocksucket:We shouldn't raise the limit because spammers are posting in existing threads? Some application of logic would help here.

The logic being that we will get even more of it if threads are unavailable to spammers.

I say no to raising user level as well.

edit: what sk said 2 minutes before me.
quote #11
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« suckersklub :
Today's flood was an example of what will happen all the time once there's a limit for opening new threads.
No.

Today's flood was an example of what happened today.

The user limit has not changed.
quote #12
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« hoosker : The logic being that we will get even more of it if threads are unavailable to spammers.

I say no to raising user level as well.

edit: what sk said 2 minutes before me.
That's not what logic means.
quote #13
34
 lynxears
4 months ago
« pocksucket : No.

Today's flood was an example of what happened today.

The user limit has not changed.
But if it did, that would be the only venue for spammers, so it might be a portent of things to come.
quote #14
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« lynxears :if
What if the moon were made of cheese?
quote #15
34
 lynxears
4 months ago
« pocksucket : What if the moon were made of cheese?
The IF, pocky, is what we're talking about. Being facetious doesn't strengthen your point, either.

If we do this, what will happen?

I agree that we'll probably push spammers into comments. Since you don't call that logic, I call it a portent.
quote #16
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« lynxears : 
If we do this, what will happen?

That is the only think since SK stepped away from the plot that is on track here.

And you got a downvote for being patronising.
quote #17
1
 arslion2
4 months ago
i also say please go for it..my karma is still 1 since i signup..i can't do any thing here
quote #18
57
 pocksuck...
4 months ago
« arslion2 : i also say please go for it..my karma is still 1 since i signup..i can't do any thing here
You need to join in discussions. If people like what you say they'll upvote you and your level will rise.
quote #19
22
 madhatte...
4 months ago
What about instead of doing all this we simply implement the Captcha(sp?). Anyone creating a new account has to type those numbers/letters/words in. This would hopefully decrease the number of Spammers on the site. Or hell do it for creating a post and thread as well. Seems a lot simpler then having to constantly change the rules of Plime.
quote #20
39
 hoosker
4 months ago
« pocksucket : That's not what logic means.
Logic isn't defined as "Something pock agrees with"
quote #21
+ add a comment < 1 2 3 4 >

copyright Worth1000, LLC