This forum requires that you wait 300 seconds between sending private messages.

by Mark Andrews Banned
58 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Is anyone else receiving this message when going through their private messages here?

"This forum requires that you wait 300 seconds between sending private messages."

Only it's a mite annoying when each day you have perhaps a dozen plus messages, some of which require a very short reply which takes no more than 20 seconds to type out, send it, within a minute the next reply is ready for somebody else... only now one has to wait 5 minutes before one can send it successfully.

A dozen pm messages before could take as little as 10 minutes, now it's a minimum of an hour to get the same work / task completed.

I can understand this being implemented to cut down, stop in their tracks the pm spammers who have been rearing their ugly heads lately - but for the rest of us, who use this function responsibly, it's a major pain being kept waiting for so long before each message can be sent out.

Thoughts?


Mark Andrews
  • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
    Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

    Is anyone else receiving this message when going through their private messages here?

    "This forum requires that you wait 300 seconds between sending private messages."

    Only it's a mite annoying when each day you have perhaps a dozen plus messages, some of which require a very short reply which takes no more than 20 seconds to type out, send it, within a minute the next reply is ready for somebody else... only now one has to wait 5 minutes before one can send it successfully.

    A dozen pm messages before could take as little as 10 minutes, now it's a minimum of an hour to get the same work / task completed.

    I can understand this being implemented to cut down, stop in their tracks the pm spammers who have been rearing their ugly heads lately - but for the rest of us, who use this function responsibly, it's a major pain being kept waiting for so long before each message can be sent out.

    Thoughts?


    Mark Andrews
    today was the first time ever, i was in the middle of a pm conversation, and then
    bamm started getting that.

    I was wondering.. how the hell do i get so much PM spam, if they have to wait that long between PM's

    i have been having random PM issue for last 2 wks, so i wasn't sure
    if it was just another glitch or not
    Signature

    Selling Ain't for Sissies!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6412233].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Joseph Robinson
    Banned
    I think they put that in place to cut down on spam. It has certainly prevented me from mass sending affiliate links to crap products for the past couple of days...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6413245].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mark Andrews
      Banned
      Offenders should be given this treatment in my opinion whilst the rest of us can be allowed to continue as before at full speed.

      Just saying.


      Mark Andrews
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6413595].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
        I have to agree. I'm in the middle of responding to WSO questions and am
        sitting here twiddling my thumbs between each one.

        Oh well, what are you gonna do? If this is what Allen wants it's his forum. I
        don't question the bosses decisions. I simply live with them the best I can.

        But this one really hurts a bit. sigh.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414245].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Joseph Robinson
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

        Offenders should be given this treatment in my opinion whilst the rest of us can be allowed to continue as before at full speed.

        Just saying.


        Mark Andrews
        But what about a case of a hijacked account? How do you predict and limit who will be hacked? I think that's why they ended up going with this measure.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414390].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author WhiteShoePrincess
        Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

        Offenders should be given this treatment in my opinion whilst the rest of us can be allowed to continue as before at full speed.

        Just saying.


        Mark Andrews
        That certainly seems fair.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414691].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sumit Menon
    A few days ago, I got a SPAM PM from someone that showed on my Gmail inbox but disappeared from the PM inbox.

    Well, there should be some delay but 5 mins is way too much. Maybe, let people who have completed a certain number of posts send out PMs more quickly?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414329].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    I might have to start billing anyone that sends me a PM/question, I'm not sitting around waiting (5 min.) between PM. I noticed the 300 sec. timer yesterday while answering PM.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414424].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Mark,
      Offenders should be given this treatment in my opinion whilst the rest of us can be allowed to continue as before at full speed.
      And how do we know who the offenders are prior to their having already sent hundreds, and possibly thousands, of spams?

      Yeah. It sucks. But the recent PM spam runs have been sending people to what appears to be a phishing site, which apparently has a pretty decent response. If it's a choice between a minor delay for a few members and possible compromise of their WF, Paypal, and other accounts for a lot of members, which do you believe is the proper response?

      We can't even tie it to War Room membership, as they've started paying for that in order to send the garbage.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414622].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        Mark,And how do we know who the offenders are prior to their having already sent hundreds, and possibkly thousands, of spams?

        Yeah. It sucks. But the recent PM spam runs have been sending people to what appears to be a phishing site, which apparently has a pretty decent response. If it's a choice between a minor delay for a few members and possible compromise of their WF, Paypal, and other accounts for a lot of members, which do you believe is the proper response?

        We can't even tie it to War Room membership, as theyve started paying for that in order to send the garbage.


        Paul
        Paul, I don't know anything about programming so forgive me if this is a
        stupid idea, but couldn't we do something like what we do with sigs where
        you have to have a certain number of posts to have the PM feature function
        the way it did?

        I understand that there is still the problem of where the cutoff line is. But
        certainly somebody who has been a member as long as yourself shouldn't have
        to wait 5 minutes to send a PM.

        Again, if this is a stupid idea, please accept my apologies in advance.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414664].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Steven,

          There is no post limit on signatures that I'm aware of. And we have War Room members with 0 posts showing, but who regularly buy stuff here and use PMs to communicate with sellers and network with other members.

          Those of us who regularly participate in the discussions have a different view of the ways the forum is best used than the folks who use it strictly for transactional messages.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414727].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        Mark,And how do we know who the offenders are prior to their having already sent hundreds, and possibkly thousands, of spams?

        Yeah. It sucks. But the recent PM spam runs have been sending people to what appears to be a phishing site, which apparently has a pretty decent response. If it's a choice between a minor delay for a few members and possible compromise of their WF, Paypal, and other accounts for a lot of members, which do you believe is the proper response?

        We can't even tie it to War Room membership, as theyve started paying for that in order to send the garbage.


        Paul
        The last PM I got was spam, the member was banned as soon as I reported it, thanks Paul (or whoever banned them).
        I don't send many PM's so the 300 sec. wait doesn't bother me.
        If I've noticed anything in the couple years I've been here is you guys don't make decisions like this lightly. So I got to believe that there isn't a better solution currently available and we'll just have to deal with the minor inconvenience that the 300 sec. wait is.
        Signature

        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
        Getting old ain't for sissy's
        As you are I was, as I am you will be
        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414679].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Thom,
          If I've noticed anything in the couple years I've been here is you guys don't make decisions like this lightly.
          Nope. We don't. If this weren't the kind of threat it is, we'd just have kept dealing with things by banning and deleting.

          Problem is, this was a whole new level of PM spamming. Most likely scenario: Identity thieves, probably Eastern European. The domain was registered through a Chinese registrar, and had Russian-hosted DNS. There are clear signs of botnet involvement.

          I've gotten some of their DNS redirects removed, which will cut down on the damage from the spams already sent, and MailChimp is on the copyright issue. Those are band-aids, though. These guys take a mechanistic old school networking view of this stuff: Problem? Route around it.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6414840].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author twersk
            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

            Thom,Nope. We don't. If this weren't the kind of threat it is, we'd just have kept dealing with things by banning and deleting.

            Problem is, this was a whole new level of PM spamming. Most likely scenario: Identity thieves, probably Eastern European. The domain was registered through a Chinese registrar, and had Russian-hosted DNS. There are clear signs of botnet involvement.

            I've gotten some of their DNS redirects removed, which will cut down on the damage from the spams already sent, and MailChimp is on the copyright issue. Those are band-aids, though. These guys take a mechanistic old school networking view of this stuff: Problem? Route around it.


            Paul
            Paul...

            I'm not sure if this would be too expensive, but would it work if the Forum added a "report spam" button to the options like G-Mail has (where it says delete, forward etc.)? This way you may get more clues for stopping it, like you mentioned above... and the members who are being spammed would be helping the cause.

            Brad
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6418454].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
              Originally Posted by twersk View Post

              Paul...

              I'm not sure if this would be too expensive, but would it work if the Forum added a "report spam" button to the options like G-Mail has (where it says delete, forward etc.)? This way you may get more clues for stopping it, like you mentioned above... and the members who are being spammed would be helping the cause.

              Brad
              Brad, at the left side of any post, at the bottom under the user name, avatar and all the data, is a red triangle with an exclamation mark. Click that to report a post. With a PM, the report post icon is above the message on the right side in the black band.
              Signature

              Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6418480].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Joseph Robinson
              Banned
              Originally Posted by twersk View Post

              Paul...

              I'm not sure if this would be too expensive, but would it work if the Forum added a "report spam" button to the options like G-Mail has (where it says delete, forward etc.)? This way you may get more clues for stopping it, like you mentioned above... and the members who are being spammed would be helping the cause.

              Brad
              That already exists. There is a report button at the top right of each message...
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6418489].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                Joe,
                That already exists. There is a report button at the top right of each message...
                Top right for PMs, lower left for regular posts.


                Paul
                Signature
                .
                Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6418771].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Joseph Robinson
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                  Joe,Top right for PMs, lower left for regular posts.


                  Paul
                  Oops, I thought we were talking about PMs lol.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6421306].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author waterotter
    And how do we know who the offenders are prior to their having already sent hundreds, and possibkly thousands, of spams?
    This has got to be a first. Sorry, was going to send you a pm, but didn't want to wait. :p
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415007].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Jody,
      This has got to be a first.
      What? Me hitting an extra key? Happens dozens of times a day. I just usually spot the red underline before posting.
      Sorry, was going to send you a pm, but didn't want to wait. :p
      Consider yourself told.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415032].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jimbo13
        Paul

        This wouldn't be popular but as the WF is free to view and make WSO purchases from then the only reason to join is to post, usually to ask a question.

        That is why I first joined, I had a question and somehow ended up on this forum so had to join to ask it.

        So could you not charge say $1 as a joining fee?

        Even though you say the spammers are starting to pay for War Room Membership so it must be worthwhile for them to do this, what % actually pay?

        If it is low then while it wouldn't eliminate them all it would massively reduce your work load would it not?

        Plus it would net you $500k although obviously there would not be 100% take up.

        Dan
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415252].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Dan,
          This wouldn't be popular but as the WF is free to view and make WSO purchases from then the only reason to join is to post, usually to ask a question.
          Not so, sir!

          War Room access is, for a lot of people, well worth the cost of entry by itself. And the ability to network via PMs is also a real plus, if you know how to do it right.
          So could you not charge say $1 as a joining fee?
          I can just see the nightmares that would go along with that.

          Someone pays a buck to join, starts off on a spree of link-spamming, and gets banned within the hour.

          What do you think their next move would be?


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415280].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
            Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


            What do you think their next move would be?


            Paul
            Um...ask for a refund?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415303].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
              Steven,
              Um...ask for a refund?
              Spammers aren't usually that polite. They'd either open a dispute (assuming Paypal) or do a chargeback. The latter is more likely, as they tend to be spiteful little creatures.


              Paul
              Signature
              .
              Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415340].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
                Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

                Steven,Spammers aren't usually that polite. They'd either open a dispute (assuming Paypal) or do a chargeback. The latter is more likely, as they tend to be spiteful little creatures.


                Paul
                Yeah, and that pretty much opens up another nightmare world, not to mention
                the problems it would cause Allen with PayPal.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415374].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author jimbo13
                  Okay, didn't think of that.

                  Funny when success can start to have problems. 500,000 members is a phenomenal achievement but I guess it becomes a magnet for these people.

                  Dan
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415405].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Karen Blundell
                  I don't really have a problem with the 300 second timer, myself, but I can see how it will affect WSO sellers who are responding to PM's.

                  Once again, the majority has to be inconvenienced because of a minority group of spammers and hackers and that just pisses me off.

                  Signature
                  ---------------
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415494].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
                    Originally Posted by Karen Blundell View Post

                    I don't really have a problem with the 300 second timer, myself, but I can see how it will affect WSO sellers who are responding to PM's.

                    Once again, the majority has to be inconvenienced because of a minority group of spammers and hackers and that just pisses me off.

                    This is pretty common in our society. The many have to suffer because of the
                    stupidity of the few.

                    Welcome to planet Earth.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415598].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author MissTerraK
                      It just will take some getting used to is all.

                      I merely liken it to the times that the forum was running a tad slow. Just click what you want, then go do something else for a few moments and when you return, you're ready to go.

                      Is it a pain? It could be if you let it get to you, but it is much better than staring at the time slowly pass, waiting and getting your dander and blood pressure up.

                      We always need to adjust to the ebb and flow of things in this world all of the time, this is just another.

                      Terra
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415703].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Dan,
    Okay, didn't think of that.
    It's amazing how many perfectly reasonable-sounding ideas turn out the be potential disasters once you see what goes on behind the scenes.

    Karen,

    WSO sellers are required to have a method of contact that does not involve the forum.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415713].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimW
    AM I nuts or didn't we have that rule in place once before a few years back?
    Signature

    Read A Post.
    Subscribe to a Newsletter
    KimWinfrey.Com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415808].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Kim,

    Yeah, but that was before the War Room, I think.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415920].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
    well to honest, i don't see this stopping the spam at all.

    I just see it as you guys getting a gazillion more bogus sign ups.
    I mean the bots don't care how long it takes between posts.

    So instead of signing up a few accounts, they will sign up , hundreds or thousands at a time
    and let each bot send a msg, and wait, and send another....

    they way you had it, its easy to spot the spammer.
    now, or soon any way, if each bot is only posting one or 2 spams, but you have a 1000 doing it... i am thinking its going to be

    a) harder to spot and b) take longer to clean up.
    Signature

    Selling Ain't for Sissies!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6415985].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Ken,
    well to honest, i don't see this stopping the spam at all.
    It's not the only measure in place.

    It won't stop it. What it will do is slow down the injection of spam into the system, which means a lot fewer messages get to end users before the stuff is reported and nuked.

    Keep in mind that you can't just create a free account and start spamming via PM. You either get to 50 posts or you pay for War Room access. Neither of those is susceptible to the sort of mass attack you're describing.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416000].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


      Keep in mind that you can't just create a free account and start spamming via PM. You either get to 50 posts or you pay for War Room access. Neither of those is susceptible to the sort of mass attack you're describing.
      Yeah, that was a "doah" moment, i forgot all about that.

      Is there any way to perhaps make it so that if your engaged in a back and forth conversation
      with the same person you don't get the wait time?
      Signature

      Selling Ain't for Sissies!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416272].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mark Andrews
        Banned
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416450].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kenmichaels
          Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

          Would this not work? Say 1 year minimum for example?
          he mentioned that would not work because of phishing issues.

          looks like this forum, is between a rock and a hard place.

          I bet when it was named warrior forum, they did not realize the war was going
          to be about defending themselves against spam.
          Signature

          Selling Ain't for Sissies!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416475].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
    Paul,

    The last PM spam I received was CC'd to 5-10 other people. How about making it so a person could only PM one person at a time?

    I don't know how many people need to send to more than one person at a time, I never have, but it seems like that could slow down the spam a great deal. Assuming people would report the spammers at the same rate, the mods would be able to ban spammers with far fewer PM's being sent.
    Signature

    Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416443].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Ken,
    Is there any way to perhaps make it so that if your engaged in a back and forth conversation with the same person you don't get the wait time?
    Probably, but that's custom programming. Not part of the current feature set of vBulletin.
    I bet when it was named warrior forum, they did not realize the war was going to be about defending themselves against spam.
    Been part of the game since before Allen registered that domain, I believe. Certainly since well before the forum was on private hosting.

    Dennis,
    I don't know how many people need to send to more than one person at a time
    Very common. That would slow down the spammers, but it would make some essential features ineffective. Stuff we're very unlikely to turn off.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416573].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post


      Dennis,Very common. That would slow down the spammers, but it would make some essential features ineffective. Stuff we're very unlikely to turn off.


      Paul
      How many CC's can one send to now? Perhaps just lowering the limit one can CC from whatever it is to say, three or five, would leave the CC functionality for the majority of people while placing a "governor" on the spammers?

      Not trying to say how things should be run, mind you, just trying to help.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416682].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mark Andrews
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

        ...to say, three or five...
        Why not just one at a time with a much smaller delay? (1 minute for example).

        Most of us regulars who've been here for a while can pick out the spammers a mile off, simply report the pm as an unsolicited spammed advertisement and chances are the person doing the spamming will have no choice but to disappear pretty quickly once reported.

        Personally... I've never ever sent a message to more than 1 person at a time all the years I've been here.

        Just throwing out another idea.

        Thanks Paul for all your help btw, you know your time spent sorting all of this out for the majority of us, keeping us all safe etc - your time and effort is always appreciated.

        Warmest regards,


        Mark Andrews
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417535].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
          Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

          Why not just one at a time with a much smaller delay? (1 minute for example).
          Mark, I suggested that in post #32. Paul wrote...

          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          That would slow down the spammers, but it would make some essential features ineffective. Stuff we're very unlikely to turn off.
          Seems a lot of folks do sent CC's, so I offered the modified suggestion that you responded to, which Paul liked:

          Suggestions are always welcomed. And that one might work. Cutting the CCs to 6 and the delay to 180 seconds would reduce the max per hour from the previous 600 or so to the same 120 we have now.

          I like it. Suggestion passed along. Thank you!
          So if Allen likes it, you won't have as long of a delay, 3 minutes instead of 5, and yet the spam will be throttled at the rate it is with the new set up.
          Signature

          Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417656].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author waterotter
    The last PM spam I received was CC'd to nine others. The spammer was banned by the time I opened the pm, thus the reason for me not reporting it.


    EDIT: I was typing while Paul was replying to Dennis regarding CC function.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416594].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Dennis,
    Not trying to say how things should be run, mind you, just trying to help.
    Suggestions are always welcomed. And that one might work. Cutting the CCs to 6 and the delay to 180 seconds would reduce the max per hour from the previous 600 or so to the same 120 we have now.

    I like it. Suggestion passed along. Thank you!


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6416991].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

      Dennis,Suggestions are always welcomed. And that one might work. Cutting the CCs to 6 and the delay to 180 seconds would reduce the max per hour from the previous 600 or so to the same 120 we have now.

      I like it. Suggestion passed along. Thank you!


      Paul
      Glad to help!
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417029].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I guess that you don't need my suggestion then that we pay a nominal fee for use of PM's and then just pay Guido and his boys to go take care of the spammer - or buy a drone.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417130].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Sal,
      pay Guido and his boys to go take care of the spammer - or buy a drone.
      I doubt Guido will do field trips to the Ukraine, and we probably don't want to be sending drones into their airspace...

      Otherwise, great idea!


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417182].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    Yeah ... 300 seconds is an eternity, and it's really annoying when you're trying to communicate via PM with customers, but I'd rather the WF has our backs on things like phishing or ID theft from these types of spammers. Don't really know of any other way it could be handled.

    Edit: Just saw this

    Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

    Paul,

    The last PM spam I received was CC'd to 5-10 other people. How about making it so a person could only PM one person at a time?

    I don't know how many people need to send to more than one person at a time, I never have, but it seems like that could slow down the spam a great deal. Assuming people would report the spammers at the same rate, the mods would be able to ban spammers with far fewer PM's being sent.
    I didn't even know you could cc. I talk to one person at a time.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417317].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post


      I didn't even know you could cc. I talk to one person at a time.
      I didn't know it either until I got spammed and saw the other names it was sent to.

      By the way, did you take a wrong turn, Suzanne? Don't see you in the OT much.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417516].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

        I didn't know it either until I got spammed and saw the other names it was sent to.

        By the way, did you take a wrong turn, Suzanne? Don't see you in the OT much.
        Well, I was trying to talk to some customers and noticed that I had to wait 300 seconds and thinking ... "how am I going to live through 300 seconds for every pm?" lol. I'm a drama queen. So while debating whether or not to start a thread I saw it in Off Topic and jumped right in.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417685].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mark Andrews
          Banned
          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

          I'm a drama queen.
          Argy bargy's oinks Suzanne out of the way

          You just keep in mind young lady that's there only room for one drama queen on this forum and that's me. I've been here longer than you have - get in line. Or else.


          Mark Andrews
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6420378].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author higherluv
    Originally Posted by Mark Andrews View Post

    Is anyone else receiving this message when going through their private messages here?

    "This forum requires that you wait 300 seconds between sending private messages."

    Only it's a mite annoying when each day you have perhaps a dozen plus messages, some of which require a very short reply which takes no more than 20 seconds to type out, send it, within a minute the next reply is ready for somebody else... only now one has to wait 5 minutes before one can send it successfully.

    A dozen pm messages before could take as little as 10 minutes, now it's a minimum of an hour to get the same work / task completed.

    I can understand this being implemented to cut down, stop in their tracks the pm spammers who have been rearing their ugly heads lately - but for the rest of us, who use this function responsibly, it's a major pain being kept waiting for so long before each message can be sent out.

    Thoughts?


    Mark Andrews
    I can't even send a PM.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417944].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by higherluv View Post

      I can't even send a PM.
      That's because you only have 2 posts. You don't get the privilege until you make 10 posts, I think it is. Posting in the Off Topic forum, the WSO forum, or the test forum don't count.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6417961].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Dennis,

    It's 50 posts. Not 10. It used to be 10 or 15, I think, but we raised it because of people slamming out a handful of posts and then spamming the hell out of the PM system. It's a lot harder to sneak your way to 50 unnoticed than to 10.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6418125].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Dennis,

    Changed it. The max number of CCs is now 3, with a 2 minute delay between PMs. Max of 10 PMs per hour.

    That should affect VERY few members. Most won't ever notice, unless they're sending a lot of very short messages.


    Paul
    Signature
    .
    Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6420989].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

      Dennis,

      Changed it. The max number of CCs is now 3, with a 2 minute delay between PMs. Max of 10 PMs per hour.

      That should affect VERY few members. Most won't ever notice, unless they're sending a lot of very short messages.


      Paul
      Won't affect me at all, but it's sure going to slow down the spammers some.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6422224].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author alivestock
    its so difficult to wait for 5 min .what can we do is there any solution for it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6423015].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
      Originally Posted by alivestock View Post

      its so difficult to wait for 5 min .what can we do is there any solution for it.
      We could read the entire thread before responding. That might take up your five minutes.

      Oh, wait... you can't PM yet, anyway, so what do you care?
      Signature
      Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
      Fast & Easy Content Creation
      ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6423027].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thegoodlifer
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6423686].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author waterotter
      Originally Posted by thegoodlifer View Post

      i am a newbie with only 3 posts,
      I wanted to send a PM but got the error that you must have atleast 50 posts to your account to send an email

      I have purchased my first WSO today that advises me send a PM request to WSO product owner, to see if I could get him/her to allow me to promote his product + him giving some helpful information to my subscribers to improve customer acceptance

      How should I tackle such an obstacle, when my coaching requires me to act fast?
      The WSO seller is required to have an alternative means of contacting them other than pm. Look for an email addy, within the WSO Sales Thread, that seller should have posted.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6423741].message }}

Trending Topics