13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Aiding and abetting spambags: Just say NO!

by Paul Myers
9 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
Come on, people. Please don't restart an old thread that's been dug up by spammers.

If you see something that hasn't been commented on in ages, and all of a sudden cindiliuxzhoo jumps in with a 2-line comment, don't reply to it. Report it.


Paul
  • Profile picture of the author twister85
    Its funny how most of the threads these people restart are actually interesting to get involved in spamming the smart way!

    But that only means we're supporting the black jacks. Can't we have a automated system which locks down a thread inactive for 1-2 years? Ready to read but write? Off course some fair people will not be able to comment even if they want to discuss on the old thread. but this will save most of the mod's and member's time reporting and moderating it.

    Because members can always start a new thread if its important and most of the people do. without even searching for a thread related to their question

    Shivam
    Signature
    Animated Explainer videos! Don't pay if you don't like it!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9062620].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
    Shivam,

    I believe they have criteria in whatever scumware they use that looks for threads with some specific (and relatively high) number of posts, or possibly even a page rank.

    I'm not sure what would be entailed in locking down threads over a certain age, but I'd be in favor of it.


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

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9062630].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    The only problem, Paul, is that if the thread is old enough and we don't remember it, a lot of us will post before we realize it's a long dead thread.

    But, we try.
    Signature

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

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9063080].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
      If it's a newly appeared thread, I look at the view count before opening. A number in the upper three figures or above usually indicates an old thread that's been revived. Failing that, noticing posts in the thread by long-disappeared members can also raise a flag.

      One more vote here for the suggestion to lock threads older than a set period.


      Frank
      Signature


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9063408].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      The only problem, Paul, is that if the thread is old enough and we don't remember it, a lot of us will post before we realize it's a long dead thread.

      But, we try.
      What she said! Although I am getting better, this still gets me on occasion.

      (I would have replied earlier but I was getting Sal another sandwich.) :rolleyes:

      Joe Mobley
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9065554].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
    That raises a couple of questions:

    What if a thread was revived because there has been a new development on that subject. Should we add this new information onto the old thread, or start a new one?

    Which is better from a mod's perspective?
    Signature
    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
    So that blind people can hate them as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9066108].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
      Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

      That raises a couple of questions:

      What if a thread was revived because there has been a new development on that subject. Should we add this new information onto the old thread, or start a new one?

      Which is better from a mod's perspective?
      Paul already answered that question in his original post...

      Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

      Come on, people. Please don't restart an old thread that's been dug up by spammers.

      If you see something that hasn't been commented on in ages, and all of a sudden cindiliuxzhoo jumps in with a 2-line comment, don't reply to it. Report it.

      Paul
      So, if you or anyone adds value to an old thread such as a new development on that subject then it is not the same as "restarting an old thread that's been dug up by spammers, has not been commented on in ages, and all of a sudden cindiliuxzhoo jumps in with a 2-line comment."

      In short, Paul has explained how-to tell the difference between a legitimate reply vs. a ill-legitimate reply to an "old thread that's been dug up by spammers."

      I've recently done it myself even though I know better
      Signature
      In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9066211].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Whatever,
      What if a thread was revived because there has been a new development on that subject. Should we add this new information onto the old thread, or start a new one?
      I'd start a new thread, beginning with "I looked through the thread on [subject] here, and there's some good information.

      "That said, given the changes in the process due to X, Y, and Z, what do you think we should do to adjust our strategies to get the same/better results?"

      The question shouldn't be what's better from the mods' perspective. It should be, "What will get the most useful answers while respecting the other members' time?"


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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9066405].message }}

Trending Topics