If you post a totally rad post in a spam thead which then gets deleted, do you lose all those sweet likes? Cos if so, boo.
I've always figured spam threads were a no-man's land full of barbed wire and tumbleweeds and imminent nuclear strikes. If you can drop a few bombs in there before the big one, great, but building a farm in there and then complaining that your harvest was poor is kind of silly.
A sick burn is a sick burn and deserves all of the accolades that the burner's peers have chosen to pour upon said burner!
I've burned my fair of sicks in spam threads. You'll always have the memories to tell your grandchildren. Maybe keep a scrapbook.
Maybe Lum can merge spam posts into a catch-all spam thread in the Drama llama forum, nuking the spam posts themselves and leaving all the witty banter. Although that seems like an awful lot of work just to support Bahimiron's likefarming.
Here's how it should work. The server should keep a record of sick burns attached to spam. Then once in a while the server should *self spam* by randomly jumbling the sick burns together to create a sick Frankenstein's Burnmonster. These posts should then be added into the mix creating some kind of sick burn fractal.
I for one support splitting off all burns of "ill" or greater quality on the Hawk Baditude Scale (We're using SI Hawks, of course. Imperial conversions are awful - can you run a conversion from Hawks to Fonzies without a calculator?) into a master Burn Archive. Freed of their spammy casings, these burns will not be eligible for further likes, but existing likes will be preserved.
With the recent appearance of porn spam (I guess we've been deemed sufficiently valuable to warrant human intervention to get around the captcha), would it be a good idea to restrict the ability to post images until a minimum post count, perhaps?
I missed it, but I hope the porn spam was in the #1reasonwhy thread, so it would at least be on topic.
On another forum I go to, mods have to manually approve new accounts after they've posted a few times. That means that you can't spam to get your post count up in order to automatically become a full member with pic posting privileges and whatnot. That would mean more work for the admin though...
Yes, the porn thread this morning was unacceptable. FYI my work environment - my producer sits right behind me and can see my 28" monitor quite easily. My producer, as it happens, is also female. So, as an experiment, I've set up the following: - Users are in the New User group when they create an account. - Users in the New User group cannot: ** create new threads (they can reply to existing ones) ** upload file attachments (they can still link to offsite images, and I will most likely have to hack in a prohibition there) ** create new social groups - Users are automatically promoted out of New User to regular User when both the following are true: ** User makes at least 4 replies to threads ** Account is a week old If you think this is too draconian let me know? (I was tempted to make promotion contingent on getting at least one like....)
I think this is actually a good idea. It isn't *that* hard to get a like, you can easily get one in the animated gif or funny images threads, and that's something a spammer might not easily figure out.
I think it's a good idea too. If you're a human and are honestly trying to participate, I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to convince another forum member to give you a sympathy like or something.
Eh it feels like you really have to go out of your way these days to not get a like when you make a somewhat coherent post. Or you post in the LP forum. However the current scheme does not seem to do anything to prevent spammers. I mean they already reply to threads and having them lie dormant does not seem to be a big hurdle. On the negative side new users who come here with the intent of posting their awesome LP might will get discouraged if they have to wait a week.
Future spambots will now post "ALL MY FEEEEEELZ" in the LP subforum to be promoted. (No gifs, unfortunately, thanks to Lum's Draconian Policy.)
How did this not get a like until now? Sometimes I just don't understand how this whole "like" thing works.
Nah, it's not a problem, I was just surprised. There should've been an image. That's how you get the likes, Hanacker! Pretty pictures from Google Images! Watch and learn! *waits for the likes to roll in*
The thing I don't understand is what kind of person falls victim to spam? I get that from a cost benefit perspective one or two suckers probably makes it worthwhile to spam, but what kind of person clicks on those links and actually buys something?
