Spammers- Help Johnny

tomjax · Post by **tomjax** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:35 am

Looks like the zappers took Monday morning off and allowed us to see just how active the spammers are.

I wish Johnny would give an update on his efforts and possibly another explanation of just why it is worth it to allow guest postings if this is the result.

I am in admiration of his open forum and allowing a lot of BS postings, but this is truly getting out of hand.

Is there a way to allow a limited number of the more savvy members who have time to help with this time consuming problem?

Many have offered suggestions, but whatever is in place is not working.

In my yahoo genealogy list, I approve requests for membership with a simple request for either a direct line or a reason for their interest before approving them.
Most of the spammers never reply and even then I will mark their postings as monitored and if they make an acceptable FIRST posting, I will approve them for unmoderated postings.

If someone could slip by this, I will ban them.

If it is possible for others to assist in this role, I am sure you can get the volunteers. I for one.
These requests will go out to your select volunteers, not the group as a whole and it should appear seamless.

Maybe others can offer help or suggestions for this problem.

Then you can turn your attention to the important things you have to do to continue the absolutely best forum in the universe.

??????????

inacpapfog · Post by **inacpapfog** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:39 am

Sounds like a good idea, tomjax!
I saw what snoredog threw back-at-um the other day. What a shoot-out!!
Way to go, s.dog!

Mikesus · Post by **Mikesus** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:37 am

Tom

There is a solution... Unfortunately because it is coming from me, it is ignored. It is a shame because my solution puts no burden on the users, and still allows guest posting.

viewtopic.php?t=12799&start=19

The best way to fight spam is to not allow them in the door. Once they are in, they will find ways around ANY effort to stop them.

We had a problem, but we dealt with it early and it isn't one anymore...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:44 am

Mikesus wrote:Tom

We had a problem, but we dealt with it early and it isn't one anymore...

------------
We dealt with it and it isn't anymore.

really? how do you define "problem?

tomjax · Post by **tomjax** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:51 am

Sorry- above was moi.

If those who come and refresh and zap would take a brief pause from their obsession, others could see the proble,m.

They cannot, though, because it is an obsession and they think it empowers them.

Why not let spam postings stay up for 1 HOUR b4 zapping them so all could see.

I am growing tired of this and maybe I am the obsessed one.

Mikesus · Post by **Mikesus** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:42 am

Sorry Tom, I was referring to the board that I volunteer for...

greyhound · Post by **greyhound** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:49 am

I think a simple way would be to require a verification (e.g., type in a sequence of letters/numbers) before accepting a new registration and also before allowing guests to post. This would a fairly simple way of eliminating most spam messages, and encourage guests to register.

Vader · Post by **Vader** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:11 am

tomjax wrote:They cannot, though, because it is an obsession and they think it empowers them.

I won't take that boorish comment personal, because first of all, I'm not allowed to zap spam.
However, I sure hope something is done about the spam, because this place will become a ghost town eventually, if it continues. Timing is critical here, people may decide to move on.

GoofyUT · Post by **GoofyUT** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:38 am

Do any of you fret about the fact that sight based verification places tough barriers to surmount for the visually impaired?

Chuck

Snoredog · Post by **Snoredog** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:46 am

if you go around continually deleteing all the spam that appears then it doesn't look like there is a spam problem now does it?

Some people have a difficult time grasping that concept.

Snoozin' Bluezzz · Post by **Snoozin' Bluezzz** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:03 pm

I have a different take on this debate.

I am no big fan of the SPAM but...

IMHO snide snipes at people who are attempting to help by deleting spam do not help.

IMHO snide snipes at what people hold to be Johnny's reluctance or ineptness to deal with the SPAM do not help.

IMHO grandiose ego assurances that "I/We" know how to deal with the SPAM do not help.

IMHO punishing us or "showing" us by not zapping spam does not help.

IMHO constant kevtching and whining about what is a free resource for all of us does not help.

Courteous, thoughtful, and kind, suggestions and some patience could go a long way here.

This is afterall Johnny's site, Johnny's resources and Johnny's to deal with as he sees fit. If he seems to ignore our suggestions he must have reasons or limitations we do not understand. If you feel compelled to leave because "you can not handle it" then I am sorry to see you go but you too must do as you see fit.

Whether you, or all of us, leave or gripe him into pulling the plug on a thing that has made a big difference in my life the result is the same - the loss of a precious resource.

I would suggest that it might be helpful if some folks tone down the rhetoric and back off a little. If Johnny wants our help he will ask. It is clear he knows we are willing by our response to "Zapping".

David

neversleeps · Post by **neversleeps** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:30 pm

In case you missed it, the following was posted by Johnny Goodman on Friday, Sept. 1, 2006 at 2:46 pm
Post subject: The Next Step In CPAPtalk.com Spam Control

johnnygoodman wrote: Greetings CPAPtalkers,

We've been getting hit hard the last few days. Some have said that it is to the point where it is taking away from the forum and I'm inclined to agree. As I went through all the reported spam and deleted it, I saw that the same few IPs were big offenders.

It has been suggested before that we bad IPs of repeat offenders. On Wednesday, we're going to be upgrading our spam guard to allow us to choose a "restrict this IP from visiting CPAPtalk.com".

I think this will improve the situation, if not, we're going to have to consider "type the characters in the image" style spam prevention.

Johnny

Johnny has indicated he will be implementing new anti-spam tactics on Wednesday, Sept. 6, 2006.

Vader · Post by **Vader** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:38 pm

Snoozin' Bluezzz wrote:I have a different take on this debate.

For the sake of brevity, I won't quote everything you said, but I do agree with 'most' of it. It's good to see a well thought out, level headed approach to this problem that is also BALANCED.
Good job, Bluezzz man!

sleepyone · Post by **sleepyone** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:52 pm

Thanks tomjax and snoredog, I appreciate and supportyour ideas aboput this.

Sleepless in St. Louis · Post by **Sleepless in St. Louis** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:22 pm

Whether you, or all of us, leave or gripe him into pulling the plug on a thing that has made a big difference in my life the result is the same - the loss of a precious resource.

I have toagree with David 100%. This board has the potential to change lives for the better, sometimes in ways you may not even be able to imagine.

For those who are griping, if you think you can do a better job running a OSA-related board, please do so and leave the rest of us to cope with this problem the best way that we can. We're all just doing the best we can.

Spammers- Help Johnny

Spammers- Help Johnny

problem

Re: Spammers- Help Johnny

Sight-based verification

Mask

Mask