Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Forum Signature Spam: Let's discuss how to handle..

<< < (12/12)

jgpaiva:
I stand with f0dder, affiliate links make no sense and significantly reduces the quality of the forum, but i think that has been discussed in other threads and has been declared as banned. What intrigues me is why IQlover still uses that sign, showing an absolute disrespect for the rules of the forum.

As for links for other sites, please don't ban those, i like to visit other member's sites, and find some of them are very interesting!

housetier:
Also while spam certainly is annoying and spammers are not really "nice people" I think it is more important to welcome new (potentially nice) members instead of chasing a few (definitely bad) spammers. I mean, certain measures against spam are ok, but we shouldn't put too much effort (time, nerves, attention) to it - the rest of the community would feel the lack of attention.

How do we detect those "affiliate sites" the easy, simple, maybe effortless way?

I think I might like the idea of minimum number of posts. Very few "bad people" will still "break" this limit, but I think DC community is able to deal with that.

In the meantime I have disabled all the sigs, so no matter what the outcome I can easily accept it :D

lanux128:
i think you were kidding but in case you werent, i'll just say clearly that no we wouldn't do that, we want people to be able to link to their websites and interests.
-mouser (September 27, 2007, 07:43 AM)
--- End quote ---

mouser, you missed the winky at the end of my sentence.. :) anyway, we can leave the signature option on by default for new users and remind them that there is an option to turn it off.. also for users who unaware of the rules (nobody reads every line) and sport ten-foot high banners display inappropriate links in their sig, the mods can always send a gentle hint..

wreckedcarzz:
I personally didn't notice any signature spam, but I am only on DC for short bursts of time. :-\

cody says ban all signatures unless he's in them. and make the minimum allowed size be 1000 px tall.
-nudone (September 12, 2007, 09:38 AM)
--- End quote ---
;D
*adds Cody to signature*

I am guilty of the large picture-in-sig thing, but I am not the only one around  ;)

Well, going against myself, i think that tall signatures with big images might become anoying. (i do love mine, though :P) But people around here tend to be polite, and i probably have the biggest sign in the forum. -jgpaiva (September 12, 2007, 06:27 AM)
--- End quote ---

OGroeger:
Finally i disabled showing the signatures of other users. The last straw was a signature with an animated image. In my opinion a signature should be an addon to a posting but never should detach the attraction from the content to the signature. The content of a posting is the important part and the signature should be small and unintrusive. It's a pity to disable the signatures because i liked many of them, especially when they contain links to interesting sites, but the current signature rules offer too much room for "abuse".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page