What is Donation Coder?

[jgpaiva]

Actually, making an edit count as a new post (thus, appearing in the "new posts" section) would effectivelly solve this problem.
F0dder: that doesn't necessarily mean the mod must approve it. The problem here is that an edit isn't noticeable.

[superboyac]

I like being able to edit at any given time.  Unless it becomes more common, can't we just leave it alone?

[J-Mac]

Hmm.  My suggestion didn't go over big at all, apparently. (Create a filter that prevents all new users from being able to post external links until after their 10th post).

I guess that no one liked that idea. 

Jim

The following is quoted from the InternetBusiness.co.uk web site:

3. Prevent new member links

An excellent plugin for vbulletin prevent new members from posting links according to a specific parameter, usually post count.

In other words, if you set the parameter on the plugin to “20 posts”, it means that new members cannot post a link until they’ve made 20 posts.

You can find the plugins here:
Forbid Users from Posting Links or Images if They Have Fewer than 15 Posts (NOTE: Only for vbulletin 3.5+)
Prevent Users With Low Post Counts Posting/PM’ing URLS (NOTE: Only for vbulletin 3.0.x)

Pros: This is an excellent way to prevent new member registrations simply to post link advertising on your forums.

Cons: It can be annoying to genuine new members linking to genuine third-party websites.

Additionally, some forum spammers add the URL without the http://, hoping they can get traffic from members pasting in the URL.

Worse still, some forum spammers will make “me too” posts in order to reach the required link count, then drop their ads. Combat this by ensuring a long delay between posts (ie, vbulletin Admin > vbulletin Options > Message Posting and Editing Options > Minimum Time Between Posts > 60) to make it least worth their while to do so.

[f0dder]

J-Mac: that would be very effective against spam, but also pretty annoying for legitimate users. After all, we do have the Announce Your Software/Service/Product section...

[J-Mac]

J-Mac: that would be very effective against spam, but also pretty annoying for legitimate users. After all, we do have the Announce Your Software/Service/Product section...

-f0dder (November 24, 2008, 02:33 PM)

Disable the filter for that and certain other specific forums. But to be honest, how many brand new users really have a need to post a link in their first 10?

Anyway it's just something I have seen done in other forums. I'm not certain that it is even available as an add-on/plug-in to SMF software.

Jim

[SirSmiley]

We used that filter over at Aqua-soft and for an immediate solution to a spamming increase it was great but, overall it generates more work for the administering/moderating the forum.

Good active members are still the best bet and I haven't seen any tech solution that doesn't increase the administrative workload.

[tomos]

my two cents:

• I've been driven away from some forums because (as a new member) I couldnt post links to explain my problem, or, (occasionally) to help explain my advice (usually a problem though :p)
  So, I'm very against blocking adding links

• I'm also fairly against limiting editing capability - maybe as f0dder says after a certain number of posts

Hows about:

making an edit count as a new post (thus, appearing in the "new posts" section) would effectivelly solve this problem.

-jgpaiva (November 24, 2008, 01:06 PM)

I think that's a good idea -
it will add to the new posts load but means spam will be spotted

[Dormouse]

One of the downsides of all edits being visible is that so many will be very minor. I'll often do an edit to change punctuation or remove a spelling mistake or rewrite to make my meaning clearer. Would be a bit of a pain to see them all in sequence I'd've thought.

[f0dder]

Yeah, I'm also against new members not being able to post links - I've often needed to do that as first-post when joining a new forum, for the same reasons tomos states. It would definitely help bring down spam, but... just how much spam do we get, and how much would it annoy legitimate users?

Limiting the edit capability to, say, X hours with under 10 posts would probably work out pretty well. Wouldn't be much trouble for regular users, and spammers are very unlikely to do more than a few posts at most.

As for edits showing up on "unread threads", I don't think it would be much of a problem, unless every edit would show up as an entry. Imho it'd be enough for a thread to be flagged as updated (only showing up in the list once), but probably with a per-thread "list of changes"?

This has to be done right - we don't want to flood the board with update thingies, and any new "tools" have to be easy to use

[jgpaiva]

I agree with f0dder, showing the thread as "updated" is enough, and would help us catch this kind of stuff. (and also other stuff, like the recent problem with a user editing out his posts).
Also, it'd make sense to be an option, off by default.

Still, this is so rare, that it might not be worth the effort. Not sure as I don't know the smf code.

[J-Mac]

Yeah, I'm also against new members not being able to post links - I've often needed to do that as first-post when joining a new forum, for the same reasons tomos states. It would definitely help bring down spam, but... just how much spam do we get, and how much would it annoy legitimate users?

Limiting the edit capability to, say, X hours with under 10 posts would probably work out pretty well. Wouldn't be much trouble for regular users, and spammers are very unlikely to do more than a few posts at most.

As for edits showing up on "unread threads", I don't think it would be much of a problem, unless every edit would show up as an entry. Imho it'd be enough for a thread to be flagged as updated (only showing up in the list once), but probably with a per-thread "list of changes"?

This has to be done right - we don't want to flood the board with update thingies, and any new "tools" have to be easy to use

-f0dder (November 24, 2008, 04:04 PM)

Do you know of a plug-in that can do this?

A lot of good ideas, but if there is no effective way to implement them, how would you proceed?

There are certain filters built in to most forum software along with plug-ins and add-ons; I think that suggestions need to at least be doable. As an example, I am not particularly fond of limiting links but I do know that it is available for most forums. Editing can be limited in some forums, but most are just "On" or "Off"; you can allow or disallow editing. I don’t know SMF forum software; never had the opportunity to work with it.

Anyone here (other than mouser of course!) use SMF before?

Thanks!

Jim

[alivingspirit]

Yeah, I'm also against new members not being able to post links - I've often needed to do that as first-post when joining a new forum, for the same reasons tomos states. It would definitely help bring down spam, but... just how much spam do we get, and how much would it annoy legitimate users?

Limiting the edit capability to, say, X hours with under 10 posts would probably work out pretty well. Wouldn't be much trouble for regular users, and spammers are very unlikely to do more than a few posts at most.

As for edits showing up on "unread threads", I don't think it would be much of a problem, unless every edit would show up as an entry. Imho it'd be enough for a thread to be flagged as updated (only showing up in the list once), but probably with a per-thread "list of changes"?

This has to be done right - we don't want to flood the board with update thingies, and any new "tools" have to be easy to use

-f0dder (November 24, 2008, 04:04 PM)

Said Perfectly! 
edit: But I must add that these kind of changes, if implemented correctly is not relay a tool, just a small enhancement.
While it is true that seeing little changes like spelling mistakes could be a little annoying when you click to see the changes only to find out that all the user did was add a smiley, that kind of annoyance is easily fixable. Just add a little number on the side of the changes tab telling people how many characters were changed or added.

[myarmor]

@mouser, I would prefer the disable edit after some time.. But, not after 24 hours, instead something like 30 minutes.

It is a bit longer than the usual forums but not enough to gather too many posts following it before it is locked, thereby for the most part preventing the original from being too different from what the followers might have responded to.

24 hours is way too much.. At the same time, mod posting (all posts goes through mods) is a bad idea too, for the reasons mentioned earlier.

[manimatters]

Disabling post-edit after <some timespan> seems like a reasonable compromise. And it could perhaps be re-enabled for people with more than X posts...

-f0dder (November 24, 2008, 12:31 PM)

This is what seems to me to be the best bet.