What gives?
- Thread starter Terry
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 13,851
- Reaction score
- 3,949
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
We have been inundated with bogus accounts signing up to spam the forum for more than a year. There's a filter that catches about 99% of them. Sometimes we have to rely on our own eyes to spot patterns of behaviour that the software doesn't.
Apologies if the software or one of the mods or admins thought you were a false positive. (I just mentioned this risk to a moderstor this morning, as it happens!) As a legit user you're more than welcome to stay and hang out with us.
Apologies if the software or one of the mods or admins thought you were a false positive. (I just mentioned this risk to a moderstor this morning, as it happens!) As a legit user you're more than welcome to stay and hang out with us.
Ditto to what Ransom said. I zapped some spam this morning and found accounts with similar patterns in account names and origins. My apologies for being so zealous; I'll temper my suspicious nature going forward.
Understood.
I registered under the name "Stopgap" yesterday and discovered this morning that someone on staff banned it for no reason given other than "spam." Today, I registered again under the name "Dunamis," and I think fewer than 10 minutes went by before that was also banned for the same reason.
It makes sense that some caution needs to be exercised when a website is targeted with bot accounts. That being said, it also makes sense that any website that is trying to attract new users in the hopes that new content can be created and hopefully generate revenue through AdSense and whatnot finds the right balance.
Would it be possible to identify and list here the names of the moderators who were responsible for jumping the gun? At the very least, I think some disciplinary action ought to be in order.
I registered under the name "Stopgap" yesterday and discovered this morning that someone on staff banned it for no reason given other than "spam." Today, I registered again under the name "Dunamis," and I think fewer than 10 minutes went by before that was also banned for the same reason.
It makes sense that some caution needs to be exercised when a website is targeted with bot accounts. That being said, it also makes sense that any website that is trying to attract new users in the hopes that new content can be created and hopefully generate revenue through AdSense and whatnot finds the right balance.
Would it be possible to identify and list here the names of the moderators who were responsible for jumping the gun? At the very least, I think some disciplinary action ought to be in order.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 13,851
- Reaction score
- 3,949
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
I may have to sit back and contemplate exactly how to respond to someone whose third post on the forum is calling for the moderators' heads because he was mildly inconvenienced.
It was an honest mistake. Let it go and move on. If you still want the "Stopgap" ID, I can undelete it and merge your current one with it.
It was an honest mistake. Let it go and move on. If you still want the "Stopgap" ID, I can undelete it and merge your current one with it.
I'm not "calling for heads," nor do I feel "inconvenienced." I'm actually trying to do you a favor. If it's your goal to see this website succeed, then there should be some degree of accountability.
Think of it this way... If you were the owner of a restaurant, would you be okay with any of your employees immediately yelling at the customers, "Get out!" as soon as they walk through the door? By no means should that be tolerated. It's the same for any entity that exists to generate a stream of income, as big or small as it may be.
But hey, I'm just the new guy around here, so no need to listen to what I have to say.
Think of it this way... If you were the owner of a restaurant, would you be okay with any of your employees immediately yelling at the customers, "Get out!" as soon as they walk through the door? By no means should that be tolerated. It's the same for any entity that exists to generate a stream of income, as big or small as it may be.
But hey, I'm just the new guy around here, so no need to listen to what I have to say.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 13,851
- Reaction score
- 3,949
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Pretty much what I'd say to a first-time customer who came into my restaurant and started telling me how to manage my human resources.
Okay. You've been heard loud and clear.
I would like to point out that you're entirely disregarding the fact that your first-time customer gets kicked out for no reason, before they have a chance to order a meal, before they have a chance to say anything to anybody, thus causing your establishment to lose out on business. So then maybe, just maybe, not only are you hurting yourself, but the customer has a justified complaint as well. I certainly hope you're not planning on pursuing any entrepreneurial endeavors any time soon, because I would have a hard time believing you'd make it very far with that attitude.
But by all means, you do you.
Speaking as owner of this forum, no one is getting disciplined.
Our moderators are doing well! Don't look spammy with a name like "Stopgap" and silly email.
This is a forum filled with current and former fundamentalists... looks like you have some fundy PTSD
Last edited:
So in other words, you're saying that you're okay with lying? Because that's exactly what it was—a lie. You can see for yourself that those accounts were banned for spam when one actually has to post spam-like content first for it to be considered as such.
How is "Stopgap" spammy? I've been registered on other boards with that name without any issues. And what about "Dunamis", which is a real biblical Greek word? Where in the TOS does it place limitations on usernames and email addresses? Why do I have to go by a first-name basis in order to get through the spam filter and trigger-happy moderators? Just why?
I can start throwing around some four-letter acronyms too, if that's a game you like playing. The only point I'm making is that I shouldn't have to jump through hoops to get through the registration process, and at the very least, I should have the names of the moderators who did me this disservice so I can be careful that my posts don't look too "spammy" around them in the future.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 10,955
- Reaction score
- 2,529
- Points
- 113
We who have been privileged to post in the hallowed halls of the FFF know and understand that it is an honor and a privilege (not a right) to be accepted into the “666 Family”.
If you don’t change your attitude, I will be forced vote against your permanent membership at the next Executive Committee Meeting.
I assume that this "666 Family" is some sort of inside joke; otherwise it would seem pretty demonic.
Do you mean like how it happened twice before already, before I had the opportunity to even post anything? And I'm the one that needs an attitude change? But okay, go right ahead and do what you've got to do, honey.
I think the moderators should be forced to listen to the entire library of Jack Schapp sermons.
Terry... were you or are you currently a fundamentalist?
If you're asking if I've ever been involved in the IFB (Independent Fundamentalist Baptist) movement, then yes, I have. I'm not any longer.
From one brother to another, you need to work at removing some of that baggage.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2019
- Messages
- 1,582
- Reaction score
- 700
- Points
- 113
Just what we needed, yet another disgruntled grouch on FFF. Welcome, Terry, and join the crowd.
Were they too harsh for you?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 13,851
- Reaction score
- 3,949
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Or post from IP addresses known to spam blacklists as spam hosts.
- Or use a blacklisted email address.
- Or use an email address munged with dummy characters to bypass one-user-one-address restrictions, e.g. s.p.am.m.y.l.o.se.r@gmail.com.
- Or fill out certain fields in the registration form improperly, with random characters, generic words like "yes," and so forth.
- Or fill out the registration in Cyrillic.
- Or put questionable Web sites (e.g. adult content) into the "Website" field.
- Or give yourself a username that basically shouts that you're here to post unsolicited advertising: numbers, nonsense names, a business name.
- Or put ad content in the "About Me" part of your registration.
In fact one of the last just tried registering as I was posting this: "tricoreelectricalsolution," with a corresponding email address registered at GMail and a commercial Web page, from "Austrilia" [sic], blatantly advertising electrician services in its "About Me" field. Clear, unmistakable, absolutely typical spam account. Buh-bye.
The forum has anti-spam software that recognizes many of the above patterns as "spammy," using such resources as email and IP blacklists available on the Web, and stops probably 99% of spam accounts before they can successfully register. Most of the spam we get here originates in Russia or eastern Europe and is registered automatically via some kind of script. The pattern is predictable and repetitious to the point that I only need to look at one field in the registration to recognize those users as fake.
Human eyes can see patterns too--we're wired for it--and we catch nearly all the rest manually.
There are 25,000+ users in our database. Somewhere between 7-800 of them are legitimately registered users. The rest are disabled spam accounts.
So, yes, we can tell before anyone posts a word. And since you are the first legit user to get caught by mistake, we can do so with literally better than 99.9999% accuracy. You managed to fool us. Congratulations.
And then what?
Last edited:
What you're calling "fundamentalist baggage," I'm calling a valid concern with the moderation practices around here. From one brother to another, we can respectfully agree to disagree about how we choose to define it.
I would still like to formally request the names of those moderators.
- Status