Banned!

[gizmoman]

On 11/6/2022 at 7:40 PM, scatteredscreens said:

perhaps post restrictions the on new accounts. I.E. you can't create new topics if your account is <1 week old.

 

On 11/6/2022 at 7:47 PM, Neil said:

there's already restrictions like that in place.

Are there? Then why do we still get spamming posts? There are some on the site now, account created 4 hours ago and multiple spam posts.

This has been going on for years and nothing has been done to stop it, and yet genuine users are stopped from posting.

[Skip997]

16 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

This has been going on for years and nothing has been done to stop it, and yet genuine users are stopped from posting.

I report every one I see.

No idea why @Neil is reluctant to ban these people.

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

I report every one I see.

No idea why @Neil is reluctant to ban these people.

spam posts are all deleted and spammers blocked ... posts are removed 

[gizmoman]

6 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

spam posts are all deleted and spammers blocked ... posts are removed 

Yes, after the fact, the point is Neil's claim that there are restrictions on new members is wrong, anyone can sign up and create a new topic straight away, the content could be offensive or even illegal and it may not be removed for hours, not an ideal situation. Most forums have measures in place to prevent new accounts being used in this way.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, gizmoman said:

Yes, after the fact, the point is Neil's claim that there are restrictions on new members is wrong, anyone can sign up and create a new topic straight away, the content could be offensive or even illegal and it may not be removed for hours, not an ideal situation. Most forums have measures in place to prevent new accounts being used in this way.

fair ... ill let neil respond on that one ... id normally have removed them sooner though . please use report button and that should help a little timing wise 

[gizmoman]

3 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

fair ... ill let neil respond on that one ... id normally have removed them sooner though . please use report button and that should help a little timing wise 

Now there's an extra mod it hopefully shouldn't be as much of an issue, still would be better to prevent them in the first place rather than having to play Whack a Mole!

[Skip997]

12 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Yes, after the fact, the point is Neil's claim that there are restrictions on new members is wrong, anyone can sign up and create a new topic straight away, the content could be offensive or even illegal and it may not be removed for hours, not an ideal situation. Most forums have measures in place to prevent new accounts being used in this way.

There are clearly no checks or restrictions on new members. It's the only forum I've used without new members having to be approved. Even facebook groups I use require new members to be approved.

[Neil]

55 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

 

Are there? Then why do we still get spamming posts? There are some on the site now, account created 4 hours ago and multiple spam posts.

This has been going on for years and nothing has been done to stop it, and yet genuine users are stopped from posting.

It's not the spammers that cause me to block ip addresses. The spammers are mostly under control. There's some good colaberative systems in place to help reduce them. 

[Neil]

8 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

There are clearly no checks or restrictions on new members. It's the only forum I've used without new members having to be approved. Even facebook groups I use require new members to be approved.

There are checks and restrictions on new users. But limited restrictions, to allow new users to engage with the topics, which is what they sign up to do. 

[marathonsteve]

I have asked too be banned but haven’t. Wots  going on ere

[Crazyfool01]

15 minutes ago, marathonsteve said:

I have asked too be banned but haven’t. Wots  going on ere

you are free to come and go as you want 

[Alvoram]

I could be speaking out of turn here, but I guess @Neilwould prefer an environment of trust. A community where you're innocent until proven guilty. 

I can see several sensible reasons for him not requiring new members to be approved by admins first. 

1) Because it will reduce the likelihood that the new member sticks around if they're unable to engage for a period of time.

2) Because people often sign up to respond to a specific thing they've read, or to ask a specific question. Having to wait for approval would be an obstacle to that. 

3) This is the big one, what difference would it make? People are hardly going to sign up and drop him a message saying 'By the way, I'm a spam bot, please approve me.' There's often no way to tell just from the sign up form whether somebody is going to be a spammer, troll or any other kind of unsavoury character. So member approval is often a pointless task. 

Requiring approval for the first 5 posts of new members can work much better than member approval. And if spam was a 'serious' problem, then that could be a good way to solve it. But it would increase the work load of @Neil and @Crazyfool01 no end. So whilst it's only a minor issue that they're generally on top of, it may not be worth the extra workload. Especially since only a week ago we were all saying how Neil had too much on his plate already and needed help. 

I see FAR less spam on here than many other forums, and it never sticks around long. I don't personally think there's a huge issue here. Just keep reporting any spam you see. 🙂 

[EamerRed]

3 hours ago, Alvoram said:

I could be speaking out of turn here, but I guess @Neilwould prefer an environment of trust. A community where you're innocent until proven guilty. 

Totally agree with all of your post by the way, except for this. Really don't think blocking wide swathes of IP bands, and capturing innocent users in the process, is 'innocent until proven guilty'. Particularly when the advice is to just try another connection. If someone really wanted to spam the site, they can do that too. Very easily.

I run corporate websites for a living, some of which have millions of hits a day, and have run forums before, including those run on Invision like this one. I appreciate Neil is definitely trying to do the right thing, but banning IP bands is one of the least optimal solutions available. And to ban users who have contributed to the site financially.... well if I was one I wouldn't be paying again.

On the plus side, introducing a moderator, even if only 1, is the best move anyone could have made. And I really hope it's eased the burden a little bit, because it's a large site to run alone.

Edited November 16, 2022 by EamerRed

[Neil]

when i get a minute i'll review the settings for new members.

[FuzzyDunlop]

I was banned for a day. Used the same device the day after & it has been fine.

I appreciate there have been a lot of issues & Neil is doing his best. I dont post on here as much as I used to, but read a lot.

It's Neil's livelihood at the end of the day & from the amount of traffic are repeat regular posters, he's done a good job. Hopefully the issues are sorted.

[tarw]

5 hours ago, EamerRed said:

. And to ban users who have contributed to the site financially.... well if I was one I wouldn't be paying again.

 

Totally agree with all of your post by the way, apart from this.  
If you are talking about gold membership then you are not contributing financially to the site; you are paying to use the site without adds.  The fee merely covers the advertising income lost.

If you are talking about some people who have moaned about having helped out with a donation to buy a mobility scooter  then I think they should take a long hard look at their motivation.  If I decide to help someone out then I don’t expect them to be beholden to me! 

[stuartbert two hats]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

when i get a minute i'll review the settings for new members.

Cheers Neil.  I've not wanted to weigh into this discussion, but since you're reviewing it, having a minimum length of time since account creation before posting and a minimum number of posts before topic creation is the kind of thing I'd welcome, rather than being able to sign up and immediately create a topic, as appears to have been the case recently.

**butts out again**

[Neil]

22 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Cheers Neil.  I've not wanted to weigh into this discussion, but since you're reviewing it, having a minimum length of time since account creation before posting and a minimum number of posts before topic creation is the kind of thing I'd welcome, rather than being able to sign up and immediately create a topic, as appears to have been the case recently.

**butts out again**

There's already settings for those am on my phone at the moment so can't access control panel to see what they're set at. 

[gazzared]

My account was banned yesterday using my O2 mobile phone but all working again today 👍

[DeanoL]

It is possible to just IP ban on the registration page? So existing users with accounts don't get caught up in that but the trolls can't make new ones once the individual accounts are banned?

Appreciate there's a good chance the two systems don't talk to each other but worth looking at if you haven't already.

[km9]

2 hours ago, tarw said:

Totally agree with all of your post by the way, apart from this.  
If you are talking about gold membership then you are not contributing financially to the site; you are paying to use the site without adds.  The fee merely covers the advertising income lost.

If you are talking about some people who have moaned about having helped out with a donation to buy a mobility scooter  then I think they should take a long hard look at their motivation.  If I decide to help someone out then I don’t expect them to be beholden to me! 

But the ads pay for the site, so by paying for gold membership you are also paying for the site 

[gfa]

16 hours ago, Skip997 said:

There are clearly no checks or restrictions on new members. It's the only forum I've used without new members having to be approved. Even facebook groups I use require new members to be approved.

Plenty of forums i've been on let members post without needing to be approved.

[Cream Soda]

3 hours ago, tarw said:

If you are talking about gold membership then you are not contributing financially to the site; you are paying to use the site without adds.  

Bit hard if you can't access the site in the first place.

[Tranquility of Solitude]

1 hour ago, Cream Soda said:

Bit hard if you can't access the site in the first place.

Aye, but you won’t see any ads either. (Sorry, I know you were making a serious point, but I couldn’t resist)

[Neil]

2 hours ago, DeanoL said:

It is possible to just IP ban on the registration page?

no, the ban is to all forums pages

 

2 hours ago, DeanoL said:

So existing users with accounts don't get caught up in that but the trolls can't make new ones once the individual accounts are banned?

Appreciate there's a good chance the two systems don't talk to each other but worth looking at if you haven't already.

nice idea thanks, but not possible.