|
Was the response "Seems to work fone on SO"?
Because this pretty much is how SO stops spammers. A newbie who has a legitimate reason to post a link/image is quickly voted up to give him the required rep to post it.
|
|
|
|
|
New members could still be allowed to post 'raw' URLs to their code/images.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: It would discourage the spammers, as they would have to make a useful contribution before they could spam the site...
No it won't. It will simply make them change their message. I could remove live links and just display the URL of the link. That would still allow them to get traffic. I could then, more sensibly, remove anything that looks like a link in a message. So "Buy my product at www.scam-o-matic.com" would become "Buy my product at [removed]".
At which point the spammers would just use "Buy my product at www .scam-o-matic.com" (or www dot scam-o-matic dot com or whatever).
Remember: it's free for them to post spam. They use actual people who I assume get paid pennies. They go on volume and even if they get a few clicks, no matter how convoluted, they win. Further, they are after search engine results. They just want their product or site appearing in search results as a branding exercise. So maybe the links aren't clickable, but a reader has heard of them and that provides a small hint of legitimacy for them next time a reader stumbles across their name or site.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Good point. But I assume the people who are posting it are paid as piecework - if so, they aren't going to want to check back to see if the link worked, or waste any time in getting the drivel posted. Just making it harder for them should mean they go dump their rubbish somewhere else...which is a very immoral way to do things now I come to think about it.
Dammit!
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Just making it harder for them should mean they go dump their rubbish somewhere else
Remember that in making it hard for spammers you can also make it hard for regular posters. I'm not going to spoil it for the 99.9%
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
When someone replies to your post, the notification alert appears after a refresh. However, if you reply to someone's reply, the notification should really be removed. Not sure how easy it is to implement this, but I figured I'd throw it out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - linking these things up is possible but a lot more work. We just wanted to get the basics done first
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like almost a whole day without a bug to report. 
|
|
|
|
|
It's quiet. Too quiet.
*tumble* *tumble*
*weed* *weed*
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe instead it's:
*smoke* *smoke*
*weed* *weed*
|
|
|
|
|
I created an alternative tip/trick and for some reason it is marked as an article.
Furthermore, it seems to be showing up as original submitted version and the latest updated version depending on how I get to the tip/trick.
It has yet to be approved, so this maybe why it is having issues.
The tip/trick can be found here.
|
|
|
|
|
As a followup, it seems the type of submission is set to "Article" when creating an altnerative tip/trick using the "Add your own alternative version" button.
|
|
|
|
|
Your alternative has the correct status now. Sorry about it
Sincerely,
Elina Blank
Life is great!!! Enjoy every moment of it! 
|
|
|
|
|
Np. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to bother, but it seems the tip/trick is now no longer linked to the original tip/trick.
As seen by this link[^]...
|
|
|
|
|
It appears linked to me, both while logged in and not. Can you please send me a screenshot of what you see, and let me know the operating system and browser you're using?
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
It is linked now. I'm not sure what happened or if it was fixed by someone.
|
|
|
|
|
So, I have been instantly downvoted (-16), twice. Each one was when I posted only a thumbsup or a winking smiley. I will demonstrate here. If you have automated some horribly sh*tty algorithm to eliminate noise or potential spam posts, you should probably at least acknowledge it to us. You owe to your members, who, maybe you forgot, are the ones that provide your site with content.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, there you go, instantly. What have you guys done? This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, and the fact that you won't address it is the worst part. Just turn it the f*** off.
|
|
|
|
|
wizardzz wrote: the fact that you won't address it is the worst part
Thanks for the giving us the benefit of the doubt[^].
It has already been turned off and, as I said, I'm cancelling our account with the anti-spam service with which we contracted.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Thanks for the giving us the benefit of the doubt[^].
I thought that was my job. 
...tough crowd. Have a beer.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm cancelling our account with the anti-spam service with which we
contracted.
Why would you need an anti-spam service at all? Any spam that gets posted gets voted down into auto-deletion within minutes of appearing on the site. I don't see how a spam service would improve on this.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
