|
Have a look in spam and abuse: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4939891/Codeproject-Bot.aspx[^]
This guy (presumably a bot) was posting up to 14 "answers" all at the same time (as far as your DB was concerned - they all showed as "11 secs ago" and so forth in his answers list) and had nearly 300 "queued up" at one point.
Manual deleting can't keep up with that kind of speed. We need a faster way to shut these scum down.
I know you don't want the "Nuke" message button, but how about a change to the rules on account closing? Two protectors report a user and it dies? Any abuse, you can remove Protector status pretty quickly. That way, you have a "backup" verification, and we get rid of the annoying little ****s.
Think about it: he "answered" every new post in QA for a couple hours... which meant the OP's didn't get any real answer, which means they assume this site is full of idiots and probably don't come back...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Two protectors report a user and it dies
How about I make it one protector reports a user and he's gone?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Only reason I suggested two is that it prevents accidents.
There are a good number of active protectors, from most timezones, so finding two here at the same time isn't difficult.
And it removes the temptation to kill an account just to get a little peace and quite from a certain "my answer was better, see here" merchant... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: it removes the temptation to kill an account just to get a little peace and quite from a certain "my answer was better, see here" merchant...
If this happens then that person loses their protector status.
I could make it two votes, but the complexity it adds to the code is something I can't stomach on a Sunday evening!
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I can't stomach on a Sunday evening!
Ah! OZ time!
Fine, let's go with one and see what happens. As you say, removing status isn't difficult.
Best let people know before it goes live - at the moment we have a built in safety check that some may rely on. Oh, is it possible to add a "Are you sure?" alert to confirm? Sometimes tablets don't recognise fingers that accurately...and a one-hit kill is a bit drastic for finger trouble.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
For One-hit Kill there is a one in top of this forum [^] 
Edit : That post already deleted
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Best let people know before it goes live
Fully agree
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
we can use rate timing based on retutation on activities like ask question, answering etc..
for example:
Asking question
1. rep count < 1k: 1 question for 10 minute
2. otherwise : 1 question for minute and if posting more than that better to use captcha
using captcha will be prevent most of the bots. we can show captcha when user try to answer more than one per 30 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
CAPTCHA is a solution that annoys everybody and doesn't slow down spammers one bit. The spammers are humans, not bots.
The latest spammer was posting answers, not questions, and limiting answers limits someone's ability to help out. Sure - we can limit an answer per minute, but this doesn't help the general issue which is usually one or two spam messages per account.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris - just a suggestion: how about you re-enable the message / thread delete buttons in forums for Protectors as well? We have them, but they just say "you don't have permission" so they are currently a little pointless.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
You mean: fix that bug?
(Sorry about that. Fixed, will deploy when I get on solid ground again)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
 well, I squashed it for you, at least.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Should be fixed now. Sorry
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Then I think you need to reconsider the auto-report-the-member functionality when reporting a forum post as spam.
I like the functionality, but I feel there is a potential for a Protector inadvertently killing a legitimate member in the one-shot case.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
SoMad wrote: Then I think you need to reconsider the auto-report-the-member functionality
That was disabled ages ago.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
It still works like that for spam reports. Perhaps it was only disabled for abuse reports.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Should be able to trap and Q&A volume that is extraordinary, IE more than # responses per time period suspends the account for a period of time and alerts the protector. I presume there are only 2 channels to choke on, answer and question posting.
You could set the variables as parameters and allow the protectors to vary them.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: I presume there are only 2 channels to choke on, answer and question posting.
What about messages in articles or normal forum or comments in QA?
I think that can be a bit more difficult to catch than we think (as CM already said)
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think comments would be so critical, while read that don't show up as an answer and the OP may still get a solution if there are no registered answers.
It is never as simple in reality as it is from the outside!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
.. I today stumbled upon this account[^]. named CodeProject.
He (it)'s been updating questions in the Quick Answers section, so I just wanted to know whether CodeProject owns it or not.
Looking at his (its) speed of answering the question with almost good logic is a good news for CodeProject if its a CodeProject's bot.
You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
This opportunity comes once in a lifetime, yo - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly!
I have reported the profile as Abusive/Troller. Hopefully it will be taken down.
You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
This opportunity comes once in a lifetime, yo - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
I clicked on a few links in QA questions from whatever/whoever 'Codeproject Bot' is: one of them was a link back to the QA question itself.
This is clearly some form of abuse of CodeProject. But, why would someone take the time to do this, or to write some program that automated this kind of nonsense ?
That it's easy to bloat one's reputation-score on QA by rapid look-up on Google, and pasting in links into a "solution," without any real effort to understand the question, and whether or not the links found are really relevant to the question asked ... that's already obvious to most people.
« I am putting myself to the fullest possible use which is all, I think, that any conscious entity can ever hope to do » HAL (Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer) in "2001, A Space Odyssey"
|
|
|
|
|
Right, but that doesn't make sense. This (bot) is not even posting those Googled CodeProject answers. He is even posting MSDN links. Have a look at this answer[^].
He (it) posted a totallyyyyy un-relative link.
You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
This opportunity comes once in a lifetime, yo - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
