From what I've observed, there is some moderation on weekends, but it's much reduced from the usual weekday amount, and the spammers have learned to hit the forums hard during the US evening and overnight hours when it's clear there's none.
We've augmented our existing forum spam control system so that these types of accounts should be shutdown fairly quickly as long as enough of their posts are reported using the usual mechanism. This empowers any community member in good standing to help us handle spam.
We agree that there may also be some advantage to empowering specific trusted users with additional tools. It's something we've been considering for a while, and will continue to consider as HubPages grows.
Good to know Paul. The software should help clear up some of the crud, providing hubbers send the reports in (you listening hubbers?!). I think Darkside's idea is also a good way to help combat spammers, in the event that some will drop through the net.
OR, account of a person whose posts are reported as spam a certain number of times in a certain period should be suspended and later someone from the staff members can reinstate the account if the person wasn't spamming?
exactly or we can add another condition in the if statement and that will be (JoinedSince > 6 months) ... spammers normally don't wait that much to spam. You must have noticed that those spam accounts are not even a day old.
HubPages HQ know who they can trust. And the 'power' would only be to suspend accounts and delete posts of obvious commercial bulk spam. If a selected spam moderator ever misused the powers, they'd have the ability removed immediately.
There'd be no need for the moderator to make a song or dance about. Just clean up the mess and move on.
No badges, no bragging rights. If a person publicly states that they've got the permissions set to delete spam posts, they will have the ability removed immediately.
It will be a thankless job. But spread over as many timezones as possible so the spammers get kicked to the curb as quickly and silently as possible.
Moderating the site for personal attacks or other rule infractions would still be HubPages job.
Darkside, why are you still in favor of moderators when quite a few options have been discussed above.
HP will have to trust 8-10 people to moderate forums. Secondly it is easy to design an algorithm with a few constraints which can restrict spam while HP staff is not available. It is easy to check if the post being reported contains hyperlink(s) or same message being sent again and again etc.
It will be up to HubPages HQ whether or not they wish to read this thread and if they do if they find any of the suggestions useful. We don't need to come to a consensus and have everyone in favour of the one idea for HP HQ to adopt it.
Limiting the number of posts a person with zero hubs is allowed to make, or having a certain amount of flags on a post automatically hide it until admin can perform a review would also be options for dealing with this sort of behavior.
Not to long ago it was suggested that the forums could benefit from the type of functionality that yahoo answers and youtube uses, a thumbs down or flag option, if a certain number of hubbers mark the post as spam or in violation it would automatically be hidden from sight. If this happens frequently to a single account than it would effect that account sitewide - no visible posts
One of the hubadmin I believe Paul, said they were developing a very similar functionality, if YA and youtube can do it Im sure hubs can figure it out also.
actually the religion forums would be perfect, it seems many threads are started by someone with some sense of belief who wants to speak and converse about that topic.
Along comes a few atheists, non-believers /dissenters who just attempt to stir up trouble and disagree (even if its intelligent disagreement)
In most well moderated forums, and even in a personal conversation, such people would be ejected from the conversation for being "off topic" ...rightfully so.
If in the religion forums people want to discuss a topic in a positive manner and others are unwilling they can be "ignored" ...if they see they are frequently being blocked from posting within the thread perhaps less problems would escalate to childish insults from each side.
It applies well to those who think "thread-jacking" is funny ..ive never seen anyone with a speck of wit do it, but anyways months later that threadjacking is just useless text inside of a thread of conversation that may otherwise been easily navigated by a knowledge seeker.
Before the "ignore" option effected someones sitewide ability to post it would probably have to be in a N amount of different threads. Say user SPAM, is ignored to the point of being hidden in 5 unique threads in a 48 hour period (the weekend) ...or something similar
im muttering outside of the scope of the original thread myself now though..goodbye
I suggest that HP prevent any registered user from posting a new topic to the forums if they have no hubs. They can comment but not start new threads.Most forums that I use have this restriction in place.
We seem to be having quite a lot of forum spam lately, I've been reporting it up to 5 times a day and I'm sure there's been others reporting it too. Why anyone would come to a writing site to promote their products here...
Stupid question, but here goes. Can we get flagged by HP as a spammer if we report several spammers or spam questions/comments/etc within a short period of time. When I was going through the "answer" section,...
This morning I was surprised to find I had 11 new hub comments! Considering I'm lucky to get 1 every 3-4 months I wondered if I was fortunate enough to have a HOTD. To my disappointment, every comment was spam. (No...