I've noticed that quite often a new user joins hub pages, and adds a great load of spammy hubs in a very short time.
For instance, a user called "plumbingrepair" joined 37 minutes ago, and has already posted 19 spammy hubs.
The new User "plumbingrepairs12" joined 24 minutes ago, and has already published 23 hubs.
To minimise the impact of this type of activity, why not put a timeout on the publication of hubs?
Say - for new users, they can publish one hub every 4 hours or something.
More frequent posts could be made when the user has proven themselves - ie when their hub score has gone above - say 80 or 90.
This measure would make it more difficult for spammers to dump their crap here, while still allowing normal usage for "normal" hubbers - (if there is such a thing!)
Regards, Eric G.
Edit: New User "contractor121" has now started publishing spammy plumbing hubs.
Edit 2: 19 of them in 40 minutes.
I think it makes sense, at least I can't find any drawbacks to this idea from the top of my head
And advantages are obvious.
I would second the suggestion: I really think it would be greatly reduce the spam clutter
I'll suggest to restrict the number to 1 hub/day. If new or old hubber publish a hub per day, the number of hubs per year would be 365. If you examine this figure, I don't think any established hubber (best hubber) has more than this number in a year.
I am fully satisfied with you but there should only a limit for minimum time not maximum. So that the hubber can expand any amount of time when he is going to publish a new hub.
I agree with aradhana08, There should not be any limit for maximum time. A minimum limit will prevent spammers from loading junk here. No hubber old or new should be allowed to post more than one hub in a day or two and monthly limit may also be set. Hundred hubs in a year is a good number from even from hubpages' business point of view. Not only this limit will keep spammers under control, it will save lot of moderator's time in deleting irrelevant hubs. There may be some relaxation for hubbers publishing image gallery and a different limit may be set for them.
Eric, I had only one hub on celebrity since I joined here and recently I removed that too. I am asking this favor for the hubbers who are experts in publishing image hubs and publish more frequently compared to others. I don't agree with your number (one image hub a year).I am asking for relaxation but I found some logic in your statement. If image hubs are half or quarter in number to hybrid hubs, these hubs will certainly carry more weight. Since I am not publishing image gallery, I don't think I am the right person to comment.
I am asking my self how did that 'spammy' hubber manage to publish 1 hub/minute?
Good suggestion. Just like Digg won't allow new users to post much for few hrs
We generally catch this kind of behavior and ban the users within a day or two (before they've gained any benefit from the links, etc.). If you just flag one or two of the hubs, we'll find the rest. Unfortunately most any countermeasure we deploy will eventually be worked around by spammers (for instance by posting 1 hub in each account, or by posting from a different ip address each time). We spend an ungodly amount of time fighting this stuff ...
even so it would give them a bit more trouble
I think that 1 hub every 12hours would satisfy both "normal" hubbers and "image" hubbers.
I suspect the same hubs would still get posted, but they would be harder for us to identify. Hopefully spammers don't read the forums.
I know that you find them eventually, but it doesn't give a good impression of HubPages when the list of latest hubs shows 2 or 3 screens full of entries from the same spammy user.
I understand that it's easier to find them if all the entries are inserted under the same username, and I certainly appreciate the work that HubPages puts into dealing with spammers.
Paul, yeah, we got you, and you are right as usual
I say forget about it. I think Eric will not object now.
I can understand how hard it is to fight this stuff. As for checking IP and tracking everything, well I think it does not affect us hubbers and sooner or later these spammers will find their way out of Hubpages, I wanted to point out that there are still hubbers with an enormous number of hubs that I can still call spammers.
Paul Deeds lays down the Spammer Hammer!
With a hammer like that, the spammers never stand a chance.
But with all seriousness, we take spamming issues very, very seriously and it's our goal to make HubPages the least spam-friendly place to write on the web. We appreciate all of you bringing up your thoughts on the subject and it's great to see that all of you seem to be just as concerned as we are.
One of the best ways that all of us can help the cause is to flag any spammy-looking Hubs as soon as you notice them. That way they show up on our radar and we can take action on our end.
Thanks again for all of your help, Hubbers!
Don't know what you're trying to say Misha, but the link you put there is not clickable or copyable either !
I was able to copy it
Not really sure why it stays this way, probably Paul or Larry should have a better idea.
However, when I copied the image URL and plugged it into the browser window, it showed me the image in the browser, and now shows the image in the thread, too. And to copy it you just need to open your own post with the link in the edit mode
My point is that if you want to visit the website, you have to type the URL into your browser.
I think this is the first time I see something like that on Hubpages. My wild guess is the donor site for some reason blocks the image from loading, and then Hubpages code (or firefox) does not handle this correctly. After opening it in the browser image got cached and now opens from the local cache.
Again, you don't have to type, you can copy it if you open the post with the link for editing - either making quote/reply to the original post, or opening your post that quoted it. Not that the image itself is worth the effort I should say
by M. Toni2 years ago
I've been on here for a few years, and I guess I never really understood the point of these scores. They don't seem to provide any real value to the user and I can't convince myself that they add value because they...
by Dan Harmon6 years ago
Along with the Google effect lately I've seen a lot of forum posts about spam, and every time I hub hop it is obvious that there is a lot submitted here of both spam and simply substandard hubs.I would suggest that the...
by LongTimeMother3 years ago
I respect the work of many hubbers, but at the very top of my list is 'peeples'. I am a great fan of this extraordinary woman and when you go to her profile page you will see why. Peeples is now homeless. Follow this...
by Sleepylog18 months ago
For months I published no hubs and my hubber score sat around 96, in the last month I published three hubs, all of which are featured and each time I published one my hubber score dropped by two points, it's now down to...
by Mary Hyatt4 years ago
My feed is full of "shares" by a Hubber. HP recommends we do not share our own Hubs too frequently, why can't that apply to multiple sharings by the same Hubber for other Hubs. I don't think they...
by Richard Bivins7 years ago
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.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.