StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Manual approval didn't keep all trolls out, but it certainly made eliminating any that got through quick and easy. With the old system, only people with verifiably paid for ISP accounts or other similar got through, because despite what some people here may think, checking those was easy. Foreign freemail or not. That meant that anyone who did sign up was traceable in real life if any investigation was ever necessary, which would prevent anyone but the stupidest fuckers from trying to pull shit like the /b/tards did.

Now, not to put too fine a point on it, but Bounty, just shut the fuck up. For a large part you have no idea what you're talking about and you look like a hyperventilating moron and therefore I'm going to treat you like one if you keep this up.

If someone has actual technical knowledge on how to implement something on the board to make things easier, by all means share it. If someone has other workable ideas that are something different than "Go back to the old system", by all means share them. But as new regs are currently disabled, running around like a chicken with its head cut off is not going to do anything but irritate people. Aside from that, we have yet to hear from the admins and from Mike on how we're going to proceed. Patience.

It's probably worth mentioning that disabling new topic creation for new members wouldn't have actually done anything in this invasion attempt, since most of the spammers were posting replies to existing threads, and NOT starting new threads.

I'm all for the idea of locking off certain features to new members, however I would prefer it if it was done based on registration date, instead of basing it off of postcount. There are many people on this board, myself included, who don't post that often. As others have said, I fear that basing it off of postcount would just encourage +1 posting, instead of meaningful discourse. Basing restrictions on registration dates would do just encourage lurking

I would suggest adding a short, automated waiting period after registration before someone is allowed to post. As well as using the flood control to force newbies to wait 1 hour before posting again.

Both of those would have a short wait, controlling and minimizing the damage that another invasion like this would do, in a way that is transparent to the users and with no additional workload for the admins like the old system had.

Can't we just keep the automated system for weeding out the obvious bots and spammers, and use the old tried-and-true manual approval for those that get through? Going by the member list, only a few registrations per day seem to pass the automated system.

Dooey Jo wrote:Can't we just keep the automated system for weeding out the obvious bots and spammers, and use the old tried-and-true manual approval for those that get through? Going by the member list, only a few registrations per day seem to pass the automated system.

Seems like the best idea so far.


Having gotten the following PM from Bounty, I'll address it in public because it warrants that.

Bounty wrote:

Now, not to put too fine a point on it, but Bounty, just shut the fuck up. For a large part you have no idea what you're talking about and you look like a hyperventilating moron and therefore I'm going to treat you like one if you keep this up.

I'm honestly confused here. As far as I can see I'm agreeing with you, and I don't see where I have been "hyperventilating", at least not any more than the half-dozen people throwing up half-baked 'solutions'.

I'll stay out of the thread, just... why the vitriol

Seemed to me that you were just belaboring the same point after your concerns had been addressed. However, I apologize. I probably conflated the posts of some others with yours in my mind when composing that reply, because it looks like I did not address one of the salient points.

The automated system was perfectly capable of keeping out commercial spambots. It was never intended to stop a human who intended to register and it is obviously not capable of distinguishing between a troll and an honest poster.

I suppose the thing is, SDN is hardly the only board across the entire internet to have open registrations, right? And how often are these "troll attacks" going around, causing huge, crippling problems to these other boards? For that matter, how often do you really think this sort of thing will be a problem here, so much that we absolutely need a pay-to-register and/or ISP/university/work/etc. e-mails only?

I'm going to agree with Thanas that waiting and seeing what happens is probably the best course. I mean the current method seems to have worked fine: report buttons get used, mods get on the case, ban those trolling, and heck even disabling registration for a few days may not be such a bad SOP (after all, /b/tards aren't patient right? They'll get bored and go away, right?) and then go back to normal. That seems like it'd work in case we get the occasional 'invasion' like this, without having to add in new restrictions (or even go back to the old restrictions) because people get all worked up over these things.

Now if there happen to be child porn spamming invasions every other week for whatever reason, then I could see getting more restrictive. But right now we don't even know if it is that big of a problem which requires adding in more restrictions yet.

That's my two cents, at least.

How long did it take for someone to go from registering to posting? I've seen several people mention the lack of patience of /b/tards and wondered if they'd have bothered if they had to wait two or three days to enter. Stupid board invasions seem like something an idiot sees a thread on and immediately does, but given a waiting period (even a short one) they'd probably forget or lose interest.

Just throwing an idea out that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet.

How about until someone is approved they can only post in an introduction type forum, where they'll tell a bit about themselves, answer questions from board users, be given the usual advice (read rules twice, read parting shots once, figure out what NOT to do), and finally a vote open to all users. After say, a week, the winning result of the poll (Pass/Fail, obviously) takes effect.

This won't necessarily stop raids altogether, but it would contain them into this area, and for serious new users it gives us a chance to make sure they know policy and learn a bit about the.

That's akin to razing the whole city block to the ground when just one house is on fire. Being confined to a sandbox like that would remove any incentive from anyone to register here at all.

Edi wrote:

Dooey Jo wrote:Can't we just keep the automated system for weeding out the obvious bots and spammers, and use the old tried-and-true manual approval for those that get through? Going by the member list, only a few registrations per day seem to pass the automated system.

Seems like the best idea so far.

I concur, its less work than a non-automated system but more secure than a fully automated one.

Mayabird wrote:How long did it take for someone to go from registering to posting? I've seen several people mention the lack of patience of /b/tards and wondered if they'd have bothered if they had to wait two or three days to enter. Stupid board invasions seem like something an idiot sees a thread on and immediately does, but given a waiting period (even a short one) they'd probably forget or lose interest.

Just throwing an idea out that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet.

I really like this idea and I would support it (in fact, I suggested it earlier in the thread).

Also, I would support the idea of a per-day quota of registrations. Something like no more that 5 registrations per day. It would not be noticable for a normal day, but if a single forum decided to mass-register accounts, an account quote would severely limit the damage caused.

One thing to keep in mind, is the solution should hopefully involve a minimal amount of effort on the part of the admins - either that or someone volunteering to create the modifications needed to make things work.

Instant Sunrise wrote:

Mayabird wrote:How long did it take for someone to go from registering to posting? I've seen several people mention the lack of patience of /b/tards and wondered if they'd have bothered if they had to wait two or three days to enter. Stupid board invasions seem like something an idiot sees a thread on and immediately does, but given a waiting period (even a short one) they'd probably forget or lose interest.

Just throwing an idea out that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet.

I really like this idea and I would support it (in fact, I suggested it earlier in the thread).

Also, I would support the idea of a per-day quota of registrations. Something like no more that 5 registrations per day. It would not be noticable for a normal day, but if a single forum decided to mass-register accounts, an account quote would severely limit the damage caused.

Oops, sorry I didn't see it.

How many people/bots/whatever normally try to register per day? If the threshold is set too low, the backups could get really long, especially at times when registration tends to be higher, like school breaks. Making someone wait for more than a week would be excessive.

Back in the days of the old software, it was around 20 bots per day, so you can immediately scrap that plan. There's no need for extraneous complexity.

Okay - I can't be bothered to read this whole thread at the moment, so I am going to drop my idea real quick - Why not have a group of volunteers - regular users - long-time, trusted dudes to do an initial review of all board regiastrations - maybe....10 of us, that way we get lots of coverage (That is, little chance of all 10 of them being offline for days and the registrations backing up. then, these 10 dudes, (or dudettes) will act as a sort of initial filter, maybe making contact with registrants, or whatever (work out the details later) and they will then pass along to the mods only the ones which pass muster. That way, the worload on the approving mods would be much, much lighter and all the work of filtering BS is spread among more people.

Oversight on these 10 dudes and dudettes would probably be not-very-good, so again, these league of 10 (lol?) would need to be trustworthy indeed.


There. Now I go back to workzorz.

Chardok wrote:Okay - I can't be bothered to read this whole thread at the moment, so I am going to drop my idea real quick - Why not have a group of volunteers - regular users - long-time, trusted dudes to do an initial review of all board regiastrations - maybe....10 of us, that way we get lots of coverage (That is, little chance of all 10 of them being offline for days and the registrations backing up. then, these 10 dudes, (or dudettes) will act as a sort of initial filter, maybe making contact with registrants, or whatever (work out the details later) and they will then pass along to the mods only the ones which pass muster. That way, the worload on the approving mods would be much, much lighter and all the work of filtering BS is spread among more people.

Oversight on these 10 dudes and dudettes would probably be not-very-good, so again, these league of 10 (lol?) would need to be trustworthy indeed.


There. Now I go back to workzorz.

Rather than appointing anyone, couldn't we just implement something similar to Yahoogroups? In other words, rather than some complex math problem or appointing a lot of people we include a small text box in the registration fields asking users to write a short paragraph to explain why they want to register. That will keep out the obvious spam bots and make sure users are capable of saying more than just stupid memes or text speak. I'm not sure how practical this would be to implement but to me it seems simpler than going through the trouble of appointing a bunch of people or trying to cook up tests.

General Zod wrote: Rather than appointing anyone, couldn't we just implement something similar to Yahoogroups? In other words, rather than some complex math problem or appointing a lot of people we include a small text box in the registration fields asking users to write a short paragraph to explain why they want to register. That will keep out the obvious spam bots and make sure users are capable of saying more than just stupid memes or text speak. I'm not sure how practical this would be to implement but to me it seems simpler than going through the trouble of appointing a bunch of people or trying to cook up tests.

I posted a link to an existing mod for the board that would do just that a few pages ago. Since its been done on this software, it shouldn't be too hard. Though what do the admins think of this thread?

darkjedi521 wrote: I posted a link to an existing mod for the board that would do just that a few pages ago. Since its been done on this software, it shouldn't be too hard.

I actually missed that, though I've largely been ignoring this thread because of all the hysterics.

General Zod wrote:I actually missed that, though I've largely been ignoring this thread because of all the hysterics.

If that's your threshhold, why even bother to show up at all?

Coyote wrote:

General Zod wrote:I actually missed that, though I've largely been ignoring this thread because of all the hysterics.

If that's your threshhold, why even bother to show up at all?

I wind up ignoring a lot of threads because of hysterics, but I figure people have mostly calmed down by now.

General Zod wrote: Rather than appointing anyone, couldn't we just implement something similar to Yahoogroups? In other words, rather than some complex math problem or appointing a lot of people we include a small text box in the registration fields asking users to write a short paragraph to explain why they want to register. That will keep out the obvious spam bots and make sure users are capable of saying more than just stupid memes or text speak. I'm not sure how practical this would be to implement but to me it seems simpler than going through the trouble of appointing a bunch of people or trying to cook up tests.

Everyone keeps suggesting this, but there's a flaw in that it might keep out spam bots but trolls can still get through rather easily, writing things like "Here for serious debate and discussion of Star Wars," then troll.

Oscar Wilde wrote: Everyone keeps suggesting this, but there's a flaw in that it might keep out spam bots but trolls can still get through rather easily, writing things like "Here for serious debate and discussion of Star Wars," then troll.

Unless you happen to know a way of developing psychic powers to know who's going to troll, there's really not a whole lot of other options without expecting long resumes and applications complete with references. And who wants to deal with anything more complicated than a simple question or two for a messageboard?

For systems where users are crippled at lower post counts, the administration could always artificially pump up the post count of posters who are obviously not retarded if they ask for it after proving themselves.

Fuck.
This really isn't that hard. Mostly automation, with some manual oversight, just as Dooey suggested. There IS NO 100% guarantee for any set up.
It's like I tell people that start buying a ton of locks for their motorcycles. If someone wants it, they WILL get it. The trick is to deter the undetermined thieves. The joy riders. The pros will get your bike, so you don't need to over complicate the situation and make it a pain in the ass to ride your own bike.

Same situation here. A real hardcore troll, that is determined to fuck with people, will get in. It is the "doing it for quick laughs" assholes that you are going to keep out.

...like our most recent chunderheads. Those guys seemed to be drive-by spamtards, and they are the ones that a little vigilance would have kept out. A long-term, determined troll like RDJ will get in regardless, and we just have to be ready.

I agree with the notion of keeping it simple. Use the automated challenge question to filter the spambots, and then use the old manual-approval method for those who pass the automated portion of the test. No fucking around with such questionable miscellany as n00b forums, waiting periods, or essay test questions.