RFC: 20071018-1 - Member Signature Policy

[peter]

Purpose: To reduce the amount of SPAM postings.

Other Information: We have been seeing a noticeable increase (at least 1 per day) of members who meet the following criteria:

1. Low post counts
2. Repetitive posts, often by different members
3. Blatantly corporate signatures for search engine optimization (SEO)
4. Email addresses that quickly become invalid.

I would like to limit the use of signatures to members with greater than 50 posts(Junior Members). Avatars and other features would remain.

Poll Question: Is this a site modification that requires a vote from the entire membership, or can this be implemented without one?

[fossy]

I opine that is not a minor modification in the effect it has on the innocent majority but requiring votes of the whole membership isn't justified imo, which I suppose makes it a minor change. I think the administrator should have a free hand, any objections should be aired on the appropriate board and changes made as the administrator sees fit.

It would be a shame if genuine signatures had to be sacrificed. I've just checked mine and I see I mention a community project. If it has to be ruled out, it has to be.

I have moderated a forum. All we moderators could do was delete or lock multiple posts (I favoured deleting). The administrator can ban IP addresses and, I would have thought, corporate slogans and certain words, both of which would be better than a blanket ban on signatures.

In short, I think it's a minor change but one I dislike.

[peter]

Sadly, I'll have to implement this with a 25 post limit before signatures are allowed. The problem is getting worse.

It will be implemented this weekend.

[Kernel_Killer]

I opine that is not a minor modification in the effect it has on the innocent majority but requiring votes of the whole membership isn't justified imo, which I suppose makes it a minor change. I think the administrator should have a free hand, any objections should be aired on the appropriate board and changes made as the administrator sees fit.

It would be a shame if genuine signatures had to be sacrificed. I've just checked mine and I see I mention a community project. If it has to be ruled out, it has to be.

I have moderated a forum. All we moderators could do was delete or lock multiple posts (I favoured deleting). The administrator can ban IP addresses and, I would have thought, corporate slogans and certain words, both of which would be better than a blanket ban on signatures.

In short, I think it's a minor change but one I dislike.

Well, another point that isn't being made is that even though there are many users adding legitimate signatures, we like to see them lend a hand to gain rights to advertise their sites. There have been a few times where people will make 5-10 posts helping with something, linking their sites all over the place, or referring to their sigs, and never show up again.

It would also be nice to also setup the forum to not allow links to be posted after a certain post count as well, but that's me.

[peter]

It would also be nice to also setup the forum to not allow links to be posted after a certain post count as well, but that's me.

How is this done?

[Kernel_Killer]

I'll look up the module, and PM the link to you (talk about irony). Sorry it took so long to read this.

[peter]

I've activated the signature feature. 25 posts before you can get a signature.

It would also be nice to also setup the forum to not allow links to be posted after a certain post count as well, but that's me.

Thanks KK, I have activated this feature as part of this RFC as I think it is related to robot SPAM which we're trying to combat. Members must have at least 25 posts before they can put links in posts.

If any community members have any problems with the implementation, please place your comments here.

[Kernel_Killer]

Sweet! Thanks Peter.