Sockpuppets/GHOULS/Trolls/Banned Users

Spartacus_Mills

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That's actually a really good idea.

Having to make 100 posts elsewhere on the board before coming here would probably help a lot.

I'm with you 100% on that Mr McTavish. That is a superb idea.

StevieJ

Running_Horse wrote: »

You didn't just post that in the context of a message board squabble did you?

Please tell me you didn't just post that in the context of a message board squabble.

Why? can't you read, if you quoted the post you will know what he was replying too.

Spartacus_Mills

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well the current situation with endless sock-puppets is driving away good posters.

Requiring a minimum post count would make it very difficult/tedious to get multiple ID's to work, as well as making people more conscious of not getting banned (and having to go through all that again).

Most logical solution I've heard yet. (In the absence of full moderation)

I agree with Hamish. I would not want full moderation. This is a sensible solution as proposed.

StevieJ

Hamish is always coming up with great ideas.

Exocet

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I'd like to think such a stunt is well beneath mewbie, who was generally funny, witty and original. I reckoned he was a quite a decent chap overall.

This latest batch of nonsense is just pathetic.

I haven't been around much recently but thought this was a nice comment from someone, er, about someone else. This probably isn't the best thread to make an appearance on with hindsight.

What did Jesus say about the Prodigious Son? He would be better to pass through a camel's bottom than try to enter the Kingdom of Martyn.

Sorry. Couldn't help myself. One for old times sake. Love to all.

StevieJ

Exocet wrote: »

I haven't been around much recently but thought this was a nice comment from someone, er, about someone else. This probably isn't the best thread to make an appearance on with hindsight.

What did Jesus say about the Prodigious Son? He would be better to pass through a camel's bottom than try to enter the Kingdom of Martyn.

Sorry. Couldn't help myself. One for old times sake. Love to all.

Good to see you back :beer:

Exocet

StevieJ wrote: »

Good to see you back :beer:

Don't encourage me Stevie, it'll only lead to trouble.

Anyway, I've lost all interest in arguing about house prices, so I tend mostly to muse on higher things such as the price of fish.

twadge_face

Exocet wrote: »

Anyway, I've lost all interest in arguing about house prices, so I tend mostly to muse on higher things such as the price of fish.

Well, if fish is yer game, let me give you this tip:

Don't ever teach a man how to fish, else the price of fish will plummet as he'll be able to eat forever.

You need to make sure he can only eat for a day. You need to be the fishlord.

Keep him uncertain where his next fish is coming from. Restrict the supply. Starve him a bit.

Then he'll need less fish to fill him up.

And he'll probably pay more money, for less fish, and.... he'll work harder for longer hours to get the fish!

Gotta *heart* the free market! Inequality is beautiful.

N1AK

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Most logical solution I've heard yet. (In the absence of full moderation)

• Hide new users posts until moderated as soon as they are reported.
• Limit new users to 2-5 posts per day for first couple of days.
• Limit new users to 1-3 post(s) prior to their username being authorised.
• Limit users abilities to create threads until they have 10+ thanks on replies.
• Limit the speed at which users can create posts.
• Report the twit to their ISP, threaten to ban the entire ISP if they don't deal with them.
• Report the twit to the police.
• File for the twits details from his ISP, and threaten him with a civil claim.

Before you laugh off the last three, I've run multiple sites in the past and have had users disconnected for behaviour of this nature (although admittedly more explicit).

RenovationMan

N1AK wrote: »

• Hide new users posts until moderated as soon as they are reported.
• Limit new users to 2-5 posts per day for first couple of days.
• Limit new users to 1-3 post(s) prior to their username being authorised.
• Limit users abilities to create threads until they have 10+ thanks on replies.
• Limit the speed at which users can create posts.
• Report the twit to their ISP, threaten to ban the entire ISP if they don't deal with them.
• Report the twit to the police.
• File for the twits details from his ISP, and threaten him with a civil claim.

Before you laugh off the last three, I've run multiple sites in the past and have had users disconnected for behaviour of this nature (although admittedly more explicit).

The last three are in use on MSE. While I was searching the forum T's & C's to find out how many posts newbies have to make before the HTML link restriction is removed, I saw that MSE can lay a financial charge against trolls (I think it was £100 per hour or something) for the work involved in tracking them down via their Internet Service Provider. They will also get the police involved if required.

The concept behind my restricted posting idea is that it will reduce the burden on the site administrators, not increase it by having moderation. Also, if you have a moderated site, you are liable for the content. Hence why board guides can move or delete threads but everyone at MSE is very carefull to stress that the Admin team and the Board guides are NOT MODERATORS. If the site is unmoderated, then the site owner cannot be liable for content, because they dont moderate the content.