Spam Rules — OZONE Asylum, home of the Mad Scientists

Mad Scientists' Laboratory

Spam Rules

This page's ID: 25845

Edit Post

Who can edit a post?	The poster and administrators may edit a post. The poster can only edit it for a short while after the initial post.

Your User Name:
Your Password:
Login Options:	Remember Me On This Computer

Your Text: Insert Slimies » Insert UBB Code » Close Last Tag \| All Tags UBB Help	Not being an MS, I suppose I'm not technically qualified to comment, but I'll comment anyway. ;) I can understand your concern, and I agree with you that they do indeed appear to be spam. However, as WS pointed out, they are posted in the Site Reviews forum, so technically they are legitimate. Where do you draw the line, then? Well, I asked myself this: "How do these threads differ from genuine requests for reviews?" The answer, I think, is that the original poster rarely (if ever) replies to criticism in spam threads, and the threads either die out for lack of interest or spiral into silliness before fizzling. Yet, as you mentioned, they remain in plain site where they can be crawled. (I suppose it would be worth mentioning at this point that posting a link to your site in your sig is even more effective in terms of relevancy, and sigs are not generally considered spam. But that's another story, and no, sigs and spam review threads are not the same thing.) Anyway, I can understand your concern, so I'll throw an idea out and see what you guys think. Feel free to ignore it, discuss it, shoot it down, whatever. Since the primary characteristic of spam threads is a lack of participation by the spammer, this could be made a requirement of threads posted in the SR forum. Newly admitted inmates would be given a week to respond to any criticism (i.e., one week from the moment a reply is posted), while other inmates would be given a longer period of time (say, two weeks to a month). This reply must address the criticism given and not just be filler. If these conditions are not met, the thread is shut down and deleted. Now, even as I typed that, a number of objections popped into my head. For starters, what if someone is legitimately unable to respond during the required time period? Granted, this is unlikely, but it is possible. It might also be seen as too authoritarian a measure. It also requires that a judgment be passed on whether or not any replies to criticism are genuine or just filler, creating yet another task for our beleaguered mad scientists. That being said, these stipulations should be no problem for people genuinely looking for criticism. In fact, even if it is not publicly announced as policy, few people will ever notice--because the threads that get deleted will be the ones started by spammers who don't really care about them anyway. And if this new rule were to cause these spammers to take a genuine interest in the threads they start, well, there's victory in another fashion. In my mind, this sounds like a reasonable solution, if indeed it is determined that a solution is required. I suppose that issue is still up for debate, though. Just the two cents of a lowly mad librarian. ;) ___________________________ Suho: [url=http://www.liminality.org]www.liminality.org[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/4837]Cell 270[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/5689]Sig Rotator[/url] \| [url=http://www.ozoneasylum.com/22173]the Fellowship of Sup[/url] Loading...
Options:	Enable Slimies Enable Linkwords

« Backwards — Onwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu