LQ Suggestions & FeedbackDo you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you need to post a link, then you can use something like "www dot something dot com/page dot htm". There are perhaps other ways, too (be creative?). If you can though, try and help people, thus increasing your post count and letting you post links .
The "minimum post rule" for URL's is indeed intended to block spam. As you might guess, the site admin needed to determine a reasonable compromise between preventing spammers from flooding the forums with advertisments, but also to avoid creating obstacles for legitimate users from posting links.
If you need to post a link, then you can use something like "www dot something dot com/page dot htm". There are perhaps other ways, too (be creative?). If you can though, try and help people, thus increasing your post count and letting you post links .
Or just post without the link, then edit it. For example, my post here:
But really, that's not the solution. Better ways of determining that a real person is posting is the solution. Something like Captcha would work fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by titanium_geek
The idea is that bots sign up and post once- then move on. So after 5 posts in the old days, you could post links. now it's 3 posts, is it not?
Sure, but if you use something like Captcha at registration time and at post time, you will confirm that a person performed both operations, and did so with a verified email address. Surely that's too hard for the spammer at the moment?
How about a combination of both approaches: For registration and the first x posts (x could be higher than the current 3 non-URL post limit, since it's less of an inconvenience than not posting URLs) Captcha is required, then afterwards it's not.
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 7,142
Thanked: 164
We already use captcha for registration. Two comments: First, I don't think requiring captcha for 100% of new users is more convenient then now allowing URLs for the <5% that need a URL immediately. More importantly, we get a fair amount of hit-and-run *manual* spammers who would happily fill out the captcha. The no URL policy usually means they try a couple times, and move on to an easier target.
1. Get involved with the community:
... look through the zero-reply threads and help three people before you make your first post. You should be able to find three issues you can at least comment on. As an added bonus you'll establish an early rep as someone worth talking to. The really experienced folk here will give better replies to people they feel are contributing.
2. Tax your English writing skills:
Write the URL in its searchable format ... say: "I found that the open source version of "foo" from "bar.org" worked well, though my mate still preferrs the proprietary version from tanstaafl.com" instead. Thus anyone googling "foo" in connection with either domain should hit the right page in the top five.
3. Hack the parser:
(a) Leave off the entire "http://www." part at the front.
(b) Disable "automatically parse urls" in your profile.
(While you're at it, you could add your distro and location there too ...)
4. Start a Thread (or three) about why this is lame...
You sould be able to get three easy posts out of protesting the policy while the hackers all try to tell you why it isn't Honestly; I'm surprised Jeremy dosn't just respond with a link to the standard reply-set.
Last edited by Simon Bridge; 05-03-2006 at 11:29 PM..
Reason: Jesus had twelve true apostrophes - I cannot seem to get one <sigh>
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.