Advertising honeypot?
 

I noticed there's been an increase in the amount of spam-vertising in the General forum recently (some intentional... some not). I was wondering if anyone has given thought to an advertising honeypot. Create a sticky thread titled something like "Advertisers, place your links here!". Then, if possible, make the thread readable by only people with fewer than 5 posts (or the same posting requirement for web links). That way, the spammers can post their junk, their post count does not increase (since it's in General), they can "review" their ad by loading the thread again, and normal users can't even read the thread. It would serve to lessen the mundane task of moderators removing links and locking threads. It would also reinforce LQ's future sanctioned advertising: legitimate advertisers that follow the rules get the visibility they want, and the spam-vertisers get ignored.

Of course, this relies on the spammers seeing the link and actually posting/replying to it rather than creating a new thread. I thought I might offer the suggestion in case it might help and if it's feasible. It might take some significant coding to implement, but I figure it can be done.

I'd think Jeremy and LQ would prefer to charge for advertising space, like they do currently, rather than giving up server disk space and bandwidth for freebies like that. They more sponsors, the better, and giving that way doesn't even coincide with the "free" philiosophy of linux. It's more of a free lunch deal.

Besides, who wants to find deals for cell phones on a linux community board?

--Shade

No, no, you misunderstand. I know LQ gets money from advertisers. Whenever you see a spam advertisement, the mods will close the thread, remove the ad links, and post a link leading to a page describing how to legitimately advertise through LQ. This is not a suggestion that would affect legitimate advertisers that work through "the LQ process".

This is targeted at the unrequested spammers. There would be no "free ride" for the spammers because of the way the honeypot thread is set up. Like I said, users with more than 5 posts would not be able to read the thread at all. Not even if they wanted to. Since the spammers create an account, and immediately try to start posting advertising links, they will have less than 5 posts, and will be able to see the thread. In other words, they will think the advertising was successful, because they can see it themselves by reading the thread (because they have fewer than 5 posts). Put this honeypot thread in the General forum, and the spammers will not increase their response count because posts in General do not add to the post count. They will perpetually stay stuck at 0 replies, and never realize that users with 5+ replies cannot view the thread they are posting advertisements to.

To give an even greater air of legitimacy to the thread, the first post could say something like "each ad will remain visible for one week". So, space is not a concern anymore. Have the forum delete the advertisements when their week is up (with the exception of the first post).

The point is, no legitimate users will ever be able to view this thread. New users will quickly rack up 5 posts, and after that, can't view the spammer's thread at all. The spammers think they've dropped an ad that's getting exposure when in fact it's just a trap for them. Legitimate advertisers won't be affected, and mods won't have to delete as many spam messages.

I think creating a thread like this would only entice them to post them elsewhere on the forums, cross post and so on. We don't want anything to encourage them to post spam or advertisements, it would only get out of hand, even if the threads are only readable by members with 5 posts or less, etc.

I'm against it.

My two cents.

The biggest problem would be convincing the spammers to unwittingly participate. The thread would have to be noticed and feel "welcoming" enough for them to post in it. That's a huge IF... A sticky thread could be placed in each sub-forum that redirects them to the thread in General. That could mitigate some of the cross-posting and would increase the thread's visibility (and hopefully convince more of the spammers to use it). It might be feasible to allow links for users with less than 5 posts IF they are posting in this honeypot thread. That might make it more attractive. There's nothing worse in advertising than making your customer work (vis-a-vis reconstructing a link) to see your product. Any thread a moderator locks/edits could also spell out that spamming is allowed in this special thread, and that links are valid in an attempt to "corral" them.

Other problems include: oblivious spammers. The help-out sticky threads in the forums don't seem to be read by newbies that often, and I'll admit, there's no evidence to indicate spammers would be any different.

The storage space could become a factor. It might require automated cleaning should the thread reach "critical mass". Traffic might also be a problem if they try to create some spam-posting bots. However, I imagine there's some sort of traffic control available. Maybe something set up to guard against (D)DOS attacks could be employed here.

Finally, I know there's something going on behind the scenes with regard to advertising. Those changes might make some of this irrelevant, but I imagine there will always be rogue advertisers.

I'm not saying this is a cureall, but I thought it was something interesting; at least worthy of some discussion.

To be honest I doubt that the spammers who sign up once just to post actually read more than the "new thread" button. The chance that they would actually read a sticky and bury their ad in the middle of it sounds far too much to hope for.

Exactly, they come, they click the New Thread button not looking at anything else, post their crap and logout.. most probably don't even look at their old posts they've made to see who's replied.. they just want others to follow the links...

Spammers don't care about anyone or any rules. They want money and they don't care if they break rules if people are stupid enough to click on those links from spam they've posted.

If legit businesses want to advertise the honest way, there's an advertising link at the bottom of every page.

Regards

Although there is an increase in spam it is taken care of extrememly quickly. I was in General and the second newest post was spam, i went to report it and it had already been reported. Most LQ users hate spam so the spam is reported and removed quickly.

I agree that I really don't think the spammers would read the thread and then post in it. I would like to thank all the members that take the time to report such posts though. It really does help the mods take care of the threads and make LQ a bit cleaner.

--jeremy

This isn't a good idea.

Would you voluntarily go to a thread full of spam? No.
Why would spammers waste their time posting in a thread nobody will be interested in?

Horrible.

ALright... I can tell when I'm outnumbered :)

MikeZila:
You are overlooking two key parts of the argument.

First, you're right, I don't want to see a thread about spam, but the process I describe actually prevents legitimate users from seeing the thread. A legitimate user can't see the thread even if they wanted to.

The spammers do not know legitimate users can't see the thread. That's the whole point. They think the ad is getting exposure when it has simply fallen into a black hole. The only way the spammers would know the ad is ineffective is if someone told them that people with 5 or more posts can't view the thread.

The idea may not be perfect, but it is far from "horrible". Maybe the concept is a bit confusing or my description is inadequate. It's a moot point either way, because like I said, I'm outnumbered. ;)

... or unless they saw this post ;)

Either way though, I'd say that if LQ took steps that could actually attract more spam, the outcome would not be desirable. I do see point behind your suggestion, but I respectfully would say this falls into the "nice in theory, but wouldn't translate in practice" category.

Lastly, to reiterate a point jeremy made: If you see a thread or a post that includes spam, please report it. The sooner spam is identified, the sooner it can be dealt with. Thanks. -- J.W.

Yeah. If spammers see that their junk is deleted promptly, they won't bother posting. It would be wasted effort to spend time posting, only to have your thread killed ten minutes later.

Correct me if I'm wrong about the mechanics of the site, but doesn't that mean that the thread remains & it's original Subject remains as the thread title. This, in turn, means that any spam link that was put in the Subject remains in the thread title, because editing the original subject does not change the visible thread title.

I believe I have seen at least one closed thread where this was the case. A moderator had killed the post & closed the thread, but I was still able to visit the site being promoted because the link was in the "official" thread title in the forum index.

The current behavior of permanently fixing the thread title from the originally posted subject of the first thread has at least 2 other undesirable side effects: It prevents an OP from correcting any spelling or other typos in the title, & also prevents those who thoughtfully add "[SOLVED]" to the subjects of their OP's from having that info show up in the forum indices. I think one of the things that hampers acceptance of the idea of adding a solved flag is that it isn't readily visible. I certainly have given up encouraging people to do it, because I don't see how it would have much benefit.


Yes, I have been following one of the recent solved flag threads in this forum.
BTW, is it appropriate to post a link there to this post, since it concerns both?

My personal opinion on [SOLVED] aside, this is an issue that we are evaluating for the upcoming code upgrade. It should be noted also that you can't post a link (as in href) in a thread title, so it would have to be copy/paste and the spammer wouldn't get the inbound link (which is what most are really after).

--jeremy