I think that there needs to be a minimum post threshold for new users until they can post a url, maybe somewhere on the lines of at least 15 or 20?

It would be a good way to discourage any spamming or any other nonsensical posts with 'shady' links?

Example: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...survey-836097/

Interesting concept. I think the whole user level system in general needs to be totally revamped.

Like it only takes a single post to be elevated from "New User" to "Member". Why? Who would create an account and never make a single post? What demographic of the site is served by the "New User" group? Or why does 100 or so posts get you into "Senior Member", but it takes 5000 to get to the next level?

Personally, I think you should be a "New User" for at least 10 to 20 posts, as you said, to limit spammers. From there, you would be a "Regular Member" until something like 200 posts, which would put you up to "Senior Member". There should be a few more user groups sprinkled in before hitting "Guru" too.

I've seen this exploited. A new member would make a post that consists of randomly mashed keyboard keys, then immediately post spam.

I never noticed that. Good idea.

There actually is a minimum post threshold before a new member can post a URL, and has been for many years. Thanks for the feedback.

--jeremy

There are 10's of THOUSANDS of members who do this, for a variety of reasons. The main one is the ability to track read posts, but there are many many others.

None of the above numbers reflect how user groups work here at LQ.

I think you may be confusing user titles with user groups.

--jeremy

A spammer would be able to make any number of arbitrary posts though, so raising the number of posts before URL would not have any impact. Before a member goes from 'New Member' to 'Member', they must make a post. All posts made by members in the 'New Member' group go through a variety of spam and other heuristic checks. It's not perfect and some spam gets through, but a huge amount gets caught and the mods typically clean up what gets through very quickly. Improving (and possibly expanding) the current checks will be considerably more sustainable, effective and new member friendly than arbitrarily raising the number of posts needed to post a URL.

--jeremy

Jeremy

I see, sorry for my lack of knowledge but then how come that particular user with a post count of 0 was able to post his url?

It's possible there's a bug in the logic that tries to prevent it. I'll take a closer look.

--jeremy

Thanks Jeremy!

Dear Jeremy:

I posted my first post which I believed was a well drafted and thoughtful question but which also included the technical URL's for clarity.

It has been about 12 hours since I fist posted the message and yet the message still is not showing up. Could it be the URL's prevented the post from being received or is this just a new user delay in activation of my account? And if so, how long should we expect a new user account activation to take?

Regards,

Gerald

1 members found this post helpful.

anon1231, your post (including URL's) has been approved.

--jeremy

1 members found this post helpful.

Here's another one that seems to have slipped through. One post, and a signature full of advertising links. The post itself is compliment spam: "great post" followed by the payload: the sig, where the ads are.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...51#post4146651

Are brand new users just not allowed to use url tags, or are they also blocked from having links in their sigs?

A member can add a sig after they make their first post. Keep in mind that .sig spamming is not very effective anyway, as guests (and therefore search engines) do not see .sigs and members can turn them off.

--jeremy

Is this new? -- It will either cut down on sig spamming or delay detection of the perpetrators. I hope the former.