When clicking button "Preview Post", I get following message:
"You cannot post URLs to other sites until you have made at least 5 posts."

Is that a bug or just a trick to force newbies to do 5 posts as quick as possible ?
If it is the latter, hmmm, I find that somehow unorthodox...

P.S. Hah, this post itself gets me 1 step nearer to avoiding upper message...

It is a mechanism to prevent spam. It prevents spammers signing up just to post a link to their site.

But I notice that you now have more than 5 posts, so you are able to post links.

--Ian

IBall is correct - it's not a "trick", it's a spam prevention method.

--jeremy

Somehow relieving to know my trouble serves a noble cause

That happened in post nr.5.
I still think there's a bug somehow, and this issues might frustrate
some s and drive them away.(Or it might lead to things like
those: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=208597
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=208594

Just found a related post, but in opposite to me that user got a
much more informational message,
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=254735
so if this measure has to be taken
to prevent spam, the content of the message matters, to get any
idea.

Please note that I had not put any URL at all!!!
post was: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi....php?p=2053702 (#5)

After not being able to preview post I finally hit button "Submit
Reply", only to notice that I got same message over and over again, until eventually (when I was at the brink of giving up)
it worked.

Exactly same story with starting this thread, which I tried parallely.

Sorry, if anybody thinks there's no bug at all and this is just
business as usual, I'd need some convincing to believe it.

O.K., personally I took the 5-post-hurdle, but the reason I insist are s to come... (as said above)

We do realize that a small number of new members will potentially be frustrated by this. It's extremely unfortunate that spam has become this much of an issue, but in reality - it has. If you have any specific suggestions on how the process could be improved or made more "new member friendly" please do post them here. Thanks.

--jeremy

Since you've past the 5 post count now, just take a deep breath, lean back, and bask in the spam-free glory of LinuxQuestions.org

http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=92766

We're using this now for almost a month at a fairly large forum, and so far all spam got caught.

This makes NO sense at all. This rule is creating more spam by requiring people to make UNEEDED posts so they can communicate what they want to. Who the heck came up with this? It's a self defeating institution!

Actually it works quite well. The only "UNEEDED" posts are the few that are posted by members not following the rules. What it prevents are the tons of automated bots we get daily that attempt to spam the forum with links. The bots are smart enough to sign up for accounts and even ack the email to activate posting for the account. Once they can't post a link though, they almost always move on. As for who the heck came up with it, I did - based on the profile of spam we've been seeing on our network of sites. While it really is unfortunate and is certainly a minor pain for legitimate users, I can assure you it's not "a self defeating institution".

--jeremy

Not to mention that if all those posters that were creating more "spam" by posting about it would actually use the search function once in awhile, we wouldn't have this problem, now would we?

The five post thing is a good thing. Even if you're new chances are that you know something that could help someone (Without having to post a link). Spend a few minutes helping some people, then post your link.

Newcomers (new to this forum ain't the same as new to linux) who want to refer to a url to illustrate a question, can usually get away with it by leaving out the www or writing "dot" for the dots etc. There are many, creative, and non-spam ways around the rule.

Newcomers who protest this can be referred to the zero-reply threads and asked to contribute. Personally I'd favour a system that counted how many times a newcomer replied to an existing thread before being allowed "full" membership (or being able to post new theads).

However, this is quite draconian and newcomers won't undestand. (There are forums with much more draconian limitations, like restricting access to a "newbies" forum until a moderator gets around to reviewing your posts, or requiring existing members to promote your access.)

They usually, like me in fact, will come to the forums for the first time when they have a problem. Difference is, I read the rules and made sure I posted some replies before inflicting my problems on the community.

Later, jeremy posted a call for a blitz on the zero-reply threads which encouraged me to reply even when I had only limited knowledge ... since the research and analytical skills may still help.

Perhaps: one can maintain the existing system but also provide a fast-track method for people prepared to be of use to the community? The existance can be placed at the bottom of the rules (so only people who actually read the rules will find out about it )

The user requests the fast-track membership. They get directed to an old zero-reply thread (say 2 days to a week old) to respond to. After that, they are in ... number of posts gets increased by 5. On the understanding that it can be decreased by 4 again if there is a compliant about that post.

OR: maybe this post is automatically moderated?

OR: maybe there could be a quiz - on the forum rules and common newbie mistakes. 10 questions on ettiquette and how to write a question and what is allowed in the rules... ? Pass that and you get your 5 posts too.

In other words, an auxiliary program could be included to encourage knowledgeable and useful members.

Certainly it would be useful for jeremy to call a zero-reply thread blitz regularily? A LQ.org sticker to the member who clears the most zero-reply threads each month? What can we do to promote community spirit?

Simon Bridge, one of the rotating text links up top does point to the 0 reply thread, but I'd be interested in additional ways to promote the functionality. I'll make sure to plug it again in an upcoming Community Bulletin, which is something I try to do regularly.

While on this topic, it is possible I think to potentially lower the number of required posts from 5 to say 2 or 3 without it having much impact on spam prevention. Thoughts?

--jeremy

3 sounds rather reasonable...

Done.

--jeremy