Theory on resurrecting old posts...

[sbattisti]

So, in looking around here, I often see the moderators slapping the wrists of people who respond to older threads.

If I can pose a theory, it's this: in many cases people do this because they have just joined the site, usually because they have a question they want to ask. But then, they immediately run into the "you must respond to 5 threads before you can post" thing, so they have to sift through the forum and reply to things forcibly before they can post their question.

Of course, not knowing it's bad form, they often pick older threads. This is absolutely what happened to me (although I didn't end up resurrecting any older threads).

Anyway, what's the story with that rule? I've been on hundreds of forums that use this same vBulletin software, and I've never seen one that forces you to reach a certain post count before you can create a new thread. It's pretty tedious.

Just curious!

~Steve

 

[Jordy]

it didn't used to exist but this is a popular forum and people used to join the forum just to spam and it was annoying.. i thin that's why the rule exists anyway LOL

 

[mom2many]

Yeah I got my wrist slapped when I first joined, but at the time there wasn't the 5 post rule.

It really is in an effort to stop the spamming, this site get's hit more then any other site I am on.

 

[ElliottCarasDad]

If I can pose a theory, it's this: in many cases people do this because they have just joined the site, usually because they have a question they want to ask. But then, they immediately run into the "you must respond to 5 threads before you can post" thing, so they have to sift through the forum and reply to things forcibly before they can post their question.

~Steve

I believe that you can post immediately in the introduction section, which is where your first post should be anyway.

Jordy is right. You can see the spammers get 5 posts in 5 minutes then open a thread telling us about some Fantastic! New! Great! product they found and just had to tell us about it.

I think that the only rule should be first post in the Intro section. Then the mods can just delete/ban the spammers

 

[IADad]

You are correct one and all, and Bravo ECD about an Intro Thread - all new users can and really should post there.

The 5 post rule doesn't help the spammers that are people, they just post useless posts to five threads, but I think it does help with the spambots. There is a re-statementsx of the rules in the works (but since nobody much reads them anyway, I don't see it making a huge difference.)

There has been some work done recently to close really old threads, so nothing should be too hoddibly old, but still there no point dredging up a 60 day old thread, just to say "I agree."

So, yes, it's pesky, and writing those reminders is something I really don't like to do, but the sooner people understnad the rule and the reason, the happier they are here (unless, of course they are only here to post their one question, get people to invest their time in responding and then move on...in which case I don't mind having admonished them.) we're tying to build and maintain a community here.

 

[sbattisti]

I understand the spam point, and I suspected that was the reason, but I'm still surprised, because I'm on some forums with far higher volume than this one that use the same forum software, and they don't have this sort of restriction.

What are they doing that we here aren't, to deal with spam?

Meanwhile, I would suggest that the five-post rule may actually <I>discourage </I>people from becoming members of the community. That is: I theorize that the majority of people who come to a parenting forum for the first time do so because they have an issue they would like to discuss. And often times, it's urgent enough (to them) that they are anxious to get some feedback quickly.

So, they Google, find this forum among many others, and go to post their issue/question. But then they realize they can't post their question until they have written a self-introduction and replied to four other posts. I wonder how many people, at that point, just say "Forget this, I'm going to parentingforums.com or some other site instead."

You might be able to see some anecdotal data on this by looking for people who have registered but have a post count of &lt; 5.

Anyway, this is certainly not a huge deal, so we don't need to have a long discussion about it. I just thought that some of the mods might be interested in the opinion of someone who recently joined the site!

 

[IADad]

well, you're right, those are both sides of the coin,

and understand i'm a mod, not an admin.

I would say just casually, that membership has risen here recently, not sure if the spam rules have anything whatsoever to do with that. I would say that we do see a fair number of users with 6 posts. So they come here ask their question and sit back and read. The question is how accomodating do we want to be to this person? I guess I'd say to the person who tries to post once, then gives up, that they probably weren't going to be good community members anyway. Now, I don't know what the owners of this forum want in terms of head counts, but for me personally, I'd rather have people come, get to know each other, trust each other and share their experiences rather than just post an annonymous question, suck the knowledge and in some cases emmotions of people and then never show up again or contribute in any way.

So, I see what you mean, I'm just not sure anyone is interested in just boosting headcounts or post counts.

 

[Xero]

The administrators are the ones that set the 5 post rule. I personally agree with you on most accounts about that rule. I think there were good intentions in mind when the 5 post rule was made, but that it didn't turn out the way it was intended. It does bother me. But we don't handle software changes like that. There is a limit to what we can do as moderators. I have closed all threads older than 90 days, and that seems to help. It was kind of up in the air whether or not we would close them younger than that. I will be closing several threads tomorrow though, on the first of the month. Its my organization tactic.

Nobody likes the 30 day rule, sorry about that. We've been trying our hardest to make it easier on you guys though. It really is in the best interest of the forum not to bump dead threads, and we don't really slap wrists so much as gently inform. Something important that we want you guys to be in on. We're not warning anyone, just letting them know really.

 

[kassierossiter]

just another question and opinion...

the 30 day rule combined with the 5 post rule is really sort of tough... here is why i say that...

i joined the forum due to issues i wanted to talk about... i introduced myself. i really hate to post simple "i agree" posts... i only want to post when i have some real vocabulary i can add to what is already posted... so i read through probably everything on the first couple pages of each topic...

there are not a lot of real current threads out there... and not each one of us has something to say to what is posted... but we may come across an older thread and have a spark in our heads... some thing we would like to say regarding that thread... if it is too old we could just start a new thread about it, but often what we have to say stems from the earlier posts in the thread so it makes it hard to have to say that so-n-so said blah blah blah and then so-n-so said blah blah blah so now i have to say.... blah blah blah...

know what i mean?

so i had to respond to threads i truely didnt give a big hoot about with some nonsense just so i could post my actual question....

so i guess i didnt have a question just an opinion... lmao!

 

[IADad]

well it does help keep people from saying they have questions and then just posting opinions...oh, no, I guess it doesn't...

It was a well-intentioned rule and at the end of the day, it really doesn't make that much difference. Kassie, consider it having paid your dues....

no, seriously thanks for everyone voicing you feeling on the subject. They are posted in the right area to get noticed by admins, so we'll see what happens.

 

[kassierossiter]

lol yay! yea i thought i had a question when i started typing that, but by the time i reached the end and re read what i wrote i couldnt remember my question!!!

hate it when that happens!

 

[sbattisti]

there are not a lot of real current threads out there... and not each one of us has something to say to what is posted...

Bingo! I did the very same thing, surfing for good threads where I could get a comment in!

Ah well, perhaps the admins will see it.

 

[Xero]

I know Mizfish seems to check this forum very often. I imagine she'll probably see this and take it into consideration. If anything, maybe I will PM her or E-mail her asking about it.

 

[Xero]

Update: I have e-mailed mizfish about this topic. I will let you know if I hear back from her, and what she says.

 

[singledad]

Surely they can build something into the sign-up process to keep out the spambots? I can't remember the actual process, but I remember thinking "Wow, is that it? And I can just log on?" IIRC it didn't even send me an e-mail with a link I have to click on...

Personally I find it really frustrating to come on here, see that there's been activity in a lot of threads, only to find that most of the activity is only people saying "I agree" and some thread about a new website we simply HAVE to visit...

 

[Jeremy+3]

If each person who signs up has to just enter a code (which is randomly selected), it stops spam bots, tbh this the only place I haven't had to do that, and that hasn't requested that my account be finally opened after confirming my email address.

 

[ElliottCarasDad]

I think a more logical requirement would be 1 post prior to starting a new thread, and this post would be in the intro section.
This would stop any spambot and minimize the number of "I agree" posts we have to wade through

 

[Dadu2004]

Typically, what I've done with the "I agree" postings with the spammers is ban the spammer and delete all of their posts. That way it doesn't clog up the forums with useless BS.

We're the most popular parenting forum on the internet, thus the most targeted. Being the top has it's ups and downs....we do what we can do to control the experience here and make it the best possible for everyone.

 

[sanjay]

Let me chime in and give you guys some information on what we are doing to address spammers and spam-bots on this and all of our crowdgather forums.

1. CAPTCHA image verification at registration to try and limit registrations to humans and not automated scripts.

2. StopForumSpam plugin which checks IP and email addresses against a huge database of known spammers. If someone is on the list, they are rejected.

3. Cyb Advanced Permissions which prevents someone from making a new thread or posting images or links until they have a certain post count. I usually set this at 10 because they tend to have the energy for 5, but there is a drop-off at 10. On PF it is set to 5 to try and be friendlier to some parents who might not be very technical in their capabilities and really just want to make a thread to ask a question.

4. Finally we have human moderation. Personally, if I see short inane replies to threads that are not on-topic, or on old threads- I will just ban the user.

Hope this helps explain all the things in place to make life better. Since 2008, forums have been bombarded with spammers. PF is a site that they perceive to be high value because it is friendly to parenting and consumer products. Some of our forums are much busier, but get less spam because the subject matter is not as spammer friendly.

At this point, I will monitor this thread and look to take action, but don't be afraid to send a PM to warn someone you think is just jacking up their post count. Or ban them and let them PM you so you can verify that they are just impatient and not a spammer...

 

[mom2many]

Thanks info, it does help to see what is being done...the spammers are very annoying!