May need to up the post requirement for link posting?

[Exentenzed]

As the title says: Up the post req for links?

I know this could be a problem with getting us some newbloods, but the amount of spammers are tedious.

On the other hand it might attract people that knows WHY there is a posting requirement.

[Jayhmmz]

It's getting beyond a joke, I don't know what threads are properly unread, or what threads are just unread because of spammers, advertising their ****.

[LiNuX]

I might do that, or try to find another mod that enforces the time limit as well. Our old one used to but that stopped working after an update.

[Saph]

My opinion is that the requirements to posting links should be set up by ALOT!

I mean what people come on forums and post a link in their first what 100 posts? Who does that?

Sure it'll be inconvenient for the people who are legit and just wanna show an awesome review or something, but there're other ways to guide someone there!

But spammers can easily get to 10 posts in like 5 seconds and begin flooding the forum with links in no time. I believe that the post count required should be 100, and maybe add 3 days+ of membership in there to scare spammers away. Who will want to wait days just to post a link? They'll go elsewhere.

So to put it short:

Regarding requirements for posting links, I think we should:

Up the post count requirement significantly...50+ at the very least.
Up the required membership time by 3 days or more.

[Jaykub]

Linux, is there anyway we can make it to where we have to approve a link before its posted?

I feel like I've asked that before but I'm unsure.

[EpsilonX]

On invisionfree forums, I think you could set it so that new topics need to be approved or something. could you set it so that new topics or posts by people with under X posts have to be approved? or would that be too much of a hassle/too much of a deterrent for new members

[ROFLBRYCE]

I mean what people come on forums and post a link in their first what 100 posts? Who does that?

I believe that the post count required should be 100, and maybe add 3 days+ of membership in there to scare spammers away. Who will want to wait days just to post a link? They'll go elsewhere.


Up the post count requirement significantly...50+ at the very least.
Up the required membership time by 3 days or more.

I've done that. I don't post alot, unless the topic is of interest to me. I've posted links to a few YouTube videos and another website or two, and I just broke 100 posts last week.

Post count is too high, but you have the right idea with the extra days

Not up the post count that high, but maybe 35? Easy to see someone spamming with 35 new posts in 1 day, and let the wait draw out to about 5 days before links mayhapz.

[LiNuX]

Linux, is there anyway we can make it to where we have to approve a link before its posted?

I feel like I've asked that before but I'm unsure.

Nope.


On invisionfree forums, I think you could set it so that new topics need to be approved or something. could you set it so that new topics or posts by people with under X posts have to be approved? or would that be too much of a hassle/too much of a deterrent for new members

We can do that here too, we even tried it a while back - it hurt us when it came to new members sticking around.

[paecmaker]

I think ROFLbRYCE has right. Not everyone posts so much a day so I think you should have been a member for longer time to post links and have like 35 posts.

[Saph]

I agree, honestly, ignore the upped post count.

Just make it so that they should've been a member for like ~a week before they can post links. I think that sounds like a fair idea. With 7 days to up root spammers before they even get started? Sounds good to me.

[paecmaker]

I agree, honestly, ignore the upped post count.

Just make it so that they should've been a member for like ~a week before they can post links. I think that sounds like a fair idea. With 7 days to up root spammers before they even get started? Sounds good to me.

Sounds good indeed.