Jump to content

Cheating the Spammers


Recommended Posts

They post these phone numbers in as many places as they can, as fast as they can, to maximise how many times the number appears on the web, and outrun the anti-spam measures that remove them.

If anyone's ever fooled into phoning one of the numbers, they're probably speaking to some convincing guy who talks them into divulging bank details or a credit card number 'to check your booking', and then they steal a load of money. It's not that likely to work, but they only need it to work a few times to be in profit. And the web space costs nothing because they're stealing it from forums for old coots who like cameras.

Some of them (the ones who post gallery pictures of wedding saris and custom trailers) are, I guess, acting for fools with businesses, who have paid for some cheapskate 'web marketing' deal, probably not knowing that what they're getting is spam they could do better themselves for nothing. They really are fools; this cheap stuff does nothing but harm to their reputation. We are one victim, because our forum is spoiled, but the business is another if they pay for this.

  • Like 1
  • Excellent! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AlanKlein said:

I don't understand why they are doing it.  What's the point?  Could someone explain?

1) They are hoping you will accidentally or intentionally click on a link or call a phone number (I almost said “dial”, haha) thereby potentially compromising yourself. 

2) In some ways, it’s like graffiti, though often less creative and interesting. Attention via landscape defacement. 

Edited by samstevens
  • Like 1

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago, Photo-net had a spam problem like the current one. One evening, I opened a spammer's profile, to report them, and found I had a tab with moderator's tools - I could delete the spam and ban the spammer. I live in hope that something like this will appear here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be a daft idea - some while ago, I think just after the update, many people mentioned that their user-ids were having random numbers attached. Is there any way that a) these numbers could be made official, and b) an id-filter be incorporated to reject, or at least quarantine, any id without this addition ?

That is my ticket to Cloud-Cuckoo land for this week 😁

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tony Parsons said:

This may be a daft idea - some while ago, I think just after the update, many people mentioned that their user-ids were having random numbers attached. Is there any way that a) these numbers could be made official, and b) an id-filter be incorporated to reject, or at least quarantine, any id without this addition ?

That is my ticket to Cloud-Cuckoo land for this week 😁

 

The reason it is likely a daft idea is that we’ve been told, clearly and distinctly, that no proactive measures other than after-the-fact cleanup are going to be instituted. So continuing to think up solutions that are not going to be adopted seems like, if not daft, at least an exercise in futility. 

It seems the spammers have hit a major nerve. It’s not getting fixed any time soon. Try to just let it go. Make it an exercise in dealing with a reality over which you have no control other than your own reaction. Or don’t! 😊

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All admins need to do is give more people the permission to delete users and their posts. At the moment, there’s Sandy in Montana and William in Australia (I think) and no one in between. 
 

If that isn’t possible, we’re fooked 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume that the mods/admins are doing everything possible to prevent Spam using the options in the 'Administrators Control Panel' (ACP). That said, I reported 3 or 4 'members' as spammers this morning simply by searching the forum for the word 'Airlines'. Together, they had posted hundreds of spam messages in different forums in a matter of hours. Probably, it was the same bot switching 'members' (and messages) every so often.

Given the prevalence of specific 'keywords' in the flood of spam posts we're seeing, I wonder if we're making full use of the 'block post if it contains a keyword' function in the ACP. It was intended to flag posts for moderator approval (and/or remind members that specific words in their posts do not comply with forum guidelines).  But perhaps the 'keyword list' and flagging/blocking could be applied to 'SPAM keywords' too. Just a thought.

 

Mike

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Normanski said:

All admins need to do is give more people the permission to delete users and their posts. At the moment, there’s Sandy in Montana and William in Australia (I think) and no one in between. 
 

If that isn’t possible, we’re fooked 

Interesting idea. Just one comment :

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

  • Excellent! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, samstevens said:

The reason it is likely a daft idea is that we’ve been told, clearly and distinctly, that no proactive measures other than after-the-fact cleanup are going to be instituted. So continuing to think up solutions that are not going to be adopted seems like, if not daft, at least an exercise in futility. 

It seems the spammers have hit a major nerve. It’s not getting fixed any time soon. Try to just let it go. Make it an exercise in dealing with a reality over which you have no control other than your own reaction. Or don’t! 😊

Sam, dear heart - Life is an exercise in futility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, samstevens said:

The reason it is likely a daft idea is that we’ve been told, clearly and distinctly, that no proactive measures other than after-the-fact cleanup are going to be instituted. So continuing to think up solutions that are not going to be adopted seems like, if not daft, at least an exercise in futility. 

It seems the spammers have hit a major nerve. It’s not getting fixed any time soon. Try to just let it go. Make it an exercise in dealing with a reality over which you have no control other than your own reaction. Or don’t! 😊

IHMO, this is a defeatist attitude. Will we ever defeat spam completely? Probably not. But - with no access to the 'Administrators Control Panel' (ACP) I suspect - just as a member - that there is perhaps more that we could do. I - accept - primarily - the statement by PN-admins that they are unable to install (anti-spam) plug-ins. I do wonder why they - on this specific website - have this restriction.

Mike

PS. I've made it abundantly clear in PM's and in forums that I'm willing (and reasonably able) to join the fight against  spammers. No response so far.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, mikemorrellNL said:

IHMO, this is a defeatist attitude.

What’s the difference between defeatism and realism?

Sandy has faced and is facing reality every day. He has a task he can accomplish and does it. The only task given you is reporting spam. That’s it. Do it or not.

@mikemorrellNL, if I were a defeatist, I’d be feeling defeated by spam. I don't. Not in the least. I ignore it, even laugh at it … when I’m not too busy laughing at all the posts about it which, to me, are no more interesting than spam itself. I find that’s a better attitude for me than whining about it. If you want to keep wondering about administration policy and choices, which isn’t going to get rid of a single bit of spam, while tilting at windmills thinking there’s more you can do when there’s clearly not (if there was, I’m sure Sandy would have you do it), be my guest. 

Isn’t it clear that this site is going to live or die by its choices and you have no control over those choices at this point? If not, I hope it becomes more clear to you soon. 

You are responsible for the content of the site, posting photos and making comments. You are not responsible for executive decisions and whether those decisions lead to the site’s success or failure.  In return for providing its content, you get NO say in financial, software, or planning. Hopefully, you’re getting other kinds of returns from being here. I know I am.

I’m the defeatist? I sense you’re feeling much more defeated by this spam business than I, or you wouldn’t be part of the crowd helplessly and pointlessly talking about it. 

Edited by samstevens
  • Like 1

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2023 at 7:04 AM, Tony Parsons said:

Interesting idea. Just one comment :

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Not only that, but I just noticed that the font color selector is missing from the editor bar...  Time to call the Wizard of Ahhs!

A long time ago on a forum long forgotten, I thought something like this was a good idea.  That was until several clubbish pissing wars started and people began to delete each other's content and give warnings that had points.  Let's just say that this was a large part of why that site failed. 🤡

These spammers seem to like the image posting route--as that avoids even the most carefully constructed word filters.

We should gather up our torches and pitchforks and seek out those who rain this mayhem upon us.

I would feel ever so much better if I could just turn some of these fonts to red. 😄

Edited by PapaTango
  • Like 1

 "I See Things..."

The FotoFora Community Experience [Link]

A new community for creative photographers.  Come join us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PapaTango said:

font color selector is missing from the editor bar...  Time to call the Wizard of Ahhs!

Just call good ol' Sam. It's missing from my phone but not from my desktop (iMac). I suggest simply adapting and, when you see an exclamation point, think RED! [Typed on a color-capable machine.] Don't be blue.

Edited by samstevens
  • Like 1

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, samstevens said:

Just call good ol' Sam. It's missing from my phone but not from my desktop (iMac). I suggest simply adapting and, when you see an exclamation point, think RED! [Typed on a color-capable machine.] Don't be blue.

Well, that's a shame.  Everyone ought to have color in their lives.  I can see it on my phone--perhaps you should check again...

Edited by PapaTango

 "I See Things..."

The FotoFora Community Experience [Link]

A new community for creative photographers.  Come join us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PapaTango said:

I can see it on my phone--perhaps you should check again...

And you think because you can see it on your phone I would see it mine? On PN? I did check and, of course not. Logic be damned! (iPhone 13)

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...