Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Fight spam: Difference between revisions
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Fight spam (view source)
Revision as of 16:17, 29 June 2009
, 14 years agoEw. Spam. Thoughts and options.
No edit summary |
(Ew. Spam. Thoughts and options.) |
||
Line 4:
:::Since I think it's not robotic spam, I can't see that a CAPTCHA would help. —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 14:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Yeah and I wouldn't suggest turning off anonymous edits because we've had a recent surge of legitimate anonymous editors (and some people would probably think that was inconvenient). We may just have to keep up the old fashioned delete and block strategy. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 14:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::Gah. Drop off the face of the planet for a weekend and come back to another spam influx. It could very well be robotic spam if they have a human being sign up the account; CAPTCHAs are only presented to anonymous edits, account creation and login failures. Those settings have worked well for us for the better part of two years. Roboticizing after account creation was an eventuality, but it depended on someone deciding that RC was a big enough target to go the extra steps. (And extra steps are something that the spam economic model tends to avoid; They'd rather hit more weak targets than fewer higher profile ones.) I'm not going to have time to tweak the server settings for a few days, at least. In the mean time, let's watch to see if the problem is going to be bad enough to warrant significant attention. (Unless they've broken reCAPTCHA, it's roughly 1:1 manual labor, which is uneconomic for spammers.) If need be, it might be possible to do a halfway-block; Rather than an outright ban on a user or IP, force all edits from them to go through reCAPTCHA. But that will likely require modding an extension, which I don't have time for right now. --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 16:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
| |||