Well, they’ll now be replaced by “I had a big post, but I submit and it said I wasn’t logged in and I lost the post” posts.
Hey, my hotmail is my primary account. This limitation would be a little extreme. It’s not like people are going to make fifty new hotmail accounts just to spam a message board.
Troy
Hey, my hotmail is my primary account. This limitation would be a little extreme. It’s not like people are going to make fifty new hotmail accounts just to spam a message board.
Troy[/quote]
Ditto. Not that I think you guys would lock out hotmail accounts. . .
Hey, my hotmail is my primary account. This limitation would be a little extreme. It’s not like people are going to make fifty new hotmail accounts just to spam a message board.
Troy[/quote]
Actually, they will.
I’ve moderated several very large boards, and people will go to extreme lengths to spam them. However, I think that the banning of hotmail/yahoo and other free accounts is where you draw the line. You start stumbling into the law of diminishing results very quickly.
I think what Tom’s saying is that the point of this is not to stop spammers from posting in the first place, it’s to have a way to shut down the spammers after they start posting. In other words, nobody is claiming that registration, whether with or without Hotmail accounts, will stop someone from spamming the board (after all, foofighter1976 registered, didn’t he?). But it will give Tom and Mark an easy way to ban people who spam.
Given that outlook, there’d be no point in banning Hotmail accounts. The question that intrigues me, though, is this: Who is going to get banned? Are you going to be banning people just for spamming, or are there going to be other, more subjective criteria such as “All you do is troll” or “You keep flaming perfectly decent people for no reason” or “You’re just here stalking Derek”?
Whoop! Whoop! Slippery Slope Alert!!!
I trust Tom and Mark’s judgement. This recent example was an obvious extreme whose banning, if put to a vote, would be unanimous, I believe. These are probably the only one’s that will get the ax or axe.
But if they come for the people with > 2500 posts, many of which are potty jokes, we’ll also understand.
I suppose you want people that reach the age of 25 put to death, too. 
I suppose you want people that reach the age of 25 put to death, too.
Renew! Renew! Renew!
Sexiest. Movie. Evar.
In other words, nobody is claiming that registration, whether with or without Hotmail accounts, will stop someone from spamming the board (after all, foofighter1976 registered, didn’t he?). But it will give Tom and Mark an easy way to ban people who spam.
Won’t this require that Tom and Mark actually know what the hell they’re doing? Color me skeptical, because Mark takes great pride in knowing absolutely nothing about anything. He wears his ignorance like a giant badge of courage.
-wumpus
Mark or Tom will just have to change two administrative options on their board: they need to require registration to post, and they need to require a valid e-mail address to register.
Here’s instructions for requiring registration to post:
-
Go to the Administration Panel for Quarter to Three.
-
Under “Forum Admin”, click Permissions.
-
For each forum, click Look Up Forum, then select Registered, then click Submit.
Here’s instructions for requiring an e-mail address to register:
-
On the Adminstration Panel, under “General Admin”, click Configuration.
-
On the “Enable account activation” line, select the radio button next to User. This will make it so the user has to verify their address by responding to an e-mail sent to the address they gave.
-
At the bottom of the page, click Submit.
Hey, while we’re at it, why don’t we explain how we can ban wumpus?
jokes about banning regulars make my teeth hurt.
i don’t think anyone but foofighter has posted so much crap without ANY attempt to be conversational.
not liking wumpus is a shitty reason for getting rid of him, even if you were joking.
…
My apologies? Maybe I should’ve included some smilies. And in case you haven’t noticed, wumpus is a fucking asshole.
Kettle. Pot. Black.
Aren’t we all assholes in some way or another? Really. Aren’t we?
Met’s a dick and all, but I cannot believe any of you took him seriously when talking/joking about banning wumpus. While not some of his best work and fairly predictable, I thought the wumpus crack was wholly appropriate and mildly amusing.
At the risk of spoiling his night 'o trolling, I would wager that Met would be the first to say he is a bigger fucking asshole than wumpus. If he will not say it I will.
Met_K is the biggest fucking asshole in the recorded history of fucking assholes. (and that includes asshole history handed down through spoken word when there was no written asshole history.)
P.S. Met_K should be banned! Fucking asshole!
Sorry, I just get tired of a smart guy like Mark throwing up his hands and using the “we don’t know how to do it even if we could” excuse WRT moderating the boards.
It’s not rocket science, people. If you can review video games in coherent paragraphs-- which is more than I can say for 90% of the reviewers out there-- I think you’re capable of figuring out how to moderate a goddamn web messageboard.
God bless Alabama. Or at least parts of Alabama. Someone does get my humor. Tyjenks is right, none of you should take me seriously. I mean, if I didn’t have wumpus to bag on when he bags on Mark and Tom, then I’d have to aim my directionless anger at someone else. Perhaps even Tim. Or Jason. Or someone else with self-absorbed and directionless political viewpoints.
Oh, who’m I kidding. I’m an asshole. And not the funny kind, either. The wandering, drunken, my-wife-just-left-me-for-a-better-man kind.
But I’m well-liked in some circles. Especially in Alabama.
Gosh Tyjenks, that just might be the nicest thing that somebody never said about me.
Thanks,
:twisted: