strange members

[Mark Buckton]

looks like more and more of these weid members are joining.

Always the same 'no info' on their profile and no access to e-mail sending option. PM only.

May I therefore suggest, to the tech mods, that all members be required to offer just a little personal info or at least an email address 'receiving' option? (NB - the address is not displayed and all mails are monitored by staff so no real danger of abuse there) I think this would remove the need for SF to be overloaded with chasing these people out as they'd be reluctant to join in the first place.

Indeed, without anything on their profiles, and given that SF is a site where many come to share and learn about sumo, those individuals are more suspicious than anything else.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

[Kishinoyama]

looks like more and more of these weid members are joining.

Always the same 'no info' on their profile and no access to e-mail sending option. PM only.

May I therefore suggest, to the tech mods, that all members be required to offer just a little personal info or at least an email address 'receiving' option? (NB - the address is not displayed and all mails are monitored by staff so no real danger of abuse there) I think this would remove the need for SF to be overloaded with chasing these people out as they'd be reluctant to join in the first place.

Indeed, without anything on their profiles, and given that SF is a site where many come to share and learn about sumo, those individuals are more suspicious than anything else.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

I disagree with this. Privacy should be left up to the individual when they register. Each member should be allowed to provide as much or as little information about themselves as they want. Besides, how do you know the information that is provided by the members of the forum is actually real? People do lie sometimes but I am sure they never do on the forum (Clapping wildly...) . I personally don't like the idea of having people on the forum being able to PM me whenever they want but I understand that in order to be a member of this forum and get all of this valuable sumo information, I have to put up with that little annoyance (Dohyo-iri...) .

Edited May 4, 2006 by Kishinoyama

[Exil]

May I therefore suggest, to the tech mods, that all members be required to offer just a little personal info or at least an email address 'receiving' option? (NB - the address is not displayed and all mails are monitored by staff so no real danger of abuse there) I think this would remove the need for SF to be overloaded with chasing these people out as they'd be reluctant to join in the first place.

I'm sorry, but that just doesn't work. Most spammers/hackers/etc. use free email accounts - and they don't bother reading mails sent to them, trust me. Mandatory profile fields can be filled up with random garbage. Having to type "asdf" into a location field won't stop anyone from spamming. Any attempts to complicate the registration process would end up inconveniencing potential new members. And given the number of failed registrations, it is complicated enough already.

[Gernobono]

my experience is that even a visual confirmation does NOT help against those mentioned spammers any more....in my forums the subscription rules are very strict, even needing some affirmation from one of the admins, but as i said they are even passing the visual confirmation (input of a string on the entry-page).....this lowered the register-candidates form 50 a day to 3 but still there are some of the spammers trying to getting access to the forums....

to make a point, i am against such "rules" to enter some personal data and agree with kishinoyama...

[Cammy]

I was wondering how many people are we up to, that have been banned?

[Mark Buckton]

and one idea was passed to me several days ago via PM - why not 'remove' all the non-and-never-have-posted people after a certain period of membership?

Personally I was thinking having the newbies type in the king of 'jumbled fuzzy' letters that yahoo groups need to join might deter a few - or at least prove those joining are human.

[Asashosakari]

and one idea was passed to me several days ago via PM - why not 'remove' all the non-and-never-have-posted people after a certain period of membership?

Perhaps not all the "never posted" people since you'll see in their profiles that quite a few are nevertheless active readers of the forum, but I do wonder if people who haven't even visited the forum in a while (say, a year) and never posted anything need to remain in the member list. I suspect the deadwood doesn't make a whole lot of difference to the forum maintenance though, this is still a comparatively small Invision forum after all, so the database impact is probably minimal.

Personally I was thinking having the newbies type in the king of 'jumbled fuzzy' letters that yahoo groups need to join might deter a few - or at least prove those joining are human.

I obviously haven't checked this because I don't care for a second account, but I've always assumed that it's already doing that. I'm pretty sure the sign-up process asks for an email to be responded to (i.e. confirmation link clicked), at least.

BTW, to thread-hijack for a moment, I wonder which bright mind among the Invision programmers had the idea to classify members into "Active Members" and "New Members" based on some (to me) completely unfathomable algorithm in the new board software version...I mean, how can Chiyozakura be a New Member and (to pick somebody semi-randomly) Araiwa an Active Member, when Chiyozakura has been registered for longer, has more posts, and has both visited and posted to the forum more recently?

[Exil]

my experience is that even a visual confirmation does NOT help against those mentioned spammers any more....in my forums the subscription rules are very strict, even needing some affirmation from one of the admins, but as i said they are even passing the visual confirmation (input of a string on the entry-page).....

As far as I know, the IPB visual confirmation has not been defeated yet. All of our spammers have registered manually. Visual confirmation is a "best current practice", although it only helps against automated registrations.

I was wondering how many people are we up to, that have been banned?

Asashosakari? :-D

For the justxpl exploit, I'm counting nine.

and one idea was passed to me several days ago via PM - why not 'remove' all the non-and-never-have-posted people after a certain period of membership?

Perhaps not all the "never posted" people since you'll see in their profiles that quite a few are nevertheless active readers of the forum, but I do wonder if people who haven't even visited the forum in a while (say, a year) and never posted anything need to remain in the member list. I suspect the deadwood doesn't make a whole lot of difference to the forum maintenance though, this is still a comparatively small Invision forum after all, so the database impact is probably minimal.

You might have noticed that we have an Inactive Users group for accounts that are pending to be deleted. I deleted 150 inactive accounts only two months ago. As you said, some of those "non-and-never-have-posted people" are active and legitimate forum members who choose not to post for one reason or another. They are not a problem. A typical spammer will start spamming less than 48 hours after registration.

Personally I was thinking having the newbies type in the king of 'jumbled fuzzy' letters that yahoo groups need to join might deter a few - or at least prove those joining are human.

I obviously haven't checked this because I don't care for a second account, but I've always assumed that it's already doing that. I'm pretty sure the sign-up process asks for an email to be responded to (i.e. confirmation link clicked), at least.

Correct.

BTW, to thread-hijack for a moment, I wonder which bright mind among the Invision programmers had the idea to classify members into "Active Members" and "New Members" based on some (to me) completely unfathomable algorithm in the new board software version...I mean, how can Chiyozakura be a New Member and (to pick somebody semi-randomly) Araiwa an Active Member, when Chiyozakura has been registered for longer, has more posts, and has both visited and posted to the forum more recently?

Damn you for noticing every detail! :-D ;-) Invision programmers had nothing to do with that. It was implemented by me, because there are no such tools for user management. No official policy exists yet, but one is being worked on. I seem to remember Chiyozakura hadn't visited the forum for a while, but I could be wrong.

[Asashosakari]

I was wondering how many people are we up to, that have been banned?

Asashosakari? :-P

Sheesh, how obsessive do you think I am? ;-)

You might have noticed that we have an Inactive Users group for accounts that are pending to be deleted.

Psst, non-inactive user here. B-) BTW, I recall there being some searching problems on posts made by deleted/banned users in the past (although I forget if they didn't show up at all, or just couldn't be found by username)...any idea if there might be potential problems with that? I'd hate for Hoshifransu's posts to become unfindable, for instance.

Damn you for noticing every detail! :-D :-D Invision programmers had nothing to do with that. It was implemented by me, because there are no such tools for user management.

Ah, that means it can be altered, then. :-P I know the word carries a bit of a negative connotation sometimes, but maybe something like "Lurkers" would be less ambiguous than "New Members" (which is just odd when it's used for somebody who's been registered for years).

BTW - many thanks for your tireless work. I can only imagine how much is happening behind the scenes.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Asashosakari

[Exil]

Sheesh, how obsessive do you think I am? ;-)

I'd say "equally obsessive". B-)

Psst, non-inactive user here. :-D BTW, I recall there being some searching problems on posts made by deleted/banned users in the past (although I forget if they didn't show up at all, or just couldn't be found by username)...any idea if there might be potential problems with that? I'd hate for Hoshifransu's posts to become unfindable, for instance.

Yes, I noticed tugstugi logged in the other day. No worries, though. The members in Inactive Users are candidates for deletion, so anyone who has logged in recently will be moved to a more appropriate group.

I had thought of that, and I was planning on leaving certain high-volume members in the Inactive group indefinitely, just to be on the safe side. That shouldn't be a problem, since our user database is probably under 250kB anyway.

Ah, that means it can be altered, then. :-P I know the word carries a bit of a negative connotation, but maybe something like "Lurkers" would be less ambiguous than "New Members" (which is just odd when it's used for somebody who's been registered for years).

The title can (and possibly will) be changed, but I think we need something more neutral than "Lurkers". Maybe "Normal Users", or something like that (which neatly highlights the fact that the rest of you are somewhat abnormal :-P). But as I said, this was only a proof-of-concept, and you weren't supposed to notice. Next time I'm testing something I'll just ban you until I'm done. :-D

[Sasanishiki]

Ah, that means it can be altered, then. :-D I know the word carries a bit of a negative connotation, but maybe something like "Lurkers" would be less ambiguous than "New Members" (which is just odd when it's used for somebody who's been registered for years).

The title can (and possibly will) be changed, but I think we need something more neutral than "Lurkers". Maybe "Normal Users", or something like that (which neatly highlights the fact that the rest of you are somewhat abnormal :-D). But as I said, this was only a proof-of-concept, and you weren't supposed to notice. Next time I'm testing something I'll just ban you until I'm done. ;-)

How about using "Observers" as a title? They are doing just that, and then there is no problem with how long they have been registered or in assessing the normality of one person over another.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Sasanishiki

[Guest Jubin]

How about using "Observers" as a title? They are doing just that, and then there is no problem with how long they have been registered or in assessing the normality of one person over another.

I do not understand the problem

Delete members who are not posted yet is bad idea. Most of them beginners and just learning what the sumo is. It is better if they do not post "just for" questions or "oh it's nice" answers.

The "Observer" status is acceptable. There is plenty of good and fresh information from really specialists whose comments give better understanding from sumo.

Really hoping for understanding and good basho to everybody.

[Doitsuyama]

I do not understand the problem

Delete members who are not posted yet is bad idea.

You are correct. But you are missing the topic of discussion. The talk is about members who didn't log in for years, regardless if they have posted or not.

[Guest Jubin]

You are correct. But you are missing the topic of discussion. The talk is about members who didn't log in for years, regardless if they have posted or not.

Proposal:

After 6 month from last log in member who have not valid e-mail account will be deleted

Member who have e-mail address will get reminder and after 1 month will be deleted if in this period are not logged in.

(Blushing...)

[Kishinoyama]

Proposal:

After 6 month from last log in member who have not valid e-mail account will be deleted

Member who have e-mail address will get reminder and after 1 month will be deleted if in this period are not logged in.

(Blushing...)

That is a good idea. Maybe the period of time could be lengthened to one year since the last time they logged in. I'm sure Exil can come up with something that will work (Blushing...) .

[Jakusotsu]

I'm sure Exil will handle any issue just fine without any of our advice needed.

[Asashosakari]

Looks like the script kiddies have moved on, the latest five user registrations have all been legit.

[sumolady]

Well dang, I can't find the emoticon for kissing up, so I'll just have to say it --- the mods in this forum do a tremendous job, and I really appreciate it. It's a very pleasant and informative "place."

(Sign of approval)

Angie in Texas, US