Spammer

John Creighton · 2005-07-07 19:46:17

Ah, nothing like some pointless internet drama between people one shall never meet in person to make one get up and go outside. If a lowly spambot can sow such discord I can't wait for the fireworks on the way to Mars.
Time to step out the airlock for a spell.

Lol Commander Cobra. My thoughts exactly. All though I think such drama has no place on these boards it somehow makes me read it. I guess we all need a little drama.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 19:59:44

Heheh, can't say I agree with you more Cobra Commander.

clark, let me be very clear, what someones profile says is mostly their business, the primary basis for banning someone is their personal behavior, it has practically nothing to do with their profile.

In that instance, I probably would not have done anything. And I see no reason to delete posters who haven't even posted but have "questionable" interests in their profile. After all, that would be too much work.

In the end, though, it depends on our moods, really (and I was pretty pissed off that that bot had posted dozens of posts on the forum I go to, and since there are no admins ever present, the spam still lingers). :angry:

clark · 2005-07-07 20:08:14

Oh the failure of the written word! My love, my bane, our shared affliction!

What sarcasm do you detect? Is it of my intent, or perhaps merely a reflection of your own misunderstanding? You offer a conclusion based on an assumption. There are no emoticons included, no verbal intonation to guide, no body language to interpret- yet somehow I must defend my heartfelt, sincere, and deep, deep, apology from yours and others choice of interpretation.

And contrary to popular belief, I am not attempting to hijack this thread or any other thread. Perhaps the failing is mine, but I have always considered my posts to be more or less relevant to the discussion at hand. In this case, spam.

All about spam. Questions about spam. Behaviors related to spam. Decisions made based on spam. Spam, spam, spam. I'm not derailing this thread or that thread with yet another politcal rehash of the last 100 years of military history, or the current state of affairs in some far flung country. Heck, I'm not even writing about a fantasy religion and bunnies.

Even the previous posts, prior to my sincere, deep, and very heartfelt apology within this thread were on the subject of spam. Perhaps others wish to read more into it, which I admit, have led to all manner of misunderstandings.

I am not filling countless threads with my theory of spam. I am not preaching for a spam free Mars to any who will listen. I am discussing my opinion, my view, and my questions about spam, in, wait for it, a thread titled "spammer". If not here John, then where?

As for what these boards are supposed to be about, with all due respect, isn't that for the members and contributors to decide? Your theory, while quaint, is outdated given the rather free-form dialogue that takes place routinely throughout all the various areas of this board. Or would you suggest that threads, I,II,III,IV,V,VI, ad infinitum about politics has anything to do with Mars?

And yes John, I do read all the emails that I receive in my hotmail account. I either receive a record of PM's from newmars, or hate mail from one person. Wager a guess who?

Anyway, I will try not to disappoint you by only producing writing of the quality you have come to expect. Cheers.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 20:13:45

clark, hush. I answered your question. No, profiles are not a reason real to ban someone, but as always, it depends on whether or not our benevolency is shining that day.

So hush, okay? ???

clark · 2005-07-07 20:16:04

In the end, though, it depends on our moods, really

I for one look forward to being held accountable by your ever changing emotional state. I applaude you for taking a very rational approach to being an Admin.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 20:21:56

That's reality clark, you should be glad we're not filling out some subjective set of rules and forcing people to comply with it despite the rules not being able to apply to every single situation. In the end, we will always have complainers, and out of respect I will not characterize the ones (note the plural) that are most vocal here.

clark · 2005-07-07 20:34:54

Glad? Here you go again assuming you know what I think.

So instead of a list of subjective rules that are forced down our throats, we get a murky list that is haphazardly applied? Only an anarchist would think that is some kind of enlightened achievement.

As for complainers, I'm not complaining. I'm talking, or posting as the case may be, which is the whole point of this place. If no one posted, then there would be no board. So call me a complainer if you want. Everyone is a complainer.

But you and I know what I am. A pain in the- oh, there I go again with those dang metaphors.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 20:43:19

Haphazardly? You're not satisified with how we do things here? Do you know how quickly you'd be banned on a forum that actually had major rules and regulations? It's like you're not satisified that we took a complaint seriously (far be it for you to actually believe someone you're fueding with), and you want to open up this pandoras box essentially accusing us of not having some "master plan."

Please, by all means, tell us how badly we're running things. Clarify your "haphazardly" statement.

clark · 2005-07-07 21:00:33

Do I know how quickly I would be banned?

Yes. Yes I do. Same situation, no defined rules, just emotional judgement calls.

Of course, those forums and boards with major rules are easier to follow. Behavior is regulated by the understanding of the expectations. Here, the expectations go pretty much unsaid.

Take for instance "trolling". Our Admin's routinely engage in the behavior. Yet trolling is a banning or deleting offense.

Cursing? Since this is NewMars, and children of all ages ostenibily might be looking up things about Mars and the Mars Society, wouldn't it make sense to reduce swearing? The board is sort of set up to filter swear words, but again, there is no rule against it.

I of course assume that if I engaged in a post full of nothing but swear words about Mars, the post would be deleted. Haphazard.

Look, I am not saying I want strict rules. I'm calling a fucking spade a spade.

As for complaining about taking action- I generally don't. I defer to your judgement. I don't always agree, but I do defer.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 21:19:33

I generally don't. I defer to your judgement. I don't always agree, but I do defer.

Do you agree with the banning of the spammer? Or do you simply disagree with the "potential" thought process that occurs?

clark · 2005-07-07 21:39:14

The potential thought process.

You got rid of a spam bot. Come on, no brainer. Even if it said "happy fluffy butterflies", the bots have got to go. I'm not that far gone.

But deleting based on what? Harrassment? Define it. Is a simple accussation enough, or is evidence required? If evidence, what kind and how much?

If a new user with one post to their name starts saying an older established user is harrassing, what then? How do you decide who to believe in the absence of any evidence? is it different if it is an older user accusing a newer one?

Yes, this is a long winded and winding way to get to the intellectual heart of the matter. Philosphy once more.

If I had a serious problem with how things were run here, I wouldn't come. My presence, my posting, is acceptance of the rules (such as they are) and the judgement of the admins. If I really disliked something, I can leave. Right?

Consent by association. :;): But I still like to understand what I am associating with.

John Creighton · 2005-07-07 21:44:19

I just want to say that new mars has been very fortunate that members have regulated themselves with the need for rules. It is when then conduct in the board starts to change from it’s original intents that the need for rules becomes apparent. Although I haven’t frequentled the board lately from my view of recent events it may be time to start making the rules more clear and explicit.

John Creighton · 2005-07-07 21:53:38

But deleting based on what? Harrassment? Define it. Is a simple accussation enough, or is evidence required? If evidence, what kind and how much?
If a new user with one post to their name starts saying an older established user is harrassing, what then? How do you decide who to believe in the absence of any evidence? is it different if it is an older user accusing a newer one?

If the admins could read the PM’s then there would be no need to rely on anyones word. However, It would be my inclination to trust a member more who has earned trust though good behavior on the boards then a new member. If the new member denies the actions hopfuly another solution could be found. As for emails, an email would be outside of the domain of the board and should not concern the administrators on the board.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-07 22:10:48

If I really disliked something, I can leave. Right?
Consent by association. But I still like to understand what I am associating with.

Well you already know that, don't you? We can figure out who to ban, it's up to you to decide if we made the right choice. Pretty simple. So what's all this rambling about? Are you asking for a clearer explaination as to how we go about things? How can "we wing it" be any less clear? And since you clearly have no complaint (after all, you claim to not be a complainer), why must it be discussed further? It should end now.

clark · 2005-07-08 07:13:06

Well, here ya go, more spam:

http://www.newmars.com/cgi-bin/ikonboar … ...3;t=909

John Creighton · 2005-09-22 13:26:19

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … highlight=

I know it is not spam but arguing about who has a better collage degree seems like a waste of bandwidth. Perhaps the thread should be closed or set to invisible.

John Creighton · 2005-10-31 12:58:58

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … highlight=

Rxke · 2005-11-29 18:41:48

Josh, user Tarokan adspammed the talkpage of the mainpage of the wiki. I deleted the stuff, as you can see, but I suggest you lock out the user.

Josh Cryer · 2005-11-29 19:34:07

Thanks.

Rxke · 2005-11-30 02:18:34

:?

When I spotted it, i merely wiped the talkpage, but i can't figure out how to *restore* it to the prvious content, or is that only possible for the admin?

John Creighton · 2005-11-30 11:28:27

:?
When I spotted it, i merely wiped the talkpage, but i can't figure out how to *restore* it to the prvious content, or is that only possible for the admin?

In recent changes you can see what change each person made to the page. So I think you can copy and paste the text from there or perhaps there is even a revert button. There is also a page history on the page. I am not sure if that can be used. Maybe even on the page history there is a way to revert to a previous version.

John Creighton · 2005-11-30 11:33:32

Okay, this works. On recent changes click on the link that says diff right beside the revision that you don’t like. There should be two columns. An old column represent the old version and a column representing the revision. There is a link on the column above the old version and if you click on it you can then view the old version. If you then edit this page you could copy the text from the old page to the new page.

noosfractal · 2005-11-30 16:45:33

Just an FYI - you don't need to copy and paste.
To revert to a previous version,
click on history
then click on the date of the version you want
then click on edit this page
it will say: WARNING: You are editing an out-of-date revision of this page.
but that's what you want in this case
then click save page.
This works even when vandals try sneaky things like multiple edits.

Rxke · 2005-11-30 16:49:33

Cool. i just knew it was a clickety-click operation but forgot how to do it.

Thanks, Noosfractal.

John Creighton · 2005-12-02 02:27:22

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … highlight=

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2005-07-07 19:46:17

Re: Spammer

#27 2005-07-07 19:59:44

Re: Spammer

#28 2005-07-07 20:08:14

Re: Spammer

#29 2005-07-07 20:13:45

Re: Spammer

#30 2005-07-07 20:16:04

Re: Spammer

#31 2005-07-07 20:21:56

Re: Spammer

#32 2005-07-07 20:34:54

Re: Spammer

#33 2005-07-07 20:43:19

Re: Spammer

#34 2005-07-07 21:00:33

Re: Spammer

#35 2005-07-07 21:19:33

Re: Spammer

#36 2005-07-07 21:39:14

Re: Spammer

#37 2005-07-07 21:44:19

Re: Spammer

#38 2005-07-07 21:53:38

Re: Spammer

#39 2005-07-07 22:10:48

Re: Spammer

#40 2005-07-08 07:13:06

Re: Spammer

#41 2005-09-22 13:26:19

Re: Spammer

#42 2005-10-31 12:58:58

Re: Spammer

#43 2005-11-29 18:41:48

Re: Spammer

#44 2005-11-29 19:34:07

Re: Spammer

#45 2005-11-30 02:18:34

Re: Spammer

#46 2005-11-30 11:28:27

Re: Spammer

#47 2005-11-30 11:33:32

Re: Spammer

#48 2005-11-30 16:45:33

Re: Spammer

#49 2005-11-30 16:49:33

Re: Spammer

#50 2005-12-02 02:27:22

Re: Spammer

Board footer