Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » RSD Spam-free alternative
RSD Spam-free alternative [message #113] Mon, 22 September 2008 12:46 Go to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
RSD? Membership granted upon request. Only members can join.
Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
daily digest, individual e-mails, etc). Owner can delete messages and
ban accounts.

For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).

Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
account settings?

Potential downsides I see:

Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
he cared to.
Task of membership approval by owner.

I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
all the requests.

Colin
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #115 is a reply to message #113] Mon, 22 September 2008 12:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mark -Mortakai- Moran
Messages: 152
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 12:46 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
<colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
> RSD?  Membership granted upon request.  Only members can join.
> Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
> daily digest, individual e-mails, etc).  Owner can delete messages and
> ban accounts.
>
> For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
> identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
> requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).
>
> Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
> account settings?
>
> Potential downsides I see:
>
> Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
> Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
> Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
> he cared to.
> Task of membership approval by owner.
>
> I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
> called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
> all the requests.
>
> Colin

One negative I can see is that many people will read r.s.d through the
newsgroup system, and this change would require them to move from that
to a web-based system, such as Google Groups or another of the
newsgroup-emulators out there. Not to mention the logistics of
choosing the system to use for it.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #116 is a reply to message #115] Mon, 22 September 2008 13:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 3:49 pm, Mark -Mortakai- Moran <just_morta...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 22, 12:46 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
>
>
>
> <colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
> > RSD?  Membership granted upon request.  Only members can join.
> > Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
> > daily digest, individual e-mails, etc).  Owner can delete messages and
> > ban accounts.
>
> > For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
> > identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
> > requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).
>
> > Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
> > account settings?
>
> > Potential downsides I see:
>
> > Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
> > Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
> > Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
> > he cared to.
> > Task of membership approval by owner.
>
> > I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
> > called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
> > all the requests.
>
> > Colin
>
> One negative I can see is that many people will read r.s.d through the
> newsgroup system, and this change would require them to move from that
> to a web-based system, such as Google Groups or another of the
> newsgroup-emulators out there. Not to mention the logistics of
> choosing the system to use for it.

What's a newsgroup system? This is something separate from just
receiving e-mails? And in some way superior, such that people
wouldn't want to switch? Or just the inconvenience of switching?
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #121 is a reply to message #115] Mon, 22 September 2008 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
D Rich
Messages: 19
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
Hey guys,

Good to know that you are getting sick of all the SPAM. My partner
and I are working on the new and improved Ultimate Community that will
include a forum similar to RSD. We want to hear your concerns about
what a website should have for the Ultimate Community. Visit the site
and sign up for the newsletter so you can be alerted when we launch
the site.

www.scooberville.com

Thanks alot guys,

The Scooberville Team
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #136 is a reply to message #113] Mon, 22 September 2008 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ME
Messages: 137
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
You'd allow all the requests? Google has a broken "captcha" system
that's allowing all the spam from what I understand. They're
essentially allowing all the requests.

Where you have Internet traffic, you have spam. So if your idea takes
off - same shit, different location..

Don't forget, you can get a newsreader or even use Outlook Express to
read groups (some ISPs) and setup your own spam filters or use a third
party filter. Imagine filtering out your least favorite poster
<b>and</b> all the spam - joy!

Kids these days think Google is the end all, be all of the innerweb.

Vassar
*Posted from Google Groups
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #137 is a reply to message #136] Mon, 22 September 2008 14:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Frankie
Messages: 93
Registered: September 2008
Member
"ME" <greg.vassar@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:74285c27-cf29-4795-8e0d-9e8e205cf7dd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> You'd allow all the requests? Google has a broken "captcha" system
> that's allowing all the spam from what I understand. They're
> essentially allowing all the requests.

Are you retarded? I don't go through Google to post.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #138 is a reply to message #136] Mon, 22 September 2008 14:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 5:27 pm, ME <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You'd allow all the requests?  Google has a broken "captcha" system
> that's allowing all the spam from what I understand.  They're
> essentially allowing all the requests.

Not the 124345234@32l4kj34.com requests.

>
> Where you have Internet traffic, you have spam. So if your idea takes
> off - same shit, different location..

It's not an automated member approval.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #139 is a reply to message #137] Mon, 22 September 2008 14:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ME
Messages: 137
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
My reply was to Colin, not you Frank.

If Colin has a better Captcha or spam filtering system than Google,
I'd suggest he move to Mountain View, CA and get on board with the
Internet rulers.

And Colin, you're allowing all the requests but it's not automated?
How much does the approve/not approve job pay and what are the hours?

There have been RSD replacements tried for years. All of them suck.

Vassar

On Sep 22, 5:30 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> "ME" <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:74285c27-cf29-4795-8e0d-9e8e205cf7dd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > You'd allow all the requests?  Google has a broken "captcha" system
> > that's allowing all the spam from what I understand.  They're
> > essentially allowing all the requests.
>
> Are you retarded?  I don't go through Google to post.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #142 is a reply to message #139] Mon, 22 September 2008 14:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Frankie
Messages: 93
Registered: September 2008
Member
No, your reply was to RSD. An email could have gotten to Colin if you
wanted to send him a PM.

rsd predates google by 15 years. Sergai Brin was probably in diapers when
rsd formed. You can't put a 'captcha' filter on newsgroups.

"ME" <greg.vassar@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:88f3fbd9-6ca6-43ed-a38b-5193cf317c7b@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
My reply was to Colin, not you Frank.

If Colin has a better Captcha or spam filtering system than Google,
I'd suggest he move to Mountain View, CA and get on board with the
Internet rulers.

And Colin, you're allowing all the requests but it's not automated?
How much does the approve/not approve job pay and what are the hours?

There have been RSD replacements tried for years. All of them suck.

Vassar

On Sep 22, 5:30 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> "ME" <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:74285c27-cf29-4795-8e0d-9e8e205cf7dd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > You'd allow all the requests? Google has a broken "captcha" system
> > that's allowing all the spam from what I understand. They're
> > essentially allowing all the requests.
>
> Are you retarded? I don't go through Google to post.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #146 is a reply to message #142] Mon, 22 September 2008 15:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ME
Messages: 137
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Thank you for making my point.

On Sep 22, 5:58 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> No, your reply was to RSD.  An email could have gotten to Colin if you
> wanted to send him a PM.
>
> rsd predates google by 15 years.  Sergai Brin was probably in diapers when
> rsd formed.  You can't put a 'captcha' filter on newsgroups.
>
> "ME" <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:88f3fbd9-6ca6-43ed-a38b-5193cf317c7b@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> My reply was to Colin, not you Frank.
>
> If Colin has a better Captcha or spam filtering system than Google,
> I'd suggest he move to Mountain View, CA and get on board with the
> Internet rulers.
>
> And Colin, you're allowing all the requests but it's not automated?
> How much does the approve/not approve job pay and what are the hours?
>
> There have been RSD replacements tried for years.  All of them suck.
>
> Vassar
>
> On Sep 22, 5:30 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "ME" <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:74285c27-cf29-4795-8e0d-9e8e205cf7dd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > You'd allow all the requests? Google has a broken "captcha" system
> > > that's allowing all the spam from what I understand. They're
> > > essentially allowing all the requests.
>
> > Are you retarded? I don't go through Google to post.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #150 is a reply to message #142] Mon, 22 September 2008 15:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 5:58 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> No, your reply was to RSD.  An email could have gotten to Colin if you
> wanted to send him a PM.
>
> rsd predates google by 15 years.  Sergai Brin was probably in diapers when
> rsd formed.  You can't put a 'captcha' filter on newsgroups.
>
> "ME" <greg.vas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:88f3fbd9-6ca6-43ed-a38b-5193cf317c7b@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> And Colin, you're allowing all the requests but it's not automated?
> How much does the approve/not approve job pay and what are the hours?

So this strikes you as an overwhelming task? I admittedly don't have
a great sense of the scope of it, hence the questions.

> There have been RSD replacements tried for years.  All of them suck.

The ones I've seen have been bulletin boards or other formats that
caused everyone to change how they viewed RSD. A google groups
wouldn't affect those who view RSD in web view. So my question was
whether the switch would drastically affect other users or be
otherwise infeasible. Apparently the answer is yes. Well, at least
not managing membership requests will leave me more time to look into
some of these cheap shoes I've been hearing so much about.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #201 is a reply to message #113] Mon, 22 September 2008 23:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tom.Grund
Messages: 52
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Sep 22, 2:46 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
<colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
> RSD? Membership granted upon request. Only members can join.
> Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
> daily digest, individual e-mails, etc). Owner can delete messages and
> ban accounts.
>
> For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
> identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
> requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).
>
> Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
> account settings?
>
> Potential downsides I see:
>
> Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
> Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
> Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
> he cared to.
> Task of membership approval by owner.
>
> I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
> called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
> all the requests.
>
> Colin

ULTITALK.COM
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #205 is a reply to message #113] Mon, 22 September 2008 23:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joe Seidler
Messages: 482
Registered: September 2008
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 12:46 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
<colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
> RSD?  Membership granted upon request.  Only members can join.
> Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
> daily digest, individual e-mails, etc).  Owner can delete messages and
> ban accounts.
>
> For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
> identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
> requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).
>
> Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
> account settings?
>
> Potential downsides I see:
>
> Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
> Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
> Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
> he cared to.
> Task of membership approval by owner.
>
> I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
> called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
> all the requests.
>
> Colin

What I'd really like to see is being able to limit the number of posts
by a person to say 50 a month (or some reasonable number). If someone
exceeds that number, they are banned for some period of time. If they
exceed it again after they are allowed back, they get banned for life.
That would get rid of the worst problem we have ;)
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #209 is a reply to message #150] Tue, 23 September 2008 03:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bobus
Messages: 305
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Hi Colin,

Rec.sport.disc is a usenet newsgroup - usenet being an ancient,
distributed bulletin board system built around the time of Jesus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

Google merely provides an interface for people to view and post to RSD
- keep in mind RSD pre-dates Google by 8 years or so! * However,
there are other news reader clients which provide an alternative means
of posting to usenet. Frank, and I imagine the spammers, use one of
these clients to post to RSD, thereby circumventing Google's fancy
CAPTCHA system.

In short, Google can't prevent spammers from polluting our beloved
RSD. Having said that, Google could probably do a better job with
this site (ie, groups.google.com) on filtering spam as well as adding
a feature to allow users to block posts from specific users (ie, a
kill file).

I know I'm not providing any answers, but I hope that helps explain
things...

* First RSD post:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.disc/browse_frm/mon th/1991-05
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #216 is a reply to message #209] Tue, 23 September 2008 06:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CBrowning
Messages: 190
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 23, 5:23 am, Bobus <roblo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Rec.sport.disc is a usenet newsgroup - usenet being an ancient,
> distributed bulletin board system built around the time of Jesus:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
>
> Google merely provides an interface for people to view and post to RSD
> - keep in mind RSD pre-dates Google by 8 years or so! *  However,
> there are other news reader clients which provide an alternative means
> of posting to usenet.  Frank, and I imagine the spammers, use one of
> these clients to post to RSD, thereby circumventing Google's fancy
> CAPTCHA system.
>
> In short, Google can't prevent spammers from polluting our beloved
> RSD.  Having said that, Google could probably do a better job with
> this site (ie, groups.google.com) on filtering spam as well as adding
> a feature to allow users to block posts from specific users (ie, a
> kill file).
>
> I know I'm not providing any answers, but I hope that helps explain
> things...
>
> * First RSD post:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.disc/browse_fr m/month/1991-05

Great post. I had always wondered how my searches could turn up posts
that pre-dated Google. I learned something new today. Interesting
stuff.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #227 is a reply to message #205] Tue, 23 September 2008 08:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Daag Alemayehu
Messages: 249
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 23, 2:27 am, Joe Seidler <j...@seidler.com> wrote:
> What I'd really like to see is being able to limit the number of posts
> by a person to say 50 a month (or some reasonable number). If someone
> exceeds that number, they are banned for some period of time. If they
> exceed it again after they are allowed back, they get banned for life.
> That would get rid of the worst problem we have ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'll assume you wrote this entirely joking. Otherwise, this is the
worst idea possible.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #228 is a reply to message #227] Tue, 23 September 2008 08:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Frankie
Messages: 93
Registered: September 2008
Member
No. He wasn't joking.

He is, however, a joke.


"Daag Alemayehu" <daag.alemayehu@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9aa7b2f9-9d11-48a4-9d76-d92949dcd0af@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 23, 2:27 am, Joe Seidler <j...@seidler.com> wrote:
> What I'd really like to see is being able to limit the number of posts
> by a person to say 50 a month (or some reasonable number). If someone
> exceeds that number, they are banned for some period of time. If they
> exceed it again after they are allowed back, they get banned for life.
> That would get rid of the worst problem we have ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'll assume you wrote this entirely joking. Otherwise, this is the
worst idea possible.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #243 is a reply to message #216] Tue, 23 September 2008 09:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hotlou
Messages: 73
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Sep 23, 8:59 am, CBrowning <cb.brown...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 5:23 am, Bobus <roblo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Colin,
>
> > Rec.sport.disc is a usenet newsgroup - usenet being an ancient,
> > distributed bulletin board system built around the time of Jesus:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
>
> > Google merely provides an interface for people to view and post to RSD
> > - keep in mind RSD pre-dates Google by 8 years or so! *  However,
> > there are other news reader clients which provide an alternative means
> > of posting to usenet.  Frank, and I imagine the spammers, use one of
> > these clients to post to RSD, thereby circumventing Google's fancy
> > CAPTCHA system.
>
How about our own organic social network:

Resurrected Sport Disc: http://rsdead.ning.com

Anyone want to make a committee of admins?

Joe's Brother



> > In short, Google can't prevent spammers from polluting our beloved
> > RSD.  Having said that, Google could probably do a better job with
> > this site (ie, groups.google.com) on filtering spam as well as adding
> > a feature to allow users to block posts from specific users (ie, a
> > kill file).
>
> > I know I'm not providing any answers, but I hope that helps explain
> > things...
>
> > * First RSD post:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.disc/browse_fr m/month/1991-05
>
> Great post.  I had always wondered how my searches could turn up posts
> that pre-dated Google.  I learned something new today.  Interesting
> stuff.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #258 is a reply to message #243] Tue, 23 September 2008 10:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joe Seidler
Messages: 482
Registered: September 2008
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
On Sep 23, 9:45 am, "Joe's Brother" <hot...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> How about our own organic social network:
>
> Resurrected Sport Disc:http://rsdead.ning.com
>
> Anyone want to make a committee of admins?
>
> Joe's Brother
>

Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #263 is a reply to message #258] Tue, 23 September 2008 10:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Frankie
Messages: 93
Registered: September 2008
Member
See, I told you he wasn't joking.

Ignorant fuck.

"Joe Seidler" <joe@seidler.com> wrote in message
news:715b06c0-5858-436d-b248-c38c84ddf7c3@a19g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 23, 9:45 am, "Joe's Brother" <hot...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> How about our own organic social network:
>
> Resurrected Sport Disc:http://rsdead.ning.com
>
> Anyone want to make a committee of admins?
>
> Joe's Brother
>

Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #280 is a reply to message #258] Tue, 23 September 2008 12:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hotlou
Messages: 73
Registered: September 2008
Member
> Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?

The 100 post limit seems arbitrary to me. What if all 100 posts had
meaningful content?

Disruption, in my opinion, is qualitative, not quantitative.

- Joe's Brother
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #285 is a reply to message #263] Tue, 23 September 2008 12:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
> > Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?

> See, I told you he wasn't joking.
>
> Ignorant fuck.

I'm sure it's a surprise to everyone Frank, but you might be
overstating your case a bit. Post frequency is one of many attributes
that most of the online spam filters look for (there are others: links
per post, text matches, etc). 100/month is a little low to set off
warning flags since it might be legitimate use, but anything more than
that and the likelihood of a poster being a spammer is pretty high
(either that or a very committed troll). Some systems impose a cool-
down period, where you have to lay off for so many minutes after
having posted too many times within a given time frame for example.
The idea is that the cool down won't bother humans much but will
interfere with automated spambots.

The efficacy of that sort of thing is diminishing as spammers find
ways to post from different accounts (captcha breaks) and different
ips (windows + ie = hacker's dream), but it's still part of spam
defense.

Of course, we can certainly assume that the OP wasn't talking about
filtering spammers, but rather about troll control. Since trolls
usually post from the same address, a simple kill file handles that
problem much more cleanly, with the caveat that you'll still see posts
that are replies to the trolls from folk who "browse at -1" as the
geeks say. A community-wide kill file (ban) is usually counter-
productive since it just generates angry trolls, who then become very
spammer-like, coming back on with different handles and generally
being more of a nuisance than before. You can even get into RL
problems when trolls feel jilted by the ban. IMHO, it's better to let
the trolls slowly release pressure by spewing easily filtered garbage
on a regular basis rather than having them build it up and cause even
more trouble. Then again, I'm the kind of guy who enjoys messing with
trolls (obviously), so we might say that I'm not really taking the
problem as seriously as I should/could be.

That's a lot of ink, but the gist I suppose is that you can calm down
and worry no more: as long as there are internets, there will be a
place where you can tilt at windmills and call people names when they
don't agree with you.

~p
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #300 is a reply to message #116] Tue, 23 September 2008 14:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mark -Mortakai- Moran
Messages: 152
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Sep 22, 1:00 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
<colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 22, 3:49 pm, Mark -Mortakai- Moran <just_morta...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 12:46 pm, "colinmcint...@gmail.com"
>
> > <colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What are the reasons against creating a restricted group to replace
> > > RSD?  Membership granted upon request.  Only members can join.
> > > Members can choose their account settings (no-email web view only,
> > > daily digest, individual e-mails, etc).  Owner can delete messages and
> > > ban accounts.
>
> > > For those viewing RSD in web view, I think that this would be
> > > identical, except there could be spam management (through membership
> > > requirement, spam post deletion, etc.).
>
> > > Could people achieve the same results as usenet just by altering their
> > > account settings?
>
> > > Potential downsides I see:
>
> > > Difficulty in transitioning RSD posters to new group.
> > > Looming threat of censorship by the gatekeeper, if s/he cared to.
> > > Looming threat of selective membership approval by the gatekeeper if s/
> > > he cared to.
> > > Task of membership approval by owner.
>
> > > I'm sick enough of all this spam that I'd be happy to create a group
> > > called "RSD Replacement" and invite a whole bunch of users and allow
> > > all the requests.
>
> > > Colin
>
> > One negative I can see is that many people will read r.s.d through the
> > newsgroup system, and this change would require them to move from that
> > to a web-based system, such as Google Groups or another of the
> > newsgroup-emulators out there. Not to mention the logistics of
> > choosing the system to use for it.
>
> What's a newsgroup system?  This is something separate from just
> receiving e-mails?  And in some way superior, such that people
> wouldn't want to switch?  Or just the inconvenience of switching?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Usenet newsgroups... much older than the world-wide web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroup
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #306 is a reply to message #280] Tue, 23 September 2008 15:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joe Seidler
Messages: 482
Registered: September 2008
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
On Sep 23, 12:30 pm, "Joe's Brother" <hot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?
>
> The 100 post limit seems arbitrary to me.  What if all 100 posts had
> meaningful content?
>
> Disruption, in my opinion, is qualitative, not quantitative.
>
> - Joe's Brother

Any number would be arbitrary, but the intent is a good one. Sometimes
many of us get caught up in the heat of an online argument, and I for
one would welcome a limit to help bring me back to normal. And as a
reader, I would welcome a respite from the same person posting 30-40
times in the same thread... almost always repeating the same things
over and over. And duplicating that quantity in thread after thread
after thread.

Picking the appropriate number should probably entail taking a look at
how many rsd posters in the past few years have posted more than 100
times a month. And 200. And 300... Then select a small percentage, say
1%, and put the limit where it would have impacted less than 1% of the
posters. I don't know what that number would be, but I wouldn't be
surprised if it's under 100-150.
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #376 is a reply to message #306] Wed, 24 September 2008 12:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joe Seidler
Messages: 482
Registered: September 2008
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
On Sep 23, 3:43 pm, Joe Seidler <j...@seidler.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 12:30 pm, "Joe's Brother" <hot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Can it limit each poster to a maximum of 100 posts per month?
>
> > The 100 post limit seems arbitrary to me.  What if all 100 posts had
> > meaningful content?
>
> > Disruption, in my opinion, is qualitative, not quantitative.
>
> > - Joe's Brother
>
> Any number would be arbitrary, but the intent is a good one. Sometimes
> many of us get caught up in the heat of an online argument, and I for
> one would welcome a limit to help bring me back to normal. And as a
> reader, I would welcome a respite from the same person posting 30-40
> times in the same thread... almost always repeating the same things
> over and over. And duplicating that quantity in thread after thread
> after thread.
>
> Picking the appropriate number should probably entail taking a look at
> how many rsd posters in the past few years have posted more than 100
> times a month. And 200. And 300... Then select a small percentage, say
> 1%, and put the limit where it would have impacted less than 1% of the
> posters. I don't know what that number would be, but I wouldn't be
> surprised if it's under 100-150.

So far this month:
179 joadnt...@ec.rr.com
142 billy_ber...@sbcglobal.net (aka Frankie no spam)
78 MrPinto@gmail.com
51 jacobsi...@gmail.com
50 Mark -Mortakai- Moran
41 Baer
41 colinmcintyre@gmail.com
24 h.infecti...@gmail.com
23 swillaho...@yahoo.com
23 cicitrad...@yahoo.cn
Re: RSD Spam-free alternative [message #387 is a reply to message #376] Wed, 24 September 2008 14:27 Go to previous message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
> So far this month:
> 179 joadnt...@ec.rr.com
> 142 billy_ber...@sbcglobal.net (aka Frankie no spam)
> 78 MrPi...@gmail.com
> 51 jacobsi...@gmail.com
> 50 Mark -Mortakai- Moran
> 41 Baer
> 41 colinmcint...@gmail.com
> 24 h.infecti...@gmail.com
> 23 swillaho...@yahoo.com
> 23 cicitrad...@yahoo.cn

Wow... My pace is 3.25 a day, which means I come in between 97 and 98
this month if I keep it up, just short of a hypothetical limit. I
benefit from the short month though - a month with 31 days puts me
over. Still, my numbers are dependent - I'm pretty much just here to
mess with the trolls. If you limit our two trolls to 100/month as
well, you'd have to figure that my posts would fall in direct ratio.
Since our trolls are on track for almost exactly 400 posts this month
between them and the new limit would put them at a flat 200 (assuming
they'd max out the new limit, an assumption that I'd consider safe).
That leaves me at a tidy 50/month, cleanly under the limit.

Question though: are there roll-over minutes? Toad is a steady stream
but Frank tends to have bursts of activity followed by bursts of
silence. I.e., Toad wouldn't benefit much from rollover since he'd go
over every month, but Frank surely would: adopting rollover might
allow him to avoid changing his behavior at all. Since we've
hypothesized that my numbers are highly dependent on troll activity,
that would help me too in a "manic" month like this one.

You know, hypothetically.

~p
ps, Heisenberg says: I'll probably end up going over 100 this month if
I talk about the monthly limits any more... =)
Previous Topic:Central Plains Sectionals Photos
Next Topic:is there an end?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Feb 26 23:17:07 PST 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software