Coffeehouse Thread

37 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

rename this place ....

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    figuerres

    new name: Channel Spam - home of drive by spam that fills up the pages every few weeks.
    we have asked for changes to slow it down and MS seems to not care ...

    MS if you will not fix it then just shut the site down and move on.

  • User profile image
    Proton2

    , figuerres wrote

    new name: Channel Spam - home of drive by spam that fills up the pages every few weeks.
    we have asked for changes to slow it down and MS seems to not care ...

    MS if you will not fix it then just shut the site down and move on.

    We all know you're the one what did it. :)

    On a serious note, I told someone Chan9 was my number two, and they took me literally...

  • User profile image
    Dr Herbie

    , figuerres wrote

    new name: Channel Spam - home of drive by spam that fills up the pages every few weeks.
    we have asked for changes to slow it down and MS seems to not care ...

    MS if you will not fix it then just shut the site down and move on.

    Channel9 has changed from an 'interact with us' site to a marketing site, so the Coffeehouse is no longer a priority.  That's OK with me (a smaller forum group is easier to keep track of), but it does mean that is doesn't get much love from the C9 team who are obviously concentrating on the videos.

    I don't mind deleting spam when it occurs (I just deleted about 3 pages worth), but it takes me 4 or 5 seconds per post to delete as spam, so when there are pages and pages I'm just going to give up -- unless I can bill MS for my time ;)

    The team just needs to take the risk and give more admin rights to someone in order to deal with these DoS spam attacks when they (regularly) occur outside of MS working hours.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Here's a thought. Every time any one of us sees spam, they should take a screenshot of it and post it here (and/or e-mail the C9 team), so they get an idea of just how much spam there actually is when the admins here are asleep.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    @Sven Groot:

    I thought C9 team already got informed by the feedback forum? Why keep pointing out the obvious? It took them almost 1 year to make their textbox WP8 IE friendly for single line of code. Since 1 line = 1 year, it will takes at least 50 years to write 50 lines of code, based on rough estimation. Personally I think the spams are amusing. Because it actually takes up more than 50% of traffic here. LOLz.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    cheong

     

    Or they could just place a "delete trigger" and save deleted items to deletelog database to see.

    If they need proof to take action, it's better to implement "proof" in the system than rely on user feedback.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    cheong

    , magicalclick wrote

    @Sven Groot:

    Personally I think the spams are amusing. Because it actually takes up more than 50% of traffic here. LOLz.

    More when you also count posts generated by spams. And I can't actually laugh at that.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Ian2

    On a related note, is anyone here going to see Monty Python live?

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @magicalclick: making the textbox work on WP8 was never 1 line of code, but ignoring that....

    We are very concerned about the spam... but I can't see how this is a 50-lines of code fix. Ages ago I wrote a full system where 'trusted' users could mark something as spam and it would immediately be removed. Within days, there was an uproar on the site about this gave power to certain people and created a two-tier system of users ... the complaints continued until I removed it. Now, it seems like we need to revisit these ideas, and that people might not complain... but regardless the issue is that we have to be careful how we implement them.

    I rolled out code this morning that was intended to reduce this, but the folks doing the spamming adjusted their text very quickly to no longer hit my (admittedly very simple) check. My hope was it was automated and wouldn't adjust like that. So, now I'd like to implement a better fix. The idea is, code that scans the site every x minutes, looks for more than y posts from a single user or IP in z minutes and removes it. I hesitate to post even that much detail, but you get the idea. I'll try to get this done and running tonight in a rough form, then turn it into code that can run 24/7 shortly after... then I'll add in code to let us know when it deletes things, track failures, etc. All of which will be much more than 50 lines of code.

    As to the perception that we don't care about the forum, I'm sorry that people think that. The reality is, we are very small group of folks and we haven't switched to working on the videos, we just are stretched out a fair bit beyond our capacity. Does that mean that Microsoft doesn't place a lot of value on this site? It is hard to say, we get continuous praise for our site, for our content, for the work we've done around live broadcasts... but yeah, in the end we don't get any real funding, so we have to make do with the team we have and just try to be efficient and focused in the work we do on the site. Sadly that means that sometimes the forum doesn't get the attention that we give to the homepage, the Build live stream or other 'higher profile' activities, but we will get to it as soon as we can.

     

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @Duncanma: Hmm... one issue with my plan just showed up already, in a spammer that posted only 4 messages, and a few minutes apart. that would be very hard to distinguish (to me at least) from 'real' content.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    , Duncanma wrote

    @Duncanma: Hmm... one issue with my plan just showed up already, in a spammer that posted only 4 messages, and a few minutes apart. that would be very hard to distinguish (to me at least) from 'real' content.

    If the system let through spammers that only posted 4 threads, then that would already be much, much better than the current system which lets through everybody who wants to flood the forums with four pages of crap. If you implemented a system that stopped people (or only new users) from more than two or three threads within a certain time period we'd have 90% of the issue resolved instantly.

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @Bas: yeah, true enough. Just trying not to make something that will be easily circumvented. Continuing with *the plan*

  • User profile image
    Blue Ink

    , Duncanma wrote

    @Bas: yeah, true enough. Just trying not to make something that will be easily circumvented. Continuing with *the plan*

    I don't know what your big plan is, but did you ever consider open sourcing this thing? Instead of pestering you with our "one line of code" change that would make us happy, we could provide actual pull requests.

     

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , Duncanma wrote

    @Bas: yeah, true enough. Just trying not to make something that will be easily circumvented. Continuing with *the plan*

    Duncan: some time back I had an idea that was posted here and other saw how it was possible to use the idea as the basis of a way to slow down the crud.

    a fast re-cap of the simple basic idea:

    new accounts are more generally the ones that spam.

    often they try to post a large number of messages in a short time span.

    do not worry what ip they come from or even what is in the message.

    limit the rate at wish one member can post each day and over time and number of non spam posts let them post more often until they become a problem.

    so a new account with zero posts may get a max rate of one per hour for the first 2 days as a  example.

    then they get more each week. unless they start getting flagged for spamming

    most "real" new users should not be too hurt and should understand the problem of junk posts.

    the ones who have been creating 1-4 accounts and in an hour dumping 4 or more pages would get slowed down to where the admins can delete posts, close accounts or the spam flags can put them on a harder limit.

    seems like most of this could be totally automated and would not need you to look at the messages or the ip addresss.  only at the age of the account and the numbers of non-spam and spam posts..

     

  • User profile image
    JohnAskew

    , figuerres wrote

    *snip*

    Duncan: some time back I had an idea that was posted here and other saw how it was possible to use the idea as the basis of a way to slow down the crud.

    a fast re-cap of the simple basic idea:

    new accounts are more generally the ones that spam.

    often they try to post a large number of messages in a short time span.

    do not worry what ip they come from or even what is in the message.

    limit the rate at wish one member can post each day and over time and number of non spam posts let them post more often until they become a problem.

    so a new account with zero posts may get a max rate of one per hour for the first 2 days as a  example.

    then they get more each week. unless they start getting flagged for spamming

    most "real" new users should not be too hurt and should understand the problem of junk posts.

    the ones who have been creating 1-4 accounts and in an hour dumping 4 or more pages would get slowed down to where the admins can delete posts, close accounts or the spam flags can put them on a harder limit.

    seems like most of this could be totally automated and would not need you to look at the messages or the ip addresss.  only at the age of the account and the numbers of non-spam and spam posts..

     

    +1

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @JohnAskew: It's a valid idea, definitely. It is actually similar to the system we put in place for links. The older your account is, the more links you can have in a message before you get flagged for spam. Brand new accounts are not allowed links at all, or limited to one (I'd have to check the code).

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @Blue Ink: Haven't really thought along those lines, it was never designed to be a general purpose system, but I know the world of what can (or should) be open sourced is always evolving so we'll keep it in mind.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , Duncanma wrote

    @JohnAskew: It's a valid idea, definitely. It is actually similar to the system we put in place for links. The older your account is, the more links you can have in a message before you get flagged for spam. Brand new accounts are not allowed links at all, or limited to one (I'd have to check the code).

    also another way you can manage to make them not want to keep posting is to do this:

    if a new account or any account is seen to be trying to make to many posts to fast is that in place of just returning an error is let them keep tying to post but to use a "tar pit" on them,  just for them setup a delay in the http traffic and even chunk small replies so that "just for them" it looks like they are getting to c9 via a 200 baud modem connection.

    and then end the conversation with an error each time that fails the post.

    so it takes so long to even find out that the post failed that they get tired of trying to keep posting.

    the idea is to make them not want to post here... make it painful and slow and waste their time.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.