Textpattern Forum

You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help

#41 2005-01-21 07:14:13

Jeremie
Member
From: Provence, France
Registered: 2004-08-11
Posts: 1,578
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

Huhu the spammers don’t look at the websites, they don’t read websites, they “write” on websites.

Offline

#42 2005-01-21 07:22:59

bleveck
Member
Registered: 2004-05-30
Posts: 52
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

Yeah… I have to agree with Jeremie… I wish spammers would look at something but I doubt they will. Why go to all the trouble to recalibrate a bot when it costs almost nothing to make a post?

The main people who won are search engines who will have better indexes as a result of this thing’s adoption.

Luckily I’ve yet to be comment spammed, though I’m guess it is because texpattern is still a bit obscure.

ohh… yeah.. and because my site is obscure = )

Last edited by bleveck (2005-01-21 07:27:17)

Offline

#43 2005-01-21 08:00:11

tenthumbs
Member
Registered: 2004-11-22
Posts: 19

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

I know it wouldn’t stop the automated spam, but there are a lot of scum entering their spam manually too. A clear signal near the comment box might stop a few of those.

Offline

#44 2005-01-21 08:00:19

Jeremie
Member
From: Provence, France
Registered: 2004-08-11
Posts: 1,578
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

Nope I didn’t say nofollow was not a good idea. I say that :

  • for it to work, the spammers need to notice that spamming some blog software is worthless, and so modify their robots to cut cost down
  • that will take a least several month, because some spammers are dumb, because the method need to be widely adopted so they notice, and because spamming comment is cheap and coding is expensive so it might take a while for the recoding of spamming robots to be commercialy a good idea
  • in theory it’s wrong, because it’s Google job to clean their indexes and think of more good ways to indexing quality than popularity, but right now we are looking at damage control not big theories
  • and even if it does shit on spam quantity, it won’t give spammers backlinks, so it’s a little revenge

And that’s why I’m for it’s integration in 1.0 TXP core release, and I think it should be set on by default.

A good other way of limiting spam, maybe more effective, is to ask for an human action to open the comment form, some kind of link that every webmaster would textualize (is that english ?) for their owns needs so it would slow down spamming robots.

The great idea with nofollow, but I don’t think it work that way right now, has nothing to do with spam. It’s to tell the spider robots not to follow a specific link, it’s very useful on some wiki for example (everytime a link does something a robot shouldn’t trigger in fact).

Last edited by Jeremie (2005-01-21 08:02:06)

Offline

#45 2005-01-21 18:07:56

bleveck
Member
Registered: 2004-05-30
Posts: 52
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

Sorry for the confusion. I wasn’t saying that you thought it was a bad idea. I mainly got the feeling that you though it wasn’t going to work for a long time because most bots don’t spam on a site by site basis. They don’t carefully look at a site.

I think it definitely should be made a default in TXP. When TXP becomes more prevalent on the internet, it will become a more juicy targets for spammers (they will set their bots to look for txp’s comment form too). If rel=nofollow is part of the default set up, that target will be greatly diminished.

On the other hand, things like this do catch on pretty quickly so I’m hopeful that maybe in a year or two there will be an impact.

Oh… and tenthumbs… yeah I can’t believe people go to the trouble to hand spam, but you are right. They do. If you find a cool icon let us know.

Last edited by bleveck (2005-01-21 21:37:11)

Offline

#46 2005-01-21 20:58:09

bleveck
Member
Registered: 2004-05-30
Posts: 52
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

Compooter gave me an idea. Since live Journal is turning rel=“no follow” on for everyon except “friends” could other software do the same but link it to something like a FOAF file? I don’t really know enough about FOAF to know if there would be problems with this.

Offline

#47 2005-01-21 21:09:30

Jeremie
Member
From: Provence, France
Registered: 2004-08-11
Posts: 1,578
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

If it’s generated on demand (anyone seen a cache system in recent RC ?) it would be pretty huge load to search the link already in the database I think.

Offline

#48 2005-01-21 23:08:21

zem
Developer emeritus
From: Melbourne, Australia
Registered: 2004-04-08
Posts: 2,579
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

> Jeremie wrote:

> If it’s generated on demand (anyone seen a cache system in recent RC ?) it would be pretty huge load to search the link already in the database I think.

Yes. I considered adding a similar feature to the plugin, but decided against it for exactly that reason.


Alex
tstate

Offline

#49 2005-01-22 01:02:10

ubernostrum
Member
From: Lawrence, KS
Registered: 2004-05-05
Posts: 238
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

FOAF isn’t the only way to do that; if we had support for XFN it’d be possible to add the nofollow to anything which wasn’t already marked as a friend.


You cooin’ with my bird?

Offline

#50 2005-01-22 06:07:58

Jeremie
Member
From: Provence, France
Registered: 2004-08-11
Posts: 1,578
Website

Re: [plugin] [ORPHAN] zem_prblock

XFN is nice… for TXP2.0 :-D

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB