




Poll: Should we have the "wall of shame"?
This poll is closed.
Keep the wall of shame
20.00%
8 20.00%
Purge spammers without notice
70.00%
28 70.00%
Don't care either way
10.00%
4 10.00%
Total 40 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[Resolved] Inappropriate users

#1
Not everyone is happy with us having a "wall of shame", highlighting the users with illegal, offensive or inappropriate posts (who then get purged).

What do you think?

The poll results are clear: 4 to 1 in favor of just banning inappropriate users, without publishing a wall of shame.

Many pointed out that it does not seem to deter spammers, or those who don't care to read or conform to the guidelines they agreed to when signing up.

Thank you all for weighing in!
James Parry
Project Lead
Reply

#2
I don't mind the wall of shame but, does a spammer really care about "shame"?
Reply

#3
I doubt they care. In some cases it might be better to do like Twitter and have a "shadow ban".
Reply

#4
I voted, don't care either way.

I think you'll find a little of column A and a little of column B in users who get spanked. Some will be, "oops, sorry, won't happen again".

I know it's extra work, but the fairest option I can see is give them a chance, post them on the wall and if they shape up, then all's well, if not, then the almighty ban hammer.

Either way it goes, I'm fine with it.
Reply

#5
I voted purge them without notice but I wonder if there is a forum tool/plugin that has a better way of stopping forum spammers.
Reply

#6
I think the wall of shame can serve a great purpose. If stickied somewhere, new members may be more inclined to view it, therefor potentially preventing them from getting a position on the wall of shame. Either way, I hope all works out in the end, no matter what the votes decide Smile
Reply

#7
why not just call this a 'ban log' or something like that, avoid judicial problems, 'wall of shame' is something vexatious and humiliating, depending on what the user has done
Reply

#8
(01-16-2018, 09:23 AM)andersonunsonst Wrote: why not just call this a 'ban log' or something like that, avoid judicial problems, 'wall of shame' is something vexatious and humiliating, depending on what the user has done

No matter how you call it, it lists mostly (if not entirely) spammers, so if it was actually humiliating to them, I'd say "good"!

Problem is, a lot of them might be bots, and those who aren't don't care and they probably won't ever see it - they came, they spammed, they left. So unless a regular forum user lands on it, it doesn't really act as a deterrent.

More like a reminder that somebody is actually keeping things in order, because that often stays behind the scenes and people rarely appreciate what they don't see - that's why I haven't voiced any displeasure anyway.
Reply

#9
If that is the case, you might want to make use of something I made years ago for a gaming community, who had to deal with annoying users and spambots. It doesn't stop all of them, but in combination with other plugins like StopForumSpam we had minimal to zero spambots or annoyances who came back after being banned due to the hazzle.

Do with it as you please. Just my few cents.

https://pastebin.com/bE1bm1Y8
Reply

#10
I'm only here for the development of codeigniter and trying to help people who have issues. As a business owner, a wall of shame just seems very juvenile and middle school for me. That's just my opinion though. I don't see walls of shame in other communities that are thriving and much larger. It just comes across as wasted time when we all should be focussed on trying to make an awesome framework. Again, that's just my 2 cents.
Codeigniter is simply one of the tools you need to learn to be a successful developer. Always add more tools to your coding arsenal!
Reply


Digg   Delicious   Reddit   Facebook   Twitter   StumbleUpon  


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)


  Theme © 2014 iAndrew  
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.  
https://forum.codeigniter.com/thread-69772-post-350496.html
forum.codeigniter.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-13
59778
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:64J4RL24JQVZEHWEC3G54ZRKNPMUQAYR
<urn:uuid:0ea05857-9641-4a12-b65e-70327190f4ca>
2019-03-22T16:35:58Z
104.27.152.103
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:7SP5HV3H5QFTPZF4U5HPQX4VFYJ5ECP5
<urn:uuid:a7143107-c80b-4b0d-8803-10def3704a3c>
https://forum.codeigniter.com/thread-69772-post-350496.html
response
<urn:uuid:1a74edc8-937b-4000-b91f-832ce9bf46cf>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-13
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for March 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-186-104-161.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/