Login

twpmarketing · 12-05-2018, 11:35 AM

Personally, I find Stack Overflow to be too convoluted and not a source of clear answers to questions. I seldom read anything there. I do recognize that it works for some people.

I do acknowledge the time and effort needed on the part of the CI team to maintain this forum. Thank you for that.

As a moderator on another forum, it is a problem to keep track of the potential and real bad actors. I have exercised the "ban hammer" when my recommended actions were ignored or the forum rules were not followed after repeated warnings. I see no better way to handle those who ignore forum rules.

Spam happens to every forum and I do recommend using the anti-spam lists. If that is used, then I still recommend a channel through which users can lodge objections if, for instance, they get booted due to being on the anti-spam list.

I'll also vote in favor of increasing the post count before granting linking or signature privileges.

I know, it is more work for the moderators... No easy solution seems available.

But, you do deserve thanks for keeping CI alive and growing.

CI 3.1 Kubuntu 19.04 Apache 5.x  Mysql 5.x PHP 5.x PHP 7.x
Remember: Obfuscation is a bad thing.
Clarity is desirable over Brevity every time.

Poll: Which of the following policies do you support, for spam control? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
disable signatures on posts	4.55%	4	4.55%
don't allow company logos for avatars	10.23%	9	10.23%
don't allow signatures or avatars during probationary period	10.23%	9	10.23%
increase moderated posts (probation) from 2 to 5	9.09%	8	9.09%
insist on oauth authentication/login	5.68%	5	5.68%
only allow non-probationary users to use links in posts	11.36%	10	11.36%
only allow letters, digits & underscore in user names (no emails)	12.50%	11	12.50%
purge "inane" posters (or redirect them to w3schools?)	6.82%	6	6.82%
use filter to identify spam content (akismet?)	14.77%	13	14.77%
use "nofollow" links everywhere	14.77%	13	14.77%
Total		88 vote(s)	100%