The 4 reports autoban needs to be implemented ASAP

jvvg

I'm going to respond to this post kind out of order.

We don't live in a sanctuary. You're disregarding every single problem with it pretending it doesn't exist.

If by “living in a sanctuary”, you mean perfect world, I completely agree. That is why this needs to be implemented. We get commercial spammers more and more often, and there's always the chance that someone will attack the forums with inappropriate images.
Also, I am not pretending that the problems do not exist. Any user on Scratch 1.4 will attest to the fact that a user was never autobanned unfairly.

You're assuming that the reason why there's never been any similar offense again is because of this autoban, yet it's only ever happened twice, and the autoban hasn't been a long-term thing. It isn't happening now, is it? All we need is a New-Scratcher filter, to stop them from saying certain words before being a scratcher, thus cleaning up the only clear problem you're trying to remove.

I apologize for being a bit unclear there. Although it was created to stop inappropriate images, that is not what it has usually used for since. The New Scratcher status also limits commercial spam. This is simply another way to more effectively prevent it.

It's more than possible for these gangs to show up, and if this new 4 ban happens, I think it will lead to collaborations being banned - they're almost a perfect host for this bullying. Someone doesn't like the collab? Team up on them. Got criticism you didn't like? Ban them. And DON'T get me started on what will happen if a famous scratcher states that they don't like AE studios or something else…

That is true, but unlikely. However, remember that if a gang does show up, all offending users will be banned from Scratch (probably permanently), while the user they target will only be banned for up to 2 hours. They also will have a hard time coming back with new accounts because the accounts need to be of Scratcher status for reports to count. The way you are phrasing it, you make it sound like a user can be permanently silenced because another user or group of users doesn't like them, while in reality it is only for two hours, while users are gone for way more than that (I spend 8 hours sleeping every night, for example).

joshuaho

MrKyurem wrote:
It's more than possible for these gangs to show up, and if this new 4 ban happens, I think it will lead to collaborations being banned - they're almost a perfect host for this bullying. Someone doesn't like the collab? Team up on them. Got criticism you didn't like? Ban them. And DON'T get me started on what will happen if a famous scratcher states that they don't like AE studios or something else…

We don't live in a sanctuary. You're disregarding every single problem with it pretending it doesn't exist.

If the 4 report auto ban was not implemented, the results could be very dangerous. Let us say that this suggestion did not exist. One day, a spam bot spammed the forums. It posted links to dangerous sites. Now since the 4 report auto ban did not exist, the spam bot could spam the forums. And it did, repeatedly. Now, people did get to report the topic, but the Scratch Team was only on the Scratch Website every 2 hours. Before the Scratch Team got to the reports, this spam bot continued to spam the forums. A new scratcher happened to come to the spam topic. He visited the link and got his identity stolen. This information was used by a malicious internet - goer who went to the scratcher's banking account and drew out lots of money.

Now, this is my ending question: Which is better? To be banned temporarily by rare accidents or to have your identity stolen?

And as for me, I would rather be banned by rare accidents then to have my identity stolen.

AonymousProfessor

MrKyurem wrote:
You're assuming that the reason why there's never been any similar offense again is because of this autoban, yet it's only ever happened twice, and the autoban hasn't been a long-term thing. It isn't happening now, is it? All we need is a New-Scratcher filter, to stop them from saying certain words before being a scratcher, thus cleaning up the only clear problem you're trying to remove.

It's more than possible for these gangs to show up, and if this new 4 ban happens, I think it will lead to collaborations being banned - they're almost a perfect host for this bullying. Someone doesn't like the collab? Team up on them. Got criticism you didn't like? Ban them. And DON'T get me started on what will happen if a famous scratcher states that they don't like AE studios or something else…

We don't live in a sanctuary. You're disregarding every single problem with it pretending it doesn't exist.

Well, you say we are assuming that no one will try to ban others unfairly.

It seems that you believe that this would be a worse problem than spambots.

Spambots spam up the forums, potentially stealing your information, and they also take moderators time.

Spambots, however, wouldn't be able to use this. Only users who are not new scratchers.

You say that people will destroy AE's and collabs, and that happened even before this was implemented.
You can't just make 4 alt accounts and ban everyone.
Besides, how would you communicate with other people that you wanted to ban someone? You can't PM very easily, and you obviously can't post it somewhere public. So where are you going to tell others to help you ban people?

BitmapProductions

@joshuaho We already have spam bots. My personal information is fine, so spambots are not a valid problem. Links don't work (and shouldn't show up) as a New Scratcher, so no problem there.

@AonymousProfessor Spambots are virtually harmless with the New Scratcher limitations we have. No problems.
No it hasn't. I've yet to see a case where moderators have given in to Scratcher abuse and banned AE studio creators.
You'd communicate the same way you'd communicate when reporting spam. You wouldn't - you'd just think the same thing.

@jvvg I didn't say that abuse of this has happened before - I'm saying it could happen. And New Scratchers have limitations (you say this in your next paragraph), so spambots are currently harmless.
While 2 hours is very small, it can scare new members into thinking they're permabanned and can irritate people who are working on big projects - they've done this massive update and it's lost because of abuse.
And by banning a member for abusing reporting systems, you're basically giving a baby a lollipop, but punching it whenever it tries to eat. Best it doesn't get the lollipop to begin with.

MrKyurem

BitmapProductions wrote:
@joshuaho We already have spam bots. My personal information is fine, so spambots are not a valid problem. Links don't work (and shouldn't show up) as a New Scratcher, so no problem there.

@AonymousProfessor Spambots are virtually harmless with the New Scratcher limitations we have. No problems.
No it hasn't. I've yet to see a case where moderators have given in to Scratcher abuse and banned AE studio creators.
You'd communicate the same way you'd communicate when reporting spam. You wouldn't - you'd just think the same thing.

@jvvg I didn't say that abuse of this has happened before - I'm saying it could happen. And New Scratchers have limitations (you say this in your next paragraph), so spambots are currently harmless.
While 2 hours is very small, it can scare new members into thinking they're permabanned and can irritate people who are working on big projects - they've done this massive update and it's lost because of abuse.
And by banning a member for abusing reporting systems, you're basically giving a baby a lollipop, but punching it whenever it tries to eat. Best it doesn't get the lollipop to begin with.

Forgot to log out, that's me.

AonymousGuy

BitmapProductions wrote:
@AonymousProfessor Spambots are virtually harmless with the New Scratcher limitations we have. No problems.
No it hasn't. I've yet to see a case where moderators have given in to Scratcher abuse and banned AE studio creators.
You'd communicate the same way you'd communicate when reporting spam. You wouldn't - you'd just think the same thing.

Spambots are not harmless because they:

Generate more messages for moderators which are completely unnecessary
Post links to virus websites, even if they are not hyperlinked
Make it harder to find legitimate topics
Are just generally annoying for those people who report them

So I do not think they are “virtually harmless.”
If there were 120 spambots, there could be one posting spam topics every second!

OrcaCat

Support.

joshuaho

BitmapProductions wrote:
@joshuaho We already have spam bots. My personal information is fine, so spambots are not a valid problem. Links don't work (and shouldn't show up) as a New Scratcher, so no problem there.
.

I know that there are already spam bots. And about the link, no, they don't use the [url] tag, they just paste it. Any one can copy it and paste it to their “doom”.

Last edited by joshuaho (Dec. 27, 2013 23:30:29)

MrKyurem

AonymousGuy wrote:
BitmapProductions wrote:
@AonymousProfessor Spambots are virtually harmless with the New Scratcher limitations we have. No problems.
No it hasn't. I've yet to see a case where moderators have given in to Scratcher abuse and banned AE studio creators.
You'd communicate the same way you'd communicate when reporting spam. You wouldn't - you'd just think the same thing.
Spambots are not harmless because they:
Generate more messages for moderators which are completely unnecessary
Post links to virus websites, even if they are not hyperlinked
Make it harder to find legitimate topics
Are just generally annoying for those people who report them

So I do not think they are “virtually harmless.”
If there were 120 spambots, there could be one posting spam topics every second!

Which is why I said there should be a url block for new scratchers.

And the 4 report autoban won't work anyway. Spambots never use the same account - they use 1 account for about 2 posts, then make a new one.

110Percent

Definite support.
There are so many malicious trolls out there.

We need to RISE UP AGAINST THEM!!!

Sorry for the really cheesy quote.

NoxSpooth

MrKyurem wrote:
Spambots never use the same account - they use 1 account for about 2 posts, then make a new one.

Which is why the 4 report autoban is needed. If we are able to quickly remove the spam, instead of just watching the spambots post more and more and waiting for a Scratch Team member to remove it manually, then it would be easier to stop those accounts.

MrKyurem

NoxSpooth wrote:
MrKyurem wrote:
Spambots never use the same account - they use 1 account for about 2 posts, then make a new one.
Which is why the 4 report autoban is needed. If we are able to quickly remove the spam, instead of just watching the spambots post more and more and waiting for a Scratch Team member to remove it manually, then it would be easier to stop those accounts.

That makes no sense. You're banning the user, not the IP.

NoxSpooth

MrKyurem wrote:
NoxSpooth wrote:
MrKyurem wrote:
Spambots never use the same account - they use 1 account for about 2 posts, then make a new one.
Which is why the 4 report autoban is needed. If we are able to quickly remove the spam, instead of just watching the spambots post more and more and waiting for a Scratch Team member to remove it manually, then it would be easier to stop those accounts.

That makes no sense. You're banning the user, not the IP.

Which one do you think it's better? Having to wait a ST member to get online and remove all spam posts, which might take some hours, or being able to report and take down the spam immediately?

Also, I believe it does ban the IP as well.

Last edited by NoxSpooth (Dec. 28, 2013 00:24:35)

AonymousGuy

I think jvvg should make it more clear that this is already going to be implemented and suggest that you read the ticket so you know exactly what it will do.

MrKyurem

NoxSpooth wrote:
MrKyurem wrote:
NoxSpooth wrote:
MrKyurem wrote:
Spambots never use the same account - they use 1 account for about 2 posts, then make a new one.
Which is why the 4 report autoban is needed. If we are able to quickly remove the spam, instead of just watching the spambots post more and more and waiting for a Scratch Team member to remove it manually, then it would be easier to stop those accounts.

That makes no sense. You're banning the user, not the IP.
Which one do you think it's better? Having to wait a ST member to get online and remove all spam posts, which might take some hours, or being able to report and take down the spam immediately?

Also, I believe it does ban the IP as well.

You're missing the point - if it doesn't ban the IP, then that means that the ban will do nothing - it'll just make a new account.

NoxSpooth

MrKyurem wrote:
You're missing the point - if it doesn't ban the IP, then that means that the ban will do nothing - it'll just make a new account.

Actually…

If the score reaches a trigger level (adjustable - set to 4), the post content is removed from view and replaced with a “being reviewed” message in a contrasting color (currently red). The owner of the post is blocked and IP blocked or a temporary period

Paddle2See

I think we are in agreement that the option worked pretty well on the old site - and it should probably be implemented here. It's a matter of finding the resources to get it done. We have a lot of things that need work and not that many people to make them happen

We do appreciate that there is a fair amount of spambot activity (probably 10+ posts a day) and it takes work from both the community and the moderators to get rid of it - but it's actually not all that bad, considering we get about 1000 posts per day total. Thanks for all your great reports that help keep our site mostly spam free

NASA-Space

We need it , Great idea but if they recieve 2 spam Alerts , They are IP Banned . A bit rude .

ev3commander

12% support. As AmayaCreates said, you can create accounts that are alternate and then have them become Scratchers.

seanbobe

semisupport.
-user is working on awesome project offline.
-4 idiots report same users same comment online.
-user uploads project and without saving xes out of offline scratch.
-project fails to upload due to autoban.
-user goes online to notice saying user was banned.
-user cannot find project
-chaos

Discuss Scratch