pm abuse? - Printable Version

pm abuse? - Printable Version

-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+---- Forum: Forum & Website (/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+----- Thread: pm abuse? (/showthread.php?tid=52606)

pm abuse? by Millenium_edition on 11-04-2005 at 08:43 AM

[Image: joelm1.jpg]
[Image: joelm2.jpg]
here it is. five of those.

and later on:

quote:
Originally posted by joelm
sorry for all these repeat messeages my pms were messing up.

am i supposed to ignore this? :dodgy:

RE: pm abuse? by Discrate on 11-04-2005 at 08:44 AM

like i said i was sorry i was messeaging you and and then when i sent it my thing kept sighing out so i thought it hadnt sent im sorry but it was a mistake like i said in the other thread i made my thing wasnt working and i thought i hadnt sent em to you

RE: pm abuse? by J.J on 11-04-2005 at 09:07 AM

No offence joelm, but that is annoying :undecided: . I know you're trying to fit in and all, but you're really starting to annoy other forum members.

Btw, if m_e is reporting a post, who says that it's 'one of yours' O.o? It could be anyones on the forum for all you know, and quite frankly it's none of your buisness what posts m_e reports. I really don't mean to be rude, but those messages were totally unessecary.

RE: pm abuse? by Hank on 11-04-2005 at 09:19 AM

slow down on Postiong joel

RE: pm abuse? by mwe99 on 11-04-2005 at 02:50 PM

I always thought any abuse of the PM system, you should forward the messages to a mod so they can take action but thats what i thought....

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-04-2005 at 03:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mwe99
I always thought any abuse of the PM system, you should forward the messages to a mod so they can take action but thats what i thought....

Well, only admins can check for PM abuse, and even then it requires browsing the database directly.

You can always just add the spammer to your ignore list and delete the messages. If the abuse is really bad, PM an admin and preferably include a screenshot.

Until now, the PM system has had no flood protection at all, but I've been meaning to add some... :type:

RE: pm abuse? by Discrate on 11-04-2005 at 03:05 PM

but like i said it was an accident

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-04-2005 at 03:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by joelm
but like i said it was an accident

I believe you, which is why I'm not going to ban you or anything...

The flood protection should prevent stuff like this from happening in the future.

RE: pm abuse? by matty on 11-04-2005 at 03:12 PM

DZ is there a reason I can't actually PM him without getting a flood protection warning but I can PM others?

I was responding to a question but got that after a bit.

RE: pm abuse? by L. Coyote on 11-04-2005 at 03:14 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Third Dimension
Btw, if m_e is reporting a post, who says that it's 'one of yours' O.o?

Paranoid kid... :rofl:

quote:
Originally posted by joelm
like i said my pming think wasnt working and i didnt no i had sent it so many times

Yeah, I think most of us understood the first time you said it.

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-04-2005 at 03:29 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Matty
DZ is there a reason I can't actually PM him without getting a flood protection warning but I can PM others?

Well, I guess the flood protection needs some tweaking...

RE: RE: pm abuse? by CookieRevised on 11-05-2005 at 02:26 PM

quote:
Originally posted by WDZ

quote:
Originally posted by Matty
DZ is there a reason I can't actually PM him without getting a flood protection warning but I can PM others?
Well, I guess the flood protection needs some tweaking...

Did you change anything yet? Because I also get those flood messages, and never had them before... I just tried to send two legit PM's to someone and got that warning message (even after waiting more than a minute and all) :/

I can't seem to send any PM's anymore to that user...

EDIT:
I send a PM succesfully to another user (after 5 minutes or so; but dunno how much this wait mattered)
After that I also could send the second PM to this first user... (but it was annoying that I couldn't earlier)

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-06-2005 at 05:00 AM

Yeah, I tweaked it already.

I made it so that you can't send a message to someone too soon after your last message to them (exactly like posting in a thread), and also so that you can't spam someone with 3 or more messages in a 15 minute period unless you're having a conversation (getting replies).

Not acceptable? :'(

RE: pm abuse? by CookieRevised on 11-06-2005 at 10:45 AM

quote:
Originally posted by WDZ
Yeah, I tweaked it already.

I made it so that you can't send a message to someone too soon after your last message to them (exactly like posting in a thread),

and also so that you can't spam someone with 3 or more messages in a 15 minute period unless you're having a conversation (getting replies).

Not acceptable?

second one is acceptable...

But for the first one not IMO; sometimes you forget to say something in a PM and need to send a second. In a thread, you can easly edit your previous post, but this isn't possible with PM's... Thus, it is very annoying that you can't do that anymore and must wait for a reply or a long period of time. This can lead to confusing "conversations"...

And because of the second tweak, the first tweak also seems a bit redundant since you can't send more then 3 PM's anyways...

RE: pm abuse? by Sunshine on 11-07-2005 at 10:56 AM

I have to totally agree with Cookie here..yesterday i researched something wich resulted in me sending 3 pm's, correcting my previous ones (wich resulted in me not beeing able to send the third for quite some time).

So you see sometimes it is necessary to send several pm's in a short period of time (corrections). Now there is flood protection the just meaning of sending pm's is suffering over a measurement taken over what? 1 person abusing? There has got to be another solution...

RE: pm abuse? by Eddie on 11-07-2005 at 11:08 AM

I think the limit should be around 10.Or every time they reply you can then reply to that message and that message only for 15 minutes until then you can send yet another PM to the same person.

RE: RE: pm abuse? by mwe99 on 11-07-2005 at 11:30 AM

quote:
Originally posted by DevilFX
Also if you make an error in the message you can edit it and resend it, but it has to be around more than 3+ changes to the message.

once a pm has been sent, you cannot recall it and edit.

RE: pm abuse? by Eddie on 11-07-2005 at 11:39 AM

Ok thanx

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-07-2005 at 02:29 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Sunshine
Now there is flood protection the just meaning of sending pm's is suffering over a measurement taken over what? 1 person abusing? There has got to be another solution...

Well, I really think there needs to be flood protection... I've had it on my mind for a long time. Without it, it would be way too easy for someone to make a script that fills up some poor user's inbox in less than 5 minutes. :-/

RE: pm abuse? by Sunshine on 11-07-2005 at 02:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by WDZ

quote:
Originally posted by Sunshine
Now there is flood protection the just meaning of sending pm's is suffering over a measurement taken over what? 1 person abusing? There has got to be another solution...
Well, I really think there needs to be flood protection... I've had it on my mind for a long time. Without it, it would be way too easy for someone to make a script that fills up some poor user's inbox in less than 5 minutes.

Weird thing is, i was able to send the first two real quickly...but not the third. Can you raise the limit to 5 per 15 mins or something.. so 3 can be sent a bit easier (usually if i correct something i don't need more than 3..but the wait is what bothers me)?

RE: pm abuse? by WDZ on 11-07-2005 at 04:21 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Sunshine
Can you raise the limit to 5 per 15 mins or something

OK, I guess I'll give that a try.

I'll edit the code in an hour or so... busy ATM.

RE: pm abuse? by Sunshine on 11-07-2005 at 04:26 PM

quote:
Originally posted by WDZ
OK, I guess I'll give that a try.

I'll edit the code in an hour or so... busy ATM.

Thanks WDZ, this will reduce the time to wait somewhat (i think)

And receiving 5 pm's in 15 mins is hardly spamming..filling up ones inbox would take plenty more periods of 15 mins

RE: pm abuse? by Fourjays on 11-07-2005 at 07:59 PM

Why don't you just add an image verification to the PM form, or something similar? That way, the only way a user can send a PM, is if the verification has been done. If the user signs out or something, then tries to access that page (where it would send the PM again), it wouldn't work, as the verification number would have changed. Defeats bots too, as they can't read the image (as long as it isn't just plain text written on a blank background...).

RE: pm abuse? by L. Coyote on 11-07-2005 at 10:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Fourjays
Defeats bots too

Bots don't have access to UserCP...

RE: pm abuse? by CookieRevised on 11-07-2005 at 10:10 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Leo

quote:
Originally posted by Fourjays
Defeats bots too
Bots don't have access to UserCP...

he means spambots created by people to explicity PM a specific user (which is actually very easy to make), not bots who roam the internet in search for cached pages like Google bot and the likes.

RE: pm abuse? by L. Coyote on 11-07-2005 at 10:35 PM

quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
he means spambots created by people to explicity PM a specific user (which is actually very easy to make), not bots who roam the internet in search for cached pages like Google bot and the likes.

Yeah, I didn't mean the legal crawlers. I hadn't thought about those other bots (weird, since I use dt's scripts).

I think a confirmation code would be too annoying... What people want to do is send the thing and move on, not type down more stuff (well, that's how I think).

RE: pm abuse? by CookieRevised on 11-07-2005 at 11:00 PM

Dunno, if a confirmation code is what it takes to prevent spam, yet be able, as a normal senseable user, to send PM's, then I'm for it...

Although I don't think it would have prevented the 7 PM's from joelm, as he probably would have entered the code 7 times, which everybody would do in that case...

To solve that problem, maybe a confirmation message could be shown also (or "also" shown together with that confirmation code thingie): "You have already send x PM's to this person (without him replying), yadda yadda yadda, do you want to send this PM?" You confirm that and then you get that special code thingie...

I can live with something like that because it will prevent botspam, it will prevent the initial 7 PM problem from joelm, and I can still send my PM's as I like (without spamming)...

RE: pm abuse? by surfichris on 11-07-2005 at 11:06 PM

quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
Dunno, if a confirmation code is what it takes to prevent spam, yet be able, as a normal senseable user, to send PM's, then I'm for it...

Although I don't think it would have prevented the 7 PM's from joelm, as he probably would have entered the code 7 times, which everybody would do in that case...

That I would find annoying - having to enter the string to send a PM each time.

quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised

To solve that problem, maybe a confirmation message could be shown also (or "also" shown together with that confirmation code thingie): "You have already send x PM's to this person (without him replying), yadda yadda yadda, do you want to send this PM?" You confirm that and then you get that special code thingie...

Thats a solution i can live with - but without the special code thingy, just a confirmation page.

RE: RE: pm abuse? by Giulia on 11-08-2005 at 04:03 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Chris Boulton

quote:
Originally posted by CookieRevised
Dunno, if a confirmation code is what it takes to prevent spam, yet be able, as a normal senseable user, to send PM's, then I'm for it...

This system exists on some forums, like the French one aufeminin.com (a feminine website). Just to recall it...