BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Our FAQ Has Been Destroyed

 
  

Page: 12345(6)7

 
 
Bed Head
14:47 / 11.05.05



?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
14:42 / 12.05.05
Kill it! Kill it!
 
 
Bed Head
10:59 / 24.05.05
*ding dong*

Sysop required to deal with infestation of spambots in the wiki, please.
 
 
The Falcon
11:09 / 26.05.05
Oh, I think I put the John Harding stuff back. Seemed fair enough.
 
 
Mario
20:54 / 18.06.05
New spammer, nameof UserUser. I cleaned up one of his pages.
 
 
lekvar
17:37 / 21.10.05
Um, I think it may be happening again - the front page seems to have multiple pharmaceutical links.
Here's the list of recent changes
 
 
grant
19:43 / 21.10.05
Very angry. Noticed an odd rewrite on the main talk page yesterday or day before... wonder if that was a clearing of the throat.

Argh! My teeth do gnash!
 
 
All Acting Regiment
11:54 / 22.10.05
Can't we have the FAQ as a regular Barbelith fora, with individual sections represented by threads, and with the usual moderation rules? If not, why not?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
09:19 / 24.10.05
Yes? No? Am I missing something?
 
 
invisible_al
09:36 / 24.10.05
Because a wiki is easier to implement than converting the Barbelith forum to this sort of thing. Putting aside the fact that this isn't going to happen if the rest of the board development is on hold, forums and wiki based FAQs are different things and you shouldn't try and force one into the other.

Wiki's are a lot easier to edit and they also are a lot easier to fix if an article has been buggered up, you can simply revert to the saved version of an article. They're also easier to search and navigate than the Barbelith Forum which has problems with searching at the mo.

Are you asking if the wiki can be moderated like Barbelith, then I think it can but it would be more work. Best I think would be to ask people who sign up to the wiki to send an e-mail to an address to confirm they're human, or does the wiki have a 'confirm you're human' method when you sign up?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
10:56 / 24.10.05
Cheers. I knew there was a reason for the Wiki-ness, was just after clarification.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:42 / 25.10.05
Can someone fix it again please. The front page is medication links. God knows what they think they achieve by this, "Well I came to this page looking for information on how to post to Barbelith, but I think I'll buy some strange medication instead."
 
 
Bed Head
10:04 / 25.10.05
Would a wiki-fixing tutorial be at all helpful? The whole point of a wiki is supposed to be that anyone can fix it. And the kind of spam we’re getting now takes less time to fix than it did to type out this post.

I think the medical links thing is supposed to be something to do with their google ratings, but I don’t pretend to understand any of that.
 
 
invisible_al
12:43 / 25.10.05
Also would it be worth installing this spam blacklist extension?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
13:03 / 01.11.05
I can't help noticing that the Wiki's search function is buggered. How do we fix it?
 
 
grant
13:25 / 19.12.05
a new user has mentioned the spam blacklist plugin as well.

We do need it, I think.
 
 
Quantum
18:41 / 19.12.05
Elseware has wiki-fu madskillz, and can provide top tips on spam prevention.
 
 
grant
13:58 / 30.01.06
Spam assaults are again rising in intensity.

Again, I post this link.
 
 
grant
02:49 / 01.02.06
Emailed Tom - he said to remind him in two weeks -- his brain is busy now. So remind me to remind him in two weeks.
 
 
Sniv
16:22 / 01.02.06
Lady - God knows what they think they achieve by this, "Well I came to this page looking for information on how to post to Barbelith, but I think I'll buy some strange medication instead."

Perhaps a psychology of spam thread? It fascinates me too, I've had many a reply on my blog pointing to spam blogs filled with rambling pointless stories about nothing. Why bother?
 
 
Char Aina
21:15 / 01.02.06
surely the point is not that we are their demographic so much as everyone is?
they do the spam thing everywhere and all the time, and eventually one person will click on a link and buy something.

for every millionth person to see a link on a wiki, any wiki, they get a click through. for every thousand clicks through, they get a sale.
more links translates to more clicks, which in turn translates to more sales.
a wiki destroying bot is a cheap way of getting your links seen by the forest of millions. the boost in search visibility calculated by links to and from, among other things)will also help.

a useful metaphor might be carpet bombing. you hit your target for sure if you drop bombs over anything in a twenty mile radius of its approximate location. the folks on the internet are germany, the few who click are the strategic targets.
our wiki is collateral damage in the war over customers.
 
 
Bed Head
19:08 / 15.02.06
he said to remind him in two weeks -- his brain is busy now. So remind me to remind him in two weeks.

*two weeks later....*

*attempts to catch grant’s eye, fix him with ‘meaningful look’, etc*
 
 
grant
19:57 / 15.02.06
The flag has gone up.
 
 
Bed Head
23:08 / 15.02.06
And what a handsome flag it is. Thanks, grant, Tom.


Also, Tom, if you’re putting your Wiki administrator hat on, there’s one two three four new-ish pages that could maybe do with being erased altogether, because they’ve only been created by spammers for the their own spammy purposes - they don’t form any part of our FAQ.

That’s if it’s an easy thing for you to do, to get rid of ‘em. But us users can only edit down the content of those pages.
 
 
Mario
18:16 / 20.03.06
May I suggest a few changes to the wiki structure, at least until the spammers go away?

1) Lock the Main Page. It seems to be the most popular target.

2) Close or restrict new registrations so we don't get anymore "Alphabet soup" editors (which tend to be spammers)

3) Lock Apeloverage's account. AFAIK, he's the only repeat offender.

The decision is yours, of course. But it's getting tedious.
 
 
grant
20:53 / 20.03.06
emailed Tom again. Tried not to let the desperation creep into my voice.
 
 
Mario
10:51 / 30.03.06
I think it's time to get desperate....
 
 
Bed Head
11:07 / 30.03.06
I can understand that Tom’s superbusy and it's fine that dealing with this thing is on the list. I'm always sorry to be raising another problem when he's already got so much stuff to do. But I I’ll just repeat the request for grant to be made a wiki admin - there *are* admin jobs that could do with being done, there will be others, he’s on the wiki most days and is super-responsible and generally handsoffish about Stuff. That would be a way to go.

Also, user: “zero”. Is a spambot that - get this - fills in the reason field to make out that it’s deleting spam links when it edits a page. Just so y’all know.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
12:59 / 30.03.06
Have you PMed this to Tom?
 
 
grant
16:39 / 30.03.06
I noticed that about zero, and it kind of freaks me out.

And bedhead, I think you and/or Mario would probably be better admins than me because you're on the thing more often. But something does have to be done however it gets done, because SPAM IS HAPPENING FAST.

(Although I don't even know what a wiki admin can do, really.)

I'll email Tom a link to this thread.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
16:45 / 30.03.06
Also, user: “zero”. Is a spambot that - get this - fills in the reason field to make out that it’s deleting spam links when it edits a page. Just so y’all know.

WHAT THE FUCK???

Okay, technology is officially frightening me now.
 
 
Bed Head
16:55 / 30.03.06
Flowers, no, I haven't PM'd anything to Tom. The suggestion that there should be other admins has been there since we moved to Mediawiki, which allows for the whole having-other-admins thing; it was Tom’s idea in the first place, and grant’s name has, I think, been suggested several times since then. Other than that, we’ve got umpteen pages here of noting every little problem that comes up with the wiki. Tom knows there are recurrent problems that will need the attention of an admin. Having several people sending this stuff off to him as those problems happen, and then having those messages piling up in his PM inbox, isn’t any better than just putting them all here for when he’s got time and headspace to deal with it, imo. All the suggestions in Mario’s post are pretty spot-on.

And I do tend to leave it to grant to email Tom, because I’m sure he gets an awful lot of PMs asking him to do stuff, and I think he’s more likely to take note of an single email from grant than any number of a PMs from some guy he doesn’t really know. I don’t want to just add more noise for him to filter.


(And, ooh, after months of sinister faceless drone-like spambots that attack in waves and have numbers instead of names, the Zero one actually seems quite sweet in its deviousness. It's a delight to delete it.)
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
17:06 / 30.03.06
They look like us... AND THEY HAVE A PLAN.

Don't fall for it, Bed Head! Don't fall in love with a toaster!!!
 
 
Bed Head
17:12 / 30.03.06
*smokes cigarillo, tosses mane of lustrous hair, looks cuh-razy*
 
 
Bed Head
18:15 / 30.03.06
grant, (Although I don't even know what a wiki admin can do, really.)

Here we go: what an admin - or sysop, rather - can do.

I dunno if it'll allow the installation of those anti-spam updates mentioned upthread, or for any sort of catchpa for new registrations (and that would be a really big help for keeping on top of this) ... but freezing the Main Page, check, permanently deleting non-barbelith pages, check, and there's the ability to block spambots rather than delete their accounts outright. Or so it sez here.

It all looks a bit programmer-y though, and that's why I probably wouldn't be any good for this. But still.
 
  

Page: 12345(6)7

 
  
Add Your Reply