Dealing with signature links spammers - suggestions please!

[Fergal]

Most forum owners have to deal with spammers who make a large number of low quality posts, with the sole objective of promoting links in their signature.

Some forums restrict member signatures, for example by;

1. Only allowing text in signatures, i.e. not allowing links
2. Adding no follow tags to all signature links - hence members and visitors still see signature links, but there is generally less spam because the links are no follow and do not help with Page Rank
3. Charging a small fee to members who wish to have links in their signatures, spammers generally won't pay even a very small fee for this service
4. Only allowing signature links to members who have say over 50 posts. My concern with this approach is that it might actually encourage spam posts as spammers try to build up their post count, just so they can start adding links.

What are your views on these approaches and do you think they could help a growing forum? Do have any other ideas or suggestions?

Thanks!

 

[Akilan]

I Would Allow links for users having posts over 50 , this will be kind a reward for active users

 

[ChatBox]

Maybe you could change their signature yourself if they request or have something so they have to post in a topic and then you activate it for them so they can change it themselves.

 

[David]

Could number one be altered so it says: "Only allowing text in signatures, i.e. not allowing images"? Surely some links are acceptable. Maybe 2-3.

As for the rest, great suggestions.

 

[PurpleCrow]

I dont see the problem with signature links, certainly when someone only posts a few times - two days later, if not sooner, the post is going to be buried within the forum, most likely not to be looked on again.

 

[posey]

What would be a good idea is to use the "Newly registered users" from phpBB 3.0.6 and disallow Signature links for this group. Once they're registered long enough they will be automatically moved to the Registered Users group and can use links in their signature.

This will not cause spam, as it's not about the amount of posts you made on the forum but the time you've been part of it! Spambots usually register, post and don't come back.

 

[Cosmic]

I don't really see the problem. If they are making too many low content posts then you can treat then as you do any member who makes too many low content posts. As long as their signature isn't too flashy, I don't see how a spammer with a link to their forum in their signature is any worse to you than a spammer without one. I guess restricting them from having the links in their signatures might turn them away, but it also might affect normal users too.

Is there a mod which only displays signatures in posts which are over x amount of characters?

 

[Deleted member 4320]

Well there are a few ways you can combat this, the first one is of course simply not allow links in signatures. Another one would be to review a users signature. And last only have 1 link in per X number of posts.

I hope this helps, spammers can be a real pain to be honest, if they are solely there to spam I just advise you delete them.

 

[Pinky]

Quite a tricky one this.

I do use a mod so that only so many lines can be used in the signature area. The image size is that is allowed is around the size or just under of that of this posting reply area. The reason I have done that is because I do and have had members in the past on previous forums that put in huge images, just way too big.

I feel though that any members should be allowed the freedom of adding links to their signatures, whether it's a personal blog or another forum. I feel that a members signature is their own personal space and as long as they follow the forum guidelines then I don't have a problem with that.

There is a worry that members on your forum who see links to other forums in the signatures that they may be led away from your forum, that is expected and could happen. All you can do is your best on your forum to make it interesting, friendly and a great place to be for your members so hopefully they will remain supportive.

 

[Fullmoon]

I dont see the problem with signature links, certainly when someone only posts a few times - two days later, if not sooner, the post is going to be buried within the forum, most likely not to be looked on again.

I agree, forums that have these restrictions annoy me

 

[Fergal]

Thanks everyone for your feedback and suggestions, they were very helpful. I am going to use VB's infraction system to manage this. Member's will be given infractions for spammy posts. Once they receive a certain amount of infractions they will lose the ability to display their signature and if they continue to offend their account will be banned.

I'll test it for a while to see how it works out and if it stops spam on the forum.

 

[Bossanova]

Fergal,

I have seen so many of these sig spammers that it's unreal. On another forum, they added a code that makes it so users have to have over 10 posts before they can add anything in their sig.

Figuring out who these spammers are is easy, because most of their posts start with 'hi'.

 

[CyberFreak]

One thing that is annoying me here is that alot of users sign up and add their signature into their actual post. Basically it allows them to have a different signature for every post they make while it is disguised as a sig so it makes it harder to notice that they have hidden a spam link in the post as you would think it is their sig. The posts these users make usually actually fit in well with the topic. Sometimes they are just pointless posts like "I agree" or "I think *insert what the topic is about* is good".

 

[FilmFoo]

As long as their posts aren't spam, it shouldn't matter. Restricting it for that reason would put off members if they knew you was doing so. It's too controlling.

 

[Gimgak]

I dont see the problem with signature links, certainly when someone only posts a few times - two days later, if not sooner, the post is going to be buried within the forum, most likely not to be looked on again.

It's not that people will view it, it's that it gives backlinks to spammers.

 

[Leo Ghost]

It's not that people will view it, it's that it gives backlinks to spammers.

Which means the issue at hand is simple, do we really care if we give them linkbacks? Is it worth worrying about in the long run? Personally I think not. No need to place any restrictions or odd rules that will deter real guests, just clean up the ones that are easy to find. It's not a huge worry.

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Some of the newer spambots reply with a post earlier in the topic with their spam sig, or combine multiple posts into one (sometimes splicing a paragraph, changing tenses midway).

I think the best way to combat such spam is users with <20 posts' signatures cannot be seen by guests. By 20 posts you will be able to tell if they are legit users or not.

 

[NBK*Twitch]

To prevent this I make it where they need about 10 posts before allowing siggies.