How much do you crack down on spam?

On your forums how much do you actually crack down on spammers. For example what would be the punishment for someone signing up posting only once with a link in their signature to their dental services site? Would you bother if their post was relevant as I personally see it as a form of spamming, purely posting for a linkback.

On our forums we tend to crack down really hard on spammers with a quick ban and removal of their posts/threads, also an IP ban too if the content they post is similar to what you usually see on forums.

If the member has signed up and posted a lot then decides to spam via PM or whatnot we tend to ban their account, delete their sent PM's/VM's and spam posts if they made any.

 

I harshly punish spammers. For example, a spam topic or post to promote a service alone pretty much equals permanent ban and IP ban. However, whether I'll delete a post with a link in the signature and take further action depends on exactly how well the member contributes to the forum. Posts like 'hi there...' with a link to some site like your said... ban. Intelligent, long posts with such a signature? I'll leave the member alone until they actually do something I'd see as breaking the rules.

 

For new members - Spammage results in bannage.

For long term members - a little spammage is ok.

Personally, I like my spam sandwiches with mayo, cheese and wheat bread.

 

Why do people even let 1 posters have a signature, or display links? It's quite easy to get around that, if you're using vB that is.

As far as spam, that which isn't caught by the above, if it is the user's first post, I tend to just ban the user and delete the post. If they are a longtime user, there's no point in banning the user, but I'll use the infraction system to let them know they've done something wrong. X infraction points and they're out the door.

 

Never get any spam. Though I would ban them if I did.

 

I have zero tolerance for spam
I ban them and forget them

 

When only considering legitimate members (i.e. not spam bots), I have only banned twice since my forum was opened in 2004, but that is not because my member list contains the least spammy group ever beheld; rather, banning is considered an extreme measure for extreme cases. I have a small forum, so everyone knows everyone else. Since the forum relies about 99.5% on my word of mouth, I have a lot of control over the type of people who join, and indeed most people find it natural to be contributive and to not go too far in irrelevant discussion (or with other forms of spam).

However, even if, say, two members were to engage in a lengthy discussion that is irrelevant to the original point, I don't feel compelled to do anything as long as the posts are worthwhile, as opposed to being composed, each and all, of a single sentence fragment. If the spamming gets out of hand, I may tell them to stop spamming in the thread or by PM, but I am always diplomatic about it, and "warnings" are never "official" (i.e., they don't count toward a strike policy, or something like that). Fortunately, rarely is there ever a member so defiant that simply talking through an issue isn't enough.

In fact, the only two times legitimate members were banned stemmed from such insistent defiance, which cannot be helped with any amount of patience from staff. For example, the first person banned (in 2004) got mad because he managed to get butt hurt in a debate about vitamins. When he demanded to one of my fellow administrators that he be banned, that administrator did not take him seriously, and pointed out that he can leave if he no longer want to be a part of the forum. Met by this response, the member then threatened to do everything within his power to earn a banning. At that point, he got his wish.

The second person to be banned (in 2009) made it his intention to undermine the forum since he registered in 2007, but with his years long posting record, it became ever more apparent that he went from "testing the waters" to coming out in full force to complete his mission. He was one to consistently ignore anything I asked of him (such as posting further feedback in the proper thread instead of populating the miscellaneous section with complaints), to never be without an accusation about my motives (which were allegedly and always because of my worldview, and fear for another), and to always have a handy passive-aggressive insult towards me (such as when he implied that I am a nihilistic mid-life loser in a topic titled "Your 2007 in a nutshell" because I failed to post my hopes and dreams).

The member described above made up most of the moderating I have had to do as of late. Besides that, the only moderating I can recall was much milder in comparison. For example, I asked a member via PM if he would please read and comply with the introduction rule. It went so well he pointed out that, for someone who came from SD.net (the forum where I invited him, and which is a "climate" much harsher than my own), I am much too nice. —Heh, I also remember several cases of helpfully editing some posts in accordance to the wishes of some members who made some mistakes in posts in the debate forum. (At this time, the ability to edit in the debate forum is disabled. This policy is a holdout from the days when I used phpBB2, and I was not aware of an alternative means to make sure that all members take responsibility for what they say. Now, I am aware that you can put a time limit on editing, and I mean to change the debate forum policy soon.)

So, despite an ominous looking rules list, enforcement is lax, though not arbitrary. Most of the members who have registered since 2004 have behaved so well that nothing about the rules have ever needed to be said. Much of the length of the rules owe to elaboration to prevent misunderstanding, many of the rules are just common sense, and one "rule" was made in jest. In fact, a former moderator (now administrator) summed it up in one sentence when, in a reply to someone asking how he became moderator, he said "I became a moderator when I said 'I don't give a shit what people do or say and don't see that much need for moderators' and they said 'okay you're hired.'"

 

Same here man! One of my staff members did post a link and got a 2 day ban.

 

If it's the plain obvious spam bot, I would permanently IP ban it. If it's a user, I would just ban them.

 

I'm having a little trouble following what spam is, and isn't.

To some people it matters if it is related to the forum so dental services & porn sites would not be welcome on AA (as an extreme example). To some people, related, but competing, sites are spam and other admin discussion forums links would be spam on AA (as an example). And to other people, vendors that sell products of interest to the forums membership, should only advertise if they pay to advertise such as the person selling cheap vB licenses on AA (as an example).

From where I am sitting you may not all have the same definition of what spam is.

 

first forum: members have to be activated by an admin, just because there is an admin of a rival forum who wants to get in and troll.

second and third forums: banned list of known spammer emails, and members have to activate account by email

on all forums, members who join just to post a link on the forum, without joining in any other threads means they are a spammer and their post and account will be deleted.

members who send pms to other members asking them to join their forum, will at first get a pm from a staff member, telling them not to send these pms. if they continue doing it they lose the ability to pm.

if a member repeatedly posts threads with links to their forum the threads will be removed and they will be told not to from an admin first time and after that they get a warning, and then a ban if they do it again.

you are allowed to advertise your forum with one thread in the advertising section (on the forum that has one) or a link in your signature, but links must not contain anything that is illegal or unsuitable for under 18s.)

 

I have no spam.
Granted all of my forums are private and I approve all members. This seems to get the point accross.

 

If its porn/dental etc then its a perma ban, if its someone from another forum closely related to ours then the link is removed and a PM is sent explaining why.

 

It's quite simple: 100% ban, and deletion of their content (posts, threads, visitor messages and PMs).

 

they and their posts get ttyl'd