Forum Moderators: rogerd

Message Too Old, No Replies

Optimum Flood Control Setting

Frustrate bots but keep members happy

         

rogerd

3:00 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



Any opinions on an optimum value for "minimum time between posts", also known as "flood control"? I just did a major forum conversion, and the value I set (60 seconds) is causing user gripes. If I knock it down to 20 - 30 seconds, I'm potentially making it quite a bit easier to a bot or even human spammer to flood the board.

I naively assumed that the thought process for creating a new post would take a minute... ;)

jdMorgan

3:13 am on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Graph complaints versus interval. What decline in complaints do you get with a 55-second delay? 50,45, 40? I certainly wouldn't cut the delay in half right away.

Also, you may be able to change the technique a little: Instead of blocking new posts or giving them a "post later" message, put part of the delay into the transfer from the posting form to the refreshed view of the forum... In other words, make it look like it takes awhile to "create" a post, instead of starting the timer after the posting is completed. I hope that makes sense, but there's a good example at hand...

Jim

rogerd

5:06 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



Good ideas, JD. I may bump it down just a bit. Unfortunately, 99% of the time the delay is affecting good members.

One thought that occurs to me is having a longer delay for new members, and shorter delays for senior/full members. I suspect that's possible with a hack.

jasonlambert

9:22 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



You really need to change the code so it looks at the TOTAL number of posts made in the last 5 minutes, rather than the last x number of seconds.

The correct way to do this is to allow 6 posts every 5 minutes, so you limit on a high number over a period of time rather than a small frequency from one post to the next.

You will find this stop's the bots, but never affects "real users" (except those who go down a list of posts adding a "me too!" to every thread, but who needs those users anyway?).

I wrote a number of "anti-bot" code changes for my phpbb forum after being hit by a bot once.

Of course anti-bot measures are a big topic and there is far more to it that outlined above. (heh, maybe I should become a forum consultant :p )

rogerd

10:12 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



Jasonlambert, your suggested approach probably is good compensation for the behavior of a normal human poster. He may do a quick "Thanks! I'll try that!" in one topic, clarify something with a few words in another, but then spend a couple of minutes reading a new thread or writing a more detailed post. I like it...

encyclo

11:50 pm on Oct 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



jason, assuming you're the same jasonlambert, I actually signed up to your forum today and was impressed by your phpBB modifications. Your idea for the flood control is excellent!

So, welcome to WebmasterWorld and I'm certainly looking forward to seeing you post here as well. Any chance of giving away a few of your secrets?!

Dave_Palmer

6:03 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



All good suggestions!

Here's another one ... after I tightened the flood control on my own forums, I quickly became aggravated that when editing a message I had to wait before resubmitting it. I'm not likely to post more than once in a two-minute period, but I'm a lot more likely to go back and fix something in a post within 2 minutes! :-)

The fix for me was to use a mod to remove flood control from editing posts (only). It's for phpBB (search for No Flood On Edit) but I'm sure most fora could be modified this way.

Best,

Dave

rogerd

1:38 pm on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



Yet another thought: I wonder if anyone has tried an even broader flood control approach by limiting the number of posts by a new member for a longer period, e.g., 10 posts in an hour, or 15 posts in a 24 hour period? This would not only slow down bots, it would frustrate human spammers and make cleanups easier.

It might also have the side benefit of slowing down prolific new members. The member who makes 25 posts on his first day is rarely a high quality contributor, at least at the outset. A period of limited posting could be a time to acclimate to the forum culture.

jasonlambert

9:55 am on Oct 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Any chance of giving away a few of your secrets?!
I'll give you 2 sentances of advice, do with them as you will:

1) Innovate, dont stagnate
2) Always remember: Innovation is never about duplication

Yet another thought: I wonder if anyone has tried an even broader flood control approach by limiting the number of posts by a new member for a longer period, e.g., 10 posts in an hour, or 15 posts in a 24 hour period? This would not only slow down bots, it would frustrate human spammers and make cleanups easier.

An interesting idea, if it can be implemented by modifying an existing SQL query in posting.php and without causing that query to use a temporary table then it may be worth doing.

Alternativly/additionally just give your mod's the ability to ban users. I wrote a custom page which allows all my moderators to do the following:
1) Ban a user
2) Remove a users signature
3) Remove a users avatar

All actions are recorded in a log which myself and other moderators can view. There is also a "staff notes" text box that allows them to put in a sentence explaining why the action was taken, eg "user was spamming", "animated avatar" etc.

Normally what happens when you have a spammer is you you need an administrator to be around at the time to ban the user and stop them spamming. As i am the only user with Administrator privileges on my forum, then previously if there is a spam issue when im asleep then the spammer could get left as an active user (..to continue spamming) for another 12 hours or whatever. This extra page allows issues to be delt with by moderators and means I dont have to worry so much :)

rogerd

5:29 pm on Oct 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member



I left the 60 second setting where it was - it seemed the the only folks complaining were users who had a lot of near-zero content posts. Making these members reflect for a few seconds isn't entirely bad. ;)