Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Approval for a post

rated by 0 users
This post has 17 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 783
Points 14,645
ryanpatgray Posted: Mon, Feb 25 2008 8:50 PM

Last night I attempted to reply to a post in the Mises Institute vs. Cato Institute thread and received a message that my post needed to be approved. I am not a new member but it may have something to do with the fact that I reformatted my computer??? Perhaps I was recognized as a new user? In any case the post has not yet been approved. If there is a reason it has not yet been approved I would appreciate knowing it. It if is just because of my computer being reformatted that is one thing. I hope there is not another reason.

Thanks,

Ryanpatgray

I am an eklektarchist not an anarchist.

Educational Pamphlet Mises Group

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 597
Points 12,920
Staff
SystemAdministrator
jtucker replied on Tue, Feb 26 2008 10:14 AM

 Can we please call a moritorium on conspiracy theories about unapproved posts? This is nearly always--like 99.99% of the time--a software issue. Tons of spam floats around the web, and there is no way admins can personally deal with it all. We have to rely on spam checks, and these are not perfect. Please be patient with the system. By the way, this is true of the main blog too. Every few days I receive a flaming email from somehow whose post was tagged as spam. This is completely unnecessary. 

Publisher, Laissez-Faire Books

Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 698
Points 12,045
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

I think the post in question got held up because it had so many links in it. 

Yours in liberty,
Geoffrey Allan Plauché, Ph.D.
Adjunct Instructor, Buena Vista University
Webmaster, LibertarianStandard.com
Founder / Executive Editor, Prometheusreview.com

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Tue, Feb 26 2008 11:16 AM
Since users need to register before posting, can the filtering done at that level ? If only legitimate users join the forum, then no filtering of individual messages is needed ?

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 783
Points 14,645

jtucker:

 Can we please call a moritorium on conspiracy theories about unapproved posts? This is nearly always--like 99.99% of the time--a software issue. Tons of spam floats around the web, and there is no way admins can personally deal with it all. We have to rely on spam checks, and these are not perfect. Please be patient with the system. By the way, this is true of the main blog too. Every few days I receive a flaming email from somehow whose post was tagged as spam. This is completely unnecessary. 

I had no conspiracy theory. I was asking. In fact, I gave a possible plausible explanation. I reformatted my computer. The post has now been aproved. 

Thank you,

Ryan

I am an eklektarchist not an anarchist.

Educational Pamphlet Mises Group

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 597
Points 12,920
Staff
SystemAdministrator
jtucker replied on Tue, Feb 26 2008 2:43 PM

Ok, I'm sorry for getting carried away with the rhetoric.

Publisher, Laissez-Faire Books

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 123
Points 2,785
BWF89 replied on Sat, Mar 1 2008 3:03 PM
Juan:
Since users need to register before posting, can the filtering done at that level ? If only legitimate users join the forum, then no filtering of individual messages is needed ?

So that's why, I was wondering. I posted a comment in the Nader thread that had links to the anti-war candidates of the Libertarian and Constitution Party's websites.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 212
Points 3,430

 The thing to remember about computers is that they do what they are told to do and what they are told to do may not be what you want it to do.

A busy database will put transactions into a queue if they cannot be handled right away.  So posts by other users, blog updates, spamming attempts and other actions will count as a transaction.  If a transaction is put into a queue the database will give a message to that effect and this bit of software converted that message into a notice about a post needing to be moderated, since that is likely the only message it had available to use. 

http://www.comebackalive.com/phpBB2 Travel, Adventure Travel, Arguments, Recipes.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 331
Points 9,905
SystemAdministrator
David V replied on Wed, Mar 5 2008 4:02 PM
You're right about transactions, but wrong about the message to the users.  If it says your post was moderated, then it was moderated.  Unmoderated posts will generally show up right away.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 331
Points 9,905
SystemAdministrator
David V replied on Wed, Mar 5 2008 4:03 PM

Juan:
Since users need to register before posting, can the filtering done at that level ? If only legitimate users join the forum, then no filtering of individual messages is needed ?
 

No, because spammers also join the forum sometimes. 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Mar 5 2008 4:24 PM
I didn't make myself clear I guess.

What about this : You don't filter any messages, but let us users report posts as spam. Now, when somebody post a message wich is spam his account (and messages) can be deleted. I don't think that a spammer would join the forum, discuss some economics for a while, and then start spamming ?

edit : Messages are filtered for new users. Let's say a user joins and posts for a week and his messages don't trigger the filter. And so you can whitelist him. If after a week he turns to be a spammer (as reported by the rest of users), you can delete his account.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 212
Points 3,430
Twirlcan replied on Thu, Mar 6 2008 10:21 AM

 

Juan:
I don't think that a spammer would join the forum, discuss some economics for a while, and then start spamming ?

I run a travel forum and have since 2004...and you would be amazed at the tenacity of some spammers.  Most are just spam-bots that sell the two P's.  Some  start out generating a random topic and sell nothing.  Sometimes that topic hits on something appropriate to the forum and is left alone or even answered by yet another spam-bot...then one month later you wake up and "blammo" your forum is filled with spam from a previous user.

 Some also crawl the user names and try to guess simple passwords to make a previous legitimate  account become a spamming account.  These are rare though but the annoyance they cause when they get through is enough to justify precautions.

http://www.comebackalive.com/phpBB2 Travel, Adventure Travel, Arguments, Recipes.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 72
Points 1,275
Rich333 replied on Tue, Apr 8 2008 5:09 PM

HeroicLife:

Juan:
Since users need to register before posting, can the filtering done at that level ? If only legitimate users join the forum, then no filtering of individual messages is needed ?
 

No, because spammers also join the forum sometimes. 

So use a quality captcha, like recaptcha, to block out spambots at registration time, and have a few moderators plus a posting delay (5-30 seconds between each post, depending on how new the poster is to the board, should work) to handle anyone who tries to post spam manually. If some spam gets through and a mod doesn't catch it, anyone who comes across it can use the "report abuse" link for the post to report it.

EDIT: Am I alone in finding it ironic that a guilty until proven innocent approach is used here?

Corporations are an extension of the state.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 294
Points 6,705
Hmm... I smell a rat!

Tucker, you don't happen to be a CFR member? ;)
Drag not your strength from government, but from the voices they abuse.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 597
Points 12,920
Staff
SystemAdministrator
jtucker replied on Tue, Apr 15 2008 1:04 PM

Well, I've not been asked to join. The application, I believe, consists in writing a few editorials for the New York Times that take a social-democratic perspective.

 

Publisher, Laissez-Faire Books

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 849
Points 17,125
Ego replied on Tue, Apr 15 2008 2:00 PM

Rich333:

HeroicLife:

Juan:
Since users need to register before posting, can the filtering done at that level ? If only legitimate users join the forum, then no filtering of individual messages is needed ?
 

No, because spammers also join the forum sometimes. 

So use a quality captcha, like recaptcha, to block out spambots at registration time, and have a few moderators plus a posting delay (5-30 seconds between each post, depending on how new the poster is to the board, should work) to handle anyone who tries to post spam manually. If some spam gets through and a mod doesn't catch it, anyone who comes across it can use the "report abuse" link for the post to report it.

EDIT: Am I alone in finding it ironic that a guilty until proven innocent approach is used here?

I'm not sure what could be ironic about it.

 

Bots are increasingly able to solve CAPTCHAs, and it's best to verify valid posts than to risk having the forum littered with v14gr4 4 ch33p posts.

Don't allow leftists to play games with definitions! Some of the libertarian-leaning leftists at this forum will try to redefine "left-wing" back to its original defition (Third Estate, limited government, free-markets, laissez-faire reforms, etc.). Fine! We non-leftists can't stop them from using their own personal definitions; they can use whatever labels they want to describe any concept they want.

However, they have the audacity to then use their personal definition of "left-wing" (remember, the original definition, which is no longer valid) to prove that modern leftists are more libertarian than modern rightists! They will say that libertarianism is "inherently leftist" (again, using the original, no longer valid definition), and use that to insist that we should prefer and side with modern leftists over modern rightists.

Question their motives.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Tue, Apr 15 2008 2:05 PM
Ego, you pretended to be a person, but are actually a bot ? You fooled us all : )

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 849
Points 17,125
Ego replied on Tue, Apr 15 2008 2:09 PM

Yes, this bot has been designed to post 250+ on-topic replies. At that point, it will begin to enter anti-spam discussions and subtlety plug pharmaceutical products.

Don't allow leftists to play games with definitions! Some of the libertarian-leaning leftists at this forum will try to redefine "left-wing" back to its original defition (Third Estate, limited government, free-markets, laissez-faire reforms, etc.). Fine! We non-leftists can't stop them from using their own personal definitions; they can use whatever labels they want to describe any concept they want.

However, they have the audacity to then use their personal definition of "left-wing" (remember, the original definition, which is no longer valid) to prove that modern leftists are more libertarian than modern rightists! They will say that libertarianism is "inherently leftist" (again, using the original, no longer valid definition), and use that to insist that we should prefer and side with modern leftists over modern rightists.

Question their motives.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (18 items) | RSS