Why do these people even bother to register as members here?

[Clinton]

We have a somewhat different approach to preventing spam - something that's been very successful and which even Sitepoint was very keen on examining in some detail with the view to implementing on their site. There's a thread or two about it, like this.

In short, we allow anyone and everyone to register, even if they are known spammers. I figured there's no point in deleting them manually. Instead they have to prove themselves for the account to live. If their initial posts are spam posts, the post is deleted but nothing happens to the account except that it doesn't get to prove itself and gets therefore destined to be killed in the monthly cull.

So, not all registrants know how it works and some sign up to see if they can slip a spam link. OK, their motivation is to spam. But hundreds of others just sign up and don't do anything. They don't attempt to make any spam posts, they don't attempt to drop links, nothing.

And I'm mystified by that. Any suggestions from you forum experts? In the last couple of days or so we've had all of these:
Rastomi
xavis2
DtqBurrough
videsh301
krispykreme
Babteengaller
ElullyRouccax
chrisx
dogeCownthego
muslatiri
Zonnarnedrawl
Hana
Guerweway
Nandral
emmeterix
Houstonh
SESSPUMEBLAMP
Enzycleincimi
westfailp
kathy lockhood
GuappyGaf
Cavafeepe
Queemajab
Teavatoppes
Sleelpese
sirlextesia
LilCleef
InsullyNulp
tradingking
NalDuette
SoarmaBloomia
Zitteejusiara
Jantplano
ACTUAXMUT
tref
DeKarafootsky
freediver
newsgyrl
SuniobStooppy
Atmottmeape
growmerce
saronochiamma
MaryFlelaytorkere
nanalink
JamesWhitney
lenasvetikova
TaumTedia
WourgyVorruct
plapsveitte

I'd be surprised if I got one poster out of all of them. The accounts will get deleted in due course. But why take the trouble to sign up, jump through all the manual stuff like Captchas etc if you have no intent to even spam!?

[tke71709]

newsgyrl

...

I'd be surprised if I got one poster out of all of them.

Then be surprised

The accounts will get deleted in due course. But why take the trouble to sign up, jump through all the manual stuff like Captchas etc if you have no intent to even spam!?

Perhaps they are Xrumer accounts where they plan on slipping a backlink into their profiles after a manual inspection period has passed, or they are simply testing to see if they can create accounts on this site.

[Clinton]

Building up account age is a tricky one. That's why I periodically purge accounts like these ...and that's why some profile privileges don't come with just age.

However, deciding the cut-off for deletion is a tricky one. If it's "zero post accounts" then people will take the time to make a single post that passes muster and then let the account age away. What about previously active members who haven't posted for yonks? Maybe they've just moved on, but the longer an account has been around the more the chance that someone else will one day take it over. I've seen that on the knoppix.net forums.

Thoughts and suggestions from members welcome on cut-off points in terms of posts and non-use... and action to be taken.

[flipfilter]

Hey Clinton,

It looks like you've been included on a forum bots scrape list - did you notice if the IPs of the users were from the same C Class?

Possibly the only way to not penalise the genuine would be to have a look over a longer time span like 6 months for example.

Firstly the account is marked for deletion if a certain period goes by without activity (login at least if not posting). After a six month period, If the user has made less than x posts for this whole period, the account is deleted. If they have, but haven't posted recently they will need to reactivate via email on their next login attempt and failing to do this within a further six months results in deletion.

This should get rid of the aged account creators without penalising people who originally posted frequently but have recently drifted. It may also give you a genuine reason to make contact via email to inform them their account is pending deletion.

Justin

[Clinton]

tke71709, oops, I missed the newsgyrl account

flipfliter, I didn't bother to check the IPs, no. There didn't seem to be any point if the accounts are just going to get deleted for non-participation.

Thanks for your suggestions, I appreciate them.

If a previously regular poster hasn't used the account for a long period and has lost interest in the forum for whatever reason then, yes, we need to protect the rest of the forum by treating that account as less trustworthy (as there's more chance of it being misused either by the poster himself who's not "a friend" any more or by someone else taking over the account). Initially I thought about just sending a notification email and then deleting the accounts but deletion would mean that all the poster's signatures are wiped out. That seems a tad unfair.

I'd be interested in some other opinions on this.

[Andy]

Hi Clinton,

A couple of thoughts here. First on the increasing junk signups - could they be bots aimed at harvesting your email address? I don't know. I have a similar problem on a wp blog of mine. I get all sorts of weird sign ups but not comments. None are even offered. Strange.

On the wayward poster, I'd encourage you to consider each on a case by case basis. But for the most part, what harm do they do? The only scenario I can think of is someone in my situation who has just reached the 50+ post mark (or maybe someone fairly close) and then stopped. Sure I could hand over my login details to a "friend" but what's the point? Suddenly my friend would offer a sleazy deal trading on the reputation I've built up? It could happen. The deal would have to be a big one so anyone doing proper due diligence would uncover the scam.

About the trust issue... who is more trustworthy? Someone with a new account or someone who posted some previously but hasn't been around a while? I'll tell you right now, there's a good chance I'd get distracted and not show up for a while. It's happened before. Am I less of a person because I get distracted? (BTW there are medical reasons for this.) Does my logic suddenly become less logical because I've been snatched by one of those pesky Antarians again? Does 1+1 suddenly equal 23.3214? Gee.

My own suggestion is to consider the person, maybe say they were missed and ask of their adventures.

Andy

[Clinton]

About the trust issue... who is more trustworthy? Someone with a new account or someone who posted some previously but hasn't been around a while? I'll tell you right now, there's a good chance I'd get distracted and not show up for a while. It's happened before. Am I less of a person because I get distracted? (BTW there are medical reasons for this.) Does my logic suddenly become less logical because I've been snatched by one of those pesky Antarians again? Does 1+1 suddenly equal 23.3214? Gee.

My own suggestion is to consider the person, maybe say they were missed and ask of their adventures.

You make some good points. Have you considered that sometimes forum accounts change hands when a website is sold? Someone on here who's built up a 500 post account with a signature link to his site would often be asked to hand over the account when he sells that site. I've have at least half a dozen Sitepoint and Digital Point accounts so acquired as well as Digg and other accounts. I don't use them, of course, but there's the possiblity that the person who comes back on a long dormant account is not the original poster. Or do you see it as a very small risk with very little damage potential?

[Andy]

Clinton,

Never considered something like that. Such a scenario brings up a whole bunch of issues - legal (which I am not qualified to address on any other than a layman's level) and ethical. As far as the legal implications, I don't even want to get into that.

Ethically speaking, it seems to me that the transfer should be made public so there is no question of underhanded dealings. I know of one similar case where a website with a forum was bought out. The new owner introduced himself and proceeded to conduct the forum in his own style. He was (or is, I guess) a good guy and no one had a problem with it.

Would considering these on a case by case basis be too troublesome? If it's not a problem now, why not cross that bridge if and when we come to it?

Andy

[Clinton]

Sorry, there seems to be some confusion, I didn't make it very clear. I have no intention of selling experienced-people.net. I was talking about members here selling the site in their signature. And having to hand over their account on this forum as part of the sale.

Let's say flipfilter's site becomes a huge success. A year down the road some company wants to buy his site. As part of the deal they'll ask him to relinquish forum accounts that use the flipfilter trademark. He'd have to give up his account here to them.

Sorry for using you as an example, flipfilter

[Andy]

I guess I should have used a different example, but it's the only one I'm aware of and it just happened to be the owner of the forum.

I still think the transfer of the member account should be done openly. While the writing style or some other comment would eventually make it obvious, I think the transfer should be transparent. If I owned the forum, I might just require a change of some sort, be it a modification to the username or a note in the profile. I'd also request the change be noted in the user's sig file. This could actually be an advantage.