Forum Post: Cleaning Spam and Trolls From The Forum
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 13, 2011, 9:12 p.m. EST by Thrasymaque
(-2138)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Hi guys,
I'm a programmer and I would like to submit software modifications for this forum in an effort to reduce spamming and trolling. I have some ideas, but I would also like to hear yours.
One thing I want to accomplish is filtering out copy/pasted text and links. These are usually spam and should be killed in the act. A spam link could be redirected to another link like a competitor of the site the spammer is trying to promote, or a random site like http://www.pixyland.org/peterpan/ or simply deleted altogether. I think the deletion should not be real, but simply hidden to all users except the spammer so that the spammer doesn't realize his messages are not being seen.
Another idea is to permit users to silently ignore other users. This would make viewing the forum so much easier. You don't like material posted by SomeAnnoyingTroll? No problem, you just ignore him and you won't see any of his posts nor his comments ever again.
Free speech is important, but respecting readers is also important. I believe it's important that everyone have the power to filter out inane babble and spam. This will become especially important if the forum continues to grow in size. What a shame it would be to see it drown in crap.
What do you think? Any ideas?
I like the ignore option. I've noticed the same trolls. I've watched for a couple of days. Some come back with new names all the time. But yeah, some I'd like to just ignore.
The ignore option could also be setup to ignore posts that contain known spam like a certain link. Some spammers are only here to promote their site. If you know what link they constantly spam, you should be able to filter them, no matter what username they use.
OOOOO GOODY!!!! lol a couple of trolls really have made an effort to stand out, I can't wait!!!
[Removed]
[Removed]
Once you start limiting free speech... sooner or later it consumes all. I agree with the ignore option allowing your personal preference as to who's comments you wish not to see, but banning specific words unless the context in which they were used is considered. The above option would fix many of the problems.
Hey, can anyone see this? Just checking.. :)
I agree and I see.
No, you're a troll.
The lack of response to my posts reinforces my belief that trolls are just about the only one's on this forum. They bully the regular people, argue amongst themselves endlessly, and in my opinion not advancing the cause. The most popular threads are started by trolls, populated by trolls, moderated by trolls, and often ignore legitimate questions and comments only to fight amongst themselves.
If I knew how to create little puppet trolls in which I could plant needles and make the real trolls suffer at a distance, I would be planting zillions of needles in them with a big hammer. I would slam as hard as possible to make them suffer the most excruciating pains anyone has ever tasted in the history of mankind. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make such little puppet trolls.
I am not a tech person so correct me if I misunderstood, but the problem I have with blocking cut and paste is that except for short posts and replies, I compose most of my stuff in a text program and paste them in later when I'm ready to post them. I compose replies a minute or two at a time between other tasks and keeping my browser up the entire time isn't feasible, and even in my off time I've had too many lost posts when after 15 minutes of writing, a browser crash wipes out 6 paragraphs of writing.
Other than this I think a way to tidy the forums is a much needed tool. Ignore would be cool :)
That's not a problem and not what I mean by cut and paste. I mean people who keep pasting the same messages over and over again even if it's not on topic just so they can advertise their spam. There's no way for the programmers to know if you prepared your text in advanced then copied it in the text box instead of typing it. Well, we could know, but that's pretty useless. The point is to reduce spam, not to stop people from taking time to write careful posts. That's something I encourage and I often use a method similar to yours. I find typing in a small box quite difficult at times.
Ahh, I see, thanks for explaining :)
I would not want automatic filters to hide anything from me, but would love a system that would allow us to each filter what we don't want to sift through, so I could at least save myself the cringe-factor of worst of the racist trolls. This is one of the only political sites I've ever been to that's NSFW,LOL
Ya, from all the comments I got it seems obvious now the filtering would have to be optional and configurable by each user. That's the beauty of the Internet, it doesn't have to be static like a newspaper. With a good filtering system you can customize what you read in advance so you save time. It could also be cool to be able to "follow" your favorite writers somehow.
I like the follow idea even better than the filters!! I am an admirer of a number of folks in here, both with similar political leanings and polar opposite ones. I would love to not have to rely on being lucky enough to stumble upon them randomly in order to learn from them!!
i like this idea. How about also considering sub-forums with their own headings, to better organize topics. Like Politics, Economics, Media, Psychology/Sociology, Civil Rights, etc. etc. and then keep a general forums as well, that way people can be directed a bit easier, and maybe an improvement upon keeping track of where a person has posted.
The way it is now, topics get buried way too fast, makes it hard to build upon ideas and keep a particular discussion focused.
I absolutely agree this place needs to be cleaned up. I'm all for having your say, but not to the detriment of everybody else, when it does not encourage productive dialogue to occur.
The ignore idea is interesting for the convenience of weeding out the spam and trolls, though it could also keep people from hammering out things if there is genuine disagreement. Easier to ignore someone than to have to confront points of contention & disagreement amongst the Occupy population that may be better suited to addressed together. I am open to the idea though still.
Categories are definitely a must.
The ability for individuals to decide to ignore specific posters is a good idea.
But your filtering idea without notifying the person they've been filtered would probably sell well in China.
If I decide to ignore you, why should I have to let you know. When you are in a room and a speaker you hate goes up on the podium, do you raise you hand and tell him you are going to use your iPod to cut out his conversation from your brain?
That's not what I said.
The first idea, to filter certain people out centrally, without them knowing it, and without the readers knowing it (how could we all know somebody's posts were filtered out if we never saw them in the first place?). That's the one I'm talking about, that would play well in China.
You could setup those filters by yourself. Or, if some are setup automatically, you could override them in your settings. You would have full control over what you want to see and what you don't want to see. At the moment, users are being banned. This does not have to be the case if they can be ignored instead. This would give the possibility for people like yourself to keep seeing what the posters who are not now being ban keep posting over and over again. I have no problems with giving the freedom to those who want to see spam to see it.
Yes I agree with this approach. It would be very helpful.
It would also be helpful if you could see all of a person's posts listed so you could decide better whether to ignore them or not.
I like this idea of seeing all the posts from a particular user. It could help decide if they are a troll like you say, but it could also be used to find all the posts of a writer you like. Good idea!
Some links are valid to prove a point.
To clean up the forum just have a "report post" option, to be used for threads that are offensive. That would flag them and make them easier to delete.
Freedom of speech and thought is important, the downside is that offensive posts have to be deleted. They are easier to find when reported. That's as far as I think filters should go.
Why bother with a report option? Why not just give a user the option to hide the post himself, or any other from said user. You don't like my posts, then put Thrasymaque on your ignore list. Voilà. You just saved yourself a lot of time sifting through the nonsense you never like to read anyhow.
My suggestion was more in regard to if an offensive thread was started. I don't think anyone is always right or always wrong so I would not put anyone on an ignore list. I don't internalize other people's anger; others get upset over remarks that other posters make so they will use the ignore option.
If you report a post as being offensive, then the moderator must decide if it is and essentially he will be censoring the site and everyone will start screaming like little girls "But, I have freedom of speech! I should be able to say anything my little heart desires!" With the ignore option, anyone can decide to ignore whoever they want. You don't like this thread, ignore it. I can still see it, but you can't. Everyone can choose to see what they want. It's a reading aid.
I never thought of it as a reading aid, or preference. It is still bad though for those who have not made those decisions, those who are new to the site to see those things when trying to figure out what OWS is about. Most people seem to know that freedom of speech extends, or should, only so far as it is not hurtful to someone else. Hate speech, semitism, labelling groups of people, continuing stereotypes creates bad feelings to those effected. Although those who engage in those things probably will not care if it hurts others, they only care about furthering their own ideas and ideology, or idiotology as the case may be.
It would seem US citizens do not care much about hate speech. I have been told on many occasions by Americans on this site that Canada is a fascist country because we have hate speech laws. To each his own I guess.
I simply want to program a filter that users can setup like they want to help them filter out the crap they do not want to read. If you don't want to use it, you don't have to turn it on.
Points made and well taken. Thanks.
How offensive! You better change the slogan!
If this is a LEADERLESS movement YOU don't get to decide who is a troll like some of the Admins already have!
TAKE NOTE how LEFT LEANING Constitutional Scholar Glenn Greenwald is in AGREEMENT with the one politician who callse the bluff and who's name is constantly censored here.
Ron P A U L! changes into Ron Lawl! http://www.salon.com/2011/11/13/gop_and_tp_on_obamas_foreign_policy_successes/singleton/
FACETIOUS...Glenn Greenwald """"It took Ron Lawl — whom every Good Progressive will tell you is Completely Crazy and Insane — to point out to the GOP the rather glaring inconsistency between, on the one hand, distrusting government authorities to run health care, but on the other, wanting to empower the President to kill whomever he wants with no transparency or due process. As Conor Friedersdorf wrote last year in Newsweek about who and what is “crazy”:
Forced to name the “craziest” policy favored by American politicians, I’d say the multibillion-dollar war on drugs, which no one thinks is winnable. . . . If returning to the gold standard is unthinkable, is it not just as extreme that President Obama claims an unchecked power to assassinate, without due process, any American living abroad whom he designates as an enemy combatant?
Crazy/Insane Ron Lawl also objected to the killing under Obama not only of Awlaki, but, two weeks later, of Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, also a U.S. citizen, and his 17-year-old cousin. Think Progress forgot to include those dead teenagers on its list of Obama’s “foreign policy successes” — just as they forgot to include such smashing successes as this, this, this, this and this. But Ron Lawl yet again showed how insane he is by pointing out that it’s a bad thing — both morally and prudentially — for the U.S. Government to run around continuously killing Muslim children from the sky. All Sane and Serious People know that the President has the right and the duty to keep killing Muslim teeangers such as Awlaki’s 16-year-old son; only crazies like Ron Lawl object to such necessities""""""".
Its time for this crowd to get educated! '
[Deleted]
He advocates on behalf of your Constitution just like leftie Glenn Greenwald. Glenn Greenwald being FACETIOUS about the Think Progress people! Man oh man we are in deep cowshit!
the Constitution you don't seem to understand.
Public schooling is doing its job!
We could have a general assembly on the forum and decide if each user should be granted the right to setup custom spam filters by themselves. We can use direct democracy and decide by consensus. Those who want the freedom to filter what others say vote yes, those who don't want to have the possibility to setup customized filters by themselves vote no.
[Deleted]
I guess you would vote no?
A really simple start would just be to ban any post containing the fragment "jew." That would get rid of about 90% of what I find most annoying. Another simple fix would be to limit the length of post titles. If you could find a way to filter out idiocy, many would be grateful, but it's pretty hard to detect idiocy without IBM's Watson technology. Besides, you might then delete a bunch of my posts ! ;o)
P.S. I would like you to note that I didn't use caps except where needed !
yeah..dont mention sikhs,chinese, and many other races to, dont give special relationship to only one small sector of human race. and please dont fragnment arabs too...that would be anti semitic. we should all agree on this , no?
Sure, I could go for that. That way I won't see all the spam posts blaming everything on the sikhs either.
For long posts, we could perhaps cut them after a certain amount of words then have a read more link to open them up. As for filtering every post with the world "jew", this should be left to the user. I'm all for having detailed filtering capabilities that each user can setup like he or she wants. If you want to hide all posts with the word jew, you should be able to in my opinion. Freedom of speech also includes the freedom to cover your ears.
As long as they don't show up on MY screen, I'd be happy.
I'm about to give up on this forum. If I were committed to continue, I would likely just tweak some old C# code I have from another effort to mechanize the filters, categorize by topic, etc.
Personally, I don't understand why they bothered to create a forum from scratch. I would just have used Vanilla which is a good open-source forum and already has various modules that can be installed for spam filtering, categories, etc...
I agree. It seems like there are a multitude of open-source options that would have been more effective. Perhaps they didn't realize how popular this would be ?
P.S. I tried to delete the silliness below, but it left your replies !
Who knows. OK, I deleted my replies as well.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
A repeated link in different posts is not necessarily spam if it relates to the OP. (You would have to determine by looking at it.)
Same link repeated in the same post is likely spam.
More than 3-posts/day may be spam.
Key word spam: "Ron Paul" "End the fed" . . . .
More than 10-comments/day may be spam.
I'm not talking about genuine links. I'm talking about obvious spam links that have been posted numerous times. Don't be afraid, I'm not planning on censoring discussions.
[Removed]
Here we go. A spammer who repeatedly posts his link and poses as myself all at the same time. Thank you for coming here. I knew you would arrive sooner or later and show everyone what I am talking about. Please keep spamming so the problem becomes ultra obvious.
[Removed]
I like the general idea - but . . .
I've been at this a while, and I am one subversive bastard. I do, never the less, try to respect others by not spamming. I even try to keep my bumping to a minimum, I'm just like that.
I've got a couple of pieces that I've saved in text, so that I don't have to repeat myself - like on the sub-prime mess. I'm not an economist - but I've got something of a handle on what happened. So as the question comes up, your filter may pick up my saved response. I mean, to explain it with any brevity and clarity is a bitch. I won't remember next week how I did it yesterday.
The same may happen with global warming issues - and I don't wanna have to research something every single time some troll comes along.
Also, there is the issue of blindly hiding links. That makes me feel funny. I don't want someone to do it to me - I'm not going to put up b.s. links - if there is some error I'll never know and thus will have no access to redress.
I guess I'm just paranoid because in reality, I am a troll. I am, aren't I? I'm the very worst of them, the devious, dastardly, the break it all and laugh kind of troll -
so maybe I should change my handle? trollingfortruth?
Yeah, that would be a bit much - skip that.
Lastly - racist/sexist/etc posts don't need to be here - neither do the posters.
Just my opinion.
Thanks for everything.
d.
You make a very good point, and yes, I have seen your copy/pasted texts. I have no problem with that. Threads disappear and it's sometimes easier to copy/paste something than to link to something else or to write something new.
My preference is that if your text is long you would post it on another site and link to that. Or, perhaps users on these boards could have a notepad where they could write notes and redirect users there.
There could certainly be a system in place to handle genuine repeated material like you are referring to. Perhaps it could be provided to moderators who would approve it and then mark it in the database as non-spam.
The reason I made my post before starting to code is exactly for comments like these. I want to hear all your ideas and see what loopholes might occur so that the best fix can be programmed.
There is a fine line between spam reduction and censorship, however, I think it's possible to implement something that does a good job at only killing spam.
Could we index the threads? And maybe see about not letting them just disappear - unless of course the material is sexist/racist/ect . . .
And networking? Thus making it easier to - well. Not tag team flame wars, that isn't what I mean, though I know that can become an issue.
And I'm on dial-up.
If you really decide you've had enough of me, all you need to do is increase the required bandwidth . . .
I think users should have much more power over how they view the forum. If they want to make a thread sticky so they can find it again with ease they should be able to. They should also be able to search the forums. Etc... Programming takes time, so we can only solve one issue at a time. Right now there aren't many people submitting pull requests, so don't expect a ton of changes.
Personally, I want to concentrate on the elimination of spammers. I'm not concerned by people who criticize the movement. I don't consider these people trolls. I want to kill those who use this site for their own advertising purposes and who do not contribute to the threads. Personally, I have no problem with posts such as yours.
Well . . . in some respects I am a bit of a 'radical without borders'
haha!
But cool. No rush. I've got most of my own links saved. I guess it's a demonstration of my own self obsession.
Take your time - I know it can be a pain. Especially since html isn't standardized [last I knew].
What's the program anyway? Something with a bit of css sprinkled in? I've been tempted to look, the bottom header has a link with the claim it's open source, but I haven't yet.
The site is built with Django which is a python Framework. There's a link to github on the bottom right of this page. You can view the source there.
And that's what produces the html output, functions and all?
Wait - never mind. I already have a headache.
You can read more about Django here: https://www.djangoproject.com/
The server-side language is python. It's used to control the flow of the information from the database and to prepare the HTML, CSS, and Javascript for output. You'll find the HTML in the templates.
Yeah-ya. in the templates.
I so hate the browser war period.
Is it over yet?
Also a Thrasymaque1 and 4 have been running around, I must have missed 2 and 3, lol
Yeah, 2 and 3 were banned pretty quick, but they made a few posts. Now it's Thrasymaqueythethird, whatever that's supposed to mean.
Your attempt at installing an exploit in the code in order to have admin access will not succeed.
You failed your mission.
You are awesome...You speak with such authority
Leave.
I will submit pull requests to the github account. Jart will be able to accept or refuse them. I have no way of modifying what is on the server, I can only make suggested modifications to the code. Anybody can, it's open source.
[Removed]
They won't do it. Order would bring this forum to an abandoned crawl within days. I doubt seriously Jart is incapable of simple banning or organizing. It's a choice.
They want to do it. I'm already talking about the issue with Jart. There is some spam filtering in place, but it's not powerful enough. You can ban users, but they just come back with another username.
$ip_check = $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'];
IPs in a flatfile, line break as the dilimiter
Read my post about the problems with blocking IPs. It's just a bit lower.
Also:
This is not very good code to get a user's IP. There are much better algorithms. Look at Kohana's class for example. Much more powerful. In any case, IP banning can never be perfect. Some users don't have static IPs, like myself.
requiring an email auth would be a good idea as well. for sign up at least.
Yes, signup is way too easy. Those who want to create multiple accounts should be made to suffer a little. I agree. 100%.
hey, i had to. they banned me. for what? no idea. i don't support the OWS brand but i support the movement. idk?
I don't support the methods of Occupy or anarchy in general, but I agree with their complaints. I think users from both sides of the fence should be able to be heard here. And for that, we need a way to be able to cover our ears when spam starts filtering us like the great flood. I have no idea why you were banned. I thrashed around these boards like crazy and insulted many others, haven't been banned yet.
idk. my posts didn't show up after i created them and my replies didn't show either. but i could sign in and out. i assume that was their banning.
Most likely. I have no idea how their banning works. I haven't looked at the code in detail yet.
you don't need to be perfect to make the site manageable. basic ip banning will bring it down to less than 5 or so trolls. that makes it much easier to educate people on socially excluding the remaining trolls and managing the forum. If they really want on, they will get on. the point is to make it manageable.
You have a point. My main concern is banning entire intranets like a library. That's really crappy. Like I said, I don't know what the current setup is for IP banning. Maybe there's something already in place. You could certainly ask jart or review the code and submit some pull requests. That would be awesome! If I get down to programming some type of spam/troll filter, I'll definitely be considering IP banning. It's just that I have had bad experiences with it in the past.
why aren't they banning by IP?
easy...turn modem off for 10 minutes, turn back on...new ip. now someone gets my old ip and can't post.
go from mcdonalds with free access to starbucks with free access and my ip changes. jump from open wireless to open wireless and my ip changes.
then you start banning til you have banned every ip.
lol. let me know when the web becomes totally secure and managing a website never means the innocent get caught in the net. That reality has not been realized by any site.
If we can just filter out known spam links that will already be a big improvement.
all of the links posted here go to political pages. i have seen only one that was obviously commercial, but it was still political. what are you considering spam?
I consider this to be spam: http://global-human-rights.us/home/ It is being posted hundreds of times everyday on the forum. You can sometimes find it 10 or more times in one thread.
LMAO, yeah that guy is an a$$
I really like the song on the homepage of that website only the original from the movie is better, I grew up listening to that song -- brings back good memories.
BTW, I've been watching how popular this forum is: http://push2check.com/occupywallst.org
I also agree about not censoring alternative opinions and conspiracies. I'd like to see more about the Kennedy assassinations and 911 -- don't mind discussing the Holocaust or Jews either but I refrain for fear of being banned. There are legitimate conspiracies and illegitimate conspiracies. All organized religions are irrational IMO.
There's no doubt in my mind the CIA killed JFK (I have a webpage about it) and that 911 was a setup/false flag to get U$A into war (I have webpage about that and the Holocaust too). U$A has very BAD karma.
I doubt many here even know about the USS Liberty false flag that almost got U$A into war against Egypt.
If we're going to change the world, we should know why it needs changing: Peak oil, geometric world population growth, global warming, funny-money Wall Street scams . . . there was a good segment on 60-minutes last night on how members of Congress use inside information to make money on Wall $treet and on land deals: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=contentMain%3BcbsCarousel
Exactly, IP banning is not very efficient and can be circumvented in a manner of ways. Spammers make money, so they have the motivation to do this.
I'm not sure. I don't have information about that yet. However, IP banning is not perfect and can be circumvented. You can use proxy servers like Tor. The problem is these spammers go around posting links for their business. They know how to use proxy servers and banning their IP doesn't do much good. The other problem is that you might end up banning IPs like a library where many people are using the same IP. Then you punish many because of one spammer. Another issue is that many users don't have a static IP; that is, there IP always changes.
And how to we know the code running on the server and the js is the same? Doing a minify on the js obfuscates the code you know.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Javascript is fed from the server to your computer and I have no way of modifying what is on the server. Again, I can only make pull requests which jart can accept or ignore. Anybody can do this since this software is open source. If you have any good ideas, you should also contribute some code.
Dude, these guys are not worth responding to. they install wordpress and call themselves designers.
What's the "min" mean in the JS code called occupywallst.min.js?
It's been minified to make it smaller and thus faster to send over the Net. Your point? Like I said, jart would be accepting or refusing all pull requests. This is open source software, this is how it works. You're making no sense.
You didn't answer the question - how do we know you are using the same version as on GitHub?
When did you ask me this question? Did you ever make a pull request? It means I download a copy of the code from github, make my changes, then submit a pull request to the github account. Then, the main programmer, jart, can look at all my changes and decide to accept or refuse them. Have you ever worked with Git before? Read up on how it works.
You're very evasive. I wonder why ....
I'm not evasive at all. Ask anything you want. Iv'e answered all your questions. The problem is you don't seem to understand how programming works and how people co-operate on open source projects. Again, ask any questions you want. I'll take the time to answer them.
TROLL
At least we now know you are outed TROLL and that your technical skills at programming are at the beginner level.
And, how do you know that? Again, please message jart if you have any questions about Github, and don't be afraid to contribute with your very own pull requests. You are a loser, it's clear to everyone. Now, leave me be. I am coding tonight.
Ok, I get it - when you said I could verify that the JS downloaded to my PC against your code on GitHub you lied. You would not provide the min function used so in fact there would be no way for me to actually do what you said would be easy for me.
At least we confirmed some aspects of your personality.
What are you talking about?! You make no sense whatsoever! Have you ever coded anything apart from a Hello World program. What an insulting ignorant loser you are. Stop bothering me and message jart. You're an ass.
As long as you provide the tool used to minify, then we can check the code against an un-minified version.
There are several ways of minifying so you would have to provide your method.
Thanks for insulting me but it took you 4 replies to give the answer.
There's no reason for me to provide my method, and even if I did how would you know I'm telling the truth. Your thinking makes no sense. If, and that's a big if because my changes would mostly likely be database related and only done in python, so yeah, IF I change the Javascript I would be modifying the main source then compressing that. If jart, or you, or both of you, are not happy with the idea of me compressing the code, jart can recompress it herself or you can do it and make a pull request of your own. In any case, all the changes I would make to a minified Javascript file could be seen by anyone.
You're a nitwit. Sorry, but you know nothing about coding. Please, talk to jart for more info. You're tiring and your baseless accusations are insulting.
BTW - I insulted you because you made a baseless accusation which is very rude. Remember this:
Sorry, but you're a major loser, a nitwit, a dork, and any other synonym I can't care too look up in the dictionary. You're wasting everyone's time because of your ignorance and your nonsense. Stop it.
For the THIRD TIME, how do we know that the open-source code on GitHub is the same as that being run on the site. Because the client-side JS is obfuscated it can't be verified against the source on GitHub.
PS: I might be your boss, BTW. LOL
Of course the minified JS can be verified against the source on Github. Every single change I make on any file would be verifiable and obvious to jart, and anyone else, including you. Open-source coding is absolutely transparent. You can't hide anything from the main programmer, and he/she is the only one who can put the code live on the server.
In any case, minified Javascript is not really obfuscated in any real way. It's simply compressed, not encrypted. Any respectable programmer can decompress the file and read the code to understand what is going on. If I need to touch the Javascript, which is not even certain, then I would be modifying the main file and then compressing that to make the minified version. If jart or anyone else doesn't trust that I have been honest during the compression stage, they can compress the main file themselves or look at all my changes before approval. You yourself can look at all my changes and report anything you might find strange. You could even submit your own pull requests with any fix you deem important.
It's obvious you've never used Github and don't understand open-source coding nor minified Javascript files. There are tons of open-source projects on Github and if people could sneak in dirty code like you imagine it would not work. Your accusation is absolutely without substance and it's actually funny how little you understand.
Why don't you look at the github account. You can browse all the code of this forum here: https://github.com/jart/occupywallst
You can also look at all the code changes jart as made in recent days: https://github.com/jart/occupywallst/commits/master/
You can also look at pending pull requests here: https://github.com/jart/occupywallst/pulls
Finally, if you're not happy with my explication and you still think I can somehow hack the site using Github, you can do two things to ease your fear and help you sleep better:
I'm sorry, but I have real work to do. I can't go around explaining coding practices to people who don't understand what coding is, how it works, and how it is shared. It's your responsibility to educate yourself. There are countless resources on the Internet for this. I'm done wasting my time with you. Again, your accusations are groundless and only expose how little you know about coding.
Like the idea of an ignore function for getting rid of known trolls.
Silence those who disagree with you. I understand the people who are spamming businesses or the same copy/paste over and over again but when you silence those who can disagree in an objective manner well,isn't that a little hypocritical from a group exercising their rights of free speech and assembly? I agree with OWS on some things and not on others. I actually do try to see the other persons side even if I don't agree.
Read the other posts. It looks like everyone agrees it would have to be a filter each user can configure on his own. You can already choose what you want to read and what you want to ignore, this would just permit you to do this automatically so you don't have to glance at every post to decide.
Ah my mistake,apologies.
It's my fault. I should take the time to modify the main post. My original ideas have changed quite a bit after reviewing all the suggestions on this thread. Your concerns were warranted.
I think you're a big turd
You are so articulate and original. It's fascinating.
Stop letting people make posts with jew in the title.
Enough with the hatred.
http://www.freepatriotism.com
[Removed]
I think it is very important to ignore viewpoints that do not agree with you, as otherwise you cannot be sure that you are right.
I love viewpoints which are in disagreement with mine. Those are the ones I learn from. Unfortunately, it's very hard to read those arguments when they are flooded by spam.
Yes, I don't like to be around people who think differently, it makes me uncomfortable.
I like people who think differently. I want to hear them. That's why I want to get ride of the spammers who don't think and simply use this forum to advertise their site. They make it hard for me to read all the different points of view around here. In my opinion, the most important posters are the anti-Occupy ones. I hate forums where everyone agrees and gives each others high fives. Arguments get stronger when they are challenged. Unfortunately, spammers don't challenge any arguments. They just spam their links.
I agree, if I wasn't interested in the variety of views, I'd have moved to one of the more heavily moderated Occupy forums.
Why not just allow free speech, and stop with the control. This getting really creepy. Maybe we need mind control too.
Because spam flood the boards which make it inconvenient for users interested in real discussion. As the forum grows more and more spam will accumulate and these good posters will eventually get tired and leave. At the end of the day, the forum will have been killed.
Free speech is important. It's primordial. However, if your ideas are flooded by spammers, then they don't get heard. Do you really not see the problem with some users who just go around promoting their websites? This should be a discussion board, not an advertising forum.
Readers should be allowed to filter what they don't want to be bothered with. Do you not have spam filtering on your email? Do you turn it off because you want the world to have free speech?
For people like you who want to read everything, we could have a setting which eliminates filtering. Why not. In that case, everybody is happy.
How can you differentiate those from who you believe have the right to express themselves here, from those who don't. seems really unfair.
The users could make that decision themselves. There are some spammers who are obvious. I'm sure you've seen this link: http://global-human-rights.us/home/ Let's say you are super tired of seeing that link and never want to encounter it again, then you can set that up to be filtered in your preferences.
Oh thanks...but I think I like reading all the different posts.. i wouldn't want to filter or censor any..some are funny
This would be an option.
Thanks Thrasy.. I am a libertarian...and I do not think I support The OWS cause. But I am trying to find out more on this web site
I don't support the OWS methods, but I do agree with their complaints.
well lets here some solutions.. any one can complain.
There ya go. another demand. Narcissism much?
Fred go find Ginger. You seem challenged in some areas regarding thought. have a lovely evening.
fred astaire you sound like you think who you are.
that didn't even make sense. have another.