Policy on spam like threads in com cafe

[Bodsda]

What is the forums policy on threads in the Com Cafe being nothing more then a link?

I keep seeing threads like


http://www.somerandomsite.com/some/relatively/uninteresting/information.html

Wow


Just seems so pointless. Why not explain what the link talks about and discuss your opinion. Seems more like spam then a useful thread to me.

Kind regards,
Bodsda

[aysiu]

Next time you see one of those, click the Report Post button, and the staff will figure out how to handle it.

[Bodsda]

Next time you see one of those, click the Report Post button, and the staff will figure out how to handle it.

It will be the one that you were the first replier to :)

reported as suggested.
Cheers aysiu

Kind regards,
Bodsda

[KiwiNZ]

That thread in your report does not look like spam.

[Bodsda]

That thread in your report does not look like spam.

Ok, maybe spam is the wrong word. How about unintentional spamdexing or pointless post that does nothing but link to an external site containing advertisements and incorrect information. < (I am referring to the ad containing the message "Hackers work hard at disrupting vital networks. We think harder about stopping them")

[KiwiNZ]

That was a legitimate Tech article in the Washington Post

[Bodsda]

That was a legitimate Tech article in the Washington Post

With an incorrect definition of the word 'hacker' - you picked me up on my definition of spam and I picked them up on their definitions

But that is besides the point, it is still a thread that does nothing but link to an external site.

[KiwiNZ]

That alone does not make it wrong.

[Bodsda]

That alone does not make it wrong.


The Community Chat area is for lighthearted and enjoyable discussions, like you might find around a water cooler at work.

Who stands next to a water cooler points at a load of advertisements and a tiny article and then waits for conversation to start. No one... You engage your audience by starting a conversation regarding the matters expressed in said article and discuss the points raised.

[schauerlich]

Who stands next to a water cooler points at a load of advertisements and a tiny article and then waits for conversation to start. No one... You engage your audience by starting a conversation regarding the matters expressed in said article and discuss the points raised.

People find interesting articles, and want to get other people's opinions on them. They link to them, and then people read the link and respond to the thread. Why is that bad? It's starting conversations.

[KiwiNZ]

"tiny article" ...it was a full page and few adds :(
It was tech related
It was posted once , it was not flooded
It did not use a zillion smilies , large font or animated text

It was a simple post to draw attention to an article of interest.

[Bodsda]

People find interesting articles, and want to get other people's opinions on them. They link to them, and then people read the link and respond to the thread. Why is that bad? It's starting conversations.

No it isn't. It is waiting for someone else to start a conversation. He might as well have not bothered with a link and just written

What are your opinions on the Windows malware online banking articles?

Hell, that is even more convenient then the link. At least I have some idea of what the thread is about before I attempt to wade through countless ads.

[Bodsda]

"tiny article" ...it was a full page and few adds :(
It was tech related
It was posted once , it was not flooded
It did not use a zillion smilies , large font or animated text

It was a simple post to draw attention to an article of interest.

Tech related does not mean it should be on the forums. It is in no way related to open source and serves little purpose other then to incite more anti windows comments

[KiwiNZ]

Tech related does not mean it should be on the forums. It is in no way related to open source and serves little purpose other then to incite more anti windows comments

Did you even read the article ?

Just in case here is the last paragraph " If you've never used a Live CD and are interested in learning how, or if you just want to take a Linux operating system for a test drive, check out my tutorial on this topic here (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/10/e-banking_on_a_locked_down_non.html)."

[Bodsda]

Did you even read the article ?

Just in case here is the last paragraph " If you've never used a Live CD and are interested in learning how, or if you just want to take a Linux operating system for a test drive, check out my tutorial on this topic here (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/10/e-banking_on_a_locked_down_non.html)."

So he mentions the word Linux and suddenly it is vital to open source? It is less related then the Internet censorship scare we had a while back, which incidentally was closed and the objectors silenced/ignored/overruled - again

[KiwiNZ]

So he mentions the word Linux and suddenly it is vital to open source? It is less related then the Internet censorship scare we had a while back, which incidentally was closed and the objectors silenced

Here is two other paragraphs from the article

"
In direct response to this series reported and published by Security Fix, the SANS Technology Institute, a security research and education organization, challenged its students with creating a white paper to determine the most effective methods for small and mid-sized businesses to mitigate the threat from these types of attacks. Their conclusion? While there are multiple layers that of protection that businesses and banks could put in place, the cheapest and most foolproof solution is to use a read-only, bootable operating system, such as Knoppix, or Ubuntu. See the SANS report here (http://www.sans.edu/resources/student_projects/200910_05.pdf) (PDF).
Also known as "Live CDs," these are generally free, Linux-based operating systems that one can download and burn to a CD-Rom. The beauty of Live CD distributions is that they can be used to turn a Windows-based PC temporarily into a Linux computer, as Live CDs allow the user to boot into a Linux operating system without installing anything to the hard drive. Programs on a LiveCD are loaded into system memory, and any changes - such as browsing history or other activity -- are compeltely wiped away after the machine is shut down. To return to Windows, simply remove the Live CD from the drive and reboot."




Clearly you have not read the article before posting here and reporting the thread as spam.

[Bodsda]

Here is two other paragraphs from the article

"
In direct response to this series reported and published by Security Fix, the SANS Technology Institute, a security research and education organization, challenged its students with creating a white paper to determine the most effective methods for small and mid-sized businesses to mitigate the threat from these types of attacks. Their conclusion? While there are multiple layers that of protection that businesses and banks could put in place, the cheapest and most foolproof solution is to use a read-only, bootable operating system, such as Knoppix, or Ubuntu. See the SANS report here (http://www.sans.edu/resources/student_projects/200910_05.pdf) (PDF).
Also known as "Live CDs," these are generally free, Linux-based operating systems that one can download and burn to a CD-Rom. The beauty of Live CD distributions is that they can be used to turn a Windows-based PC temporarily into a Linux computer, as Live CDs allow the user to boot into a Linux operating system without installing anything to the hard drive. Programs on a LiveCD are loaded into system memory, and any changes - such as browsing history or other activity -- are compeltely wiped away after the machine is shut down. To return to Windows, simply remove the Live CD from the drive and reboot."




Clearly you have not read the article before posting here and reporting the thread as spam.

Clearly you have selectively read the parts of this thread that back up your opinion and dismissed any thoughts of compromise long before this discussion became annoying

[KiwiNZ]

Clearly you have selectively read the parts of this thread that back up your opinion and dismissed any thoughts of compromise long before this discussion became annoying

I have not.

What I have tried to point out that as staff we look at the full picture before making a decision.

[Bodsda]

I have not.

What I have tried to point out that as staff we look at the full picture before making a decision.

As far as I was concerned this thread ended on post #2 -- A helpful post informing what to do and what would happen. By post #4 I was told that there was basically no point in reporting these threads as you have no intention of acting upon them.

Threads with nothing more then a link are annoying and needless. Even a copy & paste would have been more useful

[lisati]

Now now children! Do I detect a risk of a flame war here (it hasn't quite got that far yet)? How boring things would be if we all had identical interests and expectations!

What I call spam isn't quite the same as what others call spam, which is why many email filters do some kind of statistical analysis based on what they have been taught. My definition of spam is closer to the more generic term "junk" mail, which can refer to "any old rubbish from people you don't know", than, say, Spamcop's definition, which appears to be based on the idea of "unsolicited commercial email".

[aysiu]

I think both sides of the argument have merit here.

On the one hand, it is annoying for a first post to merely link to an article without saying anything about it.

On the other hand, the article is related to Linux, which makes it at least relevant for the Community Cafe.

I don't think reporting a post means the post will necessarily get an infraction or jailing. Reporting a post just flags it for review by staff. In clear-cut cases, the staff act on it immediately. If it's a gray line, we may discuss it amongst ourselves before making a decision.

[Bodsda]

I think both sides of the argument have merit here.

On the one hand, it is annoying for a first post to merely link to an article without saying anything about it.

On the other hand, the article is related to Linux, which makes it at least relevant for the Community Cafe.

I don't think reporting a post means the post will necessarily get an infraction or jailing. Reporting a post just flags it for review by staff. In clear-cut cases, the staff act on it immediately. If it's a gray line, we may discuss it amongst ourselves before making a decision.

Once again, thanks for a useful post aysiu

[aysiu]

Once again, thanks for a useful post aysiu
Bodsda, thanks for your concern. Please do keep reporting posts. I think sometimes you'll be glad we took care of something, and other times you'll be frustrated that we didn't act on something you felt should have been acted upon.

We do appreciate your vigilance.

[KiwiNZ]

I think both sides of the argument have merit here.

On the one hand, it is annoying for a first post to merely link to an article without saying anything about it.

On the other hand, the article is related to Linux, which makes it at least relevant for the Community Cafe.

I don't think reporting a post means the post will necessarily get an infraction or jailing. Reporting a post just flags it for review by staff. In clear-cut cases, the staff act on it immediately. If it's a gray line, we may discuss it amongst ourselves before making a decision.

That is what my point was here " What I have tried to point out that as staff we look at the full picture before making a decision."

[Bodsda]

That is what my point was here " What I have tried to point out that as staff we look at the full picture before making a decision."

I think apologies are in order KiwiNZ. I think things got a bit heated unnecessarily .

Sincerest apologies,
Bodsda

[Tipped OuT]

Now now children! Do I detect a risk of a flame war here (it hasn't quite got that far yet)? How boring things would be if we all had identical interests and expectations!

What I call spam isn't quite the same as what others call spam, which is why many email filters do some kind of statistical analysis based on what they have been taught. My definition of spam is closer to the more generic term "junk" mail, which can refer to "any old rubbish from people you don't know", than, say, Spamcop's definition, which appears to be based on the idea of "unsolicited commercial email".

Why isn't this guy a moderator yet? No seriously.