You can also limit the number messages a person can post. And +1 for moderation. Apart from spam, people start discussions, chats, etc in comments. There is no way to stop that. And +1 for layered filters. For example, if two people tag each other repeatedly you can flag it as a chat, and so on.
Regards Prakhar Singh IIT Roorkee On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Tai-Lin Chu <[email protected]> wrote: > I have seen some spam filters that have layers. > > The first layer is captcha, which blocks most bots. Google recaptcha > is very useful in this case. I don't think this will block any human > user. In addition, users don't have to enter captcha every time once > it determines that a person is not a bot. For reference: > https://www.google.com/recaptcha/intro/index.html > > The second layer is letting users to report spams, or having some kind > of rating system (reddit). This blocks diligent human spammers. In > particular reddit's rating system is smart because it requires no > moderator; users actively downvote bad comments and upvote useful > ones. > > I generally don't like keyword-based spam filters because they take > time to maintain a good keyword list and are easy to block legit > users. > > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Oon-Ee Ng <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Johannes Löthberg > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Not all spam is automated , so just requiring a CAPTCHA wouldn't be very > >> useful. I think a slightly better approach would be to add the comment > to a > >> queue if it fails the spam filter, and require a TU to approve it. > > > > Seems like a lot of unnecessary work for TUs though. Maybe it would be > > better for maintainers approval to be required for posts that fail a > > spam filter (they could just ignore it). Even if its not really spam, > > its probably aimed at the maintainer anyway. >
