Spam reporting thread #39

É uma continuação do tópico Spam reporting thread #38.

Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #40.

DiscussãoSpam Fighters!

Aderi ao LibraryThing para poder publicar.

Spam reporting thread #39

Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.

Jul 19, 2015, 10:36 am


Distinguish between the following, and flag the highest level of the violation:

-- Type 1: Irredeemable commercial spam: make sure to flag the member's profile, as well as the spammy activity. This type includes things selling strollers, pharmaceuticals, live-streaming sports games, porn, and/or trying to create traffic/links to sites for such things. Sufficient profile flags will automatically result in temporary suspension and deletion of the member's activity, so use your profile-flagging powers wisely and carefully.

-- Type 2: Teachable moments: DO NOT flag the member's profile, but DO flag the violating activity (e.g. self-promotional Talk post, group, or local venue). This type includes promotional activity that violates the Terms of Service (TOS), but where the member is potentially redeemable, e.g. overzealous authors, overzealous publishers, or other members with small TOS violations but who are otherwise using the site legitimately. These cases should be reported to staff (by sending a message or email to staff and/or or posting on this thread), so the member can be taught how to use the site.

Specific procedures:
-- Overzealous authors or publishers (these fall under type 2): do NOT flag the member's profile. Report to staff here or privately. You can also send the member a polite message pointing them to the terms, mentioning the "no promoting" language, and pointing them to the Do's and Don't page for authors:
-- Suspected sock-puppetry to promote a book, write fake reviews, and/or stack ratings: do not flag the profile, but report to staff here or by message, so staff can investigate. This is a serious violation for which members can be permanently banned.
-- Profile flags for commercial spammers only (type 1): On the member's profile page, click on the "report for spam" link, then follow instructions to flag the member. Again, this is only for commercial spam, not for "overzealous" authors, publishers, or booksellers, which should be reported to staff instead. See Talk post:
-- Spam or promotional posts in a Talk topic (type 1 or 2): flag the post as an abuse of the terms of service.
-- Spam or promotional groups (types 1 and 2): flag new groups using the "flag this group" link.
-- Spam lists: report in this thread, and flag the member if it's commercial spam.
-- Spam works (type 1 spam): flag the work as spam on the work's editions page, and then vote on proposed work spam. Make sure to read the guidelines before proposing or voting, especially for what is not spam. Voting page:
-- Spam in a review (type 1), or an explicitly promotional review (type 2): flag the review as an abuse of the TOS, using the red flag.
-- Spam or promotion in "published reviews," or other CK fields (type 1 or 2): post here and/or delete.
-- Spam or egregious promotion/advertising in venues or events (type 1 or 2): post here and/or delete. Note that authors are permitted to add events for their books.
-- Spam in book links / quick links: post here and/or edit to remove spam.
-- Spam author names listed on a work: No current procedure. Tim has asked us not to change CK to indicate spammers, and not to combine spam authors together.
-- Not sure if it's spam? Post here, and explain why.

Please note that Tim has asked us not to use either CK or the combining system (whether works or authors) for spam fighting.

For more information see these wiki pages:
Procedures for flagging and reporting spam:
Spam works, guidelines for flagging and voting:

(A copy of these guidelines, for pasting in new threads, can be found here or at the top of previous threads.)

Jul 19, 2015, 1:32 pm

Enthusiastic author (and one who thinks we're not very smart):

I followed the link, which leads right to a listing on Scribd for a teleplay by... guess who? Yep, the poster. It *sounds* like it's going to be on television, but that's just wishful thinking, I'd guess.

Note that the author of all his books but one is actually him. The only item he isn't the author of is a collection where he appears. As long as I'm being unkind, I'd also guess that this other profile is him, also.

Why do people do that? I just do not understand. Anyway, I flagged the post, and suggest that someone ought to leave a note on his profile (and that he ought to know better, considering how long he's actually been here).

Jul 19, 2015, 1:43 pm

>10 Lyndatrue: Hmm, this one looks a little fishy too :

Jul 19, 2015, 1:51 pm

>11 Jarandel:

Very fishy.

Note the comment.

Jul 19, 2015, 2:19 pm

>11 Jarandel: Huh. I never noticed that. Yeah, looks like another fake account. Bleagh. Seals is one busy boy.

Jul 19, 2015, 10:15 pm

nutrition, engagement rings, wood lathes - all in one

Editado: Jul 21, 2015, 11:42 am

What happened here?

ETA: Never mind. Problem resolved.

Jul 21, 2015, 11:43 am

Awww, now I want to know what happened.

Jul 21, 2015, 11:50 am

Nothing exciting. It said it was deleted as spam, but it was still there. There was no second message to make it linger, so I was just wondering why it wasn't gone. I refreshed a few times and it was still there. But it's gone now.

It might have been on my end. My internet is dragging its feet this morning.

Jul 21, 2015, 1:57 pm

What sometimes happens is that the MEMBER is removed as spam, and it then takes a few minutes before the topic disappears.

Jul 21, 2015, 3:06 pm

Ah, I bet that's it. Thanks, MarthaJeanne.

Jul 22, 2015, 3:10 am

Someone needs to point out to alicia & co that we are not stupid and just putting the word review in the subject will not prevent flagging.

Jul 22, 2015, 8:00 am

The italian translates to

"Browse the best digital flyers of your favorite brands. Compare the best deals and buy at competitive prices: only! Choose between all the opportunities available in your region, province or city."

Jul 23, 2015, 4:49 am

Overzealous author; so far no follow up message:

Jul 23, 2015, 10:10 am

>49 Mr.Durick: needs flagging still, both the group and the profile.

Jul 23, 2015, 10:11 am

54> Gone now.

Jul 24, 2015, 12:53 pm

Dude created a spam venue (which I have deleted, and the image of which I flagged here.

Jul 24, 2015, 1:30 pm

Jul 24, 2015, 1:30 pm

>60 lilithcat: Don't forget to also vote on the book (to mark it as spam, so it disappears).

Jul 25, 2015, 10:40 am

Not sure why the topic's still there, if both posts (from the same user) have been flagged.

Jul 25, 2015, 10:45 am

Gone now.

Jul 26, 2015, 6:13 pm

This may not be the right place, but has a whole bunch of inappropriate tags. Profile "kulamom" tried to shove a whole plot summary as a tag, and not only for one book. Can someone get these tags deleted?

Jul 26, 2015, 6:53 pm

>75 shmjay: Dang. I've never seen such a thing, but I guess everything happens, sooner or later (I may be channeling Vonnegut here).

I'm not sure what can be done about it. I see you left a comment on the profile. You might try sending an email to staff, but I suspect that it's a non-starter on getting them changed unless the user chooses to.

Editado: Jul 26, 2015, 10:38 pm

> 75

It's not spam, and it's not able to be deleted by anyone other than the member using it (user data is sacred on LT).

I am, frankly, appalled at the comment you left. ("You must not try to put an entire plot summary as a tag."). Seriously? It is none of your business how someone else uses tags. If you think the person used that field in error, intending to use the review field, you can point them politely in the correct direction. But your comment was peremptory and rude.

Jul 27, 2015, 7:54 am

"Review" by the author can be flagged as Not a Review. It's just a discussion of the book and her writing of it.

Editado: Jul 27, 2015, 11:02 am

>82 2wonderY:

Unfortunately, a "discussion of the book and her writing of it" is a review. Tim keeps promising that author-written reviews will be marked, but under the TOS it is perfectly OK for someone to review their own book.

So that should not be blue-flagged, tacky though it may be.

Jul 27, 2015, 10:05 am

>75 shmjay:

That is not spam. The only "inappropriate" tags would be those attempting to sell something. Those are perfectly acceptable tags, nobody other than the poster can or should delete them, and we have specifically been asked not to ask other users to "correct" their data - this applies even in the case of actual error and even more so in the case of "A usage you don't like". I would recommend you delete your comment and, if you wish, replace it with something like "I notice you are using the tags field for plot summary, and just wanted to give you a heads-up in case you wanted to put these in the Comments or Review fields instead."

Jul 27, 2015, 10:56 am

>84 lilithcat: You confused me for a moment (your reference was to >81 2wonderY:, but I suspect you meant >82 2wonderY:). The review has been deleted, as far as I can see. It still shows that there's one review, but if you look the review is gone. Her account had only one review (of someone else's book) showing, and I counter-flagged it (someone had flagged it as not a review, and it certainly looked reviewish to me, and yes, reviewish is a word...sort of).

Editado: Jul 27, 2015, 11:05 am

>87 Lyndatrue:

You're quite right, I've corrected that.

Actually, the review was of her book; Eileen Kern Goodman and emausmom are the same person. The one that's there now, is someone else's.

Editado: Jul 27, 2015, 11:10 am

Right, but emausmom currently does have one review of someone else's book. So now emausmom's book has one review, not by her, and has written one review, not of her own book; apparently she deleted the review of her own book. (And good for her. It's very uncommon to see authors responding positively like this.)

Jul 27, 2015, 3:08 pm

>77 lilithcat: I was surprised, too, at the tone of that message. But there is the fact that those hugely long, discursive tags showing on the works pages effectively make the entire tags section completely useless. They're not the user's private property when they're posted in everyone's way. If I want to see how readers have tagged those books, I can't.

Jul 27, 2015, 3:57 pm

Jul 27, 2015, 4:32 pm

>89 lorax: Yes, she did delete her review.

Editado: Jul 27, 2015, 6:04 pm

>91 Meredy: They're a very suboptimal use of the feature, but not particularly less legitimate than other information only relevant to the individual tagger : "mom's basement", "that's John's Bible", "in the water closet", "F2B220A", "I need a cover scan", etc...

As soon as the book gets more than a few taggers those kind of extremely idiosyncratic tags no longer show anyway, except when you choose to see everything.

There may be spoilers thrown in the face of some people as long as the book doesn't have enough taggers to bury them I guess, but that's another matter.

Editado: Jul 28, 2015, 12:15 pm

Editado: Jul 28, 2015, 1:44 pm

Link spam:

(That was fast, when I originally posted one minute ago it was just word-salad spam probe.)

Jul 29, 2015, 2:15 am

>112 Mr.Durick: >113 Mr.Durick: I flagged them; now they're gone.

Jul 29, 2015, 2:17 am

>114 henkl: The topics are gone. The profiles in 112 and 113 still need flagging.

Editado: Jul 29, 2015, 11:01 am

Nearly all the profiles, from >111 Yamanekotei: until >119 rybie2:, are still there. I think that something's wrong in the system. I'll probably notify timspalding later, once I've had a bit of coffee. It may be that the system is just catching up (one went to suspended while I was typing this). I'll check back in a bit.

ETA: I removed my flag on:

This was from >118 Mr.Durick: Sure, it's probably just been created for spamming, but there's no reason given, and I'm loathe to just flag because it's an empty account, just created today.

Jul 29, 2015, 12:37 pm

>110 Yamanekotei: Isn't that the one that was just a youtube link? I wasn't brave enough to click it, so I wasn't sure it was spam.

Jul 29, 2015, 6:15 pm

>123 JackieCarroll:

I don't remember which one was a link to youtube,but both 110 and 111 posts were spam.

Jul 29, 2015, 11:25 pm

> 147

I would definitely hire!

Leo Nelson is a London base Author and Editor; here he is sharing his experiences with educations & writing services. He provides Custom essay writing UK help to the one who require such assistance for various reasons.

Jul 30, 2015, 12:09 am

OK, lilithcat. I couldn't decide which was better, the profile name or the about me description.

“Spent high school summers managing easy-bake-ovens for the government. Garnered an industry award while researching psoriasis in Cuba. Spent high school summers importing jungle gyms in the government sector. Practiced in the art of supervising the production of circus clowns on Wall Street. Prior to my current job I was short selling carp in Gainesville, FL. Had a brief career donating xylophones in Phoenix, AZ”

Jul 30, 2015, 7:17 am

Self-promotion - a bit too heavy and in the wrong place.

Jul 30, 2015, 2:30 pm

How do I flag a picture?

Jul 30, 2015, 2:31 pm

You cannot flag a picture, but if it is clearly spam, you can flag the profile.

Jul 30, 2015, 2:34 pm

>164 Ennas:, >165 henkl:

To clarify: you can flag an author image or a venue image, but you cannot flag a profile picture.

Editado: Jul 30, 2015, 2:55 pm

>166 lilithcat: That's what I meant; thanks for the clarification.

Jul 31, 2015, 1:00 pm

Huh. So what happens when a profile is blocked before the topic has enough flags to vanish? still there, and has three flags. The profile's already been suspended, and the note on that topic is "This user has been removed as spam." I usually only see this when a comment's been posted on a thread where there were other comments.

Anyone have an explanation for this? I'm confused.

Jul 31, 2015, 2:30 pm

>182 Lyndatrue:

It just takes time.

The topic is gone now.

Jul 31, 2015, 3:02 pm

Ago 1, 2015, 12:50 pm

Live stream in picture comment

Ago 1, 2015, 12:53 pm

Spammer posted 6 profile pictures of medical/lab equipment:

Editado: Ago 1, 2015, 5:25 pm

>192 henkl: The topic has been removed but the profile remains.

Gone now!

Ago 1, 2015, 5:55 pm

Ago 1, 2015, 7:47 pm

UFC "Ladies" Live streaming in picture comment

Ago 2, 2015, 7:25 pm

Ago 3, 2015, 7:19 am

>204 Mr.Durick: Looks like we got them all.

Editado: Ago 4, 2015, 12:38 am

The first one two has a "review" advertising selenium online training.

The last one is tagged “sap srm online training, sap srm courses online, sap srm training online, sap srm courses online usa, sap hana online training, sap srm online courses, sap fico training in usa”


Ago 4, 2015, 1:22 am

If you are the third person to flag a spam message, do you report it here, or do you just let it take care of itself? I've been mostly reporting them, but sometime not. And I do not report those for which I am the fourth to flag the message.


Ago 4, 2015, 1:48 am

>215 Mr.Durick: It depends on the time of day, and the type of spam. I always report the streaming stuff, so that the profile can be flagged, even if the topic is about to vanish. I don't worry too much in the weekdays, when there's always someone in a timezone somewhere to join in, but on the weekends, that profile can hang around for quite a long time.

Better to post, if you're not sure.

Ago 4, 2015, 3:58 am

I never report things in Book Talk here because they will be seen and flagged anyway. This topic gets long fast enough. So often the spam is gone by the time the message is up, and then lots of people end up checking for it making the LT servers work harder.

Ago 4, 2015, 10:14 am

>217 MarthaJeanne: I would say that it is more useful to make sure that something's gone. When I get up in the morning, I check the profile listed for each piece of spam here. If it's suspended, then I don't bother with the topic. Sometimes, if there were several entries overnight, especially on late Saturday into early Sunday, I'll find that one of them is still active.

Editado: Ago 5, 2015, 12:00 pm

Here's something I've never seen happen before; a post I was reading changed when I refreshed the page, turning into a slew of spam links:
In other words, the spammer had written a few short paragraphs of nonsense about some books, then edited his post to be a wall of spam.

Edited to add the guilty party:

Ago 5, 2015, 12:05 pm

Post number three in this thread:

The OP's user name resembles some of our spammer user names. It's possible that this was a set up, but I'm cautious so I'm not going to flag it. The OP has one book in his library. Harry Potter.

Editado: Ago 5, 2015, 12:10 pm

Spammer mentioned in >229 rybie2: still lingering.

Next up:

The thread is gone already, but the spammer's still around on this one, too.

Ago 5, 2015, 12:08 pm

>230 JackieCarroll: Spam, surely, and provocative with it!

Ago 5, 2015, 12:09 pm

>231 rybie2: is >299 a typo?

Editado: Ago 5, 2015, 12:10 pm

>233 JackieCarroll: Of course 'tis ;-) At this point, the profile is already kaput, but I'll edit my post, thanks.

Ago 6, 2015, 8:58 am

The spam thread in Early Reviewers is gone already, but the spammer still needs squashing:

Ago 6, 2015, 9:46 am

Gone now.

This thread is closed.
Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #40.