Spam reporting thread #42

É uma continuação do tópico Spam reporting thread #41.

Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #43.

DiscussãoSpam Fighters!

Aderi ao LibraryThing para poder publicar.

Spam reporting thread #42

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

Out 3, 2015, 9:47 am

Procedures for reporting spam
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.)

Out 3, 2015, 10:09 am

Editado: Out 4, 2015, 6:56 am

The Koreans or whoever are at it again.

6:54 Currently 21 Topics.

6:56 Over 30

Out 4, 2015, 7:04 am

Now they're all gone.

Editado: Out 4, 2015, 7:19 am

Now is doing it.

Over 40 and coming faster than I can flag.

Out 5, 2015, 2:20 am

Twenty spam posts in some language and character set I don't understand but clearly a promotion for some website called

Out 5, 2015, 5:06 pm

He's been removed now.

Editado: Out 6, 2015, 12:51 am
tons of threads in Book Talk now

Editado: Out 6, 2015, 1:00 am

>25 tardis: Yes, the Korean spam bot seems to be back.

Hopefully will be flagged into submission. I've flagged all the posts, but I'm the only flag on many of them.

ETA: I just don't have the energy. I've already fought enough fires today to last for a while.

Hopefully someone else besides you and I shows up...

Out 6, 2015, 12:59 am

I'm going to start flagging these things, but I think maybe something is taming them so they'll be gone before I'm done. If not I'll have done my part.


Editado: Out 6, 2015, 1:02 am

>26 Lyndatrue: Flag the profile first. Pretty please.

ETA: It takes four flags (far as I can tell, that works for the profile too).

Out 6, 2015, 1:01 am

I've been flagging them, too, and did the profile as well.

Editado: Out 6, 2015, 1:08 am

I got the profile, but when I click on 'flag' the screen jerks, but I don't get the opportunity to do it. I'll try Chrome instead.


P.S. I flagged a few over half of them then got 'This User Removed as Spam' which keeps us from flagging them into non-existence.


Editado: Out 6, 2015, 1:13 am

>30 Mr.Durick: Someone probably needs to nudge a staff person. I'm about to go fall down, so it isn't me. I hate spammers. Hate hate hate.

ETA: Huh. Never mind. All gone. Thank you, mysterious cleaner upper.

Out 7, 2015, 3:30 am

The profile that posted it is a spam profile.

Out 7, 2015, 9:57 am

This looks like something to keep an eye on, although it may be just someone trying to figure out the site. (I note that he has a number of legit books catalogued - including a book by Leslea Newman with which I was not familiar! I may have to thank him.)

Out 7, 2015, 10:37 am

>43 lilithcat: All gone now.

Out 7, 2015, 11:04 am

>44 henkl:


I think I'll stop posting these "keep an eye on" ones. Guns seem to get jumped. He hadn't actually done anything yet.

Editado: Out 7, 2015, 2:35 pm

offering free book on Amazon

ETA: I see he has been told about the proper way for authors to use LT.

Out 7, 2015, 2:56 pm

>46 Taphophile13: I'm not flagging the profile this time, but since he obviously also spammed in June. That was

Out 7, 2015, 3:08 pm

>48 MarthaJeanne:
No, I didn't list or flag the profile but he does bear watching.

Editado: Out 7, 2015, 3:12 pm

Lorannen has now messaged him. See also her message to me.

Out 7, 2015, 3:13 pm

You'll note that I mentioned to him in June that rating his own book was not a good idea. He seems to have down-rated it from 5 stars to 1 star. Not the brightest.

Out 7, 2015, 3:32 pm

He is also listed as LT author on a disambiguation page. I have now moved his book from unknown to 15, and told Lorrannen that his LT author needs to be moved. How that was supposed to be good publicity...

As you say, not the brightest.

Out 8, 2015, 1:17 am
라이브바카라┏ ▲┓660BOX.COM ┏ ▲┓라이브바카​

Editado: Out 8, 2015, 1:41 am

The box com people seem to have figured out that long batches don't do any good.

Wrong. They were just warming up. I'll flag the spammers and the first spam from each name.

Out 8, 2015, 1:41 am

Now they are doing double dipping using multiple accounts.

Editado: Out 8, 2015, 1:50 am

New one: Those others disappeared quickly.

ETA: Even though the one Korean spam by this account is gone, that profile should still be flagged (or else it will just wake up in a bit, and start over).

Out 8, 2015, 2:02 am

Out 8, 2015, 7:26 am

Someone's a big fan of Selena Gomez...

Out 8, 2015, 8:38 am

Out 8, 2015, 8:41 am

No longer posting, but the profile is still up. ??

9 posts before halting. I've changed tactics and went to the profile first to flag it.

Out 8, 2015, 8:43 am

A new one was only able to post a few before being zapped.

Out 8, 2015, 8:51 am

>68 2wonderY:

Both profiles are now gone.

I've changed tactics and went to the profile first to flag it.

That's what I've been doing. I think with so many spam posts, in so short a time, flagging the profile gets rid of them more quickly than trying to keep up with the posts.

Out 8, 2015, 10:43 am

>70 lilithcat: With the bots, four flags on the profile is worth far more than flagging the posts themselves. I started using that tactic a couple of evenings ago. I've seen this same type of thing in a couple of other places. I'm beginning to think that LT ought to consider some sort of delay after account creation (at least for Free accounts) before posting is allowed. Human beings will understand the words "Welcome to LT! Have a look around. Due to the account restrictions placed on accounts, you won't be able to join in on conversations for 24 hours."

It could probably be worded much better, but that's the general idea.

Out 8, 2015, 10:59 am

Forcing people who come here to post book queries to wait 24 hrs is going to drive off more people than it invites. Definitely not a good thing for any site wanting new members. A simple limit on how many posts, especially within time periods (no one brand new needs to post more than twice in 10 minutes), new members can make would be quite sufficient.

A different site I used to use had what the owner called "system trust." Once you were an established member of the site, i.e. gained the system's trust, you had no restrictions (which of course already included everyone who was active when it was put in place), but until you had established yourself as a legit member of the community (here, that would essentially be adding books, and posting in Talk w/o receiving flags) you were only allowed basic access to things.

Out 8, 2015, 11:32 am

>72 .Monkey.: I'm sure you're right (about driving people off). The problem with limiting posts is that it will stop (or at least slow down) the 660 bot folks, but not all those live streaming things. They tend to just make a single post (sometimes with hundreds of lines).

A draconian fix for what is a temporary problem (Korean bots) is almost certainly not the right solution. Still, I'd like to see something that would help.

I do note that LT already seems to have something of the sort (re: system trust), here, on this list. There are many people (that are long time posters) who post spam topic/spam profile posts, and I usually flag the post first, and then look to see if the topic's still there. If it's someone that I don't usually see post such things, I look at the topic first (often it's already gone).

That would probably be better termed "group trust" than "system trust" but it's still there.

Out 8, 2015, 11:35 am

Yes, Tim & co did implement that in a spam-fighter capacity, but not in the general sense.

Out 8, 2015, 2:07 pm

When we last had a big problem with spam, Tim did implement a priority flagging system for long time, "trusted" spam fighters. My rule for the usual spam or author promos is to check the post first to confirm it is spam and then flag the profile, or in the case of over zealous authors, I leave a message directing them to LT links that are appropriate. When the 660Box Korean Bots appear I have been flagging the profile first.

Out 8, 2015, 2:12 pm

Yes, that is what Lyndatrue was referring to, that was around a year and a half or so ago, sometime a bit before I poofed for ~a year. But it's only about those of us fighting the spam, nothing about those making the spam. Who also should need to have "system trust" before having the ability to do such things.

Out 8, 2015, 3:59 pm

Overzealous author:

Can someone leave a comment for him?

Out 8, 2015, 4:03 pm


Out 8, 2015, 5:12 pm

>72 .Monkey.:

Forcing people who come here to post book queries to wait 24 hrs is going to drive off more people than it invites.

I'd worry about that more if I ever saw any of those "I'm looking for a book" people return to the site.

Out 8, 2015, 5:29 pm

>80 lilithcat: I do agree on a personal level, the neverending "name that book" posts in book talk make me want to scream, but I know that Tim doesn't see it that way. Hell, he just gifted a lifetime subscription to some person who'd dropped by at some point in the past and done an upload and not used the site since, and now came back wanting to win (hence review) ER books but couldn't since their 200 spots were used. Anything that diminishes the likelihood of people returning, he would definitely not go for.

Also, there are n00bs who legit join and want to post a hello or ask how to do something, and if they had to wait 24 hours to do so, well, it's rather unwelcoming behavior.

Out 8, 2015, 9:13 pm

>82 .Monkey.: If I am not mistaken, you speak of two very different posts. If Tim wants to extend or as you say "gift" an account so be it. I'm happy for the recipients. I wouldn't trod on that. Who would?

Out 9, 2015, 2:23 am

>87 Yamanekotei: Gone, already

Out 9, 2015, 2:40 am

Gone. So do we need to flag the messages anymore, or is some process working that lets us just leave it at flagging the propagator?


Editado: Out 9, 2015, 7:46 am

>90 Mr.Durick: It's fine just to flag the member. I like to flag one or two messages, too, because it makes it easier for others to see that others are flagging. We don't get that feedback on the profile.

Editado: Out 9, 2015, 7:48 am

Out 9, 2015, 10:55 am

>90 Mr.Durick: I'd say that it depends on the 660 bots, flagging the profile first is the most important, and I'm with MarthaJeanne on flagging a few messages (if there's time) to let others know that someone sees them. I prefer to post it here first though.

On normal spam (and it really hurts to type such a thing), I flag the topic (or group) first, and then the profile, and then post them here. There may be something automated going on in the background that helps with the 660 bot; I wouldn't want to depend on it for the other stuff.

I'm sure that we won't hear commentary from staff on this, on the premise that not discussing specifics is best.

Editado: Out 9, 2015, 11:31 pm

Almost gone (the only ones left were from but there's a new one:

(660 bot)

ETA: All gone for now.

Out 9, 2015, 11:29 pm

Out 10, 2015, 10:16 am

Out 11, 2015, 7:45 am

Out 11, 2015, 10:31 am

Out 11, 2015, 2:38 pm

>129 torontoc: Please remember on this type of spam to include the profile as well.


Editado: Out 12, 2015, 1:08 am

Out 12, 2015, 2:52 am

Well, that one's gone. Until the next one comes.

Out 12, 2015, 3:03 am

Re 136
It is still alive. It has been two hours since. What's wrong with it?

Out 12, 2015, 3:06 am

Looks suspended to me.

Out 13, 2015, 7:53 am

We're better than the Bots! This last one got off only four shots.

Out 13, 2015, 7:54 am

There were at least 5 I think, but yeah, enough people on to give all the flags right away. :)

Out 13, 2015, 7:54 am

Go us!

Editado: Out 14, 2015, 1:22 am

overzealous author

P.S. I think.

Out 14, 2015, 1:55 am

>163 Mr.Durick:
online textbook rental company?

Editado: Out 14, 2015, 2:16 am

Out 14, 2015, 2:18 am

>166 henkl: Gone after about nine messages.

Out 14, 2015, 2:24 am

>168 henkl: 10 messages this time.

Out 14, 2015, 2:39 am

Still alive after ten minutes...

Editado: Out 15, 2015, 1:16 am


ETA: I'm sure that this won't be the end of it tonight.

Out 15, 2015, 2:19 am

>178 Lyndatrue: Or this morning.

Out 15, 2015, 3:01 am

Editado: Out 15, 2015, 9:21 am

Another bot:

ETA: Oh, good work guys! Gone even as I typed.

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 12:07 am

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 12:16 am

bot profile

ETA: I note that this one is posting more slowly than usual. It's probably just a new strategy to see how long the individual entries stay up,

Out 16, 2015, 12:50 am

Out 16, 2015, 12:59 am

There really needs to be a test that says too many posts == spammer, and an automatic account lock... Or something.

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 1:04 am

>199 Lyndatrue:
Oh, yes. A 24 hour wait before posting, or something.

I also don't understand what they think they are accomplishing with so many duplicate ads, in Korean. How many LTers even read the language and how many are anywhere near the casinos they are advertising?

Out 16, 2015, 1:06 am

We got that one fast.


Out 16, 2015, 1:06 am

Sorry to abandon you. It looks like it's going to be a long night (again).


Out 16, 2015, 1:08 am

It isn't even the weekend yet.

Out 16, 2015, 1:23 am

Surprised this one is still up, as the posts are beginning to disappear.

Out 16, 2015, 1:23 am (with a whole slew of others; I just flagged this one and the account)

Out 16, 2015, 2:15 am

26 unread messages! It has been busy night.

Out 16, 2015, 10:00 am

>200 Taphophile13:

They're just in it for the googlejuice.

Out 16, 2015, 10:27 am

But most of the time the links don't work AND we knock them out really quickly. Does it really do them any good?

Out 16, 2015, 10:55 am

>226 2wonderY: I think they hoped people wouldn't flag an archbishop.

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 3:48 pm

>227 MarthaJeanne: Wouldn't flag an archbishop? Am I the only good Presbyterian around here?

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 6:44 pm

>299 Now she's adding spam pictures everywhere.

Out 16, 2015, 6:49 pm

>230 amanda4242:

Left another message on her profile.

Editado: Out 16, 2015, 9:20 pm

aughggggg!!!!!! (bot, massive)

ETA: Whoa. Thanks, invisible staff person. All gone. XXOO

Editado: Out 17, 2015, 5:04 am

Out 17, 2015, 5:08 am

Out 17, 2015, 7:06 am

Another couple of 550Box spammers

This one still needs more flags

Out 17, 2015, 7:12 am


Out 17, 2015, 7:14 am

Out 17, 2015, 7:15 am

>242 andyl: Wow he didn't last long - only got one message in before the ban hammer came down.

Out 17, 2015, 8:26 am

And many similar posts by the same poster

Out 17, 2015, 9:39 am

Out 17, 2015, 9:54 am

Out 17, 2015, 2:26 pm

>230 amanda4242: does anyone know how to change the group pictures back to what they were before? Eg the primary picture for the 75 Book group?

Out 17, 2015, 2:37 pm

>256 aeclark: Can the group administrator or creator do it? Perhaps you could get in touch with that person or maybe staff can do it. Also, the book covers do seem to be more about advertising her own books rather than about the group itself. Would it be appropriate to flag as spam, thus reverting to the prior picture? I'm not a member of those groups but the pictures do seem intrusive.

Out 17, 2015, 3:21 pm

Time for a new thread.

Out 17, 2015, 3:52 pm

>256 aeclark: &>257 Taphophile13: I think those pictures are spam and would have flagged them as such, but I've never flagged a picture and didn't see any way to do so. Could someone please let me know how to do it so that wretched picture can disappear from my beloved 75 Books Challenge?

Out 17, 2015, 4:58 pm

> 259

You cannot tag a group or profile pic as spam. The group creator can change the primary image, or any group member can upload a new image and that will become the primary image.

Out 17, 2015, 5:04 pm

>260 lilithcat: Thanks! Off to upload new picture.
Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #43.