Spam reporting thread #46

É uma continuação do tópico Spam reporting thread #45.

Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #46.

DiscussãoSpam Fighters!

Aderi ao LibraryThing para poder publicar.

Spam reporting thread #46

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

Dez 29, 2015, 9:39 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.)

Dez 30, 2015, 7:51 pm

An enthusiastic publisher:

Please do NOT flag the profile. I've already left a note.

Editado: Dez 30, 2015, 11:36 pm

Ah, yes, it'll be history in a heartbeat.

Dez 30, 2015, 11:36 pm

Well, that was fast.

Dez 31, 2015, 4:50 am

Look. It did it twice.


Dez 31, 2015, 5:41 am

Dez 31, 2015, 5:50 am

>15 anglemark: The spammer is now gone.

But luckily not Mr.Durick.

Editado: Dez 31, 2015, 11:13 am

Editado: Dez 31, 2015, 11:19 am

>18 torontoc: I'm a bit puzzled as to why you posted that one. I only see it in the special folder. Is it visible to you otherwise? Ah, never mind, I see that it is. We might want to poke Tim on this one, and on the other one that seems to be persisting as well...

ETA: The other one is not visible in Book Talk (but still persists, rather than having been tombstoned), but I see that this one is in both places. Odd. Very.

Jan 1, 2016, 10:48 am

First enthusiastic author of the year:

Please do NOT flag the profile. I've already left a note.

Jan 3, 2016, 8:34 am

Jan 3, 2016, 8:35 am

>29 MarthaJeanne: That was quick.

Editado: Jan 3, 2016, 8:37 am

Yes, but at least three of us flagged his first post, so we were on it. I wonder why so many Koreans are making it into regular posts today.

Jan 4, 2016, 12:30 am

bot in the bug collectors thread

Jan 4, 2016, 3:57 am

A short quote: Having experienced it’s very primary advantages on my dermis, take my phrases, this product can ne'er betray you, ever.

Jan 4, 2016, 4:00 am

>33 MarthaJeanne: Sounds good. Quick, take my money!

Jan 4, 2016, 4:37 am

Sorry, already gone.

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 12:43 am

Jan 5, 2016, 1:54 am

>42 Yamanekotei: Gone, faster than anything. Thank you, Tim, wherever you are...

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 2:57 am

ETA: Gone now.

Man, it seems extra bad tonight. Off to dreamland for me.

Jan 5, 2016, 5:12 am

Jan 5, 2016, 8:53 am

Since all the new spam getting through all have the same link, I googled it, and the entire system is being swamped. They are attacking youtube, reddit, eventbrite and lots of smaller sites.

Jan 5, 2016, 9:51 am

Holy cow. That's the most spam I've seen in ages!!

Jan 5, 2016, 9:58 am

They keep getting through, dunno why. They also keep hanging around in the list after getting killed as a spammer, taking ages to vanish. Super obnoxious. They also only make several posts before switching on to a new account. Most frustrating! Haven't seen spam like this in months!

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 10:05 am

Yeah, there's been a rash this morning—popping up faster than I can swing the banhammer. Tim's working on why they're getting through.

Jan 5, 2016, 10:33 am

Welp I'm already 15 mins late for feeding my furballs, so I'll have to leave y'all to fight the good fight without me for a bit. Maybe they'll have given up by the time I return...!

Jan 5, 2016, 12:38 pm

Gee, it's been nuts for the last little while with the Korean spam!

Jan 5, 2016, 12:42 pm

Lol it hasn't compared to what was going on a few hours ago. The whole page was getting full of their posts.

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 12:55 pm

ETA: Yikes, that was fast guys! Gone!

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 1:02 pm

Korean bot
bamwar is back again. it was really bad about a year ago

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 3:05 pm

Well, that one didn't stick around long!

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 3:08 pm

Just look at the ones that did get caught by the algorithm! It's been bad today, but it could have been a lot worse!


Jan 5, 2016, 3:53 pm

Editado: Jan 5, 2016, 7:53 pm

>87 MarthaJeanne: they're relentless today.

Jan 7, 2016, 1:34 am

Jan 7, 2016, 1:41 am

Jan 7, 2016, 11:29 am

>109 2wonderY:

They don't think.

Jan 7, 2016, 12:31 pm

>109 2wonderY:

They don't think it's okay, they think it will get through for long enough to either get seen by people or by Google and get some LT googlejuice.

Jan 7, 2016, 7:20 pm

Editado: Jan 9, 2016, 1:13 am

Jan 9, 2016, 6:38 am

Aaargh! Some (korean?) spammer is doing his weekend thingy again. >:-

Editado: Jan 9, 2016, 6:56 am

Something really ought to recognize a new member starting 3-4 topics a minute. While I agree that a new member ought to be able to start topics, one or two in a 5 minute period would be plenty for a real member.

Jan 9, 2016, 7:56 am

>128 MarthaJeanne: I agree completely.

Jan 10, 2016, 11:36 am

I wasn't sure where to post this:

I was playing around with searching Common Knowledge and that list came up. It's a list of links to online movie streaming. Unless I'm missing something, there's no way to flag a list. The creator's account appears to be abandoned.

Editado: Jan 10, 2016, 11:50 am

>131 AngelaB86: Interesting (not in a good way). I think I'll wait until tomorrow (it is, after all, the weekend still), and then post a quick pointer to your comment, and the list, on Tim's profile. It is certainly spam (in my opinion), but there doesn't seem to be a way to mark it as such, nor even to delete the items. It'll take someone from staff for action, I suspect.

(For my own sake, saving the link to your post:

Editado: Jan 11, 2016, 12:18 am

Two of them. One not a bot.

(Maybe not exactly a bot. The comment at the bottom says "Sorry, only one I'll post". Man, you cannot make this stuff up.)

ETA: Glad I saved the goofy comment. Everything is already gone.

Jan 12, 2016, 12:51 am

>131 AngelaB86: I thought you'd be happy to know that the list you found is gone. I'm not sure how or why (although I'm pretty sure that something like that took staff intervention), but I'm glad it's vanished.

Jan 14, 2016, 1:23 am

Enthusiastic author.

Note left as comment on profile. Please do NOT flag the profile.

Jan 15, 2016, 12:07 am

Enthusiastic author?

I did not leave a note on the author's profile.

It's just a bit more "enthusiastic" than I want to be involved with.

Jan 15, 2016, 11:27 pm

164, 165, 166
are still active

Editado: Jan 16, 2016, 6:15 am

And 14, now too, and others.

Those are gone. replaced by 15

Editado: Jan 16, 2016, 11:35 am

This one in the spam folder is still not dead

but so far down, I think people aren't seeing it.


Editado: Jan 16, 2016, 10:00 pm

bot with multiple threads

and they're gone!

Jan 18, 2016, 12:28 am

Jan 19, 2016, 8:06 am

Oh rats! I missed the mental health pills!

Jan 19, 2016, 2:51 pm

Editado: Jan 19, 2016, 2:53 pm

>198 Lyndatrue:

I just left her a link on her profile to "How Authors Can Use LibraryThing".

Jan 19, 2016, 2:53 pm

>199 lilithcat: Well, then, there are two notes. I'll bet against either being read, but at least we did it.

Jan 19, 2016, 3:01 pm

>200 Lyndatrue: Seeing as I left a note on her other profile in July...

Do NOT flag

I have combined the two author pages.

Jan 19, 2016, 3:13 pm

>201 MarthaJeanne: Yeah, sometimes it's truly tempting to just flag someone into oblivion, but then, we'd lose the historical information on previous warnings (for example). I wonder if this doesn't back fire a bit, now and then. I was tempted to show up at the link provided and leave an unpleasant comment about the author.

Life is too short for such things, though.

Jan 19, 2016, 3:25 pm

Oh, dear. Is she going to create a new profile and author page every time she self-publishes another book?

Jan 25, 2016, 8:29 am

Sorry I can't link but please look in the Book Talk group for user dafd68 - I've flagged the profile and some posts.

Editado: Jan 25, 2016, 8:31 am

To link, copy the URL from your browser. But things in Booktalk usually disappear quite quickly even without being reported. That member seems to already be gone.

Jan 25, 2016, 3:30 pm

>213 MarthaJeanne: Group's gone so I can't check it out. What was wrong with it? We have very active groups here on LT dedicated to Library of America (currently 215 members) and especially to Virago Modern Classics (currently 524). Is the objection simply that the group was created by the publisher?

Jan 25, 2016, 3:44 pm

>214 CurrerBell: The group's sole aim was to advertise and push the publisher's books. The other publisher groups are fan groups run by the fans and are not necessarily just about the publisher's books, but the style and genre that the publishers offer.

Jan 25, 2016, 5:26 pm

>214 CurrerBell: The paragraph starting 'Dedicated' on the profile is very close to the group description.As >15 anglemark: says, this was clearly an advertising effort by this publisher. It was up to 6 flags before disappearing.

Jan 27, 2016, 3:00 am

They weren't there just a few minutes ago. And they aren't there now any more, either.

Editado: Jan 27, 2016, 7:38 am


Jan 28, 2016, 2:45 am

Jan 28, 2016, 2:54 am

>225 CurrerBell: Please post the profile when you post the group, just to make sure. If the group is flagged out of existence, we have no way of knowing whether the member profile was suspended or not.

I do admit that things are so speedy now that I'm shocked when it isn't, and it's pretty likely that the member profile was taken care of.

It just makes it easier to post it.

Jan 28, 2016, 3:14 am

That group is gone now.

Jan 28, 2016, 5:12 am

Jan 28, 2016, 6:03 am

>226 Lyndatrue: Sorry. I do try to, but I'll have to remember to do things in a precise order because once I flag the group then the group disappears (at least from my own Groups screen under Newest) and I can't locate the URL for the member. I'll have to start making a copy of both group and member URL into a text editor before I flag anything.

Editado: Jan 28, 2016, 6:11 am

You can go to your message and get to the group and therefore the member if it isn't already dead.

I usually keep multiple tabs open until I have the whole thing up.

Jan 29, 2016, 12:19 am

So much crap that I can't even begin to list...

Jan 29, 2016, 12:32 am

Time for a new thread.
Este tópico foi continuado por Spam reporting thread #46.