# A word on spam/spam in PMs & VMs



## Chi_townPhilly

Experienced forum-users know- spam isn't just for posts, anymore. Sometimes, an entity will register and then proceed to use the Private Message system to disseminate spam (or worse). Recently, there was a suspicious (but not directly violative) registration here on Talk Classical. We've since used some resources to discover that the _modus operandi_ of this user was to send PMs to members, trying to impersonate Administration, saying that the recipient had a virus detected- and it could be cleared with an attached 'helpful link.'

Yeah, right.

Probably, 99+% of our users here wouldn't fall for this stunt... but we'd still appreciate it if anyone who receives spammy PMs uses the "Report PM" link to inform us of the activity, so that we can waste less time permanently banning the user(s) in question.


----------



## Krummhorn

To add to this:

*Please, please, please ... never ever post a reply to a spam posting. *

Doing so only confirms to the spammer that their crap is being read, and then they tend to post more and tell their spammy friends to do the same, and then we get bombed with more crap.

Just report it using the red triangle in the upper right ... Each staff member receives an email to our private accounts notifying us of the problem post(s), and we will get here as soon as we can to irradicate the cretins.


----------



## Head_case

Thanks for the clarification guys. We know what to do in the future. 

I never knew what the triangle was for. Lol. Never even noticed it till you mentioned.


----------



## Earthling

WTF is it with these bloody spammers?!?

When I see a random spam linking to whatever I don't even read it and I certainly don't click on any of the links for fear of being taken to a site with a malicious virus.

ARGH!!! [/rant]


----------



## Krummhorn

Earthling said:


> WTF is it with these bloody spammers?!?
> 
> When I see a random spam linking to whatever I don't even read it and I certainly don't click on any of the links for fear of being taken to a site with a malicious virus.
> 
> ARGH!!! [/rant]


Sage advise for sure.

Internet spammers are as irritating as telemarketers, for which we then have to "opt out" when we never "opted in" in the first place. Go figure.

We're aware of the problem, and are working towards better solutions on this all the time.


----------



## mamascarlatti

Krummhorn said:


> Internet spammers are as irritating as telemarketers, for which we then have to "opt out" when we never "opted in" in the first place. Go figure.


NOTHING is as irritating as telemarketers, with their "courtesy calls" impeccably timed for the split second you have sat down with a sigh of relief in front of your dinner.


----------



## Krummhorn

Here, here, mamascarlatti,

In the US we supposedly have the 'Do Not Call' registry ... the telemarketers have figured a way around that now ... they are no longer calling "you" - they are calling a "random number" .... Grrrr.



Krummhorn said:


> We're aware of the problem, and are working towards better solutions on this all the time.


Forgot to mention that 85% of the potential spammers are eliminated as they are registering. Today alone I axed 20 of them, some even before they completed their registration process . Some today were online getting ready to post and got zapped ... LOL. I love doing that .

We have an external resource that lists all known forum spammers ... when the data matches a new registration, that new registration is immediately and permanently banned.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Advice regarding flood-spam, linearly amplified...*



Krummhorn said:


> *Please, please, please ... never ever post a reply to a spam posting. *


This is *particularly* vital advice for flood-spam!!

You see, we on the Moderation & Administration Team have a couple of tools for dealing with spam. One is kind of like a hand-held spade... scoop the spam into the waste bin, then expel the defecator from our midst.

The other one is really more like a diesel-powered backhoe. It's extremely neat- it removes earth mover-sized shovel-fulls of spam, and flattens the spammer at the end of the process!:devil: We don't even have to LOOK at the contents of the shovel-blade to do this!

I daresay employing this equipment is one of the secret joys of being on the Moderation & Administration Team!

If there are any responses to flood-spam, we'd have to look at _each_ and _every_ steamer of spam to make sure they won't be rendered incoherent by the burial of spam in our collective mass-grave. So, more than ever, AVOID the temptation to respond to any spam posts.:tiphat:


----------



## sospiro

Chi_townPhilly said:


> This is *particularly* vital advice for flood-spam!!
> 
> You see, we on the Moderation & Administration Team have a couple of tools for dealing with spam. One is kind of like a hand-held spade... scoop the spam into the waste bin, then expel the defecator from our midst.
> 
> The other one is really more like a diesel-powered backhoe. It's extremely neat- it removes earth mover-sized shovel-fulls of spam, and flattens the spammer at the end of the process!:devil: We don't even have to LOOK at the contents of the shovel-blade to do this!














Chi_townPhilly said:


> I daresay employing this equipment is one of the secret joys of being on the Moderation & Administration Team!
> 
> If there are any responses to flood-spam, we'd have to look at _each_ and _every_ steamer of spam to make sure they won't be rendered incoherent by the burial of spam in our collective mass-grave. So, more than ever, AVOID the temptation to respond to any spam posts.:tiphat:


All instructions noted


----------



## mamascarlatti

Chi_townPhilly said:


> So, more than ever, AVOID the temptation to respond to any spam posts.:tiphat:


What about when the spammer posts on existing open threads and you want to reply to previous genuine posts, as with the recent not-lamented xixi? Should we wait until they've been flattened?


----------



## Krummhorn

mamascarlatti said:


> What about when the spammer posts on existing open threads and you want to reply to previous genuine posts, as with the recent not-lamented xixi? Should we wait until they've been flattened?


What we meant was not to reply to a spam posting ... just best to ignore the cretin who spammed us and certainly okay to reply to the subject matter of the thread, so making a genuine reply to a post previous to the spam would be okay.


----------



## mamascarlatti

Krummhorn said:


> What we meant was not to reply to a spam posting ... just best to ignore the cretin who spammed us and certainly okay to reply to the subject matter of the thread, so making a genuine reply to a post previous to the spam would be okay.


OK Goddit now. Thanks


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

We're increasingly becoming reminded that if data can be entered in a field, 
_spam_ mad can be entered there, as well.

Recently, we had encounters with Visitor Message spam. Happily, we have a "Report Visitor Message" function. Also, one can always Private Message a Mod or Admin on this issue (especially if they're on-site).

We view Visitor-Message spam as pollution of a member's profile space-
and we have employed our severest penalty upon offenders:devil:, and will continue to do so.


----------

