# If you want to cut out spam then this your plan



## Inderjit S (Nov 17, 2003)

A nice way of cutting out spam is to limit "posts" to having a minimum of a certain no. of letters. (Say 300). So the only way in which posts can count is if they have the minimum no. of letters or words. Thank you. 

(I similar idea is found at LoTR Plaza


----------



## Gothmog (Nov 17, 2003)

This has been suggested before, by Anc. If I remember correctly. I agree that it is a good idea.


----------



## Niniel (Nov 17, 2003)

I think that in less than 300 words you can also say useful things, so that it wouldn't be fair to people who are making short but good posts. (e.g. this post is only 229 letters long, while I'm not spamming). It might lead to people adding useless sentences only to make their posts long enough.


----------



## Starflower (Nov 17, 2003)

well what about forums like LOTR Trivia ? the answer is often only one word long, would people have to make up a post consisting of 300 letters just so they would be able to post? I think the answer to stopping spam is closer moderation of the forums where this seems to occur. That would mean more work for the moderators, but isn't thst what they are for? I suggest taking away the posting rights of known spammers,that is people who despite warnings continue in this manner, I think TTF should take a hard line in this, but nthe answer isn't to punish ordinary people who visit the forum.


----------



## celebdraug (Nov 17, 2003)

300 seems to be alot. And Niniel has a good point , what if they had 229 words! that is stupid! If you do have a word count make the minimum about 100 wods. that is avtually quie alot!


----------



## Gandalf White (Nov 17, 2003)

Starflower: I think you misunderstood the way in which it would work. You would need 300 letters in order to make your post count go up. It would still be possible to post a one-word answer, but your post count would stay the same. 

celebdraug: Inderjit was talking about _letters_ not _words._ 

I like the idea, and think 300, or perhaps a little below, is the ideal number.


----------



## Starflower (Nov 17, 2003)

im still not happy with it.... it doesn't really deter spammers, does it, it is easy to fill a post of 300 characters with nonsense, I think the only deterrent against spammers is banning those who do it

Spamming doesn't necessarily limit itself to short posts, people spam also by ranting or writing incoherent posts, or two people engaging in inane chatter incomprehensible to any outsider. Thus, the limit of 300 characters doesn'e weed out spamming altogether. And also it is a bit unfair to those people whose interest maybe lies in the Quiz sections of the forum , to punish them for not counting their posts casue they do not exceed the set limit of letters. It should be the quality of the post that matters not the number of characters you put in it. 

(this post has 797 characters)


----------



## Turin (Nov 17, 2003)

I don't like it at all, I post a lot in 'Guess the pic' and other such threads and often it is useless and I don't have time to say 300 words, I'm not a 'long post' kind of person and I try not to spam. It doesn't usually take 300 words to say what I mean to say.


----------



## Gandalf The Grey (Nov 17, 2003)

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

-- William Shakespeare


----------



## Turin (Nov 17, 2003)

If you don't mind me asking, what is that supposed to mean.


----------



## HLGStrider (Nov 17, 2003)

Is spam such a huge problem and are post counts what is causing it?

We recently tried to get rid of post counts to end spam, and the trial period had no effect.

Spamming doesn't seem to be motivated by post counts to me. 

At least that seemed to be the results of the trial.

Though it wouldn't effect me too much because I am loooooooooooong winded.


----------



## Starflower (Nov 18, 2003)

> "Brevity is the soul of wit."






> Originallly posted by Turin :If you don't mind me asking, what is that supposed to mean.



What our esteemed friend is telling us is that short is sweet. Shakespeare was a master of words, but he was of the opinion that only fools waste them, if you can say a thing with three words, why use thirty.


----------



## Snaga (Nov 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by HLGStrider _
> *Though it wouldn't effect me too much because I am loooooooooooong winded. *


 Or if you didnt make 300 characters, you can put a few extra letters in a word to make up the difffffference!

Tolkien was also a fan of economy (not brevity: LotR is not brief). He describes an 'archaic' writing style based on early/middle English as more 'terse', less prone to redundant words.


----------



## Confusticated (Nov 18, 2003)

The best way to cause more quality posting is for each person who cares to do their little part in encouraging it. Any other attempts are in vain.

However, I recently found it is much easier, if less rewarding, to cause spam.


----------



## Walter (Nov 18, 2003)

I pretty much agree with Nöm on this, an attempt like the one suggested in this thread, would encourage to make posts with a certain quantity, but not with a certain quality. 

This probably would not hinder some of our chatterbo... errrrm ... let me rephrase: ...some of those members who post much and have little to say about Tolkien's works to "spam" the site with meaningless posts.

Much of nonsense is not better than a few words on topic, meaningful, thought-provoking, etc.,etc.. 

I still would be favouring any attempt to encourage quality rather than quantity (like a rating system of posts, automatic deletion of meaningless off topic threads and posts after a short while, etc., etc.)


----------



## celebdraug (Nov 18, 2003)

> celebdraug: Inderjit was talking about _letters_ not _words._


_ 

*feels stupid* maybe i should read properly!

yeah, i think that seems like a good idea but it wont totally stop people from spamming, the people who dont care about their post count!_


----------



## Lantarion (Nov 18, 2003)

I don't agree that this would solve the problem, and I agree with Niniel.


> Brevity is the soul of wit


HUZZAA! 
[SIZE=0.5]Go Francis Bacon![/SIZE]


----------



## elf_queen (Nov 20, 2003)

NO!!!!

Haven't you people ever heard of the phrase "Quality, not quantity?" I've read (and made) a lot of posts that might be short, but are quality posts. It's not fair to the people who make these posts to not have them count, especially if they're working up to enough posts to get a picture, like me. And some people can go on and on about a subject, but some don't have that gift. And let's face it, I know I like to read a three sentence post better than a five-paragraph one.


----------



## Turin (Nov 20, 2003)

> _Originally posted by elf_queen _
> * I know I like to read a three sentence post better than a five-paragraph one. *



Very true. I have decided not to read many threads that start off with a very long post just because I'm short on time or I don't feel like spending 10 minutes reading it.(I'm not a fast reader).


----------



## HLGStrider (Nov 20, 2003)

Also, people don't stop making posts just because they don't count. Look at stuff and bother. It is posted in and it doesn't count. . .posted in a lot.


----------

