|Limit on amount of registration from single IP?|
We seemed to have veered away from this in favor of other methods, but just in case we are sill considering this as part of the solution I would like to point out that it would negatively impact groups of people posting from any site with a competent systems administrator; for example a university or public library with a NAT'd network. IMO we should consider these types of venues when making forum rules since they would potentially be the largest source of unique and productive contributors. I would actually like to apply this objection to all suggestions where assuming a users identity based on their IP address has been put forward.
For those of you who are objecting to the 15 min limit on the basis that it is too long of a time to wait, or the 5 posts per day as being too limited, you need to remember that this is the planning phase. Some fine tuning after implementation of ANY policy is to be expected.
If we do decide to only place these restrictions on "new users" then we really need to redefine what a "new user" is. I subscribe to the school of thought that post count is all but meaningless and suggest that we base a users "newness" on the amount of time their account has shown meaningful activity. Say for instance a new contributor creates an account and posts a question, that activity is weighted and tallied into a "score". Any further activity that day adds a depreciating value to this score (or nothing at all) until new meaningful activity is shown on another day. Once a score of 'X' is reached (remember, fine tuning is always needed) then what ever restrictions we have in place are then lifted. This both solves for the scenario where a spammer creates 10 accounts and has some script post to the jobs section or something until they reach the number of posts required to lift the restriction and it minimizes the impact of a new policy on established users.
Another solution might be to simply block any posts, new topics or replies, whenever more then half the text is a URL. But that one just seems like it would be way to easy to get around and it would block posts where a hyperlink is really all the user is asking for.
: Does it bother anyone else that the reporting here is anonymous? Am I the only one that would not be deterred from reporting posts if my handle was displayed publicly next to the "reported" button? I believe that the two or three times I've reported a post, where the user wasn't obviously a bot, I've stated my reason for doing so anyway. After all how else do we expect people to learn if we don't tell them why they are being scolded? I know the times that I've been reported it was pretty obvious who, and why they, did it anyway.