Disclaimer: I'm not sure how this could be financially and technically feasible, but reducing spam traffic at the very early stage of posting can certainly help reduce resources, thus voat's running costs.
Current voat's way to deal with spam is with the help of devoted voaters and janitors (@cynabuns, @dubbelnougat, @DerKatalog, @Owlchemy, me included) who report directly in /v/reportspammers. Reports are then reviewed by @cynabuns, and they are submitted for review by Puttitout.
This process can take several days, depending on Putt's availability.
Blocking obvious commercial spam (accounts and domains) minutes after being posted would definitely turn down most spammers to create new accounts and domains, knowing they are gonna waste their time.
My idea is that voat could add a new category of moderators (anti-spam) that would have the ability to site-wide ban, "only" newly created spam accounts (less than a month or to be decided) and their posts & comments.
This chosen group of truthful voaters could together help @Puttitout dealing with spam reports.
The less time spent by Putt on dealing with spam reports, the more time he'll have on improving voat.
Of course, for neutrality and to prevent abuse, bans from these "anti-spam" mod team will all be logged and publicly accessible in /v/reportspammers' sidebar, where the current ban lists are.
Now, in case a new account is mistakenly banned, any "anti-spam" mod will be able to un-ban with mutual agreement.
Imagine the /all/new queue with close to no spam that would last, at best, less than a couple minutes.
I think It would not be worth the time for most of these spammers to create fake accounts, submit random contents in relevant subs, for a determined amount of time, commenting relevant things in topics, before starting posting real spam links.
What do you guys think?
Sort: Top
[–] Disappointed 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
I see a lot of reports in reportspammers that are premature still and get turned down or told let's wait and see. I would rather see a few spammers get a few days off than a few legitimate voaters that could have had a warning get the hammer prematurely. If tht were me I wouldnt check back to see if I was unbanned.
Cynabuns is doing a good job and keeping up with things so far(along with the people you mentioned and the others who contribute) so I don't see the need for instaban accounts.
Edit: added the words in brackets
[–] Owlchemy 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I tend to agree, which is why I think it should take more than one anti-spammer to disable, and then be reviewed and overturned, when necessary by Cyna. I'm not sure this will work, but as it is, Cyna is also overworked and it appears that she spends nearly ninety percent of her Voat time on spammers. It wouldn't hurt to lighten the load a little, since it's voluntary anyway.
Gonna add another comment, too, you might like to look at. Be posting in a minute, about possibly making these term limited appointments and inviting other good Voaters to take their turn at it. So those chosen are just there for a spell, then someone else replaces them ... they can rotate back in, but not permanent power mod things.
[–] Disappointed 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Alright I'll check back in a bit. As for Cynabuns being overworked, which I've asked about before(and got told it was fine then), maybe some other trusted person on her level or a helper under her(think like a night and day shift) might be good.
[–] Owlchemy 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) ago
Okay, another thought just came to me ... instead of anti-spammer [AS] mod ... maybe we should make it anti-spammer submitter mod. That way, we could use [ASS]., which will be what many will call us anyway - LOL.
[–] AOU [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Ahahahahaha ^_^
[–] Owlchemy 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I'd be okay, assuming that someone else would also still review the work of the anti-spam killers, giving it a second look and deciding either to leave the ban in place or unblock it. Some spam can be in the eye of the beholder.
I guess my main question/thought, though is would this be to ban domains and/or new users? If new users, this brings up the thought that once banned, they'd have no way of fighting the ban, but to add a new account to complain. Also, maybe there could be a 'lock' account kind of thing where a user or domain is locked out by the anti-spam team until it gets more than a single anti-spammer to concur with the decision. That way no one could run roughshod over the system and go rogue.
[–] AOU [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Good idea!
[–] Owlchemy 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I have another thought I'll post separately in a moment ... I think it'll be appropriate.
[–] Mick 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I like it, good idea.
[–] AOU [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Thanks! :)
[–] Stavon 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) ago
IMHO it's the better strategy to faster block spam domains, since they cost the spammers time and money, they don't seem to care if an account gets blocked and make new ones.
[–] AOU [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The goal is to get these spammers to give up pretty much instantly after seeing how efficiently spam will be handled.
Also spam attracts spam, some subs where mod(s) is(are) inactive are flooded with spammers, if we can stop them in the /all/new queue, they will certainly give up.
I don't say it will get rid of 100% of spam, but it will drastically reduce it.
[–] Stavon 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I understand that. But I think it would be more effective to ban their domains than only their accounts, because accounts are easier to replace.
[–] Owlchemy 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
There's so many good Voaters, I have another couple of suggestions, if this should be considered. Rather than making a permanent crew of anti-spammers, how about making it a term limited kind of deal. You choose a team of five or six with the mod status, they serve in the position (voluntarily) for say three to six months, then the anti-spam mod team is replaced with another set of volunteers. Or you could stagger it, so there's experienced and novices. That way it never turns into a power mod kind of thing ... and other deserving Voaters with good reps, and there are lots of them, are given the opportunity, if they accept, to take their turn. All mods to be selected and/or removed from position by Putt. (Edit: And you can be a repeat anti-spammer, just not back to back terms)
It would also be nice, if done, that any spam reports made by users are also routed via a message to the anti-spam team, so that any online at the time gets the flag and can act on it, should it otherwise be missed, or not acted on by sub mod.
If also applied to trolls, this could go a long way in solving that problem, too. The ability of a small group to disable a troll in his/her tracks. But that's another story.
[–] OhBlindOne 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I like the idea. Obviously it could be abused, but any abuse of the system could be quickly noted from the site logs.
I would add something though.
Instead of having it so it only takes one anti-spam site-mod to remove an account, there should be a certain number that needs to agree. I'd say 1 or 2 other mods (so 2-3 in total) would need to agree that said account was a spam account.
It could be setup that a anti-spam mod could flag the account and then other anti-spam mods could go to a specific page to view the currently flagged accounts, review their account, and vote in favor (or possibly, against) the banning of the account.