Ban file recovery questions -- maybe?

Discussion in 'Feedback and Suggestions' started by Papabravo, Feb 14, 2016.

  1. Papabravo

    Thread Starter Expert

    Feb 24, 2006
    10,136
    1,786
    I'd like to suggest that we ban and lock threads dealing with corrupted files. This is not really a forum for this kind of problem. What do others think?
     
    Hypatia's Protege likes this.
  2. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,765
    2,535
    Personally I would have little problem with it, since the majority are spammers. Details would need worked out.
     
    Hypatia's Protege likes this.
  3. atferrari

    AAC Fanatic!

    Jan 6, 2004
    2,647
    759
    I prefer to have the minimum possible of restrictions regarding subjects I could talk about in this site.

    It is as valid as the so many finding a way here. Why would you like to ban that precisely?
     
  4. Alec_t

    AAC Fanatic!

    Sep 17, 2013
    5,777
    1,103
    I see no problem with it, provided it's in the 'Computers and Networks' forum.
     
  5. bertus

    Administrator

    Apr 5, 2008
    15,646
    2,344
    Hello,

    We will see soon enough if it is a catch two spammers posting.
    We will take our measures when we encounter them.

    Bertus
     
  6. Papabravo

    Thread Starter Expert

    Feb 24, 2006
    10,136
    1,786
    My argument is that there is really a very small chance that corrupted files can be recovered under most circumstances. It largely depends on the corruption mechanism which is seldom among the details provided.
     
  7. wayneh

    Expert

    Sep 9, 2010
    12,094
    3,033
    I would beg to differ on the last point - I've had some success over the years - but it seems like all the posts here on that topic are not legit. Since I now ignore them, I'm not passionate one way or the other on a ban. It's hard to see how such a question would ever be useful here unless it was specific to a file type related to circuits, such as LTspice, Eagle or such.
     
  8. spinnaker

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 29, 2009
    4,866
    989
    Why not just require email verification on registration? it would stop a lot of that garbage.

    Additional measures you should need X amount of posts before you can post an outside link.

    Our proxy server at work won't let us go to a lot of URLs. Isn't there a similar application for forums that would block links to known spam sites?
     
  9. WBahn

    Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,716
    4,788
    E-mail verification IS required on registration. The spammers know this and know how to get around it (it doesn't take a very sophisticated bot to watch an e-mail address and respond).

    Lots of legitimate users post external links, often to pictures of schematics or projects. New users are more likely to do this than experienced users. We try to discourage links to external content, but the downsides of not allowing it exceed the drawbacks of doing so. If we don't allow it, then people can't post links to data sheets or to DigiKey searches or Google searches or reference sites or... well, you get the idea. It's not uncommon for a new member to join specifically because they have run across a question/thread they feel they can offer something to. That something often involves a link to an external reference/resource.

    We check IP addresses and URLs against databases of known spam sites. Of course, serious spammers know about these databases and as soon as their information shows up in them they switch things up and use information that isn't in them.
     
  10. djsfantasi

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 11, 2010
    2,800
    831
    The spammers are no dummies and are a Darwinian marvel. I used to get a ton of spam from eku.edu and fought back, reporting them to two anti/spam services, sending an email back to webmaster and postmaster of their domain and marking them as spam in my email client. For each and every email (spam) that they sent. It worked.

    Kind of. They now have constructed their spam so it looks like I am spamming myself. The spam is increasing. I'll have to rip apart a message to develop my new strategy.
     
  11. WBahn

    Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,716
    4,788
    On the one hand this doesn't surprise me at all while, on the other, I shake my head and wonder what they think the point is of going after people that they KNOW are never going to give them a dime.
     
  12. spinnaker

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 29, 2009
    4,866
    989
    The microchip forum does not allow new users to post links. A pain but over all I think a good idea. I do not click on any links from a newbie no matter how well intentioned it might be.
     
  13. spinnaker

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 29, 2009
    4,866
    989

    Why I can't figure out how spam works at all. It is not lie this is a new thing. They must have to go through an awful lot of emails to hook a fish.
     
  14. WBahn

    Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,716
    4,788
    There are two possibilities (both of which are almost certainly true)

    1) The spammer is the one being conned -- they bought into the notion that if they buy some program that sends out huge numbers of e-mails to some special list that they will get rich overnight.

    2) The spammer is playing the odds just like any other form of advertising -- if the per-piece cost is microscopic, then you only need a microscopic response rate to make an acceptable return.
     
  15. WBahn

    Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,716
    4,788
    It's an option and there's no absolute correct answer. The owners of this forum have to decide what they believe is best for this forum.
     
  16. wayneh

    Expert

    Sep 9, 2010
    12,094
    3,033
    Banning links and not allowing pictures makes it really tough for a newbie to post a schematic, the one thing we request of almost everyone. There must be better ways to detect a human.
     
  17. WBahn

    Moderator

    Mar 31, 2012
    17,716
    4,788
    Part of the philosophy we have here, though it isn't anything official and I'm really just speaking from my own impressions and experiences, is that we try to be pretty minimalist on the restrictions and rely on case-by-case actions, taken by humans (the mod staff), often in response to reports made by humans (other members). As long as that results on an overhead load that the mods can handle, that is the way we prefer to handle things. It's not perfect, bet I think it's the better approach as long as it remains workable. What we are trying to do is to develop better tools not to block posts, but to moderate potentially troublesome posts so that the case-by-case discussions and action can be taken before the general membership see it. That will keep some of the sausage-making process behind the counter.
     
  18. wayneh

    Expert

    Sep 9, 2010
    12,094
    3,033
    Works for me. A post with keywords "file recovery" or "file corruption" should perhaps go straight to limbo for further review by a human. As I said, I've come to ignore them now anyway, so it's no big deal.
     
Loading...