Spammers, and nofollow

[Skippy]

(caution- geek talk)

Blonde seems to be getting quite a few spammers lately. This must be taking up mod time.

The reason they are doing it is because the links they put in their sigs etc. (were they to exist for a while) would help them boost their google rankings. You've probably ended up on a list of vunerable websites.

May I suggest what you should do is add http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nofollow nofollow to links that appear inside posts.  I'm sure there will be an option inside the forum software somewhere.

[celtic]

Yeah, they have been a complete pain in the arse recently skippy.

Bongo is on the  case, and has made some changes.

[kinboshi]

The links in posts and sigs are nofollow (was done this morning).

[Skippy]

They've missed a bit. If I put a URL in my profile, that's not nofollow (see globe icon left).

[Cf]

Urge to kill rising

Death to spammers!

[Bongo]

They've missed a bit. If I put a URL in my profile, that's not nofollow (see globe icon left).

Sorted, thanks

[kinboshi]

They've missed a bit. If I put a URL in my profile, that's not nofollow (see globe icon left).

The globe icon is nofollow, as is the link on your profile page (I see that Bongo just sorted that )

Looks like we're going to have a lot of new spammy members sign up this month and then hopefully we'll be taken off Paul and Angela's lists!

[DaveShoelace]

There is one in the rail now btw.

Out of interest, I presume they post these threads for SEO reasons? If so, if the threads are deleted do they lose the benefit or is the mere posting of the threads, removed or not, enough to help boost their SEO?

[Longines]

Any particular reason my useful mod suggestion didn't happen?

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=53133

[EvilPie]

There is one in the rail now btw.

Out of interest, I presume they post these threads for SEO reasons? If so, if the threads are deleted do they lose the benefit or is the mere posting of the threads, removed or not, enough to help boost their SEO?

No that one's about selling cowboy boots.

Dewi just translated it for us.

Don't know why he didn't just post it in English when he started it tbh.

[Skippy]

There is one in the rail now btw.

Out of interest, I presume they post these threads for SEO reasons? If so, if the threads are deleted do they lose the benefit or is the mere posting of the threads, removed or not, enough to help boost their SEO?

It depends if google is looking at the thread right at that moment. I also imagine that there are lots of web forums all over the world that aren't really live and moderated, and so those posts can live on for quite some time.

I can't remember what happens when you create a new username on here since it's so long since I did it, but it might be possible to write a program to a) find a forum, b) answer the registration email, c) spam it, d) repeat, 24 hours a day around the clock. I don't think there is someone sitting there thinking "blonde poker, that looks good to do a spam". It's all automatic. Because it's automatic, it doesn't matter if any individual attempt is mostly useless.

The reason I suggested nofollow is that I imagine these spammers have got a list (again, probably automatically generated) of forums that might be useful from an SEO point of view. Once you're on the list, prepare to be spammed!

[kinboshi]

The lists aren't automatically generated, there are two main ones that are published on a monthly basis.  These list forums that people can successfully register on, post profile spam and have it give a benefit in SEO terms.

If these members posts are deleted and their profiles banned, then there is no SEO benefit for them.  They need the links to stay live so Google can find them, take notice of them, and then come back periodically.  Obviously, making the links nofollow means the links have no value on Google anyway.

A lot of these new memberships aren't automated bots, but are actually people completing the sign-up manually and making the posts.  You can pay people to do over 100 of these in a number of days for about £20. 

If they were clever, what the spammers would do is create a profile that looks legitimate, and maybe make a few valid posts - then do nothing for a month or two.  Then they could go back in, add the spammy links to their sig and profiles and no one would see that they'd done that.  Of course, that's irrelevant if the links are nofollow (as they are now).

[kinboshi]

Any particular reason my useful mod suggestion didn't happen?

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=53133

It was discussed, and some of us (me included) thought it would be a good idea.  But I think it's on a 'to-do' list that's fairly long and wasn't seen as a priority.

[Bongo]

It's core functionality in SMF 2.0 which went gold over the weekend and I'm hoping to upgrade too. (will just need to test it first, then spend the next 6 months pointing out where things have moved to).

[millidonk]

must admit some of these spammers can dream up some snappy titles