Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> __/ [John Bokma] on Saturday 17 September 2005 03:42 \__
>
>> "KarlCore" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> John Bokma wrote:
>>>> Your message 'Very interesting blog!' is too short, please try
>>>> again Your message 'Realy good site!' is too short, please try
>>>> again Your message 'Your site is realy very interesting!' is too
>>>> short, please try again
>>>> Your message 'Very nice site!' is too short, please try again
>>>>
>>>> So, yeah, for now my little trick does seem to reduce blog spam.
>>>> The next step will probably be comments of a "normal" length.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You may want to instead work on a blacklist of banned phrases
>>
>> I think that everything less then 40 characters in length can be
>> counted as banned :-D
>>
>>> and
>>> banned urls like the one at http://blacklist.chongqed.org/
>>
>> Those change a lot, moreover, I have the idea that now and then
>> "innocent URLs" are posted, just for testing. With my message length
>> check off I got 10 messages in 3 hrs... (So I turned it back on).
>
> That discussion about comment spam returns to life then.
>
> You can never filter comment spam perfectly, but a good test will
> involve frequency of hits, IP address(es),
They use blog spam zombies
> word occurrence,
would work right now, but I still have the impression that this are test
runs, ie. how many blogs can they actually reach? They use domain names
that are not up (AFAIK).
> number of URL's, etc.
one, in the URL field.
--
John Perl SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get a SEO report of your site for just 100 USD:
http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html
|
|
