Mar 242012
 
 Posted by on UTC 2012.03.24Sat at 14:15 1.JotHere.com admin, this site's spam NQBNJQ  Add comments

Version 1.0

  1. M1ELNB:  Here says his site now has 857 pending posts and
    1. M1EMGG: about pages 33/43 of them are all modified (so start?) since “2012/03/22” (about 1.5 days ago), so the site is being flooded with pending-posts,.
    2. M1EO5U: Regarding the posts from the totally unknown, most, maybe all, seem to be to push an off-site URL at the end of the article: thus spam.
    3. M1EMGY: Which users are involved and how much? Sorting by author to get the counts for each, then resorting by decreasing quantity: And unless mentioned, these users are totally unknown.
      1. M1EN9J:  529=11+25*20+18 from allantun2 (13) allan@xgamesters.com
      2. M1ENGZ:  279=2+13*20+17 from megnand83 (14) maggie@xgamesters.com
      3. M1EOWO: above this line are super-abusers
      4. M1EMOE:  013 from WeheCucinella219 (03)  TiezldaDonokohofrio from the domain hotmail.com
      5. M1EMJI:   009 from AlgerIdell901 (02) julie2596 from the domain cellphonefaceplates.org
      6. M1EMT3:   009 from BuenrostroTanaka970 (05)  BattnilexoMarekla from the domain hotmail.com
      7. M1EN7O:  009 from BaumgartenWeitzel866  (12) burtonwynn718 from the domain hotmail.com
      8. M1EMX4:  007 from VottaCarcamo264 (07) koAhydmavidColette from the domain hotmail.com
      9. M1EN3P: 007 from SamSeb (09) ardent from the domain search123.info
      10. M1EN55:  007 from LamprosTozer427 (10) SimeromenonaPacker from the domain hotmail.com
      11. M1EOLV: –above this line are effective abusers
      12. M1EMQT:  002 from TurmelleNiverson750 (04)
        1. M1EU13:  http://2.loverules.info/919
          1. M1EU1T: By Google Search for (one of its sentences plus the next 2 words of the next, plus the agency name at the end, both in quotes) I find it listed by Google “About 809 results (0.35 seconds)” -definitely NOT original content!’
            1.  M1EV40: Same search as before except cutting the 2nd setence’s “. Free listings” produces same # of results.
      13. M1EMUD:  002 from MeullionMontane283 (06)
      14. M1EN75 002 from SwainTesha847 (11)
      15. M1EMYQ:  001 from JencksHeare336 (08)
      16. M1EMIP:  001 from DestinyArchitect (01) (me)
  2. M1EO03: This is clearly a result of change http://2.loverules.info/809#LYHNKC
  3. M1EO1O: So
    1. M1EO6A: Undo change http://2.loverules.info/809#LYHNKC as much as is reasonable
      1. M1EOHVStop automatically giving out the privilege
        1. M1EO7K: in http://2.loverules.info/wp-admin/options-general.php -> “New User Default Role” change from “Contributor” to “Subscriber”
      2. M1EOV3: where it was automatically given out then abused
        1. M1EOIM: Revoke it
          1. M1EOBH: If a real, reasonable user posts 1 or a few articles but doesn’t see it appear, s/he stops posting until it does.
            1. M1EOEX: Say no more than 3 posts without it appearing, else it’s likely a machine and/or a crazy person.
          2. M1EOG6: So every unknown user above who posted more than 3 articles (9 users per abuser cut-off), demote from contributor to subscriber
            1. M1EORQ: done via http://2.loverules.info/wp-admin/users.php
            2. M1EPS2: In the “Biographical Info” of each I stored a note as say “Did {effective,super}-abuse http://2.loverules.info/2686#M1EMT3 .”
        2. M1EQO8: Expose the abusers proportionate to abuse
          1. M1EQRG: Super-abusers have their email listed above
          2. M1EQS1: Effective abusers have their user@domain listed “user in the domain domain”.
    2. M1EQTI:  As time permits, plan to read the pending articles. Hopefully there will be some which are legit.
    3. M1ER0S We will probably have to add a rule that content on this site be original and mostly human-created.
  4. Additional document history, in order
    1. M1ELJMGave this post fresh ID M1ELH5

  4 Responses to “new background spam posts on this site=(http://2.loverules.info/) M1ELH5”

  1. Each subsequent apparent abuser
    *is a comment to this post.
    *for each I would follow follow the same redress procedure