The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

Note: I (Andrew) have split this away from the "New User Please read" topic, and locked the latter from reply. This is to avoid confusing new users who might be looking for anti-bot answers in that topic and getting distracted by all the other replies.

Andrew Lee wrote: ↑Mon Jan 09, 2017 3:50 am Latest anti-spam Q&A

Q: What comes after Julia, Jane, Jessie?
A: Eddie

Q: What comes after 5, 7, 13, 57?
A: 105

Can help explain how ?

@kenkang: The answers are nonsense in purpose. It turned out to be an effective way to block spammers from registering.

@SYSTEM, what is the logic for having questions that nobody can answer? It indeed blocks spammer but actual users too, so at that point why not completely disable the login form after a few failed attempts?

I got these questions too and had to google up the result here. Is that what's intended, that people Google up the answer? I honestly don't get it.

laurent22 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:39 am @SYSTEM, what is the logic for having questions that nobody can answer? It indeed blocks spammer but actual users too, so at that point why not completely disable the login form after a few failed attempts?

I got these questions too and had to google up the result here. Is that what's intended, that people Google up the answer? I honestly don't get it.

its very effective at turning away prospective new registrants

I don't get it. The answer is practically below the question, one hyperlink away.
How can we do better?

bitcoin wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:50 pm its very effective at turning away prospective new registrants

There will always be a balance between too easy to register and loads of spam versus too hard to register and zero spam. I'm comfortable with our current level and really don't want to implement one of those prove-you're-not-a-robot systems that have you identifying two dozen fire hydrants every time you want to post something.

Andrew Lee wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:50 pm I don't get it. The answer is practically below the question, one hyperlink away.

screenshot.png

How can we do better?

Take away the current verification and put a few random easy calculations instead, no bots can go over those and usually it's the most effective method

AezurX wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:56 am Take away the current verification and put a few random easy calculations instead, no bots can go over those and usually it's the most effective method

Bots indeed can't get over them, but there are CAPTCHA solving companies in countries like India were actual human beings are answering these questions for a small fee.

SYSTEM wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:37 am

AezurX wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:56 am Take away the current verification and put a few random easy calculations instead, no bots can go over those and usually it's the most effective method

Bots indeed can't get over them, but there are CAPTCHA solving companies in countries like India were actual human beings are answering these questions for a small fee.

If you really prefer the solution you currently have, just increase the FONT size for the SOLUTION by x3 or x4. When registering I didn't see it at all, only after a google search for the question XD

AezurX wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:56 am If you really prefer the solution you currently have, just increase the FONT size for the SOLUTION by x3 or x4. When registering I didn't see it at all, only after a google search for the question XD

I have now made the sentence 2 sizes bigger.

Andrew Lee wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:07 pmThe entries you add will be private until they are upvoted by enough number of higher-ranking users in order to become public.

But how will those higher-ranking users ever find those private entries?
Isn't it a bit of a paradox?
I know I have some private entries for years.

lwc wrote: ↑But how will those higher-ranking users ever find those private entries?

The custom is posting the link to the relevant forum topic and call for votes, then let the community decide...

TPFC is a small(ish) community, sometimes years is what it takes until a sympathetic user comes along.

What about differentiating between index inclusion and search inclusion?
Maybe consider making private entries at least searchable. If you think it creates a loophole, then at least consider making them searchable by title only.
If the name of the program is "Foobar", and someone deliberately looks for "Foobar", then you'll be able to display it. Maybe add a "this is a private entry - if you found it useful, could you click here to vote to make it public?" message.

lwc wrote: ↑Maybe consider making private entries at least searchable.

Private entries are searchable when prefixed with operator "[#]" (without quotes) -- you just need to be logged in.

That's good to know, but it's not really common knowledge. It's not even mentioned in https://www.portablefreeware.com/options.php.
If you implement my idea, then users will find private private entries unintentionally and will then consider voting for them.