[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', 'I')f you put policies that ban activity before it happens in place you will also stop those activities which are legitimate and look like what the filter is directed to stop. You pull up the wheat with the tares, so to speak. If something happens in the world that causes people to look up peak oil as a search term and you've done that, all you will have succeeded in doing would be to make the site irrelevant to those looking for further understanding of the story through the use of message boards. it is possible to take some measures, like waiting periods for certain activities, but don't go wholesale please. It would be like what many unions did in response to the first foreign competition wobble brought about by Japanese competition, to take action that guaranteed older workers some protection, but threw the younger ones under the bus.

[shortonoil]

<i>"Wondering where Tanada and the site's admins are. Haven't seen any feedback from them. Maybe they've been bot-napped"</i>

Bet they are trying to figure out how the little diggy-buggers got in to begin with. Obviously there is a back door that they didn't know was there. If they don't find it we are all likely to to succumb to bot-titus of the retina in short order. That would not be a good thing to happen to the site.

[Plantagenet]

I just looked at the News side of the site. There are are almost no posts there now.

Did all the the new posters on the Bakken thread in news site yesterday use some kind of bug or glitch to register, or did they just register through the normal process so they could comment on the Bakken article?

Maybe they were just a bunch of unemployed Bakken oil workers down at the unemployment office using their spare time to kvetch about the negative article on the Bakken. Someone higher up in this thread here said the Bakken article also attracted huge traffic at zero hedge where it was originally posted. Maybe it was that subject and that specific article that attracted all the comments, rather it being an attack on peak oil.com. After all, zerohedge saw the same kind of huge jump in reader comments with the exact same article.

Cheers!

[shortonoil]

Sure, 29 ex Bakken rough necks all showed up on same day to make 300 posts with the same grammatical structure, and no spelling errors.

Sure I'll buy that. Now about that bridge?

[vox_mundi]

Just an observation ...

Periodically when I compose a post I'm presented with this screen rather than the normal screen (without the Flash button) ...



I'm pretty sure that Flash button doesn't belong there.

Back Door?

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', 'S')ure, 29 ex Bakken rough necks all showed up on same day to make 300 posts with the same grammatical structure, and no spelling errors.

Sure I'll buy that. Now about that bridge?

[GHung]

Plant said; "That suggests it was just a lot of people posting about the anti-Bakken story rather then some kind of generalized attack on peak oil.com"...

....and not ONE replied to a response from other posters. Not ONE replied to a challenge to their claims. I know you're a little slow on the uptake sometimes, Planty,,, but dayum.

Also, some of the new accounts have linkable account names (colored). Click on those names and you either get bullshit links (like yahoo or some sales site), or invalid URLs. Further, they come in clusters.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', '
')....and not ONE replied to a response from other posters. Not ONE replied to a challenge to their claims. ....Also, some of the new accounts have linkable account names (colored). Click on those names and you either get bullshit links (like yahoo or some sales site), or invalid URLs. Further, they come in clusters.

[shortonoil]

"Further, they come in clusters."

Further, they almost all appeared in that one article by Steve on the Bakken. I went through several other articles, and only found a couple that might have been from the same source. It was a very sophisticated attack; drown out anyone else with an opinion or observation.

What we don't know was it directed at that article, or PO News in general? Let's hope it was the article as PO News is about the best open source about petroleum on the net. A lot of the rest of them read like canned "Spanky and the Gang" shows. They are really nothing more than well choreographed song and dance routines.

[shortonoil]

"The coming in clusters part sounds bad."

New to the planet?

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'G')Hung how did you manage to trace the problem? I managed to get through. It's called gumption. (or at least it used to be). The site admins could always ban our own resident trolls? It might help a smidge lol

[GHung]

Not biting, Adam.

[evilgenius]

How are we harmed? That's the question we have to ask. There are a number of ways to view an attack by touters or propagandists. One way is to ignore single issue attacks that are limited in duration, as long as the content is germane. If you take this view, then all but 'My uncle made $2,700 in a single day doing..." is acceptable. Obviously, we don't want that kind of spam. What about content scams, however. Aren't they really bad for us in the long run? I suppose the answer is that depends upon whether there was enough non-aligned content posted to counter the propaganda. You can never know if that will be the case, especially if the barrage of posts was conducted in connection with some kind of stock touting scam where the damage is done before enough 'real' people can add their two cents worth. But can we simply say that people can't post when they first come here? I think we can, if we assume that the overall issues are why they come. I think we can assume that the overall issues are important enough to a legitimate person who finds this site such that, even with a slight delay, they will come back. We can put a one day delay on new account's posting privileges. Maybe that's already there, I don't know. It's been a long time since I was new here.

The other side of the issue is whether we want too much new blood. We could become calcified. When that happens to older communities in the physical world sometimes they find themselves overrun by newcomers. The number of newcomers doesn't even have to be all that large for this to happen either. If the community has lost its ability to converse dynamically, then the new blood will always annoy it, no matter how small it may be as a percentage compared to the old. The tide doesn't even have to be that great because, as always, it's the marginal propensity for change that matters most. Philosophical changes often happen on the margins. So, if you are old on this site, and you view this as a place where this or that point of view, maybe a right or left slant, ought to reign unchallenged the future could look bleak. To put it simply, things like new forum creation and strict subject control can be implemented by the controlling order to prevent or stymie new forms of expression regarding peak oil, or other topics that will rise to importance as the world goes forward under the paradigm. Do we really want to do that? Maybe some limited version would work to contain foreseeable malfeasance, but should we try to control the flow of dialog any further than that?

[Plantagenet]

Oh noooooo......people are making posts! Stop them from posting! Now they are posting in clusters! Oh noooooooo!


oooooooooh noooooooooooooo! Stop them stop them! Don't let them join the site and post! Oh nooooooo!

[GHung]

evilgenius asks; "but should we try to control the flow of dialog any further than that?"

This wasn't dialogue. None of these new "commentators" responded to any queries or challenges. No discussions at all; just a barrage of opinionated blather without citations or links. Indeed, this was clearly designed to stifle dialogue and discussion to the point that it created a partial denial-of-service.

"Oh noooooo......people are making posts!"

You still think this was "people", Plant? Really?

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', ' ')this was clearly designed to stifle dialogue and discussion to the point that it created a partial denial-of-service. ?

[GHung]

I had a lot of trouble connecting on Sunday; often got a "max_user_exceeded" message or sql_database_error. Others reported errors of this type. Don't recall seeing you around.

Suffice it to say that I think you are just wrong on this, and as usual, being typically obtuse. You've yet to answer the issue that NONE of these new 'people' responded to any challenges. Not one of dozens of new accounts. Only ONE, who was likely the only real person, posted any links or citations to support their claims.

Again, as usual, you avoid addressing anything that counters your generally weak arguments. Other regulars, who are far more computer-savy than you are, declared this as a sophisticated bot attack early on. I initially said it probably wasn't until patterns emerged.

Answer this: Why did this not occur at either of the other sites where this article was previously posted as early as Sept. 12 (despite your erroneous claim, above)?

You said; "The contention that oil drilling in the Bakken will increase if the price of oil increases is a completely reasonable thing to say. There is no reason to get so upset about it."

Upset? I generally don't let anything get me "upset". Just making up shit again?

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', 'I') had a lot of trouble connecting on Sunday; often got a "max_user_exceeded" message