If you choose registered users only option, then you won't get spammy responses.
In theory, but not in reality. Online bots still sign up and post. The best thing to do is to require administrator verification before registered users can become registered. That way you can determine if it is a valid email address. For example, if someone signs up using hjhdgf@bingo.com or jimmy@makemoneyfast.com, then you know its just span so don't accept them.
It is a process, because you'll get an email every time someone registered, and you'll have to determine if you want to trust them, but it is the best way to avoid spam, and worth the extra effort.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
If you choose registered users only option, then you won't get spammy responses.
In theory, but not in reality. Online bots still sign up and post. The best thing to do is to require administrator verification before registered users can become registered. That way you can determine if it is a valid email address. For example, if someone signs up using hjhdgf@bingo.com or jimmy@makemoneyfast.com, then you know its just span so don't accept them.
It is a process, because you'll get an email every time someone registered, and you'll have to determine if you want to trust them, but it is the best way to avoid spam, and worth the extra effort.
Ah, thanks, Kevin.
See Bob, I knew there had to be a way to avoid all that spam!
edited to add: so can you do that with the blogs here at MDB? I don't see that option on the Blog CP page. How would you do it?
It looks like the problems have been fixed with rcrocket's blog.
It also looks like you (rcrocket) have found the way to allow others to reply without making them "contributors." Just make responses available only to friends, then list as "friends" the ones you want to allow to respond.
Also:
You can't make entries or responses if you aren't logged in!
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
I must confess that I don’t spend a whole lot of time reading MDB; I pop in and make a few comments here and there and look for interesting posts. This essay outlines what I think is problematic about MDB.
One particular problem with MDB is that it is nearly weightless in substantive discussion, at least when one compares it to the deep and insightful MAD board, or some of the more interesting blogs. The reason it is weightless is that there is almost no counterweight of knowledgeable Latter-day Saints. They don’t post much on MDB, and those who do post on MDB often carry substantial baggage with them to the point that they aren’t very well believed.
Dr. Shades operates a free-speech board, which is quite admirable. The consequence of the free-speech board, however, is that the faithful Latter-day Saint who might want to make a few points here and there are put off by several things. One is the incidence of vulgarity and profanity. One suspects that a large segment of MDB denizens is composed of World of Warcrafters who toke the weed on weekends, possess only a GED, and have a job mounting tapes on computer tape drives. Vulgarity and profanity, which should be avoided by decent people, is going to put off the faithful Saint.
The moderators are really kind of numb. Oh, they are nice people in their own ways. But doctrinal deepness in “Mormon Discussions?” It ain’t there. None of them could possibly hold their own in a discussion with a recent Primary grad about plural marriage or blood atonement. Really now.
What does moderating have to do with knowledge of Mormon doctrine? I don't see the connection?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07