20 messages a day -- what do we lose?

I wrote a really long post today about where I'm coming from on this limit thing, but the team said "too long -- no one's going to read it."  I'll probably post it when no one is looking and everyone can ignore it :)

Instead, I thought I'd just post some examples of what messages have come up against the 20 unreciprocated message limit (without naming names, of course):

• Warm greetings and salutations!
• Hi! I'm holding a Technorati Favorites exchange on ----- and I was wondering if you might like to participate. Here's more info: http://www.-----.com/blog-website-promotion/-----/ Thanks!
• Hey! Hope you´re doing great! I just published a EBook called "-----" on my blog [ http://-----.typepad.com/blog/2007/04/----- ]. Would love to hear your feedback about it. Rock on!
• hi,have a nice day...see you at http://www.-----.it/----- Bye
• Hey how are you doing
• Hi , nice blog u have there !! Do visit mine at www.-----.net .Feel free to join my community
• hi Join new frinds @ www.-----.com @
• Do drop by mine at http://www.-----.sg/ for a laugh sometimes! :) If you like what you laugh at, care to join my community as well?
• Hi, we'd love to welcome you to Mybloglog community, hope u have fun. God bless you!
• Hey there wuz goin on?????? / Hey wuz goin on? ur a newbie rite? / Hey party guy wana chat?

And my personal favorite, just:

• :-)

If I got this in my email box, you'd call it spam, so why is it not spam in my MyBlogLog message folder?

Comments

[Nia]

some people like what you call spam. imposing your world view on the world is not appropriate. if "spam" does not yield the sender the desired results then the sender will stop because in this system each message sent is done individually and is very time consuming. you are dealing with a community that is looking to you to protect it.

[James D Kirk]

T-H-A-N-K Y-O-U very, very much. It would be nice to turn on the messages displayed so all could see them, and not leave it set to private only.

[Garrett Albright]

"imposing your world view on the world is not appropriate."

This world belongs to MyBlogLog. I think it's entirely appropriate.

If this rule were in place since MyBlogLog first launched, would people still be complaining? Somehow I doubt it.

[dan1el]

Totally agree Garrett. People need to realise we are guests in someone elses house, and they should act accordingly.

Messages asking people to visit a blog or join a community are simply selfish ways of trying to get some traffic. Most of the time I get these messages the person hasn't even visited my blog, yet they tell me how great it is. You can try to spin it any way you want - it's still spam.

Eric, if you want to stir the pot even more, turn private messages off. How much of the more subtle types of spam do you think would get sent if the everyone could see it?

[Michael Goldberg]

The smiley is a little bit much IMHO. Mybloglog is social networking, someone may be posting a quick response to a message and wanted to use a smiley. I can understand why you would want to handle spam, but Mybloglog is not email and spam tactics are different. I do not see emoticons as spam.

*****
Eric replies:

As a one-off response, I totally agree. Someone leaves you a funny message and you send a smiley in return. But this person sent out 20 unsolicited messages consisting of only a smiley. Spammer AND lazy? That's just too much :-)
*****

[Michael Goldberg]

hehe Could be a spammer, but I think that for right now there would be more on the lazy percentage than spammers. However, I do know that there are some spammers out there that would do this. Perhaps a solution would be to strip urls, and remove avatars from the messages. Curiosity killed the cat. PS: You posted in a blog? WTF :P

[Andy Beard]

This list actually highlights one of the problems with the way the messaging system currently works or maybe how people are using it.

I haven't added lots of "contacts" in MyBlogLog because there didn't seem to be much use for contacts.

One of the messages in the list above was actually sent to me by someone I have exchanged a number of messages with, and who is a very legitimate and hard working blogger - he is even a SOB

Lots of people prefer sending me messages using MBL, even though I encourage them to use email as it is so much easier to reply in a tab that is always open.
I haven't had time to look at the post he highlighted, though I am subscribed to his feed - I have been slacking on my feed reading a little recently.

People send me emails like this all the time, and I don't look on it as spam, because they are fellow bloggers and it is a 2 way exchange quite often.
Most of the time it for things like a little Digg loving if I feel the content is worthy.

Having a temporary limit until such time as a more useful communication interface is implemented is fine, but highlighting certain messages (but without the domain) just highlights that the current fix isn't workable longterm, rather than highlighting bad messaging habits.

Why didn't I respond to the message?

I suppose I could respond with a question.

Why should I have to respond to a message?

[Eric Marcoullier]

Andy -- a good point which highlights our need to offer authors the ability to blast a message to all the members of their community.

And I will be the first to rejoice if we can get rid of these brute-force tactics at reducing spam.

[Michael Goldberg]

"Andy -- a good point which highlights our need to offer authors the ability to blast a message to all the members of their community."

That would be a kick ass feature. I would like to occasionally communicate like that. I know what draws the most attention to my site would really like to let people know about it from time to time.

[Lord Matt]

Today I had nothing better to do and no communicating to do so while skiving I set to the task of burning off my 20 comments to see what it was like without them. First I greeted six new members, I send random crap to contacts and said hello to random people. Then I posted four messages of no value at all in the mybloglog community for all to see and took a screen shot. All this to provide research for an article on just this topic because it was more fun than creating the ultimate feed parser in php. As a five message a day or less user I have 15 I could spam or I could spam 15 messages to a few users who I know like to spam and they could spam some more... It is so broken dude. Bloggers have faced spam for as long as there were blogs. Most solutions use advanced adaptive filters, blacklists and time between messages limits. 20 comments per IP per day... that'd never work -the chatty members would get irked and the spammers would still get 20 spams a day in.

[Eric Marcoullier]

Matt -- The point is not to wipe out spam completely with this approach. We're just trying to keep the major offenders in check. Here are some stats:

In the six days prior to the limit, an average of 21 people posted 20 or more messages and sent an average total of 1566 messages.

In the six days since the limit, an average of 15 people have hit that limit with a total of 339 posts per day.

We've affected almost no one with this limit yet we've reduced their spam output by almost 80%.

It seems like a decent win until we can get something more elegant in place.

[Lord Matt]

Those are very compelling numbers. However it is the implication that worries me most. As I first commented it's all in the presentation. Because that speaks volumes about the attitude behind the change. What time zone are you in BTW Eric?

[Lord Matt]

Actually by those numbers you can drop the limit and cap the spammers.

Take this fake SQL assuming you are using MySQL able to use nested select or are on DB2 or MS SQL-Sever:

SELECT Avg(number) as factor FROM{
SELECT COUNT(postid) number, userid FROM FICTION JOIN (etc) GROUP BY DAY(date)
} WHERE (DATE 20){ doaction('flag as spammer'); }

This fictional php snippet then takes the result for our user and inspects the average of the count of posts per day over the week and checks it against 20 (your magic number) should the average peek above 20 at any stage we have an abuser that gets flagged.

"Sorry the ystem has identified an you account as potentially abusive. Sit tight and an admin will check it out in the next 24 hours. Thank you for your understanding click here for more..."

Then you can inspect them and if they have jsut been very friendly you can let them go again.

Given you have an algo for reciprication you could factor that into the SQL (or logic layer) too.

That'd do the same job but present a more open, web 2.0ish message.

Then the 20+/- thing can simmer back as a personal page "My Private Usage Stats" widget.

We all win.

[ilker]

I'm happy with these changes.

[Annie]

Hey there!
I am guilty of not responding to many of my visitors right away. I cannot spend as much time, right now, as I'd like, on the internet. My husband has been quite ill, and there are many trips to the doctor....2-3 hours away from where we live.And that is time consuming.
Also, I have been building an internet ministry; and I give my address withBlogLog as a central point. This serves both of us...possibly more clients for you, and a heart that needs a touch of compassion from me. All of my sites need to be updated...I am behind in that, as well. But, I am catching up!
I love BlogLog...it was easy for a non-computer person to join. I tell everyone I know about it.
So, for limiting messages..I personally don't think it should be done! Maybe there are some out there that do nothing all day, or can find a good block of time, to answer messages. I know mine are there..I have read them, and I am aware I need to be a little more disciplined and courteous, and I am strivibg to do just that!
If you feel you must, let it be an option when we sign -up, or one that can be added, if we feel the messages are coming too fast and furious.
The one thing I loved about this site is the open-ness. I have felt only "family type relationships" here!
I do thank you for being there as a tool for me to be able to reach out!
Blessings in abundance!
Miss Annie

[Cassandra]

For me I will be overwhelmed if I'd receive messages created personally by the one sending it. Simple as that, you know what I mean.

For spam, there are categories for that. :-)

[vodosaksCrark]

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting!