[miso]

leaching is present on all forums, some forums really don't like it and other tolerate it, however, users who puts hours or days into creating something and releasing it as a thread don't want their content leached by some random person, then that person just re-releases it on other forums claiming they coded it themselves

Leaching is a big problem in the world of forums, this can be seen with one of Mr. Kurd's threads were he managed to have 1.4M views on a thread sharing proxies.


It is good that he made that much views, he really deserves it. However, the current number of members on sinister.ly is way lower, It is good that this forum basically doesn't want spam accounts, but people can easily leach content from threads & share other people's hard work as their own

I just think we should have access to that tool instead of directly having it setup for every link (for example), if people don't want their content to be leached, then they can just be like "aight lemme put this and lemme unlock the content if they've liked the thread" (for example). Thread-makers should be able to choose a way on how to unlock their content and if they want to or not. this will reduce greatly the numbers of leachers getting content for free and reposting it on other forums as their own. I hate when work gets stolen, they should instead share the link of the thread and say "hey guys, check this out, it really usefull" instead of "I've made it". I already had to deal with people leaching my cracks & mods and sharing it as their own.

[Crimin4L]

leaching is present on all forums, some forums really don't like it and other tolerate it, however, users who puts hours or days into creating something and releasing it as a thread don't want their content leached by some random person, then that person just re-releases it on other forums claiming they coded it themselves

Leaching is a big problem in the world of forums, this can be seen with one of Mr. Kurd's threads were he managed to have 1.4M views on a thread sharing proxies.


It is good that he made that much views, he really deserves it. However, the current number of members on sinister.ly is way lower, It is good that this forum basically doesn't want spam accounts, but people can easily leach content from threads & share other people's hard work as their own

I just think we should have access to that tool instead of directly having it setup for every link (for example), if people don't want their content to be leached, then they can just be like "aight lemme put this and lemme unlock the content if they've liked the thread" (for example). Thread-makers should be able to choose a way on how to unlock their content and if they want to or not. this will reduce greatly the numbers of leachers getting content for free and reposting it on other forums as their own. I hate when work gets stolen, they should instead share the link of the thread and say "hey guys, check this out, it really usefull" instead of "I've made it". I already had to deal with people leaching my cracks & mods and sharing it as their own.

tbh I couldn't have said it better, and that was my whole point on this thread, thank you for evaluating on it more!! <3

The option to block content from nonmembers would be the greatest route imo, because it directly puts the control into the content creators hands and doesn't just leave it up to the forum(Sinister in this case) to deal with it.

Also that photo brings be back to why I started this thread. I posted a proxy list (170 Elite Socks5 SSL proxies) and 2 members were viewing it, along with 50 guests/unregistered users not even 5 minutes after I posted it..

[miso]

Even though Oni has already setted up a system that blocks content for Guest users, they might be able to choose the 5 correct thread were they can leach from, therefore still making leaching possible (even though reduced)

Having a tool that allows thread-makers to block links for unregistered members will allow them to reduce leaching greatly on sinister.ly.

I understand that Oni doesn't want to deal with lots of random accounts, because it will take space on the server and will just take the general experience of the website down because of the large amount of useless accounts, i also understand that he doesn't want to ruin the member counter, however, i think that Oni can setup something which is like this:

Allow a user to register but send them an email after a few hours to just make sure they're real, with a link in it which will allow them to prove that they're humans (or send a code or something like that), if they do not click the link sent in the email, they would have access for a few weeks to the forums before getting their account deleted. They should have less things such as no customisation for example, removing the color picker or the theme selection. It might increase the number of unused accounts that have proved they're human, however, it will reduce even more the number of leachers on sinister.ly

[mothered]

Allowing guests to view, also allows Google's (and other search engines) bots to crawl & Index pages/content- which I don't need to explain the advantages of the latter.

[Crimin4L]

Allowing guests to view, also allows Google's (and other search engines) bots to crawl & Index pages/content- which I don't need to explain the advantages of the latter.

But if we had a [Hide][/hide] option, we would be able to let guests view pages but still protect the important content (like downloads, password, etc..)

[mothered]

Allowing guests to view, also allows Google's (and other search engines) bots to crawl & Index pages/content- which I don't need to explain the advantages of the latter.

But if we had a [Hide][/hide] option, we would be able to let guests view pages but still protect the important content (like downloads, password, etc..)

Implementing the Hide tags, has been discussed a few times with mixed opinions.

Whilst I agree that protecting Important content will serve Its purpose well, It may will also lower the quality of replies such as "Thanks......". Yes, the minimum character length can be Increased to help prevent LQ posting, but It's not "what" you say but "how" you say It, that also deems a quality post.

Without naming specifics, I have first-hand experience with the Hide tags on a daily basis, and I'd say around 5% of replies are valued posts.

[Crimin4L]

Allowing guests to view, also allows Google's (and other search engines) bots to crawl & Index pages/content- which I don't need to explain the advantages of the latter.

But if we had a [Hide][/hide] option, we would be able to let guests view pages but still protect the important content (like downloads, password, etc..)

Implementing the Hide tags, has been discussed a few times with mixed opinions.

Whilst I agree that protecting Important content will serve Its purpose well, It may will also lower the quality of replies such as "Thanks......". Yes, the minimum character length can be Increased to help prevent LQ posting, but It's not "what" you say but "how" you say It, that also deems a quality post.

Without naming specifics, I have first-hand experience with the Hide tags on a daily basis, and I'd say around 5% of replies are valued posts.

Nah I'm not suggesting a post to unlock the hidden content because i 100% agree with you, but maybe just liking the post could unlock it like @miso said. Or if that's too much, just prevent anyone who is not registered from viewing the content in between the [hide] tags. Either one will not increase spam and still serve the purpose of protecting the content of the posters.

[mothered]

but maybe just liking the post could unlock it

This will result In abusing the Like system, and defeat the purpose of Its Implementation.

just prevent anyone who is not registered from viewing the content in between the [hide] tags.

I agree with this suggestion.

[miso]

But if we had a [Hide][/hide] option, we would be able to let guests view pages but still protect the important content (like downloads, password, etc..)

Implementing the Hide tags, has been discussed a few times with mixed opinions.

Whilst I agree that protecting Important content will serve Its purpose well, It may will also lower the quality of replies such as "Thanks......". Yes, the minimum character length can be Increased to help prevent LQ posting, but It's not "what" you say but "how" you say It, that also deems a quality post.

Without naming specifics, I have first-hand experience with the Hide tags on a daily basis, and I'd say around 5% of replies are valued posts.

Nah I'm not suggesting a post to unlock the hidden content because i 100% agree with you, but maybe just liking the post could unlock it like @miso said. Or if that's too much, just prevent anyone who is not registered from viewing the content in between the [hide] tags. Either one will not increase spam and still serve the purpose of protecting the content of the posters.

it will fuck up the live member counter, will take space on the servers and might also ruin the experience while browsing through sinister.ly

a good mix of both should however do the trick, users having access to a [hide] tag is a good idea i think, most of the design can be taken from the quote tag, it however shouldn't be directly and a checkbox that says "Lock links for unregistered members with..." should do the trick, however, it shoudnt be automatically checked or it might increase the number of spammers in the reply section

I dont know on what sinister.ly runs on, but i think that if it needs to hold an enormous amount of spam accounts, the servers will probably slow down and it would be a hot mess to deal with. However, it might also bring real people that are actually interested in the forums (which is how i ended up here). You dont only need to see the negative side of thing, seeing both sides and having a good balance is a nice way to start, then after choosing the side you think is the best, i personally prefer having an option which can be used to prevent leachers than having none at all, sinister.ly doesnt have some measures but are way more tolerable (if can be called so) compared to other forums sites, you basically have a demo of the website here.

Hiding all link will increase the numbers of members, which might reduce the experience for other users due to the large amount of spam accounts created over time, but will bump up the stats (i really doubt @Oni wants to boost stats due to how he allows unregistered members have a preview of the website)

Allowing users to have access to a [hide] tag or a checkbox hidding all links will increase spam in the reply section/likes, which will also boost up stats, but will reduce the quality of replies. It will however keep download links away from leachers, which then can make thread-makers to post more content and creating threads on the platform because of the low numbers of leacher. Letting the thread-maker choose what other members needs to do to unlock links will also give the community a bit more control about the leachers and spam on their thread(s)

I think that giving members a [hide) tag would allow members to have a bit more control over unregistered users, they can choose if they directly have access to the links in threads.

a blocking link system should also be made, allowing thread makers to block links that members might post (this will for example make sure an alternative, unblocked link doesnt get released in the reply section)