bitflipper

...What it boils down to though, is that we do not have 24/7 moderators

Ah, but you could, simply by accepting volunteer moderators from the user base.
 
We're here 7 days a week and cover every timezone.
 
You could send 'em a free t-shirt for their trouble.

Indeed, however this offers a level of control that we decided to not move forward with since it exposes confidential information and is basically like giving the keys to the whole castle. It's very restricting. A "moderator" can't even ban a user permanently, you actually have to promote them to a higher elevation, so it doesn't really help you ban a spammer.
 
Part of what I'm referring to when I talk about "how we have it configured" has to do with sub forums and permissions settings which are baked into the app that we can't alter.

Castles have keys?  I thought they just had a draw-bridge with that bar that goes across... (J/K!)
 

Ryan Munnis [Cakewalk
<snip>
 
What it boils down to though, is that we do not have 24/7 moderators and with the rate that spam was coming in previously we would need someone to sit around all day long approving posts. Just because it might work in other forums, in no way was this practical for how we have it set up. You're suggesting this would solve the problem, but I'm telling you it would not. I think it's a very poor solution that wouldn't work out well for us.
 
I guess we can debate about it until the end of time, the difference is I'm basing my opinion off the rate of which spam comes in, the way the logs are maintained, the way we have our forum configured, and the fact that I know people are working on other priorities versus sitting around approving posts all day long. If we implemented that control, I can promise you people would be sitting around for a long time waiting to participate. Obviously we seem to disagree on level of how acceptable that is. Hopefully the new integration will make this disagreement a moot point and we can all move on.
 
<snip>
 
I'm just communicating where our priorities have been, which is developing music software. It seems like the finger is being pointed at us for not turning on a control that we all agree on internally is a poor idea, versus the spammers themselves.

 
I brought up the control configuration as a possible solution, and I didn't intend for it to point the finger (although I can see how I may have come across that way). I think we all know and can agree on who the bad guys are in this scenario. I had hoped that the control mentioned would help the forum, and I am partly basing that view on my own experience of having to wait a few hours for account approval at other forums. But if, as you seem to indicate, a new user may have to wait much longer, then it does become an issue that could turn away new users. The longer the wait, the more the inconvenience. And if a new user has to wait ~1 day or more, I would say that that is unacceptable. I assumed that you could just have a mod check new accounts every few hours, but if that is not possible, then I can see why you would be opposed to making that forum setting change.

What I'm not understanding is that Cakewalk has just rolled out a solution in the last 24 hours which may (or may not) take a few more weeks to tweak, so I don't really see any issue right now whatsoever.. action has been taken, we could not have asked for more right now, now it is a clean sheet let's see what happens. It will hopefully be unnecessary to have vetting procedures.
 
If we are getting the same regular spam in July maybe it's worth a debate, until then it's a total waste of time discussing...
As Bob says "Hang in there, all :)"...
 
Time to lock thread methinks or throw it into coffee house.

CakeAlexS
What I'm not understanding is that Cakewalk has just rolled out a solution in the last 24 hours which may (or may not) take a few more weeks to tweak, so I don't really see any issue right now whatsoever.. action has been taken, we could not have asked for more right now, now it is a clean sheet let's see what happens. It will hopefully be unnecessary to have vetting procedures.
 
If we are getting the same regular spam in July maybe it's worth a debate, until then it's a total waste of time discussing...
As Bob says "Hang in there, all :)"...
 
Time to lock thread methinks or throw it into coffee house.

Well then I (and perhaps others) can be glad that you're not a mod.
 
Personally, I appreciate that Ryan engaged my questions and provided Cakewalk's POV. And now the discussion is on record here at the forum and can be accessed regarding future forum-related questions.
 
Unfortunately, your response only reinforces to CW one of the reasons why they can't hand over mod access to non-CW members, who would move or close threads simply because those members are "not understanding" a thread.

Whatever...
BTW when was the last time we got any Black Magic spam?

Ruben

CakeAlexS
What I'm not understanding is that Cakewalk has just rolled out a solution in the last 24 hours which may (or may not) take a few more weeks to tweak, so I don't really see any issue right now whatsoever.. action has been taken, we could not have asked for more right now, now it is a clean sheet let's see what happens. It will hopefully be unnecessary to have vetting procedures.
 
If we are getting the same regular spam in July maybe it's worth a debate, until then it's a total waste of time discussing...
As Bob says "Hang in there, all :)"...
 
Time to lock thread methinks or throw it into coffee house.

Well then I (and perhaps others) can be glad that you're not a mod.
 
Personally, I appreciate that Ryan engaged my questions and provided Cakewalk's POV. And now the discussion is on record here at the forum and can be accessed regarding future forum-related questions.
 
Unfortunately, your response only reinforces to CW one of the reasons why they can't hand over mod access to non-CW members, who would move or close threads simply because those members are "not understanding" a thread.

Ruben, no need to insult people.