ban again

nedhep

New Member
Aug 22, 2015
7
0
my account “kakaisfa” was baned again,please check and tell me why please,I create this account because I send email but no response 。
my another account has been banned before and I post here ask the reason,and got a lot reply ,so I‘m sure my post are right ,but the account was banned with a reason "spam".please check
 

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594
image host
 

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594
try the linkbucks one
 

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594
no it is not error, I moved your post here, the screenshots are linkbucks
 

nedhep

New Member
Aug 22, 2015
7
0
oh ,it is my missteps,it seem only this one,I send it at other place but don't know why appaerd here,can you delete it and give my account back?
I have post hundreds of articles ,I don’t want they all deleted by this fault。thankyou verymuch
 
Last edited:

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594
no, because that will mean I would have to undelete a lot of posts

and many members
 

nedhep

New Member
Aug 22, 2015
7
0
you can give my account back but delete the post,only one article is wrong,help please
 

CodeGeek

Akiba Citizen
Nov 2, 2010
5,181
1,864
As this forum supports / offers uploading of images as attachments to the posts I don't understand anyway why external image hosters are needed / allowed.
Especially after switching to HTTPS and introducing the proxy.php (all the traffic gets through a AO proxy) external hosters are not preferable as - at least I - often get placeholder graphics as too many requests from AO result in a blocking by the target server.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoolKevin

Ceewan

Famished
Jul 23, 2008
9,152
17,033
As this forum supports / offers uploading of images as attachments to the posts I don't understand anyway why external image hosters are needed / allowed.
Especially after switching to HTTPS and introducing the /proxy/ (all the traffic gets through a AO proxy) external hosters are not preferable as - at least I - often get placeholder graphics as too many requests from AO result in a blocking by the target server.



The uploaders use "cashlinks", (which were originally banned as a concept here when the traffic was much lower). Everytime someone views an image hosted at the "cashlink" site the uploader increases his chance at a payout. Some uploaders use cashlink hosting sites (which are very common today) for the same reason chompy uses a sponsor: for funding (with hopefully a tiny profit). What the mods really used to object to back when I was among them were not these uploaders but the spammers who just copied other peoples work and weren't looking for anything but a cheap dollar off someone elses work and effort. It is quite feasable that as time goes by the distinction between the two can get a little blurry.


Now you know (and knowing is half the battle!)
 

CodeGeek

Akiba Citizen
Nov 2, 2010
5,181
1,864
The uploaders use "cashlinks", (which were originally banned as a concept here when the traffic was much lower). Everytime someone views an image hosted at the "cashlink" site the uploader increases his chance at a payout. Some uploaders use cashlink hosting sites (which are very common today) for the same reason chompy uses a sponsor: for funding (with hopefully a tiny profit). What the mods really used to object to back when I was among them were not these uploaders but the spammers who just copied other peoples work and weren't looking for anything but a cheap dollar off someone elses work and effort. It is quite feasable that as time goes by the distinction between the two can get a little blurry.


Now you know (and knowing is half the battle!)
I know, I know. :) But also normal members use image hosters (also they normally don't use "cashlinks"). I often see it in normal threads e.g. in the "JAV Discussion", "JAV Idol identification" or "JAV Idol request" section. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoolKevin

nedhep

New Member
Aug 22, 2015
7
0
The uploaders use "cashlinks", (which were originally banned as a concept here when the traffic was much lower). Everytime someone views an image hosted at the "cashlink" site the uploader increases his chance at a payout. Some uploaders use cashlink hosting sites (which are very common today) for the same reason chompy uses a sponsor: for funding (with hopefully a tiny profit). What the mods really used to object to back when I was among them were not these uploaders but the spammers who just copied other peoples work and weren't looking for anything but a cheap dollar off someone elses work and effort. It is quite feasable that as time goes by the distinction between the two can get a little blurry.


Now you know (and knowing is half the battle!)
I konw my fault ,but infact I remember I send it at another website ,I don‘t konw why it appear here,I’m not deliberate。And I had post about three hundred articles ,only this one is wrong,but my account was banned,my post all gone,so strictly , I'm so sad....
 

Ceewan

Famished
Jul 23, 2008
9,152
17,033
I know, I know. :) But also normal members use image hosters (also they normally don't use "cashlinks"). I often see it in normal threads e.g. in the "JAV Discussion", "JAV Idol identification" or "JAV Idol request" section. :(


It is a two-edged sword, it cuts both ways. Take for example this forum, if it banned all filehosters that payed its' members (which in effects makes those filehosters "cashlinks") then it couldn't use a sponsor, it would have to use some type of cheaper forum more prone to hacking and spam, it couldn't afford expensive add-ons for this forum, it could not afford an expensive host site with a high bandwidth (which would mean constant 503 errors) and etc,. etc,.

Chompy never imagined that this forum would generate so much traffic when he started it so he was forced to adapt and so were the rules. The rules now are an attempt at a balance between annoying cashlinks and allowing less intrusive ones. It is a frustrating razor thin line for both the moderators and the uploaders in order to still make this a friendly and enjoyable place for those that visit here (and it is constantly tweeking). Personally I agree with you and hate certain aspects of this forum, even though I completely understand how they came to be. Yet the least we can do....as longstanding members at least....is try not to bitch about it too much and let the staff run the forum as they see fit and try to be supportive when we can. This is a very unique forum and I have never seen anything like it nor do I believe I ever will see its' like again. I strongly suggest we just enjoy the ride.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoolKevin

HeavyNosebleed

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2013
306
793
I konw my fault ,but infact I remember I send it at another website ,I don‘t konw why it appear here,I’m not deliberate。And I had post about three hundred articles ,only this one is wrong,but my account was banned,my post all gone,so strictly , I'm so sad....
That is indeed very harsh. One little mistake and the whole account gets a ban with all posts deleted? In my opinion that's not fair. That's like getting your whole lifetime savings taken away for one speeding ticket. Maybe the whole thing could be made a little more uploader-friendly by setting the rule to "three strikes and you're out". One mistake would result in something like a 10-day-ban. The second violation would result in a 30-day-ban and only by making a third mistake the permanent ban would hit with all posts deleted.
Wouldn't that be a better solution @CoolKevin ?
Getting your whole work deleted right at the first mistake could frustrate a lot of contributors so much that they won't post again after it happened and turn away from this forum completely. That could hurt the whole forum in the long term.
But I guess this practice has been done for a long time and didn't hurt the forum significantly by scaring away a lot of uploaders so far......or did it?
 

Ceewan

Famished
Jul 23, 2008
9,152
17,033
That is indeed very harsh. One little mistake and the whole account gets a ban with all posts deleted? In my opinion that's not fair.


Really, "you would have to be there" to get a proper perspective on it. The amount of spam I used to deal with here as a mod (I have no idea exactly how bad it is now) was enough to make me even more unstable than I am normally. At one time only one out of maybe 5 or 6 posts wasn't some spammer breaking the rules or simply copying someone elses upload to his filehost. The job these mods do....for free mind you.....is basically mindboggling. Uploaders use robots too, so before you know it a hundred spammed uploads had taken place. A mod could almost spend 24 hrs a day back then just deleting posts that broke the rules. A lot of improvements have been made to the forum since then but there are also less moderators to do the job. Coolkevin, and I don't always agree with his heavy-handedness either, just has too much on his plate to be a kind understanding mod. They could probably do with 20 more mods here and then maybe the staff could ease up a bit but they have tried adding mods before and I believe chompy is a little frustrated over finding good ones.

Keep in mind as well that you don't know the particular situation between this uploader and the staff either nor or you likely to. The current climate is more a one of "keeping things in house" and the staff talks amonst themselves about things they would never share on the board. Personally I never quite understood that attitude but it is what it is. Likely they have had problems with this uploader before or assume he is a previously banned member who should know better or perhaps that he is part of a multiple account.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoolKevin

CoolKevin

Nutcase on the loose
Staff member
Super Moderator
Mar 30, 2007
9,992
3,594
That is indeed very harsh. One little mistake and the whole account gets a ban with all posts deleted? In my opinion that's not fair. One mistake would result in something like a 10-day-ban. The second violation would result in a 30-day-ban and only by making a third mistake the permanent ban would hit with all posts deleted.
Wouldn't that be a better solution @CoolKevin ?

I laughed at one little mistake

I draw your attention to the thread title, unfortunately his other thread banned again was deleted under same action, and you will find it is not just 1 mistake, I maybe wrong, but I think there was at least 10, and his other account I have forgotten, how many warnings had been issued, and the frequency lately has really stepped up, we are going through several reports every few hours, and most are cashlinks

we have a very good attachment system now, and C00Lzero set it up nicely, it is easy to use

1) Really, "you would have to be there" to get a proper perspective on it. The amount of spam I used to deal with here as a mod (I have no idea exactly how bad it is now)

2) A lot of improvements have been made to the forum since then but there are also less moderators to do the job. Coolkevin, and I don't always agree with his heavy-handedness

3) They could probably do with 20 more mods here and then maybe the staff could ease up a bit but they have tried adding mods before and I believe chompy is a little frustrated over finding good ones.

4) Keep in mind as well that you don't know the particular situation between this uploader and the staff either nor or you likely to. The current climate is more a one of "keeping things in house" and the staff talks amonst themselves about things they would never share on the board. Personally I never quite understood that attitude but it is what it is. Likely they have had problems with this uploader before or assume he is a previously banned member who should know better or perhaps that he is part of a multiple account.


1) spam has increased a huge amount

2) heavy handedness, and I thought I was the tame one, and on this one it was more than one person decision to ban, I tried to stay out of it, (I got fed up with it, and was angry, thus clouding my judgement)

3) true more are needed, 20 well a nice thought,


4) yes even I do not know how many times he has been banned, I know of at least 3, and if I dig a little I will find a lot more
If we posted the reason why we ban everybody, I would be typing non stop, and it would get very tedious, in IRC we used to get it a lot as well