Is listnook going to keep a log of which email address is linked to which account? What do you anticipate doing with that data if asked for it by law enforcement? (i.e. subpoena)
332
raldiApr 30, 2010
+11
Your email address (if you choose to provide it) is in your preferences, under the "email / password" tab. In other words, it's an attribute on your user object in our database. This is completely unchanged since 2005. The only difference is that we now provide the ability to confirm the email address, if you choose.
As has always been the case, we stand up for our users' privacy as much as legally possible. If law enforcement comes to us with a valid court order, we would do what any other website would do (comply with it), but we're not going to, say, pass along your email address just because some guy with fancy shoes and a clipboard comes knocking on our door.
If this still makes you uncomfortable, don't enter an email address. We know there are many people in the community who take privacy very seriously, and want to provide them an option. But just like how RMS has to take a little inconvenience due to his rule of not using unfree software, and Eric Raymond does the same due to his reluctance to get a credit card, you're going to have to wait a little longer between posts, or post things that get at least one upvote, or write to the moderators of the listnooks you want to post to and ask for an exemption.
11
PappenheimerMay 10, 2010
+1
>or write to the moderators of the listnooks you want to post to and ask for an exemption.
You know, that sucks. There are tons of people requesting exemption in pics now - but enabling the whitelist in pics doesn't make sense as we would have to whitelist tens of thousands of users... I can't see us enabling it. Since you told people they could do this, they won't stop asking, however. This wasn't really well thought-out.
1
legaticApr 30, 2010
+82
and for that matter, what does listnook do with the data it has currently? do you keep IP logs for each account? for how long? etc.
82
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+9
[deleted]
9
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+104
This question needs to be answered. I would do this if they didn't store the email address permanently, as a one time confirmation.
104
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+16
How could you prove the addresses weren't being stored.
16
K1mmonoApr 30, 2010
+9
You can't. If you're posting something that is that risky, you shouldn't be using your normal address, or a traceable IP number.
9
D14BL0Apr 30, 2010
+17
Because raldi would never lie to us.
In raldi we trust.
17
pope1234Apr 30, 2010
+6
Just create a dummy email. If you are not a spammer it should not matter.
6
phybereApr 30, 2010
+35
I like to go hiking.
35
legaticApr 30, 2010
+24
I agree that they're generally going to be looking for your IP address (and in another comment I asked about what logs listnook keeps of IP addresses and for how long) but I can also see the fact that you voluntarily confirming an account is yours and tying it to your email address would have legal significance.
Your point is well taken.
24
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+9
I have several apps that BY DESIGN don't store that. As do many others. There is a reason to not store it.
9
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+3
> Law enforcement won't be asking for an email address
Incorrect. They will also subpeona Yahoo or Google for access to your e-mails.
3
coderobApr 29, 2010
+26
This is a good question.
26
you_are_wrongApr 30, 2010
+6
Why doesn't it have an answer?
6
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+30
I already have verified my gmail account. Should I change it to my .edu.au address or my .gov.au address to level up? Any help? Will I achieve level 80 if I verify my .nato address?
30
raldiApr 29, 2010
+16
Ask me again after spammers have generated 10,000 throwaway addresses and I have a chance to look for patterns.
16
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+1
[deleted]
1
IConradApr 30, 2010
+1
Hey -- quick question, Mr. Raldi.
How is it that you guys had my *old* e-mail address waiting in my verification box for me O_o?
1
FunnyMan3595Apr 30, 2010
+5
I think you mean nato.int. .nato was [deleted in '96](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.nato)
5
tawApr 29, 2010
+58
What if ... the only people who verify their email addresses are spammers?
For a normal user, there's no incentive as their ratio of good to bad links will be high. For spammer, there very much is, as it lets them keep sending links in spite of a bad ratio.
So my theory is that it's a bait&switch - you want to get spammers to verify their emails, and then ban everyone with verified email address.
58
raldiApr 29, 2010
+137
> What if ... the only people who verify their email addresses are spammers?
Don't you worry about that, let *us* worry about blank.
137
sheredditApr 29, 2010
+4
Raldi, random question for you. How do people get the scrumdidiliumpcious looking pie next to their name?
4
hogiewanApr 29, 2010
+36
Like this ^ one? (comment not valid after day of posting)
36
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+10
Actually, It will be valid again once every year.
10
bondagegirlApr 29, 2010
+19
Okay, everyone meet back up here next year. I'll bring the dip!
19
hogiewanApr 29, 2010
+12
"dip" from bondagegirl sounds creepy
12
bondagegirlApr 29, 2010
+16
Imma put the the "dip" in your "bowl" *if you know what I mean*!
16
brokenarrowApr 29, 2010
+11
go on...
11
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+5
Those "cheetos" are going to make my hand "cheesy" *if you know what I mean!*
5
XfocusApr 29, 2010
+11
That's their listnook anniversary date. The day they created their listnook account.
11
ArmageddonAardvarkApr 29, 2010
+5
It designates their Listnook birthday (one year member, two year member...), and is only temporary. You'll get one on the next anniversary of having your Listnook account!
5
raldiApr 29, 2010
+8
Hover your mouse over it for info.
8
KeyframeApr 30, 2010
+11
> Don't you worry about that, let us worry about blank.
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/09/youre-probably-storing-passwords-incorrectly.html
> Recently, the folks behind Listnook.com confessed that a backup copy of their database had been stolen. Later, spez, one of the Listnook developers, confirmed that the database contained password information for Listnook's users, and that the information was stored as plain, unprotected text. In other words, once the thief had the database, he had everyone's passwords as well.
umm, no thanks!
11
nixonrichardApr 29, 2010
+71
I love when you comment in your own posts because your user name looks like "raldisa." I like to think of Raldisa as a young mexican woman . . . like the woman in [that salsa commercial](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucz039aF5l4&feature=related) . . . yeah, that's Raldisa.
71
AzuredApr 29, 2010
+29
Raldisa shares a lot in common with Listnookors now. They're both asked to show identification.
29
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+5
That would be foolish of us since all the admins have verified emails. :)
5
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+7
The first part of what you said wont happen
7
MsDruryApr 29, 2010
+3
We can start spamming the spammers....except they will probably use a throwaway account such as g634c3Gssd2d@mailinator.com
I don't see too much spam because I'm not looking for it, probably.
3
nullbitApr 29, 2010
+786
First Arizona, now Listnook.
786
raldiApr 29, 2010
+36
Only if Arizona's punishment for not having ID was that you had to wait a little while before your second helping of spam.
36
nullbitApr 29, 2010
+36
If anything, that'd cause an influx of illegal Hawaiian immigrants.
36
diamondApr 29, 2010
+10
So you're saying I probably shouldn't verify with my .mx e-mail address.
10
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+607
Papers please.
607
dwdwdw2Apr 29, 2010
+1
Is it just me or is something broken? I had already entered my address, so I tried changing it, then back to the 'real' address, but I see no mail forthcoming.
I want my trophy damnit! This is a con!!
1
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+316
*motions hand* This isn't the listnookor you're looking for...
316
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+235
Move along. Move along.
235
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+79
[deleted]
79
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+133
[deleted]
133
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+75
[deleted]
75
AzuredApr 29, 2010
+33
Close the blast doors!
33
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+30
But not to your heart.
30
AzuredApr 29, 2010
+16
It's too late...
*it's too late...*
16
aznpwnzorApr 29, 2010
+28
Look they got one of them already and put a Scarlet A on him!
28
nonamejoeApr 29, 2010
+12
As the Nazi plunges from the Listnook dirigible, jedberg smugly scans the passenger cabin and remarks, "No ticket."
All listnookors immediately verify their email addresses.
:edit. Illusio beat me to this joke. For the crime of not Control "F"ing the page, I hereby award myself zero points. May I burn in hell.
12
illusioApr 29, 2010
+19
No Ticket!
19
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+2
I was asked to verify when I tried to post a series of links. I have no problem with this at all and I gladly said sure... after 3 attempts where it said "an email will be sent to you" and checking back 12 hours later, I have not received any emails. So, what I am saying is, it would help a lot if your system actually worked. That is all.
Also, no, I did not type in my info wrong 3 times, no it is not in my spam folder and no to any other obvious level 1 tech questions.
Edit: 5 days later, no email.
2
cerealghostApr 29, 2010
+9
Can I suggest that once an account has been verified, you don't actually store the address? That way you can verify your users, store the "quality" of the address, and retain complete anonymity.
9
raldiApr 29, 2010
+7
We get far too many emails along the lines of, "I never told listnook my email address but now I've forgotten my password and I don't want to start over with a new account because i've been here eight months and have 4000 karma and a big long comment history and a trophy help!"
Plus it's easier to catch spammers when 1000 accounts have addresses of the form aaaa@example.com, aaab@example.com, etc. If we threw away their addresses, we couldn't do that.
7
blackjewobamafanApr 30, 2010
+6
That's easy. Just keep a *copy* of their email addresses instead of their real one.
6
WoozleWuzzleApr 29, 2010
+2
How do you go about verifying that for them, or do you just say tough luck create a new account?
2
UnoriginalGuyApr 29, 2010
+7
Plus what happens when Listnook gets broken into and we get sold to a spam list? Unfortunately some other sites that I enjoy have been on the receiving end of that.
7
TheFinalPastryApr 29, 2010
+20
I did it but no response in five minutes -- what are you guys doing, checking these by hand?
20
raldiApr 29, 2010
+14
Is it in your spambox? People are verifying their addresses like crazy -- reload [/awards](/awards) over and over and you can watch the trophies being handed out.
(Don't reload *too* frequently; please think of the servers!)
14
UnoriginalGuyApr 29, 2010
+2
Check spam, nothing. I did get an offer for "75% off" "USA V*****" - this isn't the Listnook verification message, right?
Been 15 minutes. :(
2
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+16
[deleted]
16
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+15
>it arrived at the same time as a V***** spam message
There are so many V***** spam messages that I wonder what I'd do if I wanted to order V***** over the Internet. Can I trust a spammer? Wouldn't I be rewarding a spammer? If I just Google "where can I buy V***** from an honest Internet boner broker?" will that suffice?
15
romwellApr 29, 2010
+254
I am opposed to this idea. Here's why:
> * Links that get more downvotes than upvotes are crummy.
and
> * We're going to start limiting them to a certain number of crummy links per hour (and per day, per week, etc).
together, in my opinion, will work to silence people who submit controversial opinions that don't align with the hivemind. You wish that people only downvoted links that they think should not have been posted because of lack of content, but this is not how downvotes are used.
If downvotes meant spam, you wouldn't need a spam filter in the first place.
Another problem is that **it gives even more incentive for spammers to downvote honest submissions**. It is my understanding that you don't need to verify to upvote/downvote.
I think this will work in the short term, but will introduce more problems than you want to solve.
254
rolmosApr 29, 2010
+23
.
23
raldiApr 29, 2010
+15
We're intentionally erring on the side of leniency -- far better to let a guilty spammer go free than convict an innocent person.
It's okay if *some* of their posts have been upvoted; let's say it's one in ten. It just means we'll take 10% longer to catch them. I think that's an acceptable tradeoff to avoid harming innocent n00bs.
15
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+10
I write for Triond, which is a pretty fertile garden of organized spam. There are groups there that co-operate by upvoting each others posts and all kinds of other nefarious tricks... what you're suggesting might work with some lone douchebag, but you're not going to stop the spam hoses with this idea because it is the type of thing that can be beaten with a little co-operation or thought.
If you want some restriction on posting, tie it somehow to comment karma. Legit Listnookors make comments, and all but the biggest assholes have positive karma. Spammers do not make comments because it takes up too much time, and if they do comment, it won't be intelligible enough to get upvoted much.
10
raldiApr 30, 2010
+12
We don't discuss countermeasures that we may or may not already be using.
12
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+7
Security through obscurity, eh raldi? Bruce Schneier is probably watering his beard as we speak.
7
raldiApr 30, 2010
+6
[I already addressed that six hours ago.](http://www.listnook.com/r/announcements/comments/by0qn/a_listnook_experiment_help_us_catch_spammers_by/c0p4vtw)
6
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+6
Naah, I'm just joshing with you. You know I love you, baby.
6
lolbaconApr 29, 2010
+28
No shit, especially in the trench warfare sublistnooks like WTF or Music where you're lucky if 1% of your submissions make it 3 seconds before getting downvoted by the queue-trolling bots. Shit, at least half of my submissions have more down than up votes, and I certainly wouldn't call any of it spam.
This is a really bad idea. All it will do is cause non-power users to submit less stuff for fear of getting blacklisted.
28
romwellApr 29, 2010
+13
This were precisely my fears, and you provide an example.
13
raldiApr 30, 2010
+7
If it actually happens to you, send me feedback and I'll tweak things. But I'm pretty confident in the measures we've put in place for just that sort of situation, and I doubt you'll actually have any problems.
7
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+10
I don't understand. He's already stated that most of his legitimate submissions have been net downvoted even though they were worthwhile posts. I have had the same experience. How would this new system change that?
10
raldiApr 30, 2010
+13
His submission page is filled with upvoted stories. And they're not submitted anywhere near frequently enough to trigger any of this new code. Yours also appear to be okay. Please don't assume the worst; if you actually do get nabbed unfairly, write to me then.
13
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+43
I too an dubious regarding the validity of using a net negative vote total as a spam indication. If anything it is an indication that users don't like what you submit.
The admins have been thrashing about on terminology lately. They have my sympathies because these aren't exactly words with 100 year histories. Mod, deputy, spam, report, upvote, etc etc. Listnook has a whole ecosystem going on that requires words to describe each activity and each word needs an etymology applied to it.
I wonder what the overlords would make of a request for a Chief Etymologist. Ya know, as PUBLISHERS they might even get a chuckle out of that. We're advancing the lexicon here god dammit!
43
UnoriginalGuyApr 29, 2010
+39
Exactly. Listnook is great but I almost don't wonder if we need a "Quality," and "Affinity" arrow. The first being purely the quality of the written post with the second being your level of agreement.
I am tired of seeing people get downvoted because they happen to disagree, particularly when their disagreement carried the conversation forward far more than another few hundred circlejerk posts.
39
moopieApr 29, 2010
+18
Still won't work. While in an ideal world, downvotes would only be used for 'just' reasons, the reality is a lot of users feel passionate about what they post and downvote good posts (often with sources) because they disagree with them (leading to the minority opinion ending in the negatives in the bottom of the page).
Doesn't really matter how many arrows you will add, limiting users from posting if they have a large negative score for the day/week/etc just reinforces the already ridiculous hivemind-mentality that is so rampant in certain sublistnooks.
18
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+9
Let's try it at least. The up/down vote fight is ridiculous on contested topics, and personally I'd love to be able to upvote a topic or reply because it's well put forth, and still be able to show that I don't agree and this person is probably not in the (my) majority.
Two quotes come to mind;
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." -- H.L. Mencken
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,' was his attitude now." -- Voltaire
Maybe it will be abused, but I'd like the opportunity to acknowledge someone I think is wrong.
9
kleinbl00Apr 29, 2010
+9
Right - 'cuz if you've got a small problem, the best thing to do is introduce a whole nuther *dimension* of complexity.
9
justonewordforyouApr 29, 2010
+5
>together, in my opinion, will work to silence people who submit controversial opinions that don't align with the hivemind.
Unless I'm mistaken, as it stands now link submissions which receive more downvotes than upvotes are quickly buried anyway, never really generating more than a few comments anyway.
In other words, I don't see how this will silence people who submit controversial links - aka: links more downvoted than upvoted - as they're not really being seen as it is.
5
romwellApr 29, 2010
+1
I believe you are mistaken, as implied by this quote:
>We're going to start limiting them to a certain number of crummy links per hour (and per day, per week, etc).
>And what happens if you use up your "crummy-links" quota? If you haven't verified your email address, you'll be prompted to. Once you do, you'll be granted a lot more leeway.
That is, if enough of your submissions become "crummy", you get restricted posting rights.
1
kleinbl00Apr 29, 2010
+9
[Here's one sublistnook I subscribe to.](http://www.listnook.com/r/skeptic)
[Here's another.](http://www.listnook.com/r/AlternativeHealth/)
Know what? You submit a link from one intended to the other, you're *trolling.*
Similarly, links intended for r/christianity that are submitted to r/atheism are going to be predictably downvoted.
The whole point of the sublistnook system is to present things to people of *like* mind. You're trying to submit content that people will *approve* of.
Take it from the man who moderates [two](http://www.listnook.com/r/Favors/) of the [most spam-infested](http://www.listnook.com/r/realestate) sublistnooks up in this b**** - the shit's obvious. Your concern is wholly related to things that are questionable, which is what the safeguards are in place for. Me? I've got guys who spam /r/realestate *twenty times a day* and the only reason I don't report 'em to /r/reportthespammers is I don't want them to get another account and make my life harder.
In my experience, downvotes aren't caused much by spammers. Downvotes are caused by people with opinions different from yours. You take your knocks and you move on.
Your concerns are unfounded.
9
romwellApr 29, 2010
+5
>The whole point of the sublistnook system is to present things to people of like mind. You're trying to submit content that people will approve of.
No. The point of sublistnook system is to group information by its category. The point of submission is to present information that may be of interest to other people (not the *majority* of people, as you seem to imply), or spark a discussion.
I believe that homogeneity of opinions in a sublistnook has not ever been (and *shoudln't* be) the intention of the community.
5
kleinbl00Apr 29, 2010
+8
You can talk about intention, but it doesn't matter when it doesn't jive with *reality.* Any time you create a system whereby people can group things by *like* you will end up with content that reinforces one opinion or another.
Your objections work fine for what you *want* listnook to be, but not at all with what listnook *is.*
8
raldiApr 30, 2010
+14
> No. The point of sublistnook system is to group information by its category.
No. The point of sublistnook system is to allow distinct communities to develop. Otherwise, polite young women who are into knitting would be overrun by requests for b*** pictures, and Christians wouldn't have a place to discuss their faith, and it would all just be a big mish mosh.
14
superdugApr 30, 2010
+23
HOW DARE YOU DISCRIMINATE
I was just about to create /r/knittinggonewild
23
jtlarousseApr 30, 2010
+4
I am intrigued by your views and would like to subscribe to your sublistnook
4
chunky_baconApr 29, 2010
+8
This was my concern as well - there's already way too much downvoting for simple disagreement, this will exacerbate the practice.
8
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+13
> _throwaway addresses like g634c3Gssd2d@mailinator.com stink, free accounts like joe@hotmail.com and sue12345@gmail.com are so-so, and anything ending in, say, .edu.au, .gov.uk, or .mil is freaking outstanding.
_
This is a very suspicious line. Why should it matter for spam purposes where the account is? It seems like Listnook is trying to get a premium email address listing. Sure, right now the policy is to keep it private, but who's to say what will happen next year, or in five. What do I get if Listnook goes back on their word?
13
raldiApr 29, 2010
+4
> Why should it matter for spam purposes where the account is?
It's very easy for a spammer to make 100 mailinator accounts. It's harder for a spammer to make 100 hotmail accounts. It's really, really hard for a spammer to make 100 .edu accounts.
4
LoneloboApr 29, 2010
+11
joke hobbies memory squash cable nose fertile wild fly safe
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
11
raldiApr 29, 2010
+6
> What do I get if Listnook goes back on their word?
If we're going to be dishonest and go back on our word, why would it matter what I say now?
6
SoManyMinutesApr 29, 2010
+5
With all due respect to you and in fairness to Lonelobo, I think the spirit of his question is valid and deserving of a better answer, especially as you seemed to miss it the first time.
The email database which you will compile from this experiment will *clearly* be *very* valuable if put up for sale, or used by Conde for other marketing purposes.
Is it your position that to your knowledge, Conde will NOT use this list for sales or marketing purposes of any kind beyond what you have stated?
5
LoneloboApr 29, 2010
+13
nose imminent combative spectacular tease light deserted fear thumb enjoy
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
13
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+4
[deleted]
4
raldiApr 30, 2010
+3
It's kind of a one-man job, and as I've said like three or four times in these comments, ketralnis has been working on it all day.
Edit: Two-man job; KeyserSosa jumped in too.
3
illiterateninjaApr 29, 2010
+6
I think this is a great idea. One question I have is, what is to stop people from flagging competitor's submissions as spam (possibly repeatedly for whatever malicious reason)? What would stop someone from abusing it and forcing normal legit users into verification?
6
gerundronautApr 29, 2010
+3
Further, will there be a way to report spam separately from reporting items that don't belong? qgyh2 (I believe) asked /r/Economics readers to use the report feature to flag irrelevant content, in an attempt to clean up the sub.
3
raldiApr 29, 2010
+6
> what is to stop people from flagging competitor's submissions as spam
By "people", do you mean the moderators of the listnook they're submitting to, or regular, non-moderator users clicking "report", or regular, non-moderator users doing deputy moderation?
If the first, you're just going to have to avoid submitting to any listnooks that are moderated by evil spammers. In the past, even the slightest insinuation of mod abuse has been taken very seriously by the community, so I don't think anyone is going to get away with it.
If the second, reports don't have anything to do with this.
If the third, deputy moderation is designed in a way to make it very difficult for a user to get themselves assigned to a particular link's deputy moderation group.
6
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+6
Question, why is my submit history completely gone now? (other than the couple stories i submitted today)
6
raldiApr 29, 2010
+7
ketralnis is investigating that and I'm confident he'll fix it soon.
7
masklinnApr 29, 2010
+3
And speaking about history, is there any chance to ever get the full comment history back? I know I had some good comments back when I was young and not stupid yet, and from time to time I try to find them because they have infos I'd like to give people without remembering/re-typing all of them, and then I'm karma-blocked by most of my comments having been lost in space.
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+9
> it makes the spammers' job dramatically harder.
No, not really.
PS: if your life is already hard enough so that you have to resort to spamming for living, email verification isn't exactly a "hard-labor".
9
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+6
[deleted]
6
octatoneApr 29, 2010
+2
Um, my awards say I'm verified, but i never got a message in my inbox ... did I break something?
2
raldiApr 29, 2010
+7
You verified your email several months ago, perhaps to look into buying a sponsored link, and we've kept your trophy on ice until today.
7
ArmandoPenbladeApr 29, 2010
+1
The bit about downvoted links being considered crummy makes me kind of sad, raldi.
Most of my submissions have zeroed out, in the end, especially early on, just because no one really finds me or my interests worthwhile. . . but I don't want to be treated like a spammer. . . and I don't have a "real" email. Gmail pretty much handles everything for me.
1
raldiApr 30, 2010
+3
You don't submit anywhere near frequently enough for this to be a problem. But if you wanted to submit a burst of five links at once, you'd need to either verify your email or message the moderators of the listnook(s) in question. Unless some of the links get an upvote, in which case you'll be okay.
3
ArmandoPenbladeApr 30, 2010
+3
O.O
I feel like Jesus just spoke to me.
I guess I just like thinking in worst case scenario theoreticals--what IF I suddenly started submitting a lot but people continued to think that I was boring, dumb, or annoying, even though I wasn't actively being malicious, spammy, or the like?
I mean, I guess it's a pretty damned unlikely scenario, and it would have been caught by the old posting limitations anyway (in two years, I've amassed a whopping 270 karma, so I don't see the limitation on my submitting frequency dropping any time soon). . . so, all's well?
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+2
ok I verified but nothing happened. After clicking the link, it went back to the front page.
2
lolocosterApr 29, 2010
+2
Two questions:
1. I'm a moderator [here](/r/pokemontrades "shameless sublistnook plug"), how do I whitelist a person should I ever need to?
2. Why is it so hard for spammers to just make a fake email account like 1012kjhsuiwoihw@hotmail.com? I don't see how just stopping mailinator makes it any harder on them.
Also, great idea (although I mainly like it for the trophy to be honest)
2
legally_noApr 29, 2010
+21
Technically the Conde Nast Digital privacy policy is disturbingly free and open to interpretation.
> for any lawful business purpose
...
> In addition, as our business changes, we may buy or sell various assets. In the event all or a portion of the assets owned or controlled by Service Provider, its parent or any subsidiary or affiliated entity are sold, assigned, transferred or acquired by another company, the information from and/or about our Website users may be among the transferred assets.
source: [privacy policy](http://www.listnook.com/help/privacypolicy)
I don't care what you state on a blog, make it a policy before you request more personally identifiable information.
Only AFTER you update the privacy policy will I consider participating.
[many edits for content and syntax]
21
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+4
Guys, did you think about it 3 seconds at all? You're jumping to a "solution" that everyone else uses, and you know damn well it doesn't work, because spammers have lots of harvested and stolen email addresses.
I know how to curb this problem. I don't know if I should tell you though. Just think for 5 minutes. You should be able to come up with the solution. Don't be mentally lazy. Hint: creating accounts on listnook should be expensive, and getting an account banned for spamming should hurt. (no not money, what else is expensive?)
4
dangerzApr 29, 2010
+32
Just an email tip. I use this and have been successful in limiting the amount of spam received in my normal inbox.
Whenever I sign up for a site (let's say listnook for example), I create a forwarding email address for that site. So let's say my server is coolguyyeah.com, I would create an email address called listnook@coolguyyeah.com and use that account to sign up for the site. That listnook email will forward all email to my main account that is not published anywhere.
I also have a generic stuff@ and junk@ for situations where I don't have the time to create an address. Anything that goes to stuff@ i usually intend on giving its own address and anything that goes to junk@ i know I don't need.
By using this method, I always know which site sold my email address and it's easy to just shut it down without affecting my main account.
I get maybe 2-3 pieces of spam mail each week and they all come from my junk@ account. Once it hits the 5 mark, I'll close it and create a junk1@. Obviously this only works if you have your own domain, but I think gmail supports this (someone with more knowledge there can chime in).
32
digitalundernetApr 29, 2010
+37
Basically you can do the same thing with gmail using the + operator.
email+listnook@gmail.com
37
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+37
Any smart company simply strips out the + details before selling the email addresses.
You have you use a technique like the OP describes to really be safe.
37
henrykApr 29, 2010
+3
Well from my mail logs, trust me, most spammers are unbelievably dumb as hell. They try to send mails to message ids from Usenet postings. They have off-by-one errors in their local part storage and send messages to truncated addresses. They can't handle their databases correctly and send messages to adresses that include their column delimiters (such as "|").
So, yeah, +-subadressing is fine and if you really are concerned with spammers that drop that you can treat mails without a +-part as particularly suspect and have a more aggressive spam filter on them.
Another neat trick: for some time I have been posting on the Usenet with henryk.nospamplease as my local part. This was a fully valid and useful address that just echoed my wish for not receiving spam. However, a lot of spammers apparently string-match for "nospam" and either try to strip it off (trying to deliver to henryk.please) or figure it's no use and ignore the address completely. (There was also a worm some time back that sent massive amounts of mail to Usenet users, but ignored addresses with "nospam" in them.)
Also if you want to get more creative: RFC 2821 allows local parts of the form "Foo Bar", e.g.
"Foo Bar"@example.com
would be a fully valid mail address and I doubt that any spammer will be able to send mail to such an address.
3
TiomaidhApr 29, 2010
+12
Then use dots:
>u.s.ern.ame@gmail.com
12
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+24
Yes, but since those are optional, smart spammers will strip them out.
24
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+47
Which is why mine has dots, and I strip out the dots for my throwaway.
47
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+28
Now that might actually work. :)
28
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+5
You can only do that once if you want to know which site sold your email address. Not very practical.
Actually you still wouldn't know even then, there's a huge amount of dictionary attacks. I get tons of spam on my private-use-only gmail account which happens to be very easy to guess.
5
digitalundernetApr 29, 2010
+3
Well cant you also use a period to do basically the same thing? My school email address has periods between the names so stripping that out wouldnt work.
first.lastname@state.edu
3
resephApr 29, 2010
+6
Smart company? Why? + is valid in an email address.
6
insertAliasApr 29, 2010
+12
But most implementations are like google's. It's a safe assumption that the majority of people using the '+' in an email are using it for filter purposes, and you won't lose much and may gain more by removing it, if your goal is to get in someone's inbox.
12
KingswoodmissalApr 29, 2010
+3
Yes, but smart companies know this trick and will get rid of the "tag" on gmail accounts before selling them. This makes it more difficult to say who actually sold your email, valid address or not.
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+5
[deleted]
5
jedbergApr 29, 2010
+7
Any smart company simply strips out the + details before selling the email addresses.
You have you use a technique like the OP describes to really be safe.
7
theonlyfiveApr 29, 2010
+3
I just use zoneedit and set it to forward anything@mydomain to my gmail account. I can filter it in my gmail. That way, there's no need to create any accounts or anything.
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+1
Have we had the deputy moderation idea implemented yet? I haven't seen the boxes..but I'm using Stylish, so I'm worried it is just blocking it out or something...
1
AzuredApr 29, 2010
+17
I don't know Raldi... this is all just happening so fast. I'm not afraid of commitment but-
**
**
**
17
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+6
[deleted]
6
EatSleepJeepApr 30, 2010
+19
3 of the 10 spammers I just booted from a sublistnook had verified email trophies. It's virtually meaningless.
19
newestmeApr 29, 2010
+1
How come not everyone has the 'new user' trophy? We were all new once
1
FatPantsApr 29, 2010
+5
"Surely, comrades, surely there is no one among you who wants to see the Spammers come back?"
Now if there was one thing that the Listnookors were completely certain of, it was that they did not want the Spammers back. When it was put to them in this light, they had no more to say. The importance of keeping the admins in good health was all too obvious. So it was agreed without further argument that the milk and the windfall apples (and also the main crop of apples when they ripened) should be reserved for the admins alone.
5
corpus_callosumApr 30, 2010
+25
I did my part, because verification guarantees citizenship.
Do you want to know more?
25
moomApr 29, 2010
+16
People who aren't chicken aren't influenced by fear of being called chicken.
16
Commander_AdamaApr 29, 2010
+10
Marty McFly would disagree with your statement.
10
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+6
No offense listnook, but the thing I like about you most is that you don't require my email address. You don't bother me, you let me come to you. I can appreciate your effort to stop the spammers, but I'm going to respectfully opt out of email registering.
6
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+275
This is by far the easiest trophy I have ever earned.
275
catmoonApr 29, 2010
+47
It's like getting the participation award at field day; unable to achieve greater I will cherish it like first prize.
47
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+8
Don't worry, four months and you'll get another ;-)
8
UnnamedPlayerApr 29, 2010
+24
Ah just like an aborted foetus.
24
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+3
One day I'm going to get lucky and be in the right place at the right time and get one of those more prestigious trophies
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+124
I was just rickrolled when I clicked your user page. Nice hat though!
124
ScarkerApr 29, 2010
+18
Looking at his trophy case, I see that he's a suave gift-giving pencil-pushing e-mailer with a f***** for sex with chains.
18
AzuredApr 29, 2010
+21
some sort of internet 'pimp', if you will.
21
SephrApr 30, 2010
+3
It's got nothing on [my user page hat trophy][1].
[1]: http://www.listnook.com/r/view/user/sephr
3
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+19
The white hat is definitely the coolest, though.
For some reason I always imagined that it would be more of a top hat or bowler hat type of look, but the Michael Jackson hat works well too.
19
borezApr 29, 2010
+8
I want a white hat too.
Oh listnook gurus, teach me the ways of the exploit finder, there's a drink in it?
8
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+7
This is by far the first trophy I've ever earned and I don't mean just Listnook.
I would like to thank my mom and dad for supporting me during these 9 months, my sister for cheering me up when I was down and low. I would like to thank God for creating the world in 6 days and shit, but most of all -- *sheds a tear* -- I wanna thank *you* for believing in me. I couldn't have done it without you. Thank you listnookors!
I'm now working on my second trophy: One-Year Club.
7
Commander_AdamaApr 29, 2010
+2
Yep, my first and only trophy so far, so it was definitely the easiest one.
2
EtchiiApr 29, 2010
+28
And what happens when the NSA wants the email addresses for everyone who subscribes to r/conspiracy???
28
foldorApr 30, 2010
+11
Let /r/conspiracy worry about that. And don't worry they will...
11
Bing10Apr 29, 2010
+19
Not accusing, just playing with the title:
"A police experiment: Help us catch criminals by letting us search your house (innocent people have nothing to hide!)"
*edit: they have since changed the title to remove the "(what are you, chicken?)" portion. I'm leaving mine intact for the records*
*edit2: four years later I have "verified" my email address because listnook was making it basically impossible to submit new posts, but I want to be clear, I used a fake address with mailinator.com*
19
recreational_assholeApr 30, 2010
+8
simple. No. I don't want to. I won't. I'll stop logging in before I give you my email address. Eat my d***. I hate you now :(
8
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+32
Now I have two trophies! I can tell my Dad I accomplished something! If only he would answer the phone.
32
YourDadApr 29, 2010
+29
Way to go, slugger!
29
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+11
Thanks Dad! I want you to know what else is going while I have a moment. I am the single best manager at Drunken Donuts. At least I would be if they let me back in the building. They didn't approve of the way I made the holes. When they realize that they could utilize more than half their staff in two positions there by doubling productivity they'll call me. I also shot some footage of a helicopter blade in slow motion. Did you see it?
11
YourDadApr 29, 2010
+6
Was it [this one](http://www.thatvideosite.com/video/camera_shutter_speed_synchronized_with_helicopter_blade_frequency/) with the camera shutter speed synchronized with the helicopter blade frequency? Cos that was awesome.
6
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+3
Yeah, but what you can't see is I'm wearing a dress. The one Mom forgot right before she left with Uncle Stan to Non Of Your God Damn Business. I've looked at a lot of maps and haven't found it. I think it's in Europe.
3
SibelingApr 29, 2010
+29
So, let's see. You have all the IP addresses I connect with, all the user agents of my browsers, you know my specific hobbies (sublistnooks) and through my comments you could probably learn the rest.. And now you want my email address as well?
No harm there me don't think.
29
randomb0yApr 29, 2010
+13
e-mail: randob0y@gmail.com
password: hunter2
Now what?
13
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+60
*looks at his email address*
Yup, thats mine. Verified!
60
hpymondaysApr 30, 2010
+4
I don't see what's all this obsession about spammers. Bad posts get downvoted, don't they? Plus, I have seen so much shit on the front page from "legitimate" users that I don't see how spammers can be worse.
So what? They submit a blog post with ads on it? What's the big deal if it's an interesting blog post?
4
rrossApr 30, 2010
+13
"verification failed" when I clicked on the link in the email?
13
[deleted]Apr 29, 2010
+6
There is no way that I would give my primary email address out to anyone but friends, the kind I actually know. Work address goes only to work contacts, which listnook is not either.
6
craigmjApr 29, 2010
+6
> listnook will never sell your address, bother you with unsolicited email, or anything remotely evil or annoying.
Can we get confirmation that Conde Nast Digital and Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. will not be using our email addresses for "evil or annoying" purposes either? After all, listnook's demographic is one of the most valuable (18-35 year old males).
6
RaerthApr 29, 2010
+4
>Firefox has detected that the server is redirecting the request for this address in a way that will never complete.
:(
edit: disregard that, I have a trophy :)
4
pork2001Apr 29, 2010
+7
I think this is a good step. Although the part about requiring n*** photos might be a little excessive. But it's okay as long as you share the best ones.
7
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+6
Services like http://trashmail.net/ (it even has API) make creating 1000s of accounts no problem when all you have to do is provide an email and click the link in it.
Example: I got tired of waiting for enough people to sign up to Dropbox using my refer link so I could have the extra 8GB. So I wrote a script to sign up 100 accounts using my referrer link. Thanks to trashmail.net it took me less than 30 minutes. Even without them I would have just setup my own mail servers and used a bunch of domains from free DNS services like afraid.org, everydns.net, dyndns.com, zoneedit.com, etc. A CAPTCHA would have slowed me down as I would have had to sit there and type them out, but only because I no longer have a Botnet. Way back when I had 400k infected machines and needed a bunch of CAPTCHAs crunched I just locked down their machines with a prompt to type out the image to unlock.
You need something other than email verification and CAPTCHAs even together they're but a minor inconvenience to a well armed spammer. Don't underestimate a spammer's creativity either. They make a lot of money doing what they do and spend a lot of time thinking of ways to make it easier and faster.
6
digitaldavegordonApr 30, 2010
+3
Hey, can you tell me what Listnook is doing about down vote bots? I know this is slightly off topic but I can't find any information about it anywhere. There is no reason for any real person to post quality links if they get downloaded to oblivion before they can possibly be read. Maybe the e-mail system you are proposing can be applied to accounts with massively disproportionate rates of down votes to up votes.
3
s810Apr 30, 2010
+3
Not to piss on everyone's little validation party, but shouldn't catching spammers be as easy as simply looking at the comment and/or submission history of the account in question?
3
theycallmemortyApr 29, 2010
+16
> (what are you, chicken?)
This from the people who stored my password in plaintext and then lost the server?
16
fergalishApr 30, 2010
+6
Not a great idea the way it's being done. Particulary links with more downvotes than upvotes being crummy. That really sucks. You'll just end up with the majority confirming and entrenching it's own opinions. Who said "the minority is always right, until they become the majority"?
6
redspexApr 30, 2010
+3
well i did it. BUT! I gave you guys a special email I use only for fantasy baseball with a friend. for 2 years this email has been secret, ZERO spam. what do i get this morning? Phishing scam email. I'll screencap if you want to see. is there a way I can take my email off now?
3
c0ldfusi0nApr 30, 2010
+2
After wondering what the hell was going on and talking with jedberg on teh Tweetor, I found out that, on Firefox on both Windows 7 and Xubuntu:
- If you're not logged in, infinite redirection loop will ensue
- Validating your email somehow only necessitates you to click or enter the URL, and you will obtain a trophy on your profile page and be redirected to either the listnook homepage or wherever it is you came from.
I'm not sure whether I had previously validated my email and a hit on /verify just ensures that or if the entire verification is fubar. Either way, shiny trophy.
Edit: Jedberg [confirms](http://twitter.com/jedberg/status/13098206179) that a hit on /verify will redirect you, attribute you the trophy and label you verified - only if you've done it in the past. If you don't remember, chances are you did :)
2
foundatiApr 29, 2010
+12
I'm against harvesting personal contact details, whatever the motive.
Censoring or suppressing user submissions is wrong, whatever the motive.
I can't believe this isn't just a joke. You're really doing this?
12
blergh-Apr 29, 2010
+8
Your computer is currently broadcasting your IP address! Click here to download the IP address hiding toolbar!
8
FurryMoistAvengerApr 30, 2010
+7
You're not doing this via https.. Why?
7
h0deApr 29, 2010
+56
Nice try, NSA.
56
ContentWithOurDecayApr 29, 2010
+6
No way I'm giving up my e-mail address for a worthless trophy.
6
DigitalEvilApr 29, 2010
+3
I use listnook specifically because I don't want to associate my email with my other online accounts. Listnook didn't require this. I hope that this is not a developing trend for this website.
3
r2002Apr 29, 2010
+3
>Links that get more downvotes than upvotes are crummy.
Awesome. This is a great way to get rid of religious folks and Republicans from Listnook. No more dissenting opinions. Yay!
3
[deleted]Apr 30, 2010
+4
Anonimity is fundamental to freedom even if people are happy to voluntarily give up their information.
Giving real information is optional in facebook also.
Will people who don't give their information be seen as more likely to be spammers? If so a two tier system is being made.
Optional or not, this will move listnook another step closer to having the content quality of the comments on youtube.
4
N0tMyRealAcc0untApr 29, 2010
+4
The validation email was caught by my spam filter.
195 Comments