Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Users: Spammer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Scruggs (why?) |
imported>ShadowDancer (spammers and classification) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I understand the intent behind this category (I think), but is it really helpful? I wouldn't like to see a war develop over who deserves classification as a spammer. If a user is placed on this list, is any action taken to monitor his posts? [[User:Scruggs|Scruggs]] 19:27, 9 July 2006 (EDT) | I understand the intent behind this category (I think), but is it really helpful? I wouldn't like to see a war develop over who deserves classification as a spammer. If a user is placed on this list, is any action taken to monitor his posts? [[User:Scruggs|Scruggs]] 19:27, 9 July 2006 (EDT) | ||
:[[User:ShadowDancer|ShadowDancer]] 21:45, 9 July 2006 (EDT): At very least it is an easy way to keep an eye on what should be suspect based on past inclination if they do post something else under that name. It would also make an easy list to follow for banning the user if someone with that ability so desired. It is certainly easy enough to check in the recent changes as to what they did in order to get classified as a spammer so I doubt that a war would develop over this. | |||
Revision as of 20:45, 9 July 2006
I understand the intent behind this category (I think), but is it really helpful? I wouldn't like to see a war develop over who deserves classification as a spammer. If a user is placed on this list, is any action taken to monitor his posts? Scruggs 19:27, 9 July 2006 (EDT)
- ShadowDancer 21:45, 9 July 2006 (EDT): At very least it is an easy way to keep an eye on what should be suspect based on past inclination if they do post something else under that name. It would also make an easy list to follow for banning the user if someone with that ability so desired. It is certainly easy enough to check in the recent changes as to what they did in order to get classified as a spammer so I doubt that a war would develop over this.