traz64 said:
Yeah that's just what the prompt looks like. Just leave the title field blank
Started to wonder,
What happens if you fill it in?
slayerduck said:
spam bots we removed
The accounts themselves were removed from the website, not just banned? Why? I thought it was standard practice to just ban rulebreakers, I've never heard of removing their accounts. (What would be the purpose of that?)

And are you sure that that alone explains the situation of all the missing accounts? Again, there are no surviving accounts created on April 6th. It's highly unlikely that every account made on the 6th without exception was a spambot.

Edit: It also doesn't explain how we ended up with those repeat accounts for the same users with no associated IP addresses.
I think the finding similar posts feature broke.
minabiStrikesAgain said:
The accounts themselves were removed from the website, not just banned? Why? I thought it was standard practice to just ban rulebreakers, I've never heard of removing their accounts. (What would be the purpose of that?)

And are you sure that that alone explains the situation of all the missing accounts? Again, there are no surviving accounts created on April 6th. It's highly unlikely that every account made on the 6th without exception was a spambot.

Edit: It also doesn't explain how we ended up with those repeat accounts for the same users with no associated IP addresses.
Why would i want like 30k spam accounts on the database? Banning all of them would take way to lnog
So the vast majority of those 43000 account numbers were actual (spam) accounts that were created in one day? Whoa. o.O

I wasn't implying that it would be more ideal to keep the spam accounts in the database, just that it was unusual to remove them. But if you were dealing with that many then it's an understandable course of action.

I'm still curious though as to how that ended up producing those 12 accounts at the end that are duplicates and mostly don't record IP addresses.
Dreista said:
Spam account found using dmail to spread malicious link.
https://konachan.com/user/show/260258
Thank you for the notification. Account banned.
Another such account here:
https://konachan.net/user/show/260044
Virus total fast scan detected spam and eventually malware.
I can't use that link since I don't have an account on the all-ages site.
I already dealt with it.

BTW, the accounts are the same for both sites, but due to browser cookie security issues you have to log in to each one seperately. Or you could just change the .net to .com in the url.
I was hoping someone had. Thank you.

And thanks for the extra info. That's a neat little trick.
otaku_emmy said:
Thanks for the extra info.
And here's me thinking it's common sense.
:P
My brain is so big that sometimes it doesn't have room for small things like changing the url.
Might just be a glitch on my end, but the find similar posts feature broke.
I can't place anything into my own pool.
It's even on public.
I broke something.
Mr peanut: The only way to add an image to a pool is to use a metatag. The add to pool option on the left side of an image page never worked. The pool you created Knight in shining armour is pool #470 (as shown in the url for that pool) the corresponding metatag is pool:470

I added two images to your pool as a demonstration.....however we have a tag for armor. I will not delete your pool, but other mods may decide the pool is redundant as pools are generally used to collect images from Art books, calendars or works related in some way that generally is not assigned a tag, pools in lieu of what should/could be a general tag is.....generally frowned upon. I would suggest that you propose, in the tag forum, the tag knight.
Kiho said:
Snippity snip.
Thanks.