Don’t really know what the right way to call it is, but someone/some bot is spamming this post everywhere, even in the comments sections:
ttps://youtube.com/watch?v=IE96LokdvH8 We weren’t in the MLS at 35

EDIT: it even spammed in this comment section

  • eatmoregreenfood@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Did block. Still annoying. What is the kbin solution for obvious spam bots? If say the instance gets overran you can’t block a thousand accounts and still use the medium effectively. There has to be some sort of back end oversight on this

    • ernest@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      An admin can ban such an account or clear its content. The admin can “delete” an account, in which case all posts are erased, but replies from other users in the threads remain. They can also “purge” an account, in which case all posts, along with replies, and all actions are completely purged.

      I am also considering a change in the Roadmap and replacing one of the points with improving moderation tools and implementing basic anti-spam protection or early warning alerts. I didn’t realize it would be so significant at this stage either ;)

      • meldroc@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Definitely, asshole control is necessary. Do Fediverse instances have ways to exchange block lists? Or mutually agree not to pass on posts flagged as spam, hate, etc.?

    • rastilin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Beyond the admin just deleting the account. There’s the progressively more nuclear option of blocking that IP address and blocking that entire ISP from posting. There are sites that do that to control spam.

        • Trebach@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          The only time I’ve had to block a group of IP addresses, it was multiple addresses in that block performing the same behavior, so any overreach was just time saved.