Re: [Jaws-project-developers] More spam ideas

[DrSlump <dr...@dr...>]

Jon Wood wrote:

>>Even when a post is considered spam the submitter should have the chance 
>>to prove the system wrong. To acomplish this, in the case a comment is 
>>considered as spam the submitter is presented with a turing test to 
>>prove he is a human :)
>>
>>    
>>
>Just because someone can pass a Turing test doesn't mean they aren't a
>spammer.
>
>According to the sites I was reading a large number of spammers actually
>seem to be doing it by hand, since they hit less common blogging tools
>(such as Jaws I guess), which automated tools are likely to be
>unavailable for.
>
>Jon
>  
>
Sure, you're right.
I guess it gets much more difficult to fight people posting spam by hand.
However, if there is someone adding spam, then he/she should read the 
page, so what about adding showing a visible warning on the page 
explaining that search engine won't parse the comments?

Showing the comments in a separate page, protecting it from search 
engines by parsing the request's headers and with the robots.txt file.
This has the drawback that the comments won't show in the same page, 
although they could be included with JS remote calls or a simple iframe.

ciao,
ivan