Limit email functionality to regular members...?

[ism]

This user sent me an e-mail with this text at around 2PM -5 GMT, using vBulletin's "e-mail this user" feature. As this user registered today, and basically did a hit-and-run 1-poster on the board, I consider it spam. Is it possible to limit the "e-mail this user" feature to someone who has posted a reasonable number of messages first?

[alliisson]

hit and run??

I emailed you the information because you seemed to declare yourself on another thread as a Gore supporter....

how is that a hit an run?

you could probrably direct your comments directly to me ...
it would be a lot less rude

[himura-dono]

well, ism didn't say it was you. so it's not rude. you declaring yourself as the one, and then getting perturbed that he kept your identity anonymous is rude.

[ism]

well, ism didn't say it was you. so it's not rude. you declaring yourself as the one, and then getting perturbed that he kept your identity anonymous is rude.

Well, to be fair, this topic was split off the original post in which I replied to her. I did identify her as "this user."

I suggested a feature enhancement to prevent abuse of the e-mail functionality, and that suggestion is directed at the administration. In retrospect, my proposed solution has several flaws. New users could simply spam the forums until the required number of posts were reached. On the false-positive end, a new user with a legitimate reason would be blocked.

The first action -- sending me an unsolicited e-mail -- I define as an abuse of the system. Unsolicited e-mail, from someone I do not know, I consider spam. Spam, by definition, is rude. Before any action, I did visit the forums to look up the user info, found that they registered the same day, had one post (an identical message) in the wrong forum (later moved by admin). If the person was a regular lurker, then the message would have been in the correct location, and there would have been no need to e-mail me a message I would see on my next visit to the forums. The user hasn't posted any messages other than that and the response to me about it.

If the person was a regular than the e-mail would have been acceptable. I am, however, somewhat comforted by the fact that I was apparently chosen based on criteria involving possible interest. In the end, I am rather displeased with spam entering my mailbox through a trusted loophole.

[himura-dono]

hrm, this sounds more like she should have clicked the pm function instead. even i don't use the email function except once with meena.

maybe she was trying to start an offshoot dialogue with you and not one cluttered with an entire board of users?

[achtungbaby]

Well, to be fair, this topic was split off the original post in which I replied to her. I did identify her as "this user."

I suggested a feature enhancement to prevent abuse of the e-mail functionality, and that suggestion is directed at the administration. In retrospect, my proposed solution has several flaws. New users could simply spam the forums until the required number of posts were reached. On the false-positive end, a new user with a legitimate reason would be blocked.

The first action -- sending me an unsolicited e-mail -- I define as an abuse of the system. Unsolicited e-mail, from someone I do not know, I consider spam. Spam, by definition, is rude. Before any action, I did visit the forums to look up the user info, found that they registered the same day, had one post (an identical message) in the wrong forum (later moved by admin). If the person was a regular lurker, then the message would have been in the correct location, and there would have been no need to e-mail me a message I would see on my next visit to the forums. The user hasn't posted any messages other than that and the response to me about it.

If the person was a regular than the e-mail would have been acceptable. I am, however, somewhat comforted by the fact that I was apparently chosen based on criteria involving possible interest. In the end, I am rather displeased with spam entering my mailbox through a trusted loophole.Regarding restricting email privileges, it's something we'll consider, however, any system we set up will have its loopholes. Another option would be to go into your user cp and disallow members from sending you email.

[ism]

Regarding restricting email privileges, it's something we'll consider, however, any system we set up will have its loopholes. Another option would be to go into your user cp and disallow members from sending you email.

In retrospect, any limitation on sending e-mail would block legitimate communication attempts, and that's something I wouldn't like to see. Like you said, it becomes each individual user's responsibility to control communication options and not force everyone else to follow the same. I am reversing my position on restricting e-mail functionality. It's something I'll deal with on my end.

Regarding the original event, I would have preferred a PM until some more solid relationship was formed. I know I probably look really uppity about the whole thing, but spam's one of the few things that really irks me. After setting up SpamAssassin with a huge corpus to train the Bayesian filter in addition to DCC's fuzzy checksums and Razor2 and Pyzor's colloborative filtering, I pretty much shut the door on spam, and seeing this spam get through really got to me.

[mr. x]

on the subject could someone explain why im not getting any emails notifications?

[achtungbaby]

on the subject could someone explain why im not getting any emails notifications?You might wanna check your junk mail settings. Because of the viruses going around, YW mail has been getting spoofed a lot...

[achtungbaby]

http://forums.yellowworld.org/showthread.php?t=10562