New user verification system - feedback

AnthonySmith

Let's have it then, based on my own observations the change required is obvious.

I am going to change it so that no one even sees the thread to vote on until they have made an actual post doing and introduction, I will make that a clear requirement.

If you are going to suggest changes or changes to numbers and requirements, please provide justification, like if not 5, why not 5. Nothing needs to be war and peace just give me a clue why you think what you think.

As a reminder the previous system was 1 question and 1 person deciding, it's just more visible now.

And the purpose was to reduce friction for new members to join and actually participate.

Not_Oles

@AnthonySmith said: I am going to change it so that no one even sees the thread to vote on until they have made an actual post doing and introduction, I will make that a clear requirement.

Thanks for improving new user onboarding! Thanks for being, as always, open to feedback!

What you just suggested here, holding the thread until the new user actually makes a post, sounds like a big improvement! I'm eager to see how much it helps!

For convenience, please let me repeat the suggestion to consider asking new users Ken Thompson's lunch-at-Google question: "What are you working on?"

Thanks again! Always best wishes!

Tom

MichaelCee

With the current system, I don't think a new user should be banned at -5 points. None of what I've seen has really called out as being bot/ai behaviour.

At most, it's just been low quality responses.

I think with the current flow, instead of banning them they should have limited access until their overall karma reaches a certain level. It gives the users a chance to prove themselves outside of their registration thread.

I think the registration thread could serve as a fast-track for certain access.

If possible, of course.

Lee

The home page has a lot of new user threads. Can they not be put somewhere else? It just seems quite polluted and distracting.

MichaelCee

@Lee said:
The home page has a lot of new user threads. Can they not be put somewhere else? It just seems quite polluted and distracting.

Suggestion?

Two throwaway ideas from me would be

1. Put them in the sidebar in the style of the sidebar columns
2. Shrink them like the Show LES posts

Lee

@MichaelCee said: Put them in the sidebar in the style of the sidebar columns

That ^^ People can see them, but not as a thread on the home page; you will end up with times that all the home page is going to be is new user threads.

cmeerw

Why an additional step? Why not have the introduction as part of the questions on the initial sign-up form? But maybe add some ideas about what people should talk about there (like "What are you working on?", "What is your favorite OS and why?") and maybe have some very basic filtering that enforces a minimum number of characters/words for the introduction. Definitely remove unrelated questions like "cats/dogs" or "pushups" - answers to those questions don't provide any value and just trigger useless comments.

So what about just a single "Introduce yourself (talk about topics such as what you are working on, your favorite operating system, your experience with system administration, and why you want to join this forum)" question with a minimum of 20 words?

The idea is just to see if they can write one or two sentences that make some sense, but not to make it any more difficult as necessary to join.

david3

Maybe with the new checks in place:

Register > Pass through Cloudflare Turnstyle > Check against stopforumspam black list

That would be enough to just create the new user. If they start posting spam, the down votes or reporting should be able to hide it until they're blocked.

AnthonySmith

I might be being too idealistic or naive, but the idea was to actually get new users interacting, as previously we got 1 or 2 per day that then never post.

Idk, just something to consider.

david3

You could just make the only other requirement a new post, too (instead of the questions).

Not_Oles

@cmeerw said:
Why an additional step? Why not have the introduction as part of the questions on the initial sign-up form? But maybe add some ideas about what people should talk about there (like "What are you working on?", "What is your favorite OS and why?") and maybe have some very basic filtering that enforces a minimum number of characters/words for the introduction. Definitely remove unrelated questions like "cats/dogs" or "pushups" - answers to those questions don't provide any value and just trigger useless comments.

So what about just a single "Introduce yourself (talk about topics such as what you are working on, your favorite operating system, your experience with system administration, and why you want to join this forum)" question with a minimum of 20 words?

The idea is just to see if they can write one or two sentences that make some sense, but not to make it any more difficult as necessary to join.

+1 ☀️

yoursunny

@MichaelCee said:
Shrink them like the Show LES posts

We prefer this solution.

@david3 said:
You could just make the only other requirement a new post, too (instead of the questions).

Keep the questions.
We love to see the push-up counts.
P.S. our answer to that question would be “22”.

Not_Oles

It's not too much to ask new users to answer a question or a few questions.

calibernode

I love the new onboarding system. Since this was implemented before I joined I'm afraid I can only do 2 pushups. Maybe 3 if I've had caffeine and a bathroom break.

somik

I'll just repost:

Well, looks like you will have very few signups at the rate this is going:
https://lowendspirit.com/categories/new-members

Most people are busy downvoting new members since:

• Their name isn't shown if they downvote
• No justification is required to downvote
• They assume everyone joining is a bot

To be honest, looks like the new member system needs a complete rework. Leaving it up to community was a good idea but since there is no accountability, people are just doing whatever they want.

Since your target is to "increase" user count, getting most new signups banned seems the opposite of what you want for LES.

So this is what I propose. Feel free to pick and choose what you like:

• Use the old system of letting mods/admins validate new users
• Let the new users on "provisional" access, where they need "X" posts in existing threads (or X karma points) before they can open a discussion.
• Just like upvote, record who is downvoting. No need to make it public, just something visible only to mods/admins only.
• Make the downvote more involved. Like reporting, it should ask the user why they are downvoting the post, specially if you want to keep the +5/-5 vote/downvote rule for new users.

nullnothere

I think there are a lot of good useful and valid suggestions all around.

My main point/request is that we should be welcoming of new users without really being overrun by them (or AI+bots rather).

It is nice to have (select/opt-in) visibility so that it doesn't crowd/dilute the main page. Have a threshold so that they can't really post a discussion without hitting that limit. If they are the right kind of users, their karma will eventually tell and everyone will know.

There shouldn't be anything against lurkers (I myself am one) - they mostly read and possibly participate occasionally.

PHP_Backend

My suggestions:

• New user can only comment until they reach certain karma/upvote.
• A thread for new user introduction where they can comment about themselves, allowing them to get some upvote.
• Downvotes must be visible to mod/admin
• Introductory thread on dashboard will pollute it if there's handful of them.

WJJ

In my opinion, new registrations should be subject to the standard anti bot, anti spam measures, I.e. cloudflare and anti spam blacklist to weed out the obvious non-humans.

After that, a mandated, "low effort but some effort" post in a new user discussion thread. Followed by the unlocking of the rest of the forum features and privileges.

I feel the whole community upvote/downvote system is a bit of a Ferrari level solution to a Fiat level problem (no disrespect to your time and efforts meant here, Ant).

Do we really need to proactively police new user registrations, or can we use the reactive (and recently improved) flagging features to weed out bad apples as and when? Ultimately, these users would then be identified organically through their own choice of forum behaviour, rather than artificially through a set of (mostly) silly questions that lack depth.

Neoon

I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

Neoon

I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

somik

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

rpqu

@somik said:

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

LMAO

msatt

Newbies that register and do not participate are a waste of everyone's time.
If someone wants to join they must participate - this is a forum not a one way street.
Posting in their own intro message should be mandatory.
Re 'policing' - It should not be down to @AnthonySmith to make the decisions, he (quite correctly) wants us to do some work.
I understand the 'pollution' of the board comments, but WE are the users and WE benefit from the new blood. So WE should be moderating.
The intro threads should be visible to all, I suggest on the rhs and make it collapsible.

somik

@msatt said:
Newbies that register and do not participate are a waste of everyone's time.
If someone wants to join they must participate - this is a forum not a one way street.
Posting in their own intro message should be mandatory.

Disagree. People are free to do what they want. If you want to force them to participate, they'll just move off to another place.

Neoon

@rpqu said:

@somik said:

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

@Neoon said:
I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

I like it, it makes LES unique, keeps the obvious spammers outside.

LMAO

I blame cloudflare.

angstrom

(I posted a comment in the thread "Feature Requests for LES" because I hadn't yet seen the present thread)

https://lowendspirit.com/discussion/comment/238731/#Comment_238731

Falzo

my suggestion would be:

make it more automated.

the rating stuff is a good idea, but I don't think it requires a separate thread for each new signup which itself creates noise.

instead let the user register normally (with the captcha and question stuff) and curate the access those new members will have access to,be given, like only posting in requests/general/off-topic, but not in offers or transfers or the likes.

more access will depend on getting karma along the way. simple as that. once someone received +20 individual thanks or so, they gain (post) access to other categories or read access to special offers and the likes.

if they however get to overall -10 pretty quick, ban them.

this is essentially still similar to your way now, but decoupled from a dedicated thread and more naturally require the new plebs to post/engage positively.

for negative topics opened by that new member, you still have the community enabled to get rid of the member pretty quick, without a moderator being involved. to avoid spamming maybe allow only 1 topic per 24h and also post rate limit for those new members anyway

AnthonySmith

@angstrom said:
(I posted a comment in the thread "Feature Requests for LES" because I hadn't yet seen the present thread)

https://lowendspirit.com/discussion/comment/238731/#Comment_238731

Yep, that's why we are having this chat

The questions are stupid, they were supposed to be fairly random and unlikely to be encountered when registering on forums, the thinking being: bot defeat through obscurity.

I was probably over focusing on that goal rather than the right goal of reducing friction for new users.

It's great to get everyone's feedback, I asked for it in advance months ago but I appreciate people don't know what they want until they see what they don't want.

I was happy to try and get it wrong and adapt, better than not trying at all.

Based on the average of everyone's comments I am thinking we do the following.

• 1 new members thread for all new members.
• New members register with 1 question, which has a minimum length requirement for the answer.
• That question generates their first post in the dedicated thread.
• They have limited access until they have +5 karma
• No more voting system for new members.

That fixes the stupid question problem, the "spam" problem, the "I don't want to help" problem, the friction on onboarding problem, what's the right amount of karma for voting problem, and the registration to scrape deals only problem.

AnthonySmith

Yeah basically what @Falzo said as I was typing that haha

DP

@msatt said: If someone wants to join they must participate - this is a forum not a one way street.

True, but not necessarily.

Some people join a forum just to browse around, look at discussions, keep up with deals/offers, without actively participating.

Every forum would probably have some old accounts that visit occasionally but rarely interact - perhaps because they have other priorities or simply don't feel the need to engage in discussions.

I mean, sure, participation can add value (depending on what's being contributed), but not everyone wants to actively engage, and you can't really force people to participate or make it a requirement just to be part of the forum.

Well, technically, you could force it through rules, but I don't think that would be a good idea

Just my $0.02.

msatt

@DP said: Some people join a forum just to browse around, look at discussions, keep up with deals/offers, without actively participating.

Everyone can browse and look at discussions without joining already. It is simply 'joining' should mean I want to participate.

@somik said: Disagree. People are free to do what they want. If you want to force them to participate, they'll just move off to another place.

If someone is looking for deals they can still find them here (assuming the providers don't add blocks etc). We are talking about joining / participating. As far as move off - everyone is free to choose why should joining effect this?