I think a good idea would be to add the ability to add a CAPTCHA to the Purge Spammer Function. By doing this you are less likely to purge a member if you aren't paying attention. Thoughts?
Yes very true, anyone else who like this?
(2017-06-12, 11:42 PM)Lunorian Wrote: [ -> ]I think a good idea would be to add the ability to add a CAPTCHA to the Purge Spammer Function. By doing this you are less likely to purge a member if you aren't paying attention. Thoughts?
isn't there a few steps required to purge a spammer in the first place though?
Only two clicks, add a CAPTCHA to make it harder; maybe allow us to whitelist certain users.
You could always store the purged data temporarily where it is then cleaned up with a task after a certain amount of time. So if you come to the realization you purged the wrong user after passing all those barriers you can quickly restore their data within that acceptable time frame.
With this you could also throw a new setting in the Purge Spammer feature allowing the ability to specify a specific amount of time before the data is completely destroyed.
It shouldn't be a captcha. That's terrible UX. A confirmation message is enough.
Dont drunk or drug and administratrate/moderate
Problem solved...
in my opinion its not usefull cause it's slowing down the workflow.
(2017-06-23, 07:30 AM)Wage Wrote: [ -> ]You could always store the purged data temporarily where it is then cleaned up with a task after a certain amount of time. So if you come to the realization you purged the wrong user after passing all those barriers you can quickly restore their data within that acceptable time frame.
With this you could also throw a new setting in the Purge Spammer feature allowing the ability to specify a specific amount of time before the data is completely destroyed.
That's a good idea and could be integrated into the task system. If you unpurge - the stopforumspam should also unlist the user.