@LMAO is flooding the site with random communities because they’re salty about being banned for claiming too many community names. They claim they’re trying to “fuck your entire site up” but I imagine it’s a relatively quick fix to delete all the communities they’re creating, LMAO.

  • boonhet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    311
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Looking at his profile

    Since you banned my main for claiming community names, I’ll just fuck your entire site up instead. Much love, Angled

    Yeah can’t imagine why an instance admin might not want this insufferable piece of shit in their instance.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Doesn’t help too much, you can generate infinite email accounts with gmail for an example.

        Manual acceptance of each and every user helps, but it’s not sustainable.

        • Stuka@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Don’t even need that, 1 click temporary email boxes everywhere

          • S_204@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            31
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s what I used… I have no intention of being a troll or asshole, but I don’t want social media like this platform linked to me IRL and never have.

            • Rolder@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Personally I just use a dumping ground email address. Just an address i use for any website I don’t particularly trust that I never look at unless I know there’s a confirmation email waiting for me

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, but a common thing websites do is block those domains, at least the easier to find ones. Nearly nobody blocks gmail.

              • pandacoder@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Some sites do this and it’s annoying. A better check is to compare the part before the + if it’s Gmail.

                • MaxHardwood@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You can add a . anywhere in the username part of a GMail address. u.ser.na.m.e@gmail.com is the same as username@gmail.com

                  • incognito_15@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Whether or not Lemmy supports this at this point, I dunno, but it’s easy enough to code your username verification to remove all +s and periods before continuing to ensure uniqueness.

        • sci@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not if you filter out . and + in gmail addresses.

      • Necronomicommunist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        80
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Idk, seems like this is quite a pivotal time with an influx of users. Be a shame to have the potential growth in community go to waste.

        • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, but they could limit community creation to, say, five a day. That would be more than the vast majority of people would legitimately need.

          • XiELEd@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately that would mean that real communities wouldn’t be created since that would be used up by someone creating spam communities. Though, maybe limiting the amount of communities that could be made by one account in a certain amount of time? What about verification by email (to send a coherent reason) to the admins to create a community.

            • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I was meaning five per day for a given user. That’s why I said that would be plenty for most individuals - most people aren’t legitimately going to want to create more than five communities in a day, and for them it wouldn’t be a hardship to wait a day for another five. But for people like this guy, trying to flood the instance with endless/pointless communities, it would cut that down to a manageable number.

              • XiELEd@lemmy.fmhy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Oh 😅 I’m sorry for misunderstanding. 5 communities per day in a week is 35 communities, which I also thought was a lot. Where do we send our suggestions to the admins though?

        • PlasticExistence@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Counterpoint: we don’t need growth if the cost is the destruction of a good thing. Guided growth is smarter and more sustainable especially when users like the subject of this post aren’t unique. There are a lot of small, mean-spirited people out there who will take a dump all over everything the moment they can.

          • EuphoricPenguin@normalcity.life
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            Eeh, federated platforms add a lot more moving parts to the mix. Since there isn’t a single Lemmy that is all of Lemmy, people can always move to another instance if this one goes to shit.

          • MaybeItWorks@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There are always going to be assholes who abuse the system, always. I agree with the other poster that now is a good time to get communities up and running. People like LMAO have nothing but time to be internet douchebags and find ways around the system.

        • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe, but what’s the alternative? Other trolls seeing this vulnerability and just letting it run?

          I would venture that these assholes just want maximum carnage. Requiring admin approval for a few days while a fix is pushed would mitigate that carnage.

          • dragontamer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, purging them likely isn’t taking that much admin time?

            One click, and bam, all their communities, usernames, etc. etc. are gone.

      • Necronomicommunist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Idk, seems like this is quite a pivotal time with an influx of users. Be a shame to have the potential growth in community go to waste.

      • XiELEd@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Verifying community creation wouldn’t inconvenience users, though it will place a lot of work on the admins having to sift through spam. Limiting the amount of community creations would essentially mean that it will all be used up by spam communities, though.

    • XiELEd@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      He got his fee-fees hurt because others didn’t like that he was trying to be a selfish asshole (shocking) so now he thinks it’s justice to destroy a site and affect multiple people who didn’t even do anything to him. 😂 jfc