No, I don't mean saying, "Hello, can of Hormel-brand tinned meat, I recognize you because of your trademarked label." I mean recognizing and responding to a specific form of abusive behavior here on HIVE and elsewhere on the web.

A Dubious History

How did spam get called spam? Again, not the Slime Presented As Meat, the mass messages. Apparently it all goes back to a Monty Python sketch, which starts about 33 seconds into the clip below.

If this link doesn't work, I'm sure you can search for "Monty Python Spam" on your favorite video hosting platform and find other uploads instead.

According to various sources on the internet (so you know it must be true), in the old days of Bulletin Board Systems, groups of early internet trolls would reference that sketch and flood a BBS with the word "spam" over and over to push active users out. Sometimes these systems could only be accessed by one user at a time, so a spammer could even lock others out of the bulletin board altogether for as long as they kept their connection open.

One way or another, the term "spam" was applied to all unwelcome, repetitive comments on the early internet. It was subsequently applied to e-mail chain letters and unsolicited mass e-mail marketing schemes (Thanks for nothing, Gary) as the natural progression of technology occurred. Web forums, social media, and now our phones are subjected to spam every day, too.

Here on Hive

We have a lot of Hive users who create original content and rely on our blockchain to protect them from corporate censorship as a long-term repository for what they write. We also have some people who want to exploit our ecosystem for short-term profit. Spam is one of the methods used by the latter.

According to Wikipedia, "Spamming is the use of messaging systems to send multiple unsolicited messages (spam) to large numbers of recipients for the purpose of commercial advertising, non-commercial proselytizing, or any prohibited purpose (especially phishing), or simply repeatedly sending the same message to the same user." This overlaps with A.I. slop and plagiarized posts, but I primarily wish to address comment spam.

Such spam may rely on using a bot to automate short generic compliments to farm upvotes from content creators who mistakenly perceive it as genuine engagement, or it may be from a human user manually copy/pasting long tirade comments to random posts, and anything in between.

Recognizing Spam

• Is the comment relevant and specific, or vague and generic? This is the first hint something may be amiss.

• Is English apparently the first language of the writer, or is it a new account? It may be a genuine human being facing a language barrier, or just someone unfamiliar with blog netiquette.

• Do they write anything themselves? Again, new users or people for whom English is a second language may not have many posts or make deep conversational comments at first, so don't be too hasty.

• Does the account comment history show repeated use of the same comment or similar templates? Someone setting such a pattern is more likely to be a spammer than a creator.

• Is the account reputation below 25, or even negative? Odds are they have been engaging in enough poor behavior to be noticed by other active users.

Responding to Spam

If in doubt, reply and try to open dialogue. We want to encourage active users who create and interact. We have a global community with users of diverse ages, many languages, and varying levels of experience with the internet.

If you're sure, downvote it. The prior blockchain which shall remain un-named here used "flags" in the same role as our downvotes. The main Hive.blog site has a downvote button next to the upvote button at the bottom of all posts and comments. PeakD has 3 dots near the upvote and comment buttons with a menu of options including downvoting. InLeo also uses a 3-dot menu, but at top right of posts in the thread and blog feeds next to the estimated read time. I don't think Ecency has a downvote function, but feel free to let me know in the comments if I am mistaken.

Downvoting should be reserved for abusive behavior in my opinion, not mere disagreement with a post. If your reputation is higher than that of the spammer, you will not only reduce the rewards their spam may have earned, but you will also slightly reduce their reputation score.

If you do respond to abusive users, you may be ignored, but you may also be subjected to wild accusations and insults for daring to point out their misbehavior. They will sometimes project their feelings of guilt on you, as though downvoting spam is worse than the spam itself, portraying you as the bad guy. This defensiveness and counterattack is usually just another signal you are dealing with a bad actor angry at being caught. Honest folks will usually try to discuss the matter.

Finally, if someone is willing to change their ways, give them a chance. If you realize you erred in your identification of spam, be willing to apologize and make amends yourself. Everyone makes mistakes. The spammers tend to double down instead of admitting fault. We're better than that.