Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
False positives by the system
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
I've restored Gerrys post (an update to his work in progress)
I think something new has been switched on in the spam detector.
Two different effects. If a reply is made to a thread that is more than a few days old, the system seems to be either marking it as spam, or withholding it from the recent posts queue.
Rhia made a response to my thread in oils 6 days later, but I didn't notice it until I went back into the thread myself. My own response to Rhia, 4 days later again, has not appeared in the recent posts queue
Posted
I think the deal is this, basically - software has been installed to catch a lot of the spam posts; it will sometimes catch those that aren't spam; and as the moderators, we have to be quick in noticing the latter, and levelling the playing-field again. I think it's a good system on the whole - a case of genuine interactivity: and as I remember sitting up into the early hours squashing spam posts that came up as fast as or faster than I put them down - it's a huge improvement on that. There's only one change I regret since Warners took on the site, and that has nothing to do with the technology: there's a Dawn-shaped hole, and I know we're all regretfully aware of it.
Posted
I also believe that the site could be time limited, all the more reason for keeping the forum running and serving a purpose .
If we can convince the powers that be that it’s worth keeping then we could have tbe site longer . It’s simply really just join the the discussion, let it be seen that you are taking part in discussions about art etc. I kin’s it’s not everyone’s cup of teas as they say , but do list a work in progress, mention something you have read in the magazines or just talk about a painting or something you are enjoying doing or struggling with . Just let it be seen that both the gallery and forum are a thriving community.
Posted
I remember Dawn saying a while ago that Warners were seriously considering closing the forum, but she managed to persuade them to keep it going, but without her now to provide support ……... It was, though, just the forum, not the whole site - Alan, you mentioned the site - do you think the whole site might now be under threat?
Edited
by Jenny Harris
Posted
I had thought once or twice of an artist dominated site - and there are a few, probably; but it's a major undertaking and beyond my limited skills to consider trying to create one. I'd join in, if anybody ever did. What Warners will do is going to depend on their commercial interests above all - they must know the Forum helps to support the magazines, they also know that this site is very easy to find on Google, Bing, and so on, which attracts advertisers - and I won't dwell on the downsides from their point of view, not wanting to give them bad ideas.
Nothing lasts forever, so enjoy it while we've got it: it is pretty well unique so for my money is worth preserving; hope the big bosses agree!
Posted
Although this forum is free to join, and is a brilliant community to be part of, I view it as part of the benefits of my magazine subscription (also it is listed and advertised as such)...it would indeed be a great shame to lose the site...so, if it is taken down, that might make some subscribers question the value and benefits of continuing with subscriptions. I might be alone in that thought, but just a thought.
Posted
I'm fairly sure they would keep the site, and perhaps monetise the gallery to subscribers only. But tbh, I'm not sure the ads revenue would cover the cost of maintaining a forum. People are less likely to have real paper these days, so as the magazines drift toward online only, the site will need to generate more cash.
If we get reasonable warning I will happily volunteer to set something up, but moderators on here now would have to do the same on any new site.
Facebook is the easiest to set up, and also free. I could alterantively set up a wordpress site, that would take a longer...it would also have wordpress ads unless we wanted to pay for ad free. (I guess FB would also have ads generated by them)
There are many ready made forum structures, but they all require upwards of £100 pa. Gone were the days when we could something for free!