If somebody wants to write a Spam answer, what reason would he have to provide more then 2 spam hyperlinks? Spam to me looks more like this:

Do you need the best product ever on the world?

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. At vero eos et accusam et justo duo dolores et ea rebum. Stet clita kasd gubergren, no sea takimata sanctus est Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.


We already have the review queues among others for detecting and deleting spam. I don't think there would be much more "spam-traffic", if we allow more of hyperlinks.

Yesterday I got an answer:


He commented some hyperlinks, after he has written his answer, because of this restriction.

I understand the problem of spam prevention, but is the current Spam prevention realy worth the costs?

  • 6
    I often see dozens of links in a single spam comment on my blog. I think the fact that they're blocked on Stack Overflow is why we're not seeing them here. – Bill the Lizard Jan 28 '16 at 18:47
  • 1
    The limit is adjustable, e.g. on Skeptics it is much higher than anywhere else. I haven't seen any bad effect due to that, but we never got any significant amount of spam anyway – Mad Scientist Jan 28 '16 at 19:10
  • So this would be a question, that would be asked in the specifc meta pages @MadScientist? However I see the point of Bill the Lizard for the communitys I am intertessted in. – Christian Gollhardt Jan 28 '16 at 19:16
  • 1
    @ChristianGollhardt On a site where an answer is expected to cite references, you can make a good argument that the limit is harmful and you can probably get SE to increase it. I don't know how much spam this limit prevents, only an SE employee could get that data. – Mad Scientist Jan 28 '16 at 19:19

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .