Proposal: disable most links in the chat

Cathy

Banned deucer.
#1
I would like to propose that most links in the Pokemon Showdown chat be disabled. What I am envisioning is that the links would display as plaintext (like http://example.com), so you could still choose to copy and paste them into your address bar, but you would not be able to accidentally click on them.

There would be a whitelist of "safe sites" like smogon.com, wikipedia.org, google.com, and so on. The whitelist would not include sites that allow for hosting arbitrary images (because they could be shock images/porn/etc.), nor would it include arbitrary redirect sites (like tinyurl).

URIs on the whitelist would be turned into clickable links.

This proposal is primarily intended to protect users from offensive, sketchy, or malicious sites. I have noticed that every time I am on the chat, a lot of highly dubious links get posted. I'm afraid to click on them myself, and often reactions from users confirm that the links are shocking. It's very possible to accidentally click on a dubious link, e.g., if the chat scrolls when you mean to click on something else.

Stripping out all links would be inconvenient, which is why I am proposing the compromise of keeping the text in the posts, but making them not clickable. This way you could never accidentally click on a sketchy site, but you could still go to one if you really wanted.

I would also propose a command you can use to enable all clicks being clickable if you really want to (like /enablelinks). My proposal is to make the default be that most links are disabled (shown as plaintext, not clickable links) but links on the safe site whitelist are clickable.

As I said, this proposal is primarily intended to protect users. I've mentioned my proposal on the main chat and people had positive reactions. This thread is to solicit comment on the forum.
 

Woodchuck

actual cannibal
is a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnus
#2
If we are doing this I would leave google.com off the whitelist, as users would simply be able to link a google search link that leads to the site they are showing:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...ej-ukVeakTgwonqt2narbYg&bvm=bv.41867550,d.cGE

this actually leads back to www.google.com but who can tell?

i'm pretty ambivalent about this but i suppose it could reduce the number of users who would click on dubious links and would still allow us to ban for obviously bad shock sites. unfortunately pokemon showdown battles will probably be whitelisted, but you can't have everything...

supporting
 

Cathy

Banned deucer.
#3
I have discussed this idea somewhat extensively on IRC and on the lobby chat and even though there's only been one reply here, support has been broad and I haven't heard any opposition, so I propose to go forward with this and construct the actual whitelist.

Here is a first draft to get started:

  • pokemonshowdown.com
  • smogon.com
  • upokecenter.com
  • wikipedia.org
  • github.com

Google searches will be allowed using the existing syntax ( [[keyword]] ) but not by constructing a link to google.com, since that can be used to link to arbitrary sites.

Feel free to propose any other sites for the whitelist. In general, we'll be able to add sites without restarting the server since this will be in the client. So it won't be a big deal if we need to add more sites later, but it won't hurt to propose more now either.
 
#4
Maybe just general Pokemon sites like serebii, bulbapedia, or nugget bridge? There's nothing malicious and they could come up in chat a bit, so there's no harm not to include them
 

Zarel

Not a Yuyuko fan
is a member of the Site Staffis a Battle Server Administratoris a Programmeris a Pokemon Researcheris an Administrator
Creator of PS
#5
veekun.com
bulbagarden.net
serebii.net
nuggetbridge.com
reddit.com
gamefaqs.com
facebook.com
twitter.com
tumblr.com
deviantart.com
pokecommunity.com
pokemonlab.com
pokemon-online.eu
pokecheck.org

I don't see a strong reason to disallow competitors.
 
#8
Couldn't websites like reddit and tumblr lead to nsfw/shock images?
deviantart and facebook also have the potential to have "mature" images hosted, so I would leave those out too.
If you guys want to get picky about this, we can only allow certain subreddits or facebook pages to be posted on the server and settle it on a case by case basis. For example we can allow something like /r/wheredidthesodago or Smogon's Facebook page. Given that most reddit links posted on the server haven't been all that malicious (bar advertisers, who are easy to silence), reddit has been fairly clean in terms of what content has been linked. I actually should give credit to those people posting the reddit links for at least being wise and not linking to NSFW stuff. Deviantart and facebook have been mainly used for advertising, and if you really want an image to be seen from facebook it isn't that hard to copypaste the image link and transfer it over to imgur.com. You don't even have to log in to an account in order to post images on imgur.
 

Cathy

Banned deucer.
#9
Deviantart and facebook have been mainly used for advertising, and if you really want an image to be seen from facebook it isn't that hard to copypaste the image link and transfer it over to imgur.com. You don't even have to log in to an account in order to post images on imgur.
Note: sites that are primarily for hosting arbitrary images, such as imgur, will not be on the whitelist, because one of the main purposes of the whitelist is to avoid links to shock images and porn.
 

Zarel

Not a Yuyuko fan
is a member of the Site Staffis a Battle Server Administratoris a Programmeris a Pokemon Researcheris an Administrator
Creator of PS
#10
I'm allowing DeviantART and Facebook because although they both allow image hosting, they both have strict guidelines and images that violate those guidelines are taken down quickly and result in sanctions for the uploader. Facebook does not allow NSFW images and DeviantART does not show NSFW images by default.
 

Cathy

Banned deucer.
#11
I don't have a problem with DeviantART and Facebook but I think we should reconsider tumblr. I don't know if it has content guidelines, but if it does, they are either extremely liberal or not enforced, as I am aware of many tumblr accounts hosting shock images.
 

Joim

Pixels matter
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Programmer Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnus
#12
Despite I doubt there's a real need for this (click vs copypaste), I'll agree it might help and it's a good measure in case no mods are watching to kick/mute or warn people.
 
#14
I don't see why not. There's no real reason for it, and there's reasons for it, so it seems like something that could be implemented.


The list so far. said:
veekun.com
bulbagarden.net
serebii.net
nuggetbridge.com
reddit.com
gamefaqs.com
facebook.com
twitter.com
tumblr.com
deviantart.com
pokecommunity.com
pokemonlab.com
pokemon-online.eu
pokecheck.org
pokemonshowdown.com
smogon.com
upokecenter.com
wikipedia.org
github.com
youtube.com
 

Zarel

Not a Yuyuko fan
is a member of the Site Staffis a Battle Server Administratoris a Programmeris a Pokemon Researcheris an Administrator
Creator of PS
#16
Users posting battle links is good for user engagement and leverage the synergy of social networking to paradigm shift into capturing the long tail!

tl;dr: users feel happy when they post battle links, and I want users to be happy
 

Worldtour

aka Swamp-Rocket
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
#17
Yeah, I have to disagree on Tumblr as well. DeviantArt has regulations relating to how old you have to be to see an image (and logged in), but I don't know about Tumblr. I once searched "Drayden Pokemon" on Google just 'cause, and iirc every image that was inappropriate was from Tumblr. I DON'T know what happens if you actually visit the site to see if they have regulation since I've tried to avoid it, but I sorta have my doubts that it is very well regulated.
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
#20
While I get the purpose of this 'whitelist' so to speak I would still advise against implementing this. because the lobby as it is has a barebones social functionality and linking stuff goes a long way in encouraging discussions.


You can argue copy-pasting can serve the same purpose, it's actually harder than it sounds on a chat which constantly keeps on scrolling up and takes out the immediacy and the practicality of sharing a link in the first place.



While it can be abused, so can any other feature be where you give freedom to the user. Anything that can potentially be abused will be abused. The lobby is usually well moderated so I personally don't see a reason to take away the little liberties allowed to the users like this. I believe in a need to put a little faith in users.

I for one personally like linking a lot of images/GIFS to keep the chat entertaining. Makes for good engagement and keeps people happy.


If I may say so I would like to suggest a middle ground where only registered users can post links. That should go a long way in taming troll flaming. because I know the kind of people Cathy is talking about. But people who have been around long enough know where to draw the line.
 

Dusk209

No relation.
is a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#21

Everything in this post is absolutely true. I'm sure it would make people very angry to have to copy/paste links. In addition to Soul Fly's suggestion to disallow unregistered users to post links, I suggest a website blacklist - it would have redirect sites such as tinyurl and it would also include .tk links. It would be great if moderators or other auths could add or remove websites from the blacklist through the use of a command, if only until the next server restart.

But seriously, if we're going to use a whitelist, please make it less strict.
 

Snowflakes

Dango Dango Daikazoku
is a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#23
registered users posting links is a good idea but atm you can either do 1v1cc or register via forums which takes 20 seconds and i doubt that'd deter many from posting the links we're attempting to block anyway. i personally like you dislike the whitelist cause seriously if you click a link without even knowing what it is it's your own fault ?_?.
 

michael

m as in mancy
is a Battle Server Admin Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
#24
i don't know about non-mods (it's been so long at this point), but i'm almost literally sick to death of clicking every imgur/tumblr/4chan link i see in the main chat to see if it's porn/gore/nsfw, and checking if every .swf is a screamer.

every time one gets posted, it completely disrupts the chat, with people yelling "don't click that" and other users asking why. for that reason, i'd like a whitelist for posted links.

registered users being allowed would never work; many ban evaders register accounts to get around /modchat true so that they can spam again. the same would happen here.
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
#25
registered users posting links is a good idea but atm you can either do 1v1cc or register via forums which takes 20 seconds and i doubt that'd deter many from posting the links we're attempting to block
registered users being allowed would never work; many ban evaders register accounts to get around /modchat true so that they can spam again. the same would happen here.

Well First of all, it will avoid the constant spam flow.

Secondly. I believe that IP banning has already been implemented, and proxy connections are automatically disconnected so I don't see how a flame troll can get away from it more than twice.
Multiple accounts won't do good in such a situation either.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)