Some clarity required on reporting dead links in PATM.

[tonanti]

I am sure I am not the only one who gets frustrated upon finding a much searched for clip only to find that the listed download link is dead. I do my best to contribute to the forum by reporting these dead links. I had noticed that the FF Filefactory links that I reported were not getting removed. A MOD explained that the MODs use a script to identify dead links and there was a glitch in that FF links did not show up as dead, therefore they did not actually click on the link to verify it was dead and just attributed it to the posters error.

Another MOD has recently told me this.
We use a script that automatically selects posts with all dead links and edits posts with dead mirrors. Posts with all links dead, including FF, are detected as dead, but when there are other alive mirrors with FF they are not edited to remove FF links.

We are aware of this problem, but manual edition takes a lot of time, and FF is not a very used filehost, so it's not a big deal. Just don't report posts with dead FF mirrors, only with all links dead.

I don’t know if other posters are aware of this recommendation? It would be beneficial to all if this was made public knowledge as it would stop people wasting time on reporting dead links that MODs are not going to action. I personally use FF if it’s the only working filehost and also if I have exhausted all my other filehosts.

I have also noticed that hidden links and “Removed at request of claimed rights holder” even when reported are left in situ, often when they are the only link in that post and often years old. Can you please clarify the procedure on these, useless line entries?

I appreciate the posts that content providers make and many ask for the thanks button to be used, may I ask that the MODs (Many of whom are content providers) reciprocate the thanks when various board members take the time and effort to report the dead links for the good and benefit of all.

[DoctorNo]

Originally Posted by tonanti

I have also noticed that hidden links and “Removed at request of claimed rights holder” even when reported are left in situ, often when they are the only link in that post and often years old. Can you please clarify the procedure on these, useless line entries?

There are no hidden links in PATM.

The system leaves posts marked “Removed at request of claimed rights holder” so the poster, and anyone else concerned, knows why the content of the post was erased. Such posts are removed in their entirety when we do thread cleaning. Removing them is not a priority since they do not have dead links that could prevent people from posting the same content.

[tonanti]

When I say “hidden links” I refer to the download links that have asterisks in their make up as mentioned here
http://veterperementour.ru/t832270-po...-quotquot.html My apologises for not using the correct title of “Dead File Host Links Censored”

Is there any way of leaving some information in the posts marked “Removed at request…” so that we know what the title, stars, date, etc actually was? At present there is a blank box with no information. No one knows what the content of the post was. I am sure on the grand scale of things that when they are left there for years on end they collectively build up and drain the system of speed and space.

[jenny48549]

Originally Posted by tonanti

When I say “hidden links” I refer to the download links that have asterisks in their make up as mentioned here
http://veterperementour.ru/t832270-po...-quotquot.html My apologises for not using the correct title of “Dead File Host Links Censored”

Is there any way of leaving some information in the posts marked “Removed at request…” so that we know what the title, stars, date, etc actually was? At present there is a blank box with no information. No one knows what the content of the post was. I am sure on the grand scale of things that when they are left there for years on end they collectively build up and drain the system of speed and space.

No, there is not. We have nothing to do with anything that happens when anyone sees that message in a post.

[DoctorNo]

Originally Posted by tonanti

Is there any way of leaving some information in the posts marked “Removed at request…” so that we know what the title, stars, date, etc actually was? At present there is a blank box with no information. No one knows what the content of the post was.

Last I checked, the title field is not erased, so the only way some information would be left is if the poster put that information in the title field.

Putting the title, stars, date, etc. in the title field is good practice. However, it's not required by the PATM rules, which only require that titles are clearly written in the text of the post.

[RobKellyyy]

Just curious...i have a question about the dead links/threads.

Is there a reason why they still show up in search results?

[DoctorNo]

Originally Posted by RobKellyyy

Just curious...i have a question about the dead links/threads.

Is there a reason why they still show up in search results?

The PATM - Dead Links section is part of Pornstars/Adult and Teen Models (PATM). So if you search all of PATM, it will also search the Dead Links section.

Please see here about searching specific sections and the "Also search in Sub-Forums" option:

http://veterperementour.ru/showpost.p...&postcount=407

[Wallingford]

Originally Posted by RobKellyyy

Just curious...i have a question about the dead links/threads.

Is there a reason why they still show up in search results?

If I am understanding the question correctly, one reason dead links are not entirely removed is to preserve the post count of long standing members.

Just hypothetical numbers, if a poster has 1000 posts since 2013 and now 800 of them, by reason of age, or "removed by request" or whatever other reason, that poster would be penalized to just 200 posts. That would dramatically effect reputation points, and whatever other metrics used on the board.

Hope that helps.

[Gwynd]

Originally Posted by Wallingford

If I am understanding the question correctly, one reason dead links are not entirely removed is to preserve the post count of long standing members.

Just hypothetical numbers, if a poster has 1000 posts since 2013 and now 800 of them, by reason of age, or "removed by request" or whatever other reason, that poster would be penalized to just 200 posts. That would dramatically effect reputation points, and whatever other metrics used on the board.

Hope that helps.

Removing 'Dead Links' to a 'non-public' section of the board, in contrast to 'Hard Deleting the post' has no bearing on the 'post count' of a member

For a variety of reasons, we do not, as a general rule, 'hard delete' posts.

The reason 'Dead Links' posts in PATM were originally removed to 'PATM Dead Links' was due to a mass die off of filehosts, which were used in large numbers as 'PATM required hosts' and we wanted to make it easier for members to find their own posts to re-up, or for people to contact members and ask for a re-up.

We move posts containing PATM dead links to non-public sections and no-one knows what was here, or who posted it.

Unfortunately, the tools we use to find 'dead links' or 'censored links' or 'removed by claimed copyright holder' links, only know that there are no 'live links,' not why - so it can sweep 'dead' and 'removed by claimed copyright holder' as being 'dead' - censored are a bit more complicated.

[jenny48549]

Hard or soft deleting posts will reduce post count of a member by the way.