I wholeheartedly believe that more social sites should use 'invite trees' as their primary abuse prevention mechanism.

It doesn't even need to limit the amount of invites, or anything like that - all it needs to do is keep track of who brought in a given user. It's a minimal invasion of privacy, and allows you to eliminate large swathes of sockpuppets and spam accounts at once through their common ancestor.

This is something that startups are unlikely to implement, because it would conflict with their "userbase growth at all costs" goal. But community sites have no such constraint.

Captchas are dead, by the way. Turns out that the one thing LLMs can actually do well, is the thing that we would want them to be unable to do.

@joepie91 since you didn't mention it, lobste.rs is a good example of this in practice

@joepie91 Do you think the tree should be public? (like lobsters)

@eloy I'm not personally convinced that that is a requirement for it to work as intended, and it does decrease the privacy, so no, probably not

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.