Google could probably stop about 60% of the spam in its communities simply by banning any post that begins with "Hello Dear".

Post has shared content
As a moderator of this community, I feel that Google+ needs some really important features to avoid spam. I've already posted them in "feedback / feature request" but Google being Google won't implement it unless a lot of people post the same request. These feature requests are:

0) Posting limit at a given time. There should be a difference of at least 5 mins between postings from the same user. Google should block users from posting for 5 mins after every post. *This will be magical*.

1) Blacklisting and whitelisting Domains. Some good urls fall into spam while bad ones in community.

2) Whitelisting users. They already give an option to ban users so it's the same as blacklisting. Some users always post relevant contents but their posts fall into spam. This hurts community.

*Please share this with other community moderators as well*. You can just copy paste these points in feature request. Make sure to post these three separately as Google takes one suggestion at a time. So, if you paste exactly this, it'll take the first point only. Adios!

Google should provide a way to tag Propaganda and spami (not quite obvious spam) posts in communities. Perhaps as simple as a vote of no confidence for the post being in the community.

I have noticed an increase of political propaganda posts and links to You Tube videos or ad-riddled blogs popping up in completely unrelated communities. The moderators of those communities either don't seem to care, are too busy, or are simply missing in action. As an example of these, we have the "crapola" post shared by +Dave E within this community

These posts are insidious, and though we could simply block the poster in some cases, this does nothing in cleaning up the "community" itself. I see a clear avenue for abuse as politics heat up later this year.

If anyone from Google is listening, I would suggest a similar category to spam with a similar view for moderators, where the votes of no confidence could be tallied and the moderators can have a view of cooperating users of the community (who keeps the best interests of the community at heart). It would allow for vetting of moderator material at the same time.

The posts in such a section should gain the attention of Google for refining the algorithms and keeping track of real fake news.

Post has attachment
Just want to make sure that all of you bosses know about stermit, the social networking platform that pays you for your content & curation. 💹🚀 This is were you need to be in 2018. #Cryptocurrency

Post has attachment
This dude started spamming my personal collections with several inappropriate videos, and is signed up with some big communities. Blocked, banned and multiply reported.

This is the sort of thing the Google spambots should be all over.
Mike Stratton
Mike Stratton

FalsePositive Spam

Owners can promote members to moderators. After, these moderators' posts will never again be flagged as spam.

I have an account which is member of a lot of communities. All its posts to communities are flagged as spam without exception. As I am also owner/moderator of communities to which this account is posting my follow-up action is to fish these posts from the spam folder. I am doing this for months now. But the Google spam algorithm seems to ignore it.

Of course I could promote this account to moderator. But this doesn't solve the problem when posting to other communities.

What I am still waiting for is the ability of an owner to promote a member to a trusted (not-spamming) member. Promoting every member to moderator who is plagued by spam suspicion has the disadvantage that those makeshift moderators might put undesired changes to the community like changing the front photo, the slogan etc. of the community. (I had this and I hated it!)

Post has attachment
Features I would like to have
and if I look at the discussions of the last 6 weeks other moderators also.

Off-Topic (but nevertheless noteworthy)
Thanks +John R. Ellis for creating this great place.
Sadly with an ugly community image :). Sorry John.

Here's a question, and I fear it's a 'known issue'. I was just promoted to moderator for a group that has had an owner that was MIA for a while. I'm trying to dig though the back log of 'Likely SPAM' for the group (of which there is weeks and weeks of data) One of the rather annoying things that I've noted is that if I find some SPAM, and I ban the user, it does not seem to remove all the other posts from that person in the SPAM bucket. Also, if I click on that user and try the "View <user>'s Activity", it will not pull up posts that are in the SPAM state. Is there a clean way to deal with this? Am I doomed to slog through pages and pages of SPAM to clean this up? (Their does not seem to be a 'Remove All' option or the like.) There are 1000's of users and I've already banned 100's of spammers, but some of these had to have been either bots or overachievers as they made quite the mess.

It would be great to be able to pin and announcement or post into each category in a community. As it stands now only one post can be pinned. In our community, we have a category with special rules. It would be a good feature to be able to post these rules (not that anybody would read them anyway) at the top of the category, or say a post of the day.

Post has attachment
An "Only You" collection

created to keep some relevant issues in one place and archive some useful tips you stumbled upon in other communities.

What you can do with it ...

• Save links with notes to critical posts
which then include the post and the whole comment section e.g. blatant copyright infringements

• Save links to solutions of problems
eg how to handle community members with "Restricted" profiles

Bugs, flaws or whatever you call it ...

• no chance to pin a post at the top of the "Only You" collection
• no chance to privately share a post e.g. with other moderators to inform/discuss an issue

Finally ...

Moderators are under no obligation to explain their decisions but in some cases it's worth doing it. So recording the truth is not only just for the records.

Thanks for reading.
Wait while more posts are being loaded