What should NamePros add?

[NamePros]

Good morning!

NamePros is working on a lot of new and exciting features, and many of them are thanks to member suggestions in our Comments and Feedback section.

We'd love to hear even more! What else would you like us to add for you?

All suggestions are welcome, from small and simple changes to big and complex features!

Please post below, or submit your suggestions privately.

Let us know what you'd like us to build!

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

That's great however, the thread says that I should PM NamePros with my suggestions however, NamePros is not accepting PM's.

Thanks for letting us know.

The link has been fixed in the first post of this thread.

how about sales lander by namepros.com?

Added: https://www.namepros.com/parking

Kindly bring back button NEW POSTS on the right corner . Last update makes hardly to navigate the forum

It's there. Please let us know if there is something about it that you'd like changed.

I propose a new 20-Year Member set of stars

Agreed! The badge system is being reworked, and then we'll be able to add new ones like this one.

Thanks for all the great suggestions!

 

[Bravo Mod Team]

when clicking the thread and reading or posting reply don't appears to be inside a thread may be due to the thread starting post is pinned on top of all page replies

Could you please provide us with more details about your feedback? We are not sure what you mean. If you could provide an image with your description, that may help us understand.

 

[DomainRecap]

Make the "Quick Reply" auto-popup a MANUAL CLICK option, and not something that occludes a large portion of the reply window and functions whenever your mouse comes near it.

 

[Quebec Tech Team]

Make the "Quick Reply" auto-popup a MANUAL CLICK option, and not something that occludes a large portion of the reply window and functions whenever your mouse comes near it.

This is a planned change for a future update. You will be able to choose if it should open on click or hover so those that prefer the current behavior can continue to use it.

 

[Alop]

Even if/when a members account is restricted it should be free to post in the “chatroom”

 

[podaf]

A platform for selling and buying domains

 

[Samer]

Ability to delete DMs.
It’s sad u think half a** method of “leaving DM” suffices..

 

[Quebec Tech Team]

Make the "Quick Reply" auto-popup a MANUAL CLICK option, and not something that occludes a large portion of the reply window and functions whenever your mouse comes near it.

This is live. As promised, there is an appearance option so you can use the old behavior if you prefer.

 

[DomainRecap]

This is live. As promised, there is an appearance option so you can use the old behavior if you prefer.

Oh thank you so much, as I has literally stopped replying on NP.

 

[Kyle Tully]

An “unread posts excluding buy/sell” button. Or just move that to its own market. Often hard to find good discussions between all the commerce.

 

[cooljub]

An AI/bot filter. Are there any plans to curb the slew of AI content & threads by new "members"?

@Bravo Mod Team
@Paul

 

[kor]

An AI/bot filter. Are there any plans to curb the slew of AI content & threads by new "members"?

About a month ago, I complained about the same thing. However, they stated that AI-generated content can be considered normal content and they have no rules about it.

Apparently they don't have much of an idea what AI is.

 

[Paul]

An AI/bot filter. Are there any plans to curb the slew of AI content & threads by new "members"?

@Bravo Mod Team
@Paul

How would you expect that to work? Do you have examples of LLM-generated content on NamePros?

 

[Lox]

An AI/bot filter. Are there any plans to curb the slew of AI content & threads by new "members"?

@Bravo Mod Team
@Paul

How would you expect that to work? Do you have examples of LLM-generated content on NamePros?

7 Jun 2023 - The University of Kansas

"Although people have accumulated a variety of experiences in identifying LLM-content, a holistic view of how LLM-generated output can be distinguishable from human writing is still missing. "

PDF attached

Regards

 

[cooljub]

How would you expect that to work? Do you have examples of LLM-generated content on NamePros?

I'm not a tech bod but I read there are such things.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/th...ing-a-supportive-network-on-namepros.1304038/
https://www.namepros.com/threads/ma...ing-a-domain-for-your-gaming-website.1306206/

 

[kor]

How would you expect that to work? Do you have examples of LLM-generated content on NamePros?

I have reported a few users before and you have not taken any action against it.

We also discussed this issue over PM and you were completely indifferent. You can see it by looking at the message history.

Simply ban users who post AI-generated content.

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

How about an adult bickering room, no holds barred.
Namepros needs some quality control
48 hours and before all noobs posts must be moderated. Sorry make your job harder @Paul but dingleberries like this are really hurting integrity.

contact me here to discuss about that : [email protected]

^ https://www.namepros.com/threads/drivingstunt-com-aiprintprofit-com-appraisal.1305999/
Pure garbage. And get rid of that invisible crap.
Bring back our chat room too
Heavy hitters flying under radar
Still laughing about that a year later
Quality>quantity

 

[Paul]

^ https://www.namepros.com/threads/drivingstunt-com-aiprintprofit-com-appraisal.1305999/
Pure garbage. And get rid of that invisible crap.

That's not LLM-generated. Please don't conflate LLMs with the spam we always receive--it complicates discussion of the matter quite a bit. Traditional spam is easy enough to block with a low false positive rate; LLM-generated content is not.

Since the content has since been deleted by moderators, here's what it used to say, with the email address redacted:

contact me here to discuss about that : [email protected]

 

[Paul]

We also discussed this issue over PM and you were completely indifferent.

Me, specifically? I don't see a DM between us. I'm not indifferent toward it, but I'm also not sure how people expect us to block LLM-generated content.

Simply ban users who post AI-generated content.

Please provide a link to something you consider to be LLM-generated. I have a strong suspicion people are getting confused over what's AI-generated versus what's just low-quality content from humans.

 

[Paul]

I'm not a tech bod but I read there are such things.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/th...ing-a-supportive-network-on-namepros.1304038/
https://www.namepros.com/threads/ma...ing-a-domain-for-your-gaming-website.1306206/

Those just look like the usual spam we receive. They might've been generated with the help of AI, but not the modern AI that's been in the news lately (e.g., ChatGPT). ChatGPT doesn't usually make formatting issues or use awkward wording like we see on those posts--it sounds more human, oddly enough.

I'm going to leave them up as examples so other people can follow the discussion, but I consider those to be spam. They're probably not from ChatGPT; they look like the same spam we've been deleting for years.

 

[Paul]

I was fairly sure I had commented on this exact sort of issue publicly, but it looks like it was in a DM.

We had an issue a few months back where a reputable member of the domaining community wrote something that several people insisted was AI-generated. It wasn't--it was written by a human--but that accusation is scary, and it hurts people. It really disrupted the public discourse that would've normally taken place.

Here's what I sent to that member at the time (pardon the typos):

It's difficult to say precisely what impact generative AI will have in the long term. It's often ascribed a level of ingenuity bordering on the supernatural, while simultaneousy being treated as a mysterious black box that its detractors fear. Of course, none of that is true. It is, at its best, a precisely tuned auto-complete engine.

But excitement and fear are never assuaged by reality. What you're observing here is a harbinger of social challenges that we're likely to experience over the coming decades. We'll grow increasingly suspcious of content that could potentially have been generated by AI, and we'll be able to dismiss anything we don't like as being fabricated by a computer. That's a bit of a wrench to throw into the machine of public discourse, and I don't expect humanity to fully adapt to that during my lifetime.

I'd like to say you shouldn't be offended by what happened, or to promise that it won't happen again. I would, of course, be lying.

We don't have a way to detect LLM-generated content. As the paper by @Lox mentions, we can, at best, get in the mid-90%'s for accuracy. Can you imagine if we incorrectly flagged 1 in 20 posts as being AI-generated? How would you react if one day we deleted 5% of your posts, claiming they were generated by ChatGPT?

 

[kor]

Me, specifically? I don't see a DM between us. I'm not indifferent toward it, but I'm also not sure how people expect us to block LLM-generated content.

No, not with you. I corresponded with Echo Mod Team. I've reported a few AI posts I've come across before, but each time they said "no action need to be taken".

The argument they argued in the PM:
There's technically no rule against using an AI bot as long as the comment is on-topic and not duplicated from another source without a source credit.

In response, I gave the following answer, but they could not come up with any logical explanation:
If the users have to refere a credit, they have to write "generated by chatgpt" at the end. Otherwise it's a "duplicated" content from a digital mind without a source credit.

If you can't jointly address critical issues about the forum, which is all about content, it means that there is a serious communication breakdown within the team and this is a much worse situation than the AI-generated content.

You need to stop playing ostrich before things get out of hand.

---

I have a strong suspicion people are getting confused over what's AI-generated versus what's just low-quality content from humans.

You're not the only tech person here. And you won't get anywhere with suspicion.

 

[Paul]

The argument they argued in the PM:
There's technically no rule against using an AI bot as long as the comment is on-topic and not duplicated from another source without a source credit.

That's an oversimplification.

It's simple: we have no way of determining whether content was generated by good LLM. Most of the content that gets reported as LLM-generated almost certainly wasn't. It's not a very good rule if we can't enforce it.

If content violates our rules because it's spam, misleading, or otherwise problematic, report it for that. Don't report it just because you think it's LLM-generated. There is no automated system to detect that--as the paper @Lox mentioned explains--and humans aren't great at it, either, unless they're able to converse with the AI.

You're not the only tech person here. And you won't get anywhere with suspicion.

I can't prove that content isn't LLM-generated, so it will remain suspicion--as will any claims that content is LLM-generated. If you have concrete examples, this discussion would be furthered by links. Otherwise, I can't really help, and our policy remains the same.

 

[Traderas]

I think it would be useful to add a transaction range, when someone gives it feedback.
There are members with dozens feedbacks of small transactions, like 5-10$ from auctions, that proves little about their credibility.

 

[NameInbox]

add some Real Traffic/real people against bot Traffic