(sub)Forums are being flooded with BS! in Professional Posted November 18, 2016 · Report reply @David Hertzberg: This is off-topic, but could you please stop with that childish "He Who May Not Be Named Lightly" and "derek500 doesn't like me to use smilies in these forums" stuff? It maybe was funny once, but it is becoming annoying now. I'll discuss the point I'm making with "He Who May Not Be Named Lightly" in this post. I see that Mayoff liked Hofstede's post. That's good, because it indicates that Mayoff is actually reading this thread—which I had come to doubt. Mayoff is, of course, the poster I intend to needle as He Who May Not Be Named Lightly. For me, the problem became evident in May 2016. In the "Retrospect 9 or higher for Macintosh" forum I made a perfectly legitimate post (I no longer remember what it was) about a deficiency in the Mac 13 User's Guide, and accompanied it with a gentle gibe about Mayoff having a hypothetical daughter with a speaking Barbie doll that says "writing is hard" (referring to a Barbie doll—quickly withdrawn after widespread criticism—some years ago that said "math class is hard"). Mayoff deleted my post, and immediately re-posted this—with evident emphasis on its final paragraph. If Mayoff was motivated by memories of a real daughter to whom something tragic had happened, I'm truly sorry, but I think an alternative explanation for his actions is much more likely. Given that, on 26 September, he posted "Technical Support does not write the Retrospect User's Guide. This is handled by a different team of people in the company which includes Product Management and Engineering. That same team currently writes most of the KB articles", I now think he was instead motivated by embarrassment at his own powerlessness to improve the UG. But that doesn't explain what happened over the last week on the Retrospect Forums when the spam tsunami started. In the "Retrospect 9 or higher for Macintosh" forum I posted a report about a similar spam tsunami on the Ars Technica Macintoshian Achaia forum, and what the administrators and moderators there were doing to deal with it. The whole thread containing my post was deleted "accidentally" along with a lot of spam posts, which I discovered when the link to it I had put into post #4 of this thread stopped working. So I first put a direct link to the Ars Technica administrative thread on the spam tsunami into post #8 of this thread as a P.S.. Then, when spam threads kept reappearing in the "Retrospect 9 or higher for Macintosh" forum after Mayoff said he "adjusted the forum spam filters", I "spelled out" the Ars Technica forums solution as post #13 in this thread. Seeing that that didn't have any effect, I copied that post #13 as a Support Case. Finally, realizing that continuing to implement the Ars Technica solution would put a strain on Mayoff, I suggested a labor-saving technique—which BTW Ars Technica can't use because they don't sell any software—as post #14 in this thread. All in all I put a fair amount of effort into helping Mayoff deal with the spam tsunami; all I got for it was my Support Case being closed without any comment—not even "Thanks, but we already saw this on the forums." Am I wrong to call Mayoff "He Who May Not Be Named Lightly"? What epithet would you folks suggest?