I'm afraid I have to agree with the general SCN policy here, though execution could probably be improved.
There's yet no magic bullet against SPAMmers and it will always be a discussion how to strike the balance.
But there are already enough posts from people, who just post any crap replies only to be seen, but at least they are remotely related to the topic and not yet excessive in numbers.
I prefer this to many other forums I have see including Oracle's (can imagine them seeing it differently as their sales reps are big SPAMmers themselves), but yes: it's a matter of taste.
When I started engaging, I've also been moderated, but it seems moderators in the HCM part are reasonably fast. If you are contributing, you'll also pass the 30 points in no time, but maybe better criteria could be found. You earn points answering and sharing, not so much by asking. This is disadvantaging the arguably post important group on SCN, users, against consultants/developers and SAP employees. Maybe SCN could also consider someone trustworthy, after they have asked x questions without being reported. Also, moderators should prioritise questions over answers or other contributions.
I can understand users' frustration, when they experience delays of a day or more. I think this is, what should be dealt with. Maybe SCN could allow all users above a certain points level to approve posts? Don't know, whether practical - just an idea thrown in.
And: if Spammers do this in order to be found by search engines, would it help to just hide posts from "low-point-users" from search engines, but not from the community?
Just some thoughts - as soon as I leave HCM, I'm not a security expert at all.
But my essence: I prefer some reasonable moderation process to having loads of SPAM messages in the forum.
kind regards
Sven