Charcoal HQ

@ByteCommander [status-planned-but-probably-not-going-to-happen-cause-its-a-big-job]

Byte Commander

Are you sure? Getting ChatExchange 2&3-compatible wasn't such a big deal either...

I guess it's more a question of mentality.

@ByteCommander i wasn't talking about CE in this case

but if you want to talk about CE, how about we figure why the debugger can't get the login cookie when it's being run in a debugger.

10:56 PM

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title: What IDE options do we have, to choose from, when we are working in a software company in India? by Zakstar on stackoverflow.com (@dorukayhan)

Byte Commander

blame the debugger...

i'll blame someone else

!!/blame

@ThomasWard It's Byte Commander's fault.

oh lookit

Byte Commander

Can it be that the debugger breaks on exceptions, even if they would be caught later?

10:57 PM

@ByteCommander nope, because then it'd 'suspend' and wait for me to do something

so yeah evil

ANYWAYS

i should probably head home, it's dark, and approaching the time of Reckoning

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Pattern-matching website in answer: Embed Dropbox website to an HTML website by Rob on stackoverflow.com (@dorukayhan)

o/

@SmokeDetector Oh dear. I autoflagged this as spam. Its a FP :/

I have retracted my (auto)flag ...

Jan Dvorak

Are you sure it's not a seed?

@JanDvorak Doesn't look like it.

@SmokeDetector why

11:12 PM

Title - Position 80-96: company in India
Body - Position 32-48: company in India

that's... kinda what happens when you have 180 as a weight

it's probably still fairly accurate, but more FP's than something higher

@SmokeDetector f

Jan Dvorak

My strategy to not opt into autoflagging seems to be working out so far

@ArtOfCode 180 is 99.73%.

so there's one of your 27 false positives per 10k posts

Speaking of autoflagging, could someone set me up for it?

11:21 PM

Proposal: bump the required accuracy up to 99.5%

Changed to 240 (99.92%)

@JF have you got a MS account?

@angussidney ? That is less than what I had it set to.

@angussidney Yes. ID 65.

@DavidPostill currently the required accuracy is 99%, which is a little to inaccurate IMO

@JF 2secs gotta give you the right permission

Okay, now go to the flagging button in the toolbar that should appear if it hasn't already

11:25 PM

the flagging link is always there

Next click the autoflagging conditions link and create a new condition

there's a guide through the whole thing in the wiki

(recommended weight is 280, which gives you 99.98% accuracy)

@ArtOfCode can you get a link to that? It might be a little hard to get to on mobile

@angussidney Probably should bump it up, yeah

github.com/Charcoal-SE/SmokeDetector/wiki/Set-Up-Autoflagging

11:28 PM

@Undo done

[ SmokeDetector ] SmokeDetector started in standby mode at rev 32ea01f (Thomas Ward: Remove debugging print outputs.) (running on Undo's Raspberry Pi)

Now, we have an issue about existing conditions

Best option is probably to disable them if they don't meet the new condition

Is this correct?
"There's a threshold of accuracy that all flagging conditions must meet before they're used to cast flags automatically. Currently, this is 99.9%"

@DavidPostill no

Probably shouldn't have a dynamic number in a static document

Thanks all!

11:30 PM

Also @JF can you let us know whether or not the sitepicker appears when you go and set up preferences and conditions? We had a bug where it wasn't showing up, and were not sure if we have fixed it

If it doesn't show up, you can refresh the page and it should

@angussidney I already set up preferences a while ago. It does work for conditions now.

Do I have to fill in all of the fields in conditions?

yep

280/1/1 is recommended

11:56 PM

[feature-request] make the fields default to 280/1/1