@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Bad ns for domain in answer and Bad ns for domain in body; use !!/watch-force if you really want to do that.
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Pattern-matching website in answer and Pattern-matching website in body; use !!/watch-force if you really want to do that.
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Bad keyword in answer and Bad keyword in body; use !!/blacklist-keyword-force if you really want to do that.
@bummi declined :( I added metasmoke links to prove the spammy link. got "None of that context is available to moderators. It was a completely legitimate answer to the question that was asked here. (Well, it was a link-only NAA, but not spam.) They had no other posts on SO."
@suraj ideally, no. Especially on SO, the amount of flags is so high that they can't spend even 2 minutes searching for external sources. A custom flag (where you can indicate those sources) should work, it's a mystery to me why that one was declined.
In my extensive experience fighting spam on Super User, I've noticed that spammers often use many different domains to evade detection. In several cases, I've found that the domains often resolve to one or a few IP addresses, which are used exclusively by a particular spammer or spam campaign. An...
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, link at end of body, pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad keyword in body: Alpha plus male enhancement by WAQE on meta.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] URL-only title, bad NS for domain in body, bad NS for domain in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +6 more: quicksupplementfact.com/brain360/ by wzfr on askubuntu.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad NS for domain in body, bad keyword in body, blacklisted website in body, pattern-matching website in body, repeated URL at end of long post: Did that nearly 50% of the girl by fenandop23 on graphicdesign.SE
I only have "Flagger" privileges. I am logged in with my SE account. It didn't show the link to clear, so I navigated to the url suggested by Tetsuya by appending /feedback/clear to the url. But I get - "The page you're trying to visit requires more privileges. You need to have the Admin role to view this page. You currently have the following roles: Flagger."
^ I don't remember how this goes -- I was under the impression you should be able to retract flags if you have flagging privileges?
@Glorfindel Hey, I gave a feedback as k, then after conversation I realized it was f. I added another feedback. It shows both of my feedbacks there. Can I remove the "k" feedback?
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] URL in title, bad NS for domain in body, bad NS for domain in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +3 more: freesupplementrial.com/force-fit-xl/ by loer on graphicdesign.SE
@AjayBrahmakshatriya either @angussidney, @ArtOfCode or @Undo needs to do that. Maybe they can also explain how feedback works in regard to Smokey vs. Metasmoke privileges.
So, how are we to be training SD? That post contained two links to two separate sites controlled by the OP and did not disclose that the OP controlled them. The help page states affiliation must be disclosed. I was under the impression that we want to train SD to report such things. Thus, "tp" feedback would be appropriate, not "fp". So, are we supposed to be training SD to report those, or not?
Note: I'm not asking about how to deal with the OP, as I would first want to try to educate them rather than flag as spam for a first/second offense, particularly given that this post had real content.
@Makyen it's slightly different from training machine learning algorithms. Our litmus test is 'do we want a system-level block on these posts'? If no, the feedback should be fp.
@Makyen I think the best way is to state that we don't have a training target, but that comes reasonably close. Because the tp/fp ratio does have an influence on the weights and hence on autoflagging.
@ByteCommander plagiarism is tpu, but a custom mod flag.
