@Kulfy You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
@Kulfy I noticed you have the Reviewer role on metasmoke, but don't have SmokeDetector privileges. That's a bit unusual. Would you like SmokeDetector privileges?
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Kulfy ╳ You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
@Kulfy If it's either way, it's a bit of the other way around, actually, although commonly done at the same time. Basically, the actions taken with SD privileges are more visible, because they are done in chat. Feedback that's given via API access enabled with the "Reviewer" role isn't as visible. We can see what feedback was given, but we have to go to metasmoke and actually look, while the in-chat messages/actions are typically seen by anyone that is in chat or looks through the transcript.
@Kulfy ╳ You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
@Kulfy The changes for SD privileges are in SD's code on GitHub. While I could have done a PR, I just committed to the master branch, but prior to SD pulling and running the new version, it needed to pass CI.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in link text in body, link following arrow in body, pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body (265): How Do I Contact POF Customer Service? by Jimmy Johnson on mathoverflow.net
@Kulfy BTW: That appears to be vandalism of their own post. Usually, we just give tp feedback on vandalism, as we don't actually want to blacklist the user (blacklisting shows all of their posts when posted or edited, which isn't normally desirable for most users who are vandalizing). On occasion, we do blacklist a vandalizing user when it looks like they will be doing significantly more vandalism, particularly if the form of the vandalism isn't something that's otherwise detected by SD.
@Machavity That pattern looks like it's already caught by Pattern-matching website in body and Pattern-matching website in answer; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Kulfy Yeah, we don't red-flag vandalism, unless the text that was used was actually offensive. Even then, I'd probably raise a custom-flag, if I'm able to rollback on the site (i.e. I'd rollback and custom flag).
@Kulfy Well, that's mostly due to SOBotics, which has bots reporting a variety content which might be flagged for SO. There's also SEBotics, which has some of the same bots reporting on all SE sites (except SO).
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Pattern-matching website in body and Pattern-matching website in answer; append -force if you really want to do that.
