@SmokeDetector tpu- Strongly suspect this is spam: title translates to "How to download free programs", they tried to link the site with promotional keywords on the link, and the site is some spammy tech-support-advice site.
@RyanM I think that's probably right, but the overall content of the post and the last paragraph in particular gives me pause, given the question is about the lavender letter
> What one practices as a chosen lifestyle is their own personal choice involving others in that choice without their consent is evil... it takes a lot of effort to rid oneself of the sex impulse and when it is finally gone it is a relief when it isn't gone out of others and disturbs practice?
The post commented on features where you are making a request for it to be... there is no place to move it too. So it is indeed in the correct and only spot for it to be. — มนต์ดำ47 secs ago
so the user is confused about the post being featured network-wide, and probable-ESL doesn't help
@SmokeDetector I might excuse as an error having this posted somewhere other than a discussion centered on LGBTQIA+ issues. With it's current location and and content, it is, IMO, R/A, or at least should be handled with immediate deletion and hidden behind a spam/R/A click-through.
@SmokeDetector tp- Upon reading it further, it appears to be an anti-LGBT post describing LGBT people in fairly degrading terms on a post about mistreatment of LGBT people.
@NobodyNada Thanks for spotting it! I totally missed the undertones the first time.
Matched by the following regexes: vbucks on line 23159 of watched_keywords.txt free[\W_]*+(?:v|[rdb]o)[\W_]*+bu[cksx]+ on line 23634 of watched_keywords.txt
@NobodyNada Matched by (?:(?:m(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:o(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:t(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:h(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:e(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)*(?:r(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+)?(?:f(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:u(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*[ck])+(?<!fuck)(?<!fuk)(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*(?:(?:i(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:n(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:g(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+|(?:e(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+(?:[rd](?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)+)?(?:s(?:[^a-z]|&\w+;)*)* on line 3187 of watched_keywords.txt
> Potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-16: frevbuxgenerator Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-16: frevbuxgenerator Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-16: frevbuxgenerator
> Potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-12: free robucks Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-12: free robucks Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-12: free robucks
@RyanM I don't believe so, but I'd have to double-check.
I know we don't have access to the network IDs of all incoming posts. There was some discussion a few months ago about creating a network-wide user blacklist, but it was ultimately regarded as impractical because there's no way to fetch network IDs without making an extra API call.
But I haven't checked whether we fetch network IDs for posts that have already been reported. I can't think of anything we currently use that data for, so I don't expect we go out of our way to fetch it
@RyanM That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer; append -force if you really want to do that.
@RyanM 'article about the same: medium.com/@loginradius/…; is not caught by a blacklist or watchlist item.
not doing the usual watch-the-username-with-a-comment because there are a ton of FP on that. Probably not with the @, but eh, at that point might as well just be specific. Plus maybe someone's using perl.
@SmokeDetector Suspected spam: "possibly the best way to market" and the keywords on the link (a normal person would have linked the product name, not "Bulk SMS provider") suggest that this is promotional spam and not a genuine attempt to answer the question about integrating API keys.
Almost entirely FP, it's a multi-author Medium-like thing that's very frequently linked. One person spammed their article there a while back and seems to have learned their lesson, based on their profile.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, blacklisted website in answer, link at beginning of answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (215): How to deal with a vengeful boss by miangaddar on workplace.SE
Yeah I reviewed up to my limit yesterday (about 9 left) and there were still 200 in the queue which potentially needed a second feedback. I skipped ~30ish.
Each morning I check it there are typically 100 that I hadn't looked yet. I try to use FIRE to go through the night's transcript, though. Bit easier that way.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in body, blacklisted username, blacklisted website in body, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title (291): Exchange EDB to PST Using EdbMails by Linden Goorge on stackoverflow.com
@Spevacus That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer; append -force if you really want to do that.
01101001 01101101 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110010 01101111 01100010 01101111 01110100
