It's just that some people (namely, the folks over at SOCVR) imply that questions/answers requesting phone numbers and giving them out usually deserve a red flag. Perhaps it's not the same for this specific post
@10Rep Yeah there's probably a debate to be had there. It's a difficult call. As far as getting FIRE to work, I have some questions for ya. What browser are you using? What userscript manager are you using? What happens when you try to use it?
@10Rep I expect the handling moderator shrugged and called it close enough. I can't see the post to see how it was deleted since I don't have 10k, but generally I'd expect moderators to delete those without a red flag. People who think the answer box is a reply box are usually NAA rather than spam, even if they include off-site contact info.
Contrast this with a question that's just a job posting with off-site contact info, or off-site contact info for someone to hack into email accounts or cast spells for you (not a made-up hypothetical, oddly enough).
@10Rep Ah, well, if you've only just installed it, refresh this page, and you should see small fire icons next to Smokey reports. More specifically, they should be right next to the MS link. When you click this fire emoji, you'll open a menu that allows you to quickly feedback based on... well... what you see. The "spam" and "rude" buttons on the left side of the window will cast a flag on your behalf of the related type, while the buttons on the right will only feedback to Metasmoke.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in body, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, potentially bad keyword in body, +1 more (394): heathbliss com keto premiere sweden by ashimshaa on stackoverflow.com
Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-14: James Kirkbond Blacklisted user - blacklisted for https://patents.stackexchange.com/a/22615 (https://metasmoke.erwaysoftware.com/post/264306) by https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/11540?m=55533238
> Blacklisted username, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Blacklisted username - Position 0-10: Quickbooks Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-22: Quickbooks File Doctor Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-22: Quickbooks File Doctor Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-22: Quickbooks File Doctor
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in body, blacklisted website in body, link at end of body, pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad keyword in body (395): Varistop X :It is compact and portable by cecotom on superuser.com
@Makyen Makes sense, although I'm surprised you could replace something I had just removed. Was that a race condition or did you target an older version?
If it helps whoever checks those, I promise I searched all of 'em on SE and got zero hits. Even wrote a bookmarklet to do it, because like heck was I gonna do all that searching manually.
@Mast 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.
But really though the problem is that it's trying to render the HTML, so anything after the <a> gets eaten, basically.
Bad keyword with a link in answer - Keyword *Thank you for* with link <a href="http://.%20%20%20%20http://www.isfahanattorney.ir"
Pattern-matching website in answer... etc.
(I believe that bug has been fixed in the WIP version of FIRE that's not out yet)
@JeffSchaller 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.
@Mast 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.
@VictorVosMottor 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.
@VictorVosMottor 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.
@Mast I reverted the unwatch, then edited the existing watch regex. It's sometimes helpful to know when a watch was first added and/or who added it, so I will commonly change a watch in-place, rather than completely replace it.
