@hichris123 Theoretically, this is a problem with 1.5+1.5 =3: whatever rounding rule is used, it will give a wrong result. Of course you won't hit that in practice.
I think that going by last feedback makes the most sense. Typical scenarios: (a) someone fat-fingered the first reply (usually with sd). (b) the OP went on and posted the same thing twice more, crossing from link-only to spam.
We have a remotely-controllable, semi-intelligent script running on a Raspberry Pi scanning thousands and thousands of posts a day, classifying them, communicating to a RoR app which implements loads of useful data views and a review queue to catch and feed back on posts that were missed in chat.
How should (self) vandalism be marked at the smokey review? With true positive because the detection was at the time the post was garbage? or with false positive because the post keeps on living
@ArtOfCode Previously, if a post was caught based on just the title & body summary, it never went to the API, so metasmoke only recorded the data it got from the websockets. Now, even if a post is caught from the websocket data, it still goes to the API so we get the full body, title, rep, etc.
Nobody of us has a 0% declined flag rate on their main site. A few mistakes are oke. It can be useful if we can change the outcome of a post directly from the posts page if something is wrong
@Ferrybig If you review the same post someone else has, it just does nothing. So if the posts don't fade out, then you know to choose another reason. :)