I've always been against the greetings and salutations (along with other extraneous clutter) in questions for a number of reasons:
It will leave even less room in the question preview so that we have more difficulty gauging what a question consists of by reading the preview.
It takes time to re...
"insignificant edit" used to be a reject reason (don't remember the exact phrasing) but it was removed, partly on the theory that even minor edits actually help improve things
but I agree that it would be useful to not have these in the queue, and probably rejecting them (especially if somebody is doing it in bulk) would send a signal to the OP to stop doing that
If I'm really wanting to highlight what they did wrong, I'll reject and give a reason, usually custom, then force an edit. This has the same effect as reject and edit, but also leaves the reject reason as a note to the user who suggested the edit.
@AnasBinNazeer Please refrain from making only minor edits on posts like these. You are cluttering the review queue with your "removed thanks" edits. We do appreciate the effort but trivial edits are better left to someone with 2k+ reputation so they don't have to be reviewed manually and don't clog the queue. — tripleee21 secs ago
@AnasBinNazeer whenever you can, do more within a suggested edit than just removing thanks. Posts like this should be flagged as Too Broad, rather than put into another review queue. — Glorfindel7 secs ago
I just amended it to take into account your accepts.
When deciding on whether we should ban or not, we now look at your last 7 days of activity.
If (rejects - (approvals / 3)) >= 5, you will be auto-banned.
Note that "rejects" is the count of rejections made by human users/moderators only, rej...
It looks like someone tried to create a duplicate account in my name last night and some mods went and downvoted all my questions -- is there anything I can do to prevent that from happening again?
@cigikath by the way, Mods generally don't downvote in revenge - (a) because that would be wrong, and (b) they have much pointer sticks they can use. Looks like it was just some random user. Hopefully the serial voting script will revert it.
@Glorfindel I think it works for code admins, which is why some of the requests went thru last night and others didn't.... But I don't think !!/approve works
@Glorfindel merging it with just !!/approve will probably fail because that requires MS, but a hand merge (click "merge", wait for CI, !!/pull) should still work; I'm in the process of doing that now
@Henders The authentication tokens used to login into SE for auto flagging (and are permitted for other things as wel) are things that shouldn't be exposed
I've been trying to figure out how hard exactly it would be to protect them while still allowing us to scale Metasmoke properly, but so far I don't really have a good idea
@Ferrybig That's the API keys I'm talking about. I'm trying to determine what the blockers are for us to take pressure off undo and have MS being a bit more resilient.
@tripleee From what I know from a bank I worked at briefly they have a 6 eye principle where no single sysadmin can access anything alone, at least 3 at a time are required, but there are like 12-15 in total
@Magisch we can always do this. Contact everyone via superping. If you don't respond to a superping.... then you're not going to notice that you're not getting flags
@tripleee the concern is not 'who can abuse it', it's simply that in the original agreement for autoflagging we implied that only Undo would have access to this stuff
@tripleee I think separate flagging servers would be a way to do this, and those separate flagging servers are in control of moderators, and don't share information, and MS just knows what users are on which flagging servers, since you can only flag, instead of having all permissions, its more safe, and those flagging servers could reject if the load suddenly spikes up to more than 50% of normal to protect against hacked MS instances, or broken code itself
@Ferrybig 'In control of moderators' is still too open because the conditions that we gained their API key says 'only Undo'. Unless, as angussidney says, we request additional consents from them.
@Henders Also, I'd be nervous putting so much control in the hands of mods. This is a system that requires a lot of in-knowledge to make it work properly.
I think that's currently the best solution - get everyone to re-auth under a new agreement, and maybe add some things e.g. to allow us to vote in a new person
@AshishAhuja I mean we'd definitely do that, but we'd also add a clause like 'we will follow <x> and <y> process to give additional people access if we ever need to in the future. If you disagree, <here> is where you can reuqest that we disable your account if new people get access'
Ignoring who's running MS and how much it goes down, I think we need to stop panicking as much as we do now. Yes, quite a few things break, and we lose a little data, but is it really that much of a problem? Most of the broken stuff is for convenience only. Any admin can manually add stuff to the blacklist. Believe it or not, you can also flag posts without FIRE. Smokey gets a little flaky, but that's easily managed. Our core functionality is working and that's what matters.
I'm not saying that we don't have some major issues that need fixing (because we do), but it's not nice for @Undo to wake up to 100 pings (real and jokes) and several hours of seemingly angry transcript just because we can't be patient.
So I am not understanding why permission levels can't be granted in MS. Most of the general maintenance issues could be resolved without having access to cause real harm with the API keys. Undo can have the permission level for managing keys, but a few others can have lower permissions for everything else.
Also, none of the people in here are guilty of this, but I find it annoying when people ignore the big pinned message in the starboard and proceed to ask 'what's wrong with MS?'
@K.Dᴀᴠɪs that's definitely not an impossible plan either but releasing Undo's grip on things is also a step towards scalability and improved resilience, and besides, probably technically easier to implement
@angussidney I agree with this. Part of the reason that I brought this up is because the last thing we want is someone so integral to the project to grow weary because of pings and MS going down. If we can remove any of those issues, that's a benefit from where I'm sitting.
@Magisch yeah, I'm not denying there's a problem with that :)
@Henders yeah - this is a good type of conversation to be having. I just don't think that Undo would like it when we have hours of 'Wake up Undo, my userscript isn't working, I have to click 4 times to flag instead of 2'
Body - Position 545-557: poker online, Position 750-760: agen poker, Position 859-870: situs poker, Position 959-969: agen poker, Position 1066-1076: agen poker Post - Username similar to website
not sure really, the Arabic looked vaguely like odd lorem ipsum
google translate: *"That the presence of a tree near the almond husk directly had a reason in the name of the eye, and evidenced by the eye of the village in the village of Al-Qadeh named for the presence of palm tree, one of the types of palm trees in Qatif.* *The bathroom has a rectangular room located along the spring of the eye. This room has square or square openings, which are used to put luggage and clothes. They are called "Rosanna". Along the room there are places to sit and rest called dikes or checkers. They are used to wait in times of crowding on the bathroom. The shower attend…
the starboard really isn't working very well; I certainly cannot see it in my normal view because the [tag:plastic-knives] etc are taking up the majority of the right sidebar
@tripleee If you didn't check it yet, my spamtracker userscript still works properly without MS, and if you turn off the FIRE userscript for now, it will open the reports in a new tab (initially implemented so the script would work independent)
I just amended it to take into account your accepts.
When deciding on whether we should ban or not, we now look at your last 7 days of activity.
If (rejects - (approvals / 3)) >= 5, you will be auto-banned.
Note that "rejects" is the count of rejections made by human users/moderators only, rej...
