@Glorfindel That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially problematic ns configuration in answer and Potentially problematic ns configuration in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Glorfindel Post 1: Already recently reported [ MS ]
@EriktheOutgolfer 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.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in link text in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, potentially problematic ns configuration in answer (125): Do I need SSL for forums by Diana David on stackoverflow.com
@EriktheOutgolfer That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially problematic ns configuration in answer, Potentially bad keyword in body, Potentially bad keyword in answer, and Potentially problematic ns configuration in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
at first glance, it looks like failed spam, but, after a second look, I realized that there's a possibility that the "Second" may be referring to a continuation of the title
third glance, and I discover a horizontal bar at the bottom
@ArtOfCode if you have time, could you generate another MS API key for me please? I'm currently using AIM's, but I'd like to have one for a work-in-progress under the name SE-toolbox.
Anyone know what Travis uses as the default version of python when you have language: python? Their documentation, while good, is also missing a lot of little things.
I just wanted to know if you could already detect any improvements about judging SD messages from the rooms I am active (SOCVR, Tavern at the Meta) yet?
@πάνταῥεῖ There are less than 6 red flags on those posts on Hinduism.SE whose messages are posted in Tavern. Users there do not flag spam posts actively. Many Charcoal users don't have account there.
@NogShine we're probably talking about completely different things. I was removed from the list of privileged SD users a while ago, and was advised to post sd reactions as plain commands to show improvements in my feedback. I am afraid doing all that is going into vain, and I am still caught in a vicious circle regarding my sd feedback.
@NogShine I'm doing these reactions more frequently at the SOCVR, though I am unsure this will really help to improve my status as being accepted as a privileged user of SD again.
@πάνταῥεῖ If you want those to be noticed, then the messages really should be here in CHQ, where the people who make the decision normally hang out. While some people in the Tavern and SOCVR will see the messages, those aren't the people who are able to make the decision. Yes, the people making the decision can go look for the messages you've posted, but it's really not that easy to do.
If I were doing so, I'd modify the SOCVR Archiver userscript for the task, as searching/reviewing transcripts is a pain and that userscript could pull all the SD reports, feedback, and your messages into a popup.
@πάνταῥεῖ I assume what you've been doing in SOCVR is reasonable in here. I really don't know, as I'm not involved in the decision process. I'm just looking at it from the point of view of you wanting to have indications of you changing be noticed, which really doesn't happen in other rooms. As for reviewing what you've already done, I'm just looking at it from the POV of if I had to do so & knowing that searching & reviewing in SE Chat is...not that easy.
@πάνταῥεῖ 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.
One of the problems I see, is that reactions should apply to specific SD reports, and I don't know how to suppress these kind of SD responses. Any ideas how I could post kinda virtual reactions here, while avoiding the unnecessary noise?
f
What about establishing a protocol like [tag:sd-xxx] for particular reports. Tho I am aware I am struggling with an edge case here :-/
@πάνταῥεῖ Add an actual link, rather than a :##### reply? For example: "This one is fp".
However, for them reviewing your feedback it might be significantly easier (I assume) if they're able to do a review with a database query. Thus, with their permission, it might be better to format your messages such that they end up as comments in the MS database. Doing so would be a :#### reply that begins with something other than a valid feedback, so something like :47583551 feedback f.
@πάνταῥεῖ Honestly, I'm not sure. I don't know the protocol, if any, in The Tavern for initial approval. In SOCVR, what I've seen in the past is new users do basically what you've been doing there. The difference being that for initial approval it's the room's ROs that are making the decision. They are present in the room to get a feel for the feedback the person is giving. Unfortunately, you are the test case for how re-permitting feedback will work, so it's really being figured out as you go.
A significant limitation for any only-in-Chat information is that searching in Chat really doesn't provide the capability to see messages with enough context to know what actually happened (i.e. to see what your feedback means one needs to see your feedback and the SD report (and other feedback?)).
The only ways to do that which I know of are to either use the SOCVR Archiver, which searches back through a specified number of chat messages for messages based on regex content matches, user ID matches, etc., or the basic OR operator that the beta Unclosed Request Review Script adds to Chat search (which would only get you partway there).
Thus, it's probably easier to have the information associated with the MS report in some way. The only way to do that which I'm aware of is to have it as a comment on the MS post.
@SmokeDetector It'd be nice if this error specified which WebSocket connection was closed (e.g. SE or MS), or at least I'm assuming that SD uses WebSockets to both.
Oh sorry someone was on here before and they showed me this so I could answer it. They probably typed something, submitted it, clicked edit, deleted all of it, and then showed me a blank area for me to start typing. I will go talk to the person who was on. — Billy52 secs ago
^ OK, that's got to be the most special excuse I've ever heard for an R/A post ...
@SmokeDetector @MaximilianAst (not pingable here) @QPaysTaxes (not pingable here) @Ferrybig You have autoflagged the above answer [ MS ] which is actually an attempt to answer. You may want to review and retract your flags.
@SmokeDetector This is actually an attempt to answer. The post asks what font it used and the answer guesses at Audiowide, which is the name of a font.
