For example, this, above mentions "ketone", and only scores a 2, but it's on Chemistry.SE - so that's OK. BUT mention that elsewhere and it's probably the diet, pills for sale. We need more weight for keto* mentioned almost everywhere else.
blacklisting a term takes it from 1 weight (using "potentially bad keyword", which is pinned to 1) to the high 90s (using the various blacklist reasons)
if there's a pattern, we'll also edit an existing or create a new check to hit it with another reason as well
I've seen others under 400. It's just that the word seems to be a fad, and usage without a doctor's advice is a poor idea. We have little need for keto-questions. IMO.
If you don't like the idea, and everything is OK as-is that's OK too. I'm just asking/suggesting.
> Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, bad keyword in username, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Title - Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Title - Position 0-4: keto Username - Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Username - Position 0-4: keto Body - Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Body - Position 0-4: keto
> Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, bad keyword in username, pattern-matching product name in body, pattern-matching product name in title, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Title - Pattern-matching product name: Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Title - Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Title - Position 0-4: keto Username - Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet Username - Position 0-4: keto Body - Pattern-matching product name: Position 0-18: keto ultimate diet
> Pattern-matching product name in body, pattern-matching product name in title, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Title - Position 0-4: keto Title - Position 0-19: keto asdfghjkl diet Username - Position 0-4: keto Body - Position 0-4: keto Body - Position 0-19: keto asdfghjkl diet
> Potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Title - Position 89-93: Keto Username - Position 89-93: Keto Body - Position 89-93: Keto
@Rob I think you have a misconception about what weight does. Weight, beyond enough to trigger autoflagging, particularly 4 autoflags, makes little or no difference to the post. The reason to have more detections for other things that happen to be in a post is in order to detect posts where those other things are the one ones there, not, necessarily, to give it more weight.
At the low end of weight and reasons, a post being autoflagged depends on people having set their autoflagging conditions such that a post qualifies. It's required that the each condition puts the post in the 99.75% is spam range, and a user must maintain that % for the combination of all their autoflagging conditions.
There are really only 4 different bins into which posts are placed: 1) detected with only "potentially bad" (i.e. experimental) reasons and no other reasons. These are only reported into Charcoal HQ, Charcoal Test, and The Fire Department. 2) Detected with 1+ non-experimental reasons, but not autoflagged. These are reported in to all applicable chat rooms.
3) Detected with enough weight/reasons to be autoflagged by at least 1 person, but below 99.9% chance of being spam, based on historical data for weight, reasons, user rep. Up to 3 autoflaggs will be placed on these, if there are enough people who have autoflagging conditions that qualify. 4) > 99.9% chance of being spam. Up to 4 autoflaggs are placed, assuming there are enough people with autoflagging conditions that qualify.
The default autoflagging condition is weight=280, IIRC. So, most people will have that weight as their point where they will autoflag.
At the lower end, it's going to depend significantly. However, there are some people that have set an autoflagging condition at 3 reasons, no minimum weight. That means that if there are 3 reasons, even three experimental reasons, then those people's autoflagging conditions will be satisfied and the post will get autoflaggs.
@Makyen I've been gently debating a minimum weight as well as minimum accuracy, just to avoid this. I haven't run the data but I suspect a lot of our FPs come from this.
So, basically, there really isn't any functional benefit (currently) for a post to have a weight > 280. The primary benefit for of additional detections is to have those detections active if the spammer chooses to change their spam sufficiently such that the original detections don't catch the new post. And, frankly, there are enough people with custom autoflag conditions such that it's very rare for a post with a weight above ~200, or so, to not have enough people to max the autoflaggs.
@ArtOfCode This is something I've grown more concerned about over time. Personally, I've chosen to specify a weight for my 3 reason conditions (except for some that I enable during spam rushes, or that I've kept active on specific sites due to specific activity). I think that some (low) minimum would be reasonable, to prevent the 3 experimental reason issue. We'd probably want to look at the data to see what makes sense.
Weights of ~300-~400 are often still there for me to read and make a decision. When the number in parentheses is over ~600 it's very difficult to read, think, and flag without the rug being pulled out from under you. -- So weights between 280 and 500 have a purpose, you don't have to be speedy Gonzales.
@ArtOfCode I'd prefer not to do that. At least in the past, we've found it useful to (temporarily) add both additional blacklist and watchlist detections to get specific spam waves to trigger autoflagging.
Which also raises the question of a spam wave tool. I've wondered if it would be useful to allow admins to define a search for which, for 24 hours, every matching post gets autoflagged regardless of conditions
Suitable safeguards, of course
Time limited, minimum % TP, etc
But if, say, AU suddenly gets an influx of spam about ProductX that's too big for the community to handle... admin enables a spam wave for it, every post matching body ~= "ProductX", site=AU gets flagged for 24 hours.
That might be useful. Obviously, it could be abused/manipulated, but we're not designing to prevent intentional abuse, just accidental. Admittedly, once we were aware of the last wave (as far as I know) we got the posts to be consistently above autoflagging in a reasonable amount of time, just by adding black/watch-list entries.
An expiry time field for the rule, with a message to the rule maker that their rule will expire in 10% * Duration - Example: rule expires in 20 hours gives 2 hours notice, and set minimum notification to half hour regardless, unless duration is less than one hour. ?
Aye, we have ways of hacking the system to be reasonably sure that the wave gets flagged - but I can't help feeling that a tool meant for the purpose would be better than abusing other mechanisms
There must be "Trend Analysis Library" that sees the wave coming and adjusts, much like YouTube had trending videos (but their algorithm isn't very good).
@Makyen it does, which has been my major concern about it. The initial idea was an autoflag button on every post for admins, which... I shot that down fairly quickly :)
Discussing it in a GH issue sounds like a good idea. I think it's something that needs a more consideration, and a broader base of input than we get by just bringing it up in chat.
We need an error chart that reads close to zero (maybe Log scaling so we can see the small values and squish the spikes). Is there a free cloud service that does 'AI Pattern Analysis' for spam, we could get a second opinion, test another method, and chart that. Maybe let it add It's 2¢ if it turns out to be a reliable 2nd set of eyes.
@TetsuyaYamamoto FYI: MS has made quite a few attempts to flag using your account on sites where you don't have an account. This isn't something that's an actual problem, per se. But, it indicates that things may not be as you are intending them. I just happened to be looking at the failed flag logs and noticed that many of them were yours.
If you want accounts on all sites, you can use this SEDE query to find all the sites on which you don't have an account.
True, but they might offer it on the cloud, and harvest our input (which we give away anyways CC) in return for an opinion on what is fed to them. We don'tneed t code, just the result.
@Rob You mean the 66 or the general collection? Thanks, either way. I've been too busy to actually put much effort in but I got three from my knitting design alone, so that helps.
The general collection. Joe Friend, Jon Skeet have zero, Shog9 has 5, a lot of high Rep (and active users) have fewer than half a dozen.
Makes me feel better about my 5, one of which are the 'giveaway glasses' and the Doughnut Hole I'm wearing now - not a hat but better than the default box with one flap opened.
Ah. :) Yeah. They're kinda hard this year... but we're also really busy. I haven't actually had any time to try, what with a baby and working half-time.
I took the video, found 0.5 seconds that I could loop. Extracted .pngs, uploaded them, downloaded them, and then combined the frames into an animation - but it was 'by hand?' on my phone.
If I had a computer it would be much better. I must wait, they've literally just taped out my CPU and engineering samples are being tested. One motherboard for PCIe 4 has been leaked, probably the one used for tested - so buying a computer is 6-7 months away - like they say: It's gonna be great.
@SmokeDetector The link in this answer is to some site/blog in Japanese. The download links on that site appear to be to non-official versions of the software. However, I'm completely unfamiliar with this software, so it could be that this is some secondary or tertiary distribution, but it doesn't appear so from information on the official sites.
That filter: Position 0-12: <p><a href=" seems to catch a few innocent links from time to time. Example: h:/site/read.pdf is a great article on fixing what you wrote about, page 2: says: "short quote from page 2". That nails you for starting with an URL and saying great article.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +6 more (885): nutritionless.com/curafen/ by griffith on drupal.SE
tpu- feedback received
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url-only title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +8 more (989): nutritionless.com/curafen/ by lavernearlon on askubuntu.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, body starts with title and ends in url, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad ns for domain in title (292): 99newsdaily.com/ by spilorcio on wordpress.SE
@Rob Yes, it catches a significant number of FP. The feeling that it catches a lot of FP is exacerbated by the fact that many of those same posts are detected multiple times (for some, it's many times). As of the point I last updated the detection, the updated version had, from the time the original version was added, 96 TP, 43 FP, and 22 NAA, which is 60% TP. The original version of the watch was 98 TP, 132 FP and 31 NAA at that point (38% TP). The update reduced the non-TP by 60%.
Run against all the data in MS (the data is quite biased towards TP), it is 14,363 TP, 173 FP and 85 NAA.
There is also a second detection, which is youtube.com and youtu.be only, which has a significantly higher FP rate, but with also was the only detection that caught a few TP in the time it was up, so I left it as a separate watch. At this time, it will appear to be the same detection from what's reported in the "why" information, but it's not, currently, intended to migrate into a separate detection.
Seems like a good (enough) answer, user for two+ years. Really the only thing wrong is the reassurance that it should work and the "Have a nice day!" is chatty (but that ought to have been edited out long ago) - we only revisit it because the Community bumped it to get more/newer answers (which is helpful) and to bring it to the attention of those more knowledgeable about it if it remains the best answer - which might have been confirmed by paper1111 - so it 'site business' not our
@SmokeDetector It may not be obvious on it's face, but this is spam. The user has a history of spamming for the site they have linked here. Most of their detected posts are short blurbs that look like they might be coming close to maybe answering, but don't actually do so.
@Rob If you make comments like this an actual reply to a particular post, it helps other people understand what you're talking about, and includes what you write as a comment on the MS post, so others reviewing the post can see it.
@Makyen Understood. I was in the middle of something when your reply came and my reply would have been consecutive were it not for the intervention of Smokey's text. It's a bad habit I'll remember to break. I have to zoom in all the way and side-scroll to confirm that I have the correct reply arrow, then zoom back out to access the reply window. I was running ten minutes late by the time I got to typing "afk". I'll be certain not to trade expediency for threading convenience. Sometimes
being online here makes me late for things. I'm fighting to avoid that too.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in body, link at end of body, pattern-matching product name in body, pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, +1 more (495): Boosts the endurance and sexual surge by jeanksuh on askubuntu.com
@Rob I'm sorry to hear that. Stuff in Real Life usually is more important. As to having to zoom in and out, there is a mobile view. I haven't really used it, but it might be something that can help with how you use chat.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in body, pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title (199): Super Keto Australia by TaauRfff on superuser.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, +3 more (590): hbmbzone.com/urogen-x/ by Katujizzz on graphicdesign.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, +3 more (786): healthytalkz.com/igr-plus/ by user438490 on meta.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +6 more (787): mummydiet.org/ketolean/ by fazozuhe on wordpress.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, +3 more (589): Vital progenix australia by Nicole James on meta.SE
