@Machavity Moderators are automatically privileged with SmokeDetector. If you mean on metasmoke, then:
@fooot, the account on MS which is associated with your SE account now has the Reviewer role. It took a little bit to find it, but it was the only account on MS which is newly a moderator. Congratulations on the election!
@Machavity A couple of weeks ago, I went through all accounts on MS which were associated with moderator accounts on SE and made sure they all had the Reviewer role.
When I see a new metasmoke user is created and the MS account is associated with an SE account, I've been looking at the SE user and giving permissions based on the SE account, with all moderators getting Reviewer. @fooot already had an account, so I wouldn't have noticed the change to moderator and granting Reviewer to moderators is not automatic at this time. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
@fooot I would highly suggest installing the FIRE userscript. Shows MS feedback on the chat message and gives you a handy popup to see the post, as well as the reason, and then leave feedback
Just remember to report spam first and THEN delete. If you do them in reverse, the API won't give Smokey the post details
@Machavity FIRE provides a button on reports which opens the popup you mentioned. AIM is the userscript that shows feedback in-line with chat messages.
@fooot Just so you know, FIRE will also allow you to, optionally, also raise spam/R-A flags. However, it won't raise flags on any site where you are a moderator. Not raising flags on sites where you're a moderator is a restriction on flags raised through metasmoke.
@Brandon_J That's going to depend on if you're asking about the weight at the time it was reported (if so, probably this post at 1,457), or if you are asking about current score. If you're asking about current score, then there are 3 that are tied for highest at 1,384: 1, 2, 3
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Blacklisted website in answer and Blacklisted website in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Blacklisted website in answer and Blacklisted website in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
:51617387 That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
:51617387 That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@Machavity That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
@SmokeDetector I'm not going to watch this domain at this time. Adding it to the watchlist would result in 3 detection reasons if the user uses it again, which would trigger autoflagging, under some conditions. I don't think this is something we want to be autoflagging, yet.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, link at end of body, pattern-matching product name in body, +4 more (693): Is Pro Blast XL Safe? by makssoul89 on askubuntu.com
