@Stormblessed Are there indications that is used in a way other than was in the spam wave? In other words, isn't used as something like 】callgroub11，c o m}?
@Makyen well this is more general in case they change it, and it’s such a weird pattern that almost definitely nothing will ever use it other than spam
@Stormblessed Yes, and it's reasonable to have additional watches and/or blacklists which cover it further, or possible permutations. We've had some additional watches and blacklists added. There are two that cover the callgroub11 text, but with a "com" of some type. What you're wanting to watch is reasonable, but it doesn't take into consideration duplication with the existing blacklisted entry (i.e. we prefer not to detect the exact same thing in both a blacklist and a watch).
It would be better to add what you want to detect as either a PR to make the (?:，|,|\.)c\W*o\W*m portion of the blacklisted entry optional (i.e. change the blacklist entry from callgroub11(?:，|,|\.)c\W*o\W*m to callgroub11(?:(?:，|,|\.)c\W*o\W*m)? ), or a !!/watch which excludes matching what the blacklist will already match (e.g. callgroub11(?!(?:，|,|\.)c\W*o\W*m).
If you make it as a manually created PR, it can count as one of the PRs you might want for Hacktoberfest. :-)
@Das_Geek It doesn't look like it's spam or R/A. They appear to be answers. While I didn't check them all, they didn't appear obviously plagiarized. If you don't think they are good, then you can downvote. However, going through a user's posts is often considered user targeting. For things where there are indications of spam, R/A, and/or plagiarism, it has generally been acceptable to do so. It's also been noted on Meta as acceptable if you are looking for posts to edit for improvement.
Doing it looking for poor content, or good content, with the intent to downvote, or upvote, is not considered acceptable. Voting in that manner is generally considered serial voting, which will usually be reverted.
Yeah it wasn't with any intent to downvote. I just saw three of his answers in review queues, and it piqued my curiosity. They do look like answers, just thought it all looked weird
For the record I gave all their posts the a-OK for the reviews, and didn't up/downvote anything
The answers are similar, but appear tailored to each question. The user just has a formulaic method of writing the code for the specific JSON provided in each question.
> Url in title, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 8-23: miningchamp.com Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 8-23: miningchamp.com Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 8-23: miningchamp.com Url in title - Position 0-23: https://miningchamp.com
> Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, bad keyword in username ---------- Bad keyword in body - Position 0-8: Leptitox Bad keyword in title - Position 0-8: Leptitox Bad keyword in username - Position 0-8: Leptitox
PR#3357 ("Stormblessed: Watch bricklanecurryfestival\.com") opened by SmokeDetector
Bad keyword in body - Position 3-11: Leptitox Body starts with title and ends in url - Body contains title and ends in URL: http://bricklanecurryfestival.com/ Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-10: jesslyn2ch
> Potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-10: jesslyn2ch Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-10: jesslyn2ch Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-10: jesslyn2ch
> Potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-7: aaaa2ch Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-7: aaaa2ch Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-7: aaaa2ch
> No whitespace in title, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title, potentially bad keyword in username ---------- No whitespace in title - No whitespace or formatting in title Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 0-20: adkjfldajkfljsadl2ch Potentially bad keyword in title - Position 0-20: adkjfldajkfljsadl2ch Potentially bad keyword in username - Position 0-20: adkjfldajkfljsadl2ch
@Stormblessed The users for autoflags are assigned randomly from the pool of users who have flagging preferences and conditions which match the site and the characteristics of the post, with some additional reservations (e.g. SmokeDetector is always the first flag, unless its flagging fails; e.g. flagging to rapidly).
There's a significant pool of people from which MS selects to use flags. Your current flagging conditions are set to the default, and you don't have accounts on all sites.
That results in every time your account is a possible flagger, the pool of people from which MS is selecting is basically everyone who has signed up for autoflagging, which gives the lowest probability of your account being selected.
If you want your account to be selected more often, then you should create accounts on every SE site, and adjust your flagging conditions to match a larger number of posts. However, be aware that adjusting the criteria in your flagging conditions downward will result in it being more likely that the post on which your autoflag is used is actually FP (i.e. you're more likely to get a declined flag if you are not around to retract it).
One of the ways that I've handled reducing the risk of that is to have a looser flagging condition which I enabled when I was around and available to retract flags.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +4 more (785): welnessdeal.com/provexum/ by fgrtfgbhn on puzzling.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, +5 more (594): thesanofi.com/balanced-max-keto/ by jigatzdr on wordpress.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in title, potentially bad ns for domain in title, potentially bad keyword in body, +1 more (297): thesanofi.com/pro-vita-keto/ by naiawalt on wordpress.SE
@Makyen but the company spams, so we should detect for it. It's certainly going to happen again, and it's a name they could and have used in the past once
@Makyen what weight do you have your autoflagging set to, normally?
How can I see what weight something had that got it autoflagged?
> Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, bad keyword in username ---------- Bad keyword in body - Position 0-11: intellipaat Bad keyword in title - Position 0-11: intellipaat Bad keyword in username - Position 0-11: intellipaat
@Stormblessed The answer was from 2010-09-22 and the user was deleted. The user was almost certainly deleted well before SD scanned the post. Thus, no username was available.
@Stormblessed Then you can add it as a watch, not a blacklist. Please follow the intent behind the Guidance for Blacklisting and Watching, which is that in the vast majority of cases we put things on the watchlist first and let them stay there for enough time to accumulate several TP and that they get no FP. This allows the regex to actually be used against real data, not just the biased data we have on MS.
@Stormblessed I have a variety of flagging conditions. Currently 5 are active. Looking at them again, some are redundant, or were for testing. The weights I use are sometimes lower, depending on the group of sites (based on the spam history on those sites, or sometimes to target specific activity). I also have ones which use the number of reasons as a primary determination.
For general use, based on current numbers, I'd probably pick 197, but the condition I used to look at the current numbers was set at 196. Basically, there's a significant number of FP posts just below that weight. You can, of course, use the other criteria. For instance, I have a condition that requires 4 reasons and 100 weight.
@SmokeDetector Without context, this feels like trolling to me (i.e. some liberals might take offense). However, a moderator has chosen to just close the question, although it got an answer prior to that. The answer assumes that the context might be George Orwell's novel 1984.
room topic changed to Charcoal HQ: Where diamonds are made, smoke is detected, and we break things by developing on production. 141k true positives and counting. For more information, see charcoal-se.org/about. Handy links: metasmoke.erwaysoftware.com, github.com/Charcoal-SE [dev-on-prod] [panic-driven-development] [plastic-knives] [programmatic-crowbars]
@SmokeDetector This self-answer and the question are really just advertisements for a contract job of fixing the OP's laptop. The question & answer don't actually express an interest in getting an answer on SE, only really getting someone to do the work for them.
