@JeffSchaller 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.
@CodyGray 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.
@Yatin That pattern looks like it's already caught by Blacklisted website in answer, Bad keyword in answer, Blacklisted website in body, and Bad keyword in body; append -force if you really want to do that.
:D I'm not sure we shouldn't watch it, but I think we should at least set up notifications, so that we can unwatch it soon, if it happens to become a problem.
Another feature request I'm going to casually make here, as if all features were easy to implement: would be very nice if we could set up an expiring watch that would automatically get removed within a certain period of time (bonus points for if it considered the waning number of TPs).
> Pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad keyword in body ---------- Pattern-matching website in body - Position 12-35: dissertationproposal.co Potentially bad keyword in body - Position 12-38: dissertationproposal.co.uk
!!/report meta.stackexchange.com/q/359872 "I'm reporting this because it seems like it might be an example of anther way to troll. Primarily, I'm wanting a record in case we see more posts similar to this."
If I were going to flag them, I'd raise a custom mod flag pointing out that one is a repost of the other answer, not a spam flag. Do you really think they're spam? Seems more like someone excited to have found a solution that works, and posting it to all questions where they feel it applies.
@NisseEngström That sounds like it could easily be spam, so... better to evaluate as to if it's spam. OTOH, it can also just be someone who unknowingly copied some tracking codes. The exact values can often tell you more.
@cigien I don't know much about them but as I understand it they seem to be used for marketing and tracking putposes. I guess my question is whether they are appropriate to use on SE sites.
@NisseEngström I don't think they're outright prohibited. They are often indicative of spam; I think we even have a watch for it. If it's spam, then it shouldn't be edited, and if it's not spam, then it shouldn't be edited either. At least, that's my logic; I don't really know too much about what the utm stuff is either.
@Makyen Someone broke a link in this edit. I can't suggest a single character edit, but I could remove the parameters to get passed the six-character limit...
@SmokeDetector This looks a lot like spam, but could be a read question. I've still closed and deleted it, and left a comment, but I can't really say that it's spam.
@SmokeDetector The user disclosed affiliation and the question was explicitly asking for this type of resource. This is not spam. The problem is the question, not the answer.
Sorry, I didn't notice the affiliation, and that it was relevant. I remembered the spam yesterday, and saw that the site was watched, and gave tpu feedback.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at beginning of answer, link at end of answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially problematic ns configuration in answer (97): App buttons gradient critique by ali khan on graphicdesign.SE
