the way R-HUB has been ramping up over the last few weeks it's a small wonder if they are drawing attention to themselves ... they were probably a lot more successful when they managed to fly under the radar
@Yatin 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 | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, pattern-matching product name in body, potentially bad keyword in body (391): Rick Simpson cbd oil by WilliWarren on apple.SE
@Yatin There doesn't seem to be any reason to think that this username will appear in a different format than the one used. Again, this one is ok, since this pattern is unlikely to be used by any account other than to spam, but in general, with usernames I think it's preferable to use the exact name unless there's a good reason. Also, there are only 4 TP for this username, but since it spams a website that has been seen in additional posts, I'm happy to count it as part of a PC.
@tripleee Yeah, that seems more like it; around 4 months. That's roughly when I started participating in Charcoal, which explains why I imagined R-HUB was always very active :)
@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.
The website itself doesn't appear to be spammy to me, and since it's not appeared in any spam posts yet, I don't think there's enough cause to watch it.
some people go to great lengths to avoid registering an account, and of course some manage to get themselves lock out of an account they wanted to keep
FIRE started throwing the ol' "No MS report found for (x)" errors and clicking the MS link on the report line also gave a "Not found" error once Metasmoke opened so I have no idea.
user435118
Metasmoke does seem to be a bit slow for me anyway.
Probably could've gone with another VLQ flag, but I raised the red flag because the previous answer had already been deleted and because Cesar told them not to post. It was marked as spam by Chris.
I think just another NAA flag would've done fine. Maybe a custom flag to suggest something slightly harsher for reposting despite the original deletion, but I dunno.
Remember, @Ollie that SE's definition of spam is a bit different than most other sites. In other sites, spam can be a bunch of text copy-pasted over and over, or repeatedly posting the same thing despite your previous posts being deleted. On SE, spam requires some sort of product, site, article, something being advertised or promoted without disclosure of affiliation. That answer definitely wasn't promoting something, so it's not spam, but it was problematic behavior for sure.
From an SE search, I also found this answer which had the (pretty spammy) site edited in by a user for seemingly no reason. Not sure if I should suggest an edit to remove that, or if a 2k user should edit it out.
