@SmokeDetector There seem to be at least 4 posts from this users plugging the same page (which was published only yesterday). Looks like it's either their own or an associate's article.
@AdrianMole Definitely. The about page I linked is from their user profile (which I should have mentioned in the flag). A mod appears to be lurking though, and has handled it already.
@cigien While I don't disagree with watching this, doing so won't be effective in this case. The user has way more than sufficient reputation to bypass the watchlist.
@Makyen Oh, that's true. Is it still worth watching in case they try it from another account, now that they (probably) know not to do it from this account?
as long as it's not overly excessive is playing around with random smokey commands here acceptable or is it supposed to only be for reports and discussing the project
@hyper-neutrino As long as it's not "overly excessive", it shouldn't be a problem, and can add some levity. Basically, as long as it's not disruptive, it's fine. You can, alternately, use one of the rooms in rooms.yml where commands are enabled, but which have lower traffic. Of those, I'd probably pick Charcoal Test SO as the least likely to impact anyone or the project (rooms on chat.SE are more likely to rate limit SD, if only slightly).
@Makyen ah, okay, thanks. Was just wondering if it'd be fine to say that people can test smokey commands here (to avoid clutter if/when we do decide to add it to our site's main chat) - would the SO test be best then?
@hyper-neutrino As long as it's relatively limited, here is reasonable. In here they're also likely to get feedback from users offering suggestions as to what might work for what they want to do.
From what you've said, you'll probably want to keep in mind that non-moderators need to be granted permission to run most commands for SD and/or provide feedback. OTOH, there are a significant number of commands which are available without any permissions.
@hyper-neutrino I should also say that we're happy to add almost any reasonably established user to the permissions list, but it is a step in the process, which does take a bit of time. In general, it's helpful for anyone who wants to be added to the SD permissions list to have an account on metasmoke, but that is not a requirement.
and right, forgot about that. though, i don't intend to allow commands (other than maybe report) in my room and so people who want to participate more here (or just mess around with the fun commands) may as well just do it here, so if they need permissions for more commands they can just ask here
@hyper-neutrino Commands in a room are currently all or nothing, at least from SD's point of view (i.e. SD's either listening for commands and in-chat feedback, or it's not; userscripts, e.g. FIRE, will still work for giving feedback even if SD isn't listening for commands). You do, however, have various options as to who is authorized to give commands in that room (if SD's listening at all). I described the most common configurations when discussing the settings for another room, which I'll quote:
@Mithical Who gets authorization in a room has generally been left up to the room's ROs and/or mods. For rooms that have commands enabled, there are four types of commonly used permissions settings: A) inherit from CHQ, B) inherit from CHQ with additional people listed per the ROs, C) have a separate list where the RO's permission is required to add people, and D) moderators only. Which is used in here, is really whatever the people in charge here want.
One thing that might not be clear from the above text is that, if SD is listening for commands in a room, then anyone who is a moderator on that chat server is authorized to give commands/feedback in that room.
Oh, I see, that's good to know. We're considering another option which is just to create a separate room with the bot - not sure how well that'd work, but thanks for letting me know about this; we'll keep discussing it for a bit.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad asn for hostname in answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, username similar to website in answer, +1 more (141): C++ Stop while loop at the end of the line (enter Key) by CodeExampler on stackoverflow.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad asn for hostname in answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (4): Error in a JavaScript comment line by Adarsh Rathi on stackoverflow.com
So yeah, turns out the reason I don't recall giving 3000 feedbacks in a day is because that never happened. The only person who has done that is Rubiksmoose, who gave 3,197 feedbacks on 2020-09-16.
@metasmoke 1 TP / 2 FP on that domain watch, looks like collateral rather than spam itself...I'd say we should keep an eye on it a bit longer but if the FPs keep up it might make sense to remove.
@SmokeDetector These appear to be coordinated promotion for Outscraper by users who've previously spammed/promoted. "Dana" here is likely also Dana Green, whose prior post on SO about Outscraper was considered only NAA. If this wasn't coordinated with the other post and there wasn't along history of spam from this company, this answer might be reasonable, given that it has affiliation disclosure. I've custom flagged both this post and the other one.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at beginning of body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body (42): How do Gorilla mate? ✏️ by Oyer on worldbuilding.SE
@JeffSchaller That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
