@Tyberius Yeah, they were very sneaky. Dug up quite a few that had been missed throughout the years once I started looking. Thanks for taking a second look!
@SmokeDetector tpu- Answer is copied directly from the linked article. User also has a question asking exactly the same question photo.stackexchange.com/questions/126889 which is also copied verbatim from the linked article. Custom flagged.
[ 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, blacklisted user (75): any hope for grad school application by sara on academia.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, blacklisted website in answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (184): Creating a running tally in excel by unknown on superuser.com (@Ollie)
@CodyGray In order for a "number" to make an exact match, the pattern must begin with a digit or up to two of +,(,[, or { immediately followed by a digit. Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
@CodyGray That pattern looks like it's already caught by Bad phone number in answer and Bad phone number in body Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
@CodyGray That pattern looks like it's already caught by Bad phone number in answer, Bad keyword in answer, Bad phone number in body, and Bad keyword in body Append -force to the command if you really want to add this pattern.
@CodyGray Because the character which you've started the pattern with, &, is a non-word character, which in nearly all cases where you want it detected will be preceded by another non-word character (i.e. a space). Thus, there will be no word-->non-word boundary for the regex to begin checking. It will only detect things like "this&support(space)" which precede the "&" with a word character.
@CodyGray We disagree. The bookending exists because most of the time when people who aren't all that familiar with regexes want to watch something they are writing the pattern they are using with the implicit assumption that they want to detect entire words and they don't add bookending. Yes, it complicates things in a relatively small subset of patterns, but it's the better choice for the default behavior.
Going with the opposite choice would have more problems, just in different situations.
I think it makes more sense to just document how it actually works, rather than adding hidden gotchas because the regexes actually work different than regexes do everywhere else.
@CodyGray How it actually works is documented. Please see the Commands: Blacklists, watchlists, and the user-whitelist. The regexes work exactly like they do anywhere else. You just have to keep in mind that the pattern you are providing is not the entire regex which is used by SmokeDetector.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of answer, linked punctuation in answer, potentially bad asn for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (131): I can not remove avast from my tablet by Jenni on superuser.com (@Ollie)
@DavidW You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
@DavidW You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
@DavidW ╳ You are not a privileged user. Please see the privileges wiki page for information on what privileges are and what is expected of privileged users.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in answer, linked punctuation in answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in username (164): How can i enable secure boot on my laptop by Maria Cleh on superuser.com (@Ollie)
@DavidW I've added you to the privilege list for SmokeDetector (SD) here in Charcoal HQ. You should run the !!/amiprivileged command to verify. It would be a good idea to read through the Feedback Guidance, SmokeDetector wiki, and SmokeDetector commands (in particular feedback).
You may also want to look at the userscripts we have available (GitHub), as they can be quite helpful, depending on how you want to participate. For viewing, feedback, and flagging in chat, I find FIRE and AIM to be the ones I use the most.
For flagging through the userscripts, your metasmoke account needs to be write authenticated with SE, which, if you haven't already done so, can be done from the authentication page and doesn't require you to also sign up for autoflagging, although authenticating is also a required step for signing up for autoflagging.
In addition, to enable manual flagging through the userscripts, the checkbox that says "Allow metasmoke to raise flags for my account" on this page also needs to be checked. If you have no entries in the "ID Site Count Flags Used Today" list at the bottom of that page, then autoflagging will still not be enabled, but manual flagging through the userscripts will be enabled.
Just so you know, we normally tell people when they are getting privileges that we practice the "ton of bricks" discipline method here: If you mess-up sufficiently, or consistently, we come down like a ton of bricks :-).
To quote ArtOfCode: "TL;DR: ton-of-bricks is mostly to say that we almost never need to enforce things because things enforce themselves through having a good community here. If it gets to the point that someone's enforcing something, something's gone badly wrong."
Quoting NobodyNada [with a bit added]: "Note that 'mess up' doesn't mean 'make a mistake', it means 'do something intentionally irresponsible/antagonistic' [or consistently do something wrong and not change when it's, repeatedly, pointed out]. Charcoalers are generally quite friendly, forgiving of mistakes, and willing to help each other learn. We recognize that our systems and policies have quite the learning curve -- so don't be afraid of us :)"
