@JeffSchaller I've made two adjustments to the regex used, so that post would now A) not be included, and B) if it was included, then another criteria would exclude it.
@tripleee 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 word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, body starts with title and ends in url, link at end of body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body (290): Organic Soy Protein Powder suppliers by DFDVX378 on askubuntu.com
The one on AU? Up to you. I could see tp as it is arguably rude, but very salvageable, so not tpu. Or maybefp, because the rest of the post is fine. Seeing as that answer-er left a comment containing that domain as well in response to a question, I'm personally more included to go tp, though (with a possible comment flag)
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ip for hostname in body, bad ns for domain in body, bad keyword in link text in body, blacklisted website in body, pattern-matching website in body, +1 more (459): How to writ an analytical essay by Marco Starc on serverfault.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at beginning of answer, potentially bad asn for hostname in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, username similar to website in answer, blacklisted user (179): Snowflake time travel by halino travel on stackoverflow.com
@tripleee That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
ah I meant that the answer really does look like spam
the question...yeah, the FP vs TP is arguable. I just went with it being a seed due to the question being posted by the same person as the clear-spam answer.
@SmokeDetector n immediately self-deleted and it's a table...probably just trying to do something with Markdown tables? I'm just gonna mod-redelete it.