« first day (2615 days earlier)      last day (110 days later) » 

2:29 AM
I think this is actually NAA (by the standard of NAA we tend to use on Ask Ubuntu). It's trying to answer the question of how to run some specific web browser, rather than the question that was asked which is entirely about how run the default web browser. (I noticed this when I another answer, which had an analogous problem, came up in review; that other answer is now deleted.)
Similarly, NAA considering what the question asks.
This suggested edit intends to improve the command but makes it worse (actually, makes it a syntax error, due to an unmatched single quote).
@karel Since you commented (and correctly so) on the new ones, what--if anything-o--do you think should happen with that older and more popular answer that has the same basic problem?
 
[ Natty | Sentinel ] Link to Post Contains Blacklisted Word - Any help; Low Length; No Code Block; Contains Salutation - appreciated; IntelliBL - 0.3; Low Rep; Self Answer; 3.0;
 
@EliahKagan I can live with one sneaky pete answer like that, but the problem is it attracts copycat sneaky pete answerers.
 
I guess people upvoted it because it solves a different problem that they may have had when they searched and found the question. I won't flag it. I did downvote it. (And I flagged and voted to delete the other two new ones.)
@Zanna Which needs work, the question or an answer? The question is considered good. :) :) :)
How did this question get four POB close votes?
 
@Natty tp
 
 
3 hours later…
6:28 AM
OT Kali oops i must have posted this on the wrong forum. I'm having the problem on kali linux, 2018.4 amd64.
 
7:09 AM
OT Windows 10
 
 
1 hour later…
8:29 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user (164): Convert .gsm to .wav wiht SOX by Davvy on askubuntu.com
 
@EliahKagan If it gets closed anyway, please pm me here and I will VTR.
 
 
1 hour later…
9:41 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Pattern-matching website in body, potentially bad ns for domain in body (98): How do i SSL spoof a host on ubuntu like in anonytun? by xaander1 on askubuntu.com
 
10:46 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url-only title, bad keyword in body, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, body starts with title and ends in url, +9 more (893): healthcircle365.com/hi-q-keto/ by Hi Q Keto on askubuntu.com
 
 
1 hour later…
12:08 PM
@Natty tp
@Natty tp
@Natty fp
I guess that one isn't NAA, but it's wrong and of poor quality. I've commented based on my guess as to what the author's reasoning is. I think we can delete it.
What is this asking?
 
12:49 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in body (99): How do I check my Google Cloud credit? by manjuladevi on askubuntu.com
 
1:22 PM
no repro (seems to have been from a loose connection in the machine, which I don't think always makes a question no repro, I don't think the diagnostic information in the question points to that or would otherwise help readers realize they may have that problem)
 
2:07 PM
@EliahKagan This question has an accepted answer posted by Byte Commander that worked when I tested it.
 
2:28 PM
@karel Yeah, I guess they were asking for one of the things Byte Commander's answer showed, either the short URL or something contained in the short URL. I still don't know what the OP was asking. I've retracted my previous unclear vote. I just hope we never close anything as a duplicate of that question (unless it's edited so it makes sense).
 
2:43 PM
@EliahKagan haha great to see that :)
 
:)
 
This answer was identified as possible spam. askubuntu.com/a/1168131/618353
It isn't, although the answer is already included in the accepted one
 
@user3140225 No system is 100% accurate. As of now it didn't receive any spam flag since spam flags trigger -1.
I have "improved" your edit.
 
@Kulfy Yes, thank you
 
2:59 PM
@user3140225 Keep on improving "spam" :P
 
@Kulfy hahahah, I'll do my best!
 
:)
 
Yeah, I find the "possible spam" warning in the LQP queue to be far less accurate than Smoke Detector.
 
Smokey gets supervised learning while I'm not sure about SE.
 
I don't know about how all the functionality in SE around spam works, but I don't think the "possible spam" warnings are very sophisticated. It might even just match it against a big regex. :)
It can also warn about that in audits (where the warning is deliberately misleading).
 
3:12 PM
Yeah it happens in every queue. Apart from audits, posts are also "identified" as spam.
I commented on this post but I don't know if what guillermo chamorro did is acceptable.
 
Well, it's not ideal.
Btw, I think you might want to reword the "cops" part, because I think that metaphor might be unclear to less experienced users (including the user you're replying to).
 
@EliahKagan Here is the link of the question in queue. I clicked on Leave Open. You can review that if you want to kick it out of the queue.
 
Thanks. I'll have to wait 8 hours though. I've already reviewed 20 close votes today.
 
@EliahKagan Too late.
 
No worries, I don't think it's a big deal.
 
3:19 PM
@EliahKagan I hope it won't get close meanwhile.
 
@EliahKagan I wouldn't have mentioned if it we weren't already taking about it.
You could delete and repost the comment if you wanted though.
@Kulfy Well, that could happen whether or not it's kicked out of the queue first. If it does, it can be reopened.
 
Yeah.
@EliahKagan I thinks cops will include mods, SE employees and all the users who are more into this. I'm not sure which "one word" I can use in that place.
 
Personally, I'd just use words like what you just said. It's longer but clearer. Also, the degree to which AU is community moderated is often underappreciated by newcomers, so IMO it's not bad to be explicit about who might take an interest.
 
Thanks. I think that's more informative and less prone to misinterpretation.
As far as whether or not what that commenter is describing is acceptable, I don't know for sure. If I understand them correctly, then it's not great, but I don't think moderators need to or should take any action. People should vote on posts, not authors. That's regarded to be very important, and is basically the only rule restricting how we're allowed to use upvotes and downvotes.
 
3:29 PM
Yeah indeed. The posts aren't bad though. But I do think favoring 1 user shouldn't be done. It's like being carried away by emotions.
 
I don't think it's necessarily emotions (or that being affected by emotion is necessarily bad) because, after all, the goal may well be to cause the new user to be more interested in continuing to contribute or even to cause the new user to get rep-associated privileges faster. But I do think that posts should never be upvoted or downvoted based on factors that are outside, and cannot reasonably be considered to be incorporated into, those posts. Especially the identity of their authors.
But what makes it tricky, sometimes, is that voting is in practice affected by how much attention the potential voter gives to a post, which is related to the potential voter's other interactions with the post author, as well as to factors like the author being new to the site (because we deliberately try to pay attention to, and help improve, posts by new authors--the system is designed to encourage this). If people spend more time with a post, they're more likely to consider voting on it.
Also, in practice people do often vote on posts they think are good because they want the author to have more rep, rather than because they want the post score to increase. (Relatedly, CW posts often don't attract as many votes as non-CW posts.) This is not regarded as a violation of the rules.
That's not the only gray area. Those of us (like me) who tend to use all or most of our votes on days we're active on the site have to consider who post authors are, but in an opposite way: if I vote on 40 posts in a day, I could easily end up voting several times or more on posts by the same author, so I deliberately remain mindful of who the authors are when I'm voting.
It's right for me to do this--it's the effect of voting based on the identity of the author, and not just the intent, that our rules prohibit. But it's also weird, because it means I'm thinking of who a post's author is when deciding whether or not to vote on the post, which is what we're ideally supposed to not do. I can explain why this is okay because I'm engaged in targeted non-voting... but someone could also say they engage in targeted non-voting on posts not written by new users. :)
Like, I often learn about posts by chat regulars in chat. This is unavoidable; people may try to avoid promoting their posts in chat, but we still must be able to discuss them, and to have discussions that lead to a question or answer being posted. But if I made voting decisions based solely on quality, then I would be breaking the rules and upvoting posts by the same few users way too much.
So I must be less willing to vote for posts by users whose posts I see very frequently. Furthermore, this is intensified by how some users' posts are almost all very good--I still must not upvote all a user's posts! Due to the combination of these factors, I only upvote Zanna's posts when they are of award-winning quality or are otherwise enormously useful in context. Sorry @Zanna. :)
 
Would this question be suitable for reopening if the OP were to use a supported Ubuntu release and they edited it to be narrower and more detailed? I'm thinking we would still say it should be closed, because it would still be a request for hardware recommendations. Should it have a comment about that?
Do we allow some hardware recommendation questions these days? My understanding is we allow software recommendation questions but not hardware recommendation questions.
@Natty tp
@EliahKagan Anyway, I've seen a number of comments, including from some very experienced high-rep users, saying they're downvoting someone's post, explaining why, and then mentioning that they went and looked for another post by that same user to upvote, as consolation. I don't think moderators need to take action on that either (though if it becomes common then it should be mentioned that it's a bad idea).
But I think that sort of thing, even though no crackdown on it would be appropriate, is way worse, and also more of a problem, than newcomers posts attracting upvotes out of sympathy (except when the posts are really bad and there's just no plausible reason to upvote them). @Kulfy
@EliahKagan I also think that's unlikely to achieve the intended effect--like most consolation prizes. I think it has the effect of saying, "Your post was so bad, I went out of my way to find something good you did, so I could make you feel good about that other thing, because otherwise it could ruin your day to contemplate how bad this bad, bad post is."
Obviously people don't mean to communicate that, but I think it's the unintended subtext when people downvote a post, go upvote another post by the same user as consolation, and they comment to say they did that.
In contrast, selectively voting for posts by new users isn't a good use of votes and approaches (or sometimes constitutes) a violation of the rules, but I don't think it has any bad effects in most cases.
 
OT no-repro, OP hasn't signed on to Ask Ubuntu for 6 years.
@Kulfy VTLO
 
4:15 PM
@karel I agree, though I think closing it as unclear is slightly preferable. I've commented and voted to close.
Why was this question made CW?
 
4:38 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url-only title, bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, blacklisted website in body, blacklisted website in title, +9 more (989): www.ketodietwalmart.com/ultra-fast-keto-boost/ by matthmmeu on askubuntu.com
 
4:52 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body, bad keyword in title, link at end of body, link following arrow in title, pattern-matching product name in body, +5 more (596): Ultra Fast Keto Boost@>>> pillsneed.com/ultra-fast-keto-boost/ by matthmmerow on askubuntu.com
 
5:13 PM
Do we have something about printing from Wine? (The Notepad++ snap package appears to run in in Wine--it still doesn't have a native port to GNU/Linux, as far as I can tell.)
 
 
1 hour later…
6:19 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (87): Adding one variable into multiple parts of an alias? by biltikespu on askubuntu.com
 
6:40 PM
dupe (or it will need more information for an answer)
@EliahKagan To clarify, I meant selectively voting for posts by a specific person. Although I definitely wouldn't recommend a general pattern of casting votes more or less often on posts whose authors have used the site for a shorter or longer time or have lower or higher rep, I don't think that would go against any rules.
 
 
2 hours later…
8:58 PM
 
 
1 hour later…
10:16 PM
 
[ Natty | Sentinel ] Link to Post Ends with ?; Low Length; No Code Block; One Line only; Low Rep; Self Answer; 1.5;
 

« first day (2615 days earlier)      last day (110 days later) »