Jeffrey Bosboom

Related reading: Is It Still Robbery If You Just Ask Nicely? from the legal humor blog Lowering the Bar, about an actual case from Israel. (A quick search found some other legal writers mentioning the case, but I didn't see any information on the case's resolution.)

Were you able to read the German references? If not, just politely explain to the editor that you can't judge the paper because you can't read the papers it references, and leave it to the editor to decide.

"I believe that they want to reuse, modify and build upon what I do" Isn't that reason enough for them to prefer you work in something they're more familiar with? You should want your research software to be reused, modified and built upon.

I didn't look too closely, but I think that was an attempt to evade a question ban by replacing an old question, not self-vandalism.

Okay, I put in a custom flag on SO.

Hmmm, this one has 21 posts. Not sure anymore.

Oooh, and what looks like sockpuppeting, also on Stack Overflow. I'll put in custom flags.

@SmokeDetector Okay, that user seems to be making legitimate posts, but some of their user profiles contain spam links. Not sure what to do here, custom flag?

@SmokeDetector f (off-topic, but not spam/offensive)

@SmokeDetector why

@SmokeDetector why

"You have a typo" is an answer. Yes, the answer just said <td"> but I think the intent was clear. You may revert if you feel otherwise.

@SmokeDetector f (typo point-out was HTML-sanitized out of the rendered answer)

@Magisch That's... an interesting rationale. I'll have to use mine more regularly to ensure my account slot isn't being wasted on me.

@Magisch You can fill in feedback through Metasmoke /review if you have/get an activated Metasmoke account.

@Marshmallow Didn't know that was automatic, but makes sense.

If you see a spam URL that isn't picked up by the "blacklisted website" or "pattern-matching website" reasons, you can ask a developer to add it, and then the next time the bot sees a post containing that URL it will be automatically reported in here.

The report command just makes the bot process the post as though it had matched some other reason (the report reason is "Manually reported question/answer"). It doesn't do anything beyond that.

You need to be privileged to report posts.

@NickGammon Report the post. You can ping Marshmallow (or any developer, I suppose) if you want a new spam URL added to the blacklist or pattern-matching regex.

Well, if there's ever a public API for feedback, someone (though probably not me) could write a script that hooks the flag dialog to automatically provide feedback.

@Undo I see SD's posting it some JSON. A stretch to call it an API, I guess.

Is Metasmoke's API only for SD's use?

@VincentVerheyen The nominal main chat for Meta Stack Exchange is Tavern on the Meta.

!!/report fitness.stackexchange.com/a/29554/19798

@SmokeDetector f (give me teh codez)

@SmokeDetector n

Okay, he posted a "question": stackoverflow.com/questions/36687702/…

Hmmm, maybe I was too generous, though I still don't think it meets our definition of spam. It's an exact duplicate so the mods will get an automatic flag.

@SmokeDetector n

@SmokeDetector f

@SmokeDetector why

Oh, it was already deleted? That was fast.

@SmokeDetector why

Hmm, I thought you changed it to only check titles for messaging numbers due to false positives.

@Marshmallow ^ New QQ number variant, though I think the current regex would match if we checked the body.

@Marshmallow ^ URL wasn't pattern-matched.

@SmokeDetector why

!!/alive

While I've read that spam flags train the anti-spam system, it's frustrating that posts containing those links don't get blocked outright. Making spammers register new domains at least costs them money.

sd 10k

@SmokeDetector Looks like an attempt to fill in this answer's missing details? But that answer had a link and it was edited out. Not sure what's going on there, though it doesn't look like spam.

@SmokeDetector n

@SmokeDetector f (legitimate use)

Oh, your comment even mentions deleting. That's what I get for assuming it's the same pro forma comment every time. (Though it's a delete link, not a button.)

@Ferrybig That self-vandal was originally NAA anyway. I guess the user realized and wanted to clean up but didn't know how.

@SmokeDetector n

I also went with NAA.

@SmokeDetector f