Hot answers tagged

29

Clarifying Smokey Let me start with a very brief summary of what Smoke Detector does, since there's been some confusion over this. (Charcoal people, please correct me in comments if I get anything wrong.) Posts which contain certain blacklisted content (swearwords, particular link patterns, etc.) are reported into chat for user review. Users then decide ...


23

I'm not sure it's spam but it really seems to run up against the link-only rule Is there even one tiny speck of information there? No. Even the title of the page being linked to would have provided something to go on, but that was entirely too much work. So let me be clear: this sort of response is not an answer. If you see this, flag it. Moderators, if you ...


22

I think the issue here is that you're trying to look at the big picture, training the post system to detect spam across the entire Stack Network and to IP-block and 'punish' spammers to prevent them from doing it again but ignoring the little picture, that getting these posts off our site by deleting them is also an effective way to deal with them. Given ...


16

That's it - have any thoughts? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Yup. Should people use the spam flag to flag spam? Obviously. That's why it exists. But if people delete it instead, so what? It's not like SF/F gets a ridiculous amount of spam. I struggle to see why Smokey even bothers monitoring our site when spam here is practically non-existent ...


14

The reason rejected spam edits used to be a problem is because even when rejected they were still publicly visible and spammers would use that as proof to their clients they had successfully spammed their site. That was changed over a year ago so that now you can only see edits rejected as spam / vandalism if you have an account and are logged in: Why are ...


10

To give you a bit of background, I'm the user that posted the current post about increasing the number of automatic flags, the previous one a year ago, and the automated comment flagger over on Stack Overflow. That should give you the idea that I'm in favor of automation. Do we want auto spam flagging? Yes. For the same reason that you want spam ...


10

The problem is that when someone encounters a spam post in the "Low Quality" review queue, they have two options for dealing with it: Scroll down, find the tiny little "Link" link, right-click and select "open in new tab", switch to the new tab, click "flag", select "spam", click "Flag answer", close the tab, and click "Skip" in the review queue. Click "...


8

It should be fine now so I've unlocked them. If you see any spam suggested edits (on those or any other posts) please ping a mod or raise a flag.


6

Oddly, while I have argued for the flagging (And intend on using it on the sites that I moderate), I am not 100% convinced that it is needed on a site such as SFF. (Yes, this is a change from my earlier stance.) There are enough very active, high rep users here that the flagging and deletion of spam is taken care of in extremely short order. Increasing the ...


4

While I have not had the paywall situation, I have had a few cases of items I could not link to due to login requirements, and a screenshot works nicely for conveying the quoted material and showing its authenticity. Admittedly, this potentially falls prey to most modern copyright systems today having a "Fair Use" policy which has no rules, only guidelines, ...


2

It’s not spam because the answerer cites their affiliation to the article. It also answers the question: that it’s in the imagination and you can put it on the map; although the latter isn’t expanded upon. It is quite a low quality answer in that no evidence is given anywhere but it is an answer. The help page on How not to be a spammer says as much: ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible