Hot answers tagged

16

Flagging spam as 'Spam' is already the most extreme action you can take - with enough spam flags raised on a post, it will be auto-deleted (without needing moderator intervention) and the user account responsible will be permanently marked & severely restricted from posting again. Close votes on Spam are superfluous at best. It only takes 3 clicks to ...


15

By our technical definition, yes, you are a spammer. You've answered three questions promoting your tool. One of them is even a self answer. Looking at it in a more positive light...I think there's something there that can be helpful. Just not in their current form. Let's break it down: You posted three answers in a very short time frame promoting your ...


13

No. One of the design goals of Stack Exchange is to put as little friction as possible in the answering process. Requiring people to ask questions before they can answer them is counterintuitive, counterproductive and goes against most network principles.


11

I think these answers should be deleted, along with the user. They might provide an answer to the question, but they're still spam. Although I think most of these types of users will just post the one answer and then move on, if they decide stick away and keep posting answers like this it becomes a lot of work to constantly edit out the spam. And, frankly,...


9

If the answer is based off the information in the link and that link is no longer valid, the correct thing to do is downvote the current answer (unhelpful now) and submit a new answer with valid information that is relevant today. In this case, that entire answer is based off of that link being the source of servers. Since it's no longer true, that answer ...


9

It really annoys me when this happens on Super User: Should we replace the content of spam posts so that they say they are spam? I feel that this is superfluous and masks the actual spam content, which a user can readily identify and flag as spam. My experience with spam posts is that users typically respond quickly to the post with flags if it is clearly ...


8

We already have a mechanism on the site for restricting users with less than 10 reputation from posting answers, called "protection". We use it solely for situations when there's a demonstrated need - a particular question that has attracted several answers from <10 reputation users that have been deleted. Users at 15000 reputation can also apply it ...


8

I personally see no need for the chatbot. I have no idea when the spam posts you located were posted, but I would guess that the ones that took 15 minutes to get rid of were posted at night when most Bridge regulars are sleeping (so having chat notifications for them wouldn't help much). I know most Bridge regulars will link spam/offensive posts for ...


7

One thing to consider - does admitting you are a dev or whatever for a particular game make the answer any better or any more correct? Likely it doesn't. Likely the only thing that matters is the specific information that you are giving - if it is correct in and of itself, then it should be able to stand on its own as a good and thus community rewarded ...


7

Flag as spam. If enough users flag, the post will be deleted (not simply closed), as spam should be. If a moderator notices the flag, he'll generally also burninate the spammy user as well. Sometimes, if the community is too adept, the flag will auto-resolve before a moderator even sees it, in which case the user might survive. If you really want to make ...


7

I agree that timeliness is an important factor when dealing with... pretty much anything on the site. Not just cleaning spam, but also commenting, answering, closing, voting. This is why we have Lazers: it posts the good, and the bad, and everything in between, so that every question has a chance to get some love. I cannot imagine this bot coexisting with ...


3

Typically, we would update links that provide the helpful supplementary information. However, in this case, the entirety of the answer is a link, which means that without the link, it no longer meets the requirements to hold water as an answer, and should be removed. The course of action in this specific case would be to flag the post as a non-answer, and ...


3

If the post "looks like" a real answer but the subject experts know it's not, I favor deletion (and deleting/suspending the user). Though kudos to the clever spammer I suppose :P If it is a valid, accurate answer, we should: Delete or suspend the user, so the problem stops. Edit the post so that the useful content remains. In place of #2 I would also be ...


2

I think that there are at least two separate issues here that have to be handled separately. The first is the self-promotion disclosure policy. This actually doesn't really matter much for game developers because it is very rare that you can answer a question with a link to a game (since recommendation questions and most identification questions are off-...


2

I don't think this needs to be addressed. Questions which only the developer can answer are off-topic. If you are here to answer the question anyone can answer, why is being a developer going to make that answer better? If an answer contains that information, it is likely irrelevant to the actual answer and could be edited out.


2

When should the Spam flag be used? When you think something is Spam. It's a judgement call. Spam flags are relevant when someone posts a wildly irrelevant question or answer promoting a product to the site, or an answer that seems relevant to the question on the surface, but contains unrelated product links or information. For example on the latter: Note ...


1

Since most of the people who voiced their opinion here think that there isn't much of a need for the bot, I'm going to leave this proposal on-hold until Arqade feels that such a bot is wanted/necessary in The Bridge.


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