Timeline for What should be the Aviation.SE consensus on spam posts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2017 at 23:49 | comment | added | mins | @reirab. Done! And by the way, I changed my mind, as it appears editing spam makes it more difficult to the persons removing spam manually. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 23:47 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1401 characters in body
|
| Apr 18, 2017 at 21:18 | comment | added | reirab | @mins Would you mind editing that into your answer here (perhaps with relevant quotes from the meta.se posts?) | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 20:01 | comment | added | Federico | yes, you're right. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 19:39 | comment | added | mins | @Federico: From the two posts I understand that the only problem with an edited spam is the next users wouldn't identify it as such, wouldn't flag it, and the spam wouldn't gather enough flags to be deleted. This is based on the assumption that the edit actually hides the nature of the post (spam). As my edits actually emphasize this nature, I think I can safely continue to flag and edit as I explained in my answer. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 12:34 | comment | added | Federico | the comments on meta are now gone, but that non edited post was not recognized as spam due to a bug, it is going to be fixed at next release. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 8:54 | comment | added | Federico | to settle this, I asked on meta: 1 and 2 | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 8:53 | comment | added | mins | @Federico: Ok, but seen from my side --> in my profile, it's the same (you flagged this as spam, it was useful). BTW, this is a good question. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 8:35 | comment | added | mins | @Federico: Yes, I'm interested in the conclusion. Examples: this one was edited, this one wasn't, seen from my side the result is the same (deleted, identified as spam, helpful flag) | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 8:17 | comment | added | Federico | I might ask again on the main meta, but the flags are marked as helpful when the post is removed, even if the post is not treated as spam. and, again for what I understand, the post is treated as spam only if enough spam flags are raised. plus I am not sure if the original version is considered by the system (given what's written in that meta post) | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 8:13 | comment | added | mins | @Federico: Well, this seems not to be a problem, as the spam posts have been removed each time (the flags were also recognized as "helpful"). I believe the original version is also used by the system. | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 7:07 | comment | added | Federico | the problem I see (from what I understand from the main meta site) is that the [presence of the] contact information is used by the system to identify spam, removing it hides it from the system. | |
| Apr 17, 2017 at 21:03 | history | answered | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
