5

My "spam" flag on https://superuser.com/a/1834925/1482432 was declined. Did the moderator not see the username and the profile of the spambot?

"Declined - a moderator reviewed your flag, but found no evidence to support it"

The comment was "doesn't work because the way I replaced VarSetCapacity(monitorInfo, 40) doesn't seem to be what the DllCall expects." (a spambotty rehash of what was already on the page).

But the username was Okkabeautydubai

and the profile contained "Online Shopping Site for Fashion & Lifestyle. We brings you a variety of Clothing, Accessories, Makeup products, Skin Care Products and lifestyle products for women. Okkabeauty is the best Online Fashion Store."

13
  • You should have customer flagged it as profile spam
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:21
  • @DavidPostill How do I do that? Perhaps the moderator should spent 2 more seconds before declining a flag.
    – Gantendo
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:22
  • 1
    Flag > "In need of moderator intervention" and explain why in the text box.
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:24
  • @DavidPostill Ah lol "customer" = custom I get it now. Yeah I thought it was obvious but apparently not. Weird that we can't flag a profile.
    – Gantendo
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:25
  • 1
    The answer is cr@p but it is not spam.
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:25
  • 1
    @DavidPostill Yes it is. Of course it is.
    – Gantendo
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:25
  • 1
    Anyway user has been nuked.
    – DavidPostill Mod
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:26
  • @DavidPostill And nothing of value was lost.
    – Gantendo
    Commented Mar 13 at 16:26
  • I’m surprised that nobody has posted this yet, so: There seems to be a policy that spammy usernames and profiles are allowed.  If you go into the Users page and type any product name (e.g., “automobiles” or “clothes”), you’ll find several users whose names are clearly commercial.  Spam flags against them have historically been declined.
    – Scott - Слава Україні
    Commented Apr 8 at 22:46
  • @Scott-СлаваУкраїні they're allowed in the sense that we don't have great tooling to remove them: Spam Profiles are getting my goat. Could we have better tools for mods to deal with profile spam?. Note that without posts of theirs, they can't be easily flagged :(
    – Robotnik
    Commented Apr 11 at 4:46
  • @Robotnik: Thanks for the link, but it feels red-herring-ish.   That post doesn’t state any policy that I can see; it’s more like “everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.”   And, even to the extent that it implied a policy-by-consensus, it’s seven years old; if there was a policy then, it seems to have shifted.  … (Cont’d)
    – Scott - Слава Україні
    Commented Apr 11 at 22:06
  • (Cont’d) … Maybe a better analogy is the dog chasing cars: Yes, the chasing is futile.  But, even when one is caught, the reaction nowadays is catch-and-release.    Moderators have the capability to suspend, delete and/or destroy identified accounts, and yet spam flags against identified users routinely get declined.
    – Scott - Слава Україні
    Commented Apr 11 at 22:06
  • @Scott-СлаваУкраїні That's not been my experience - but then there's two paths that a spam flag can take. Either enough spam flags are raised on a post that the post (but not the user) is automatically deleted (the user account has severe restrictions placed on it though), OR mods see the spam flag, and action it by either casting their own spam flag (same outcome as above), or by deleting/nuking the user. But here's the catch: a spam profile with no questions, answers, or comments is effectively immune to spam flags - there's no way to raise them on a profile!
    – Robotnik
    Commented Apr 11 at 23:24

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

DavidPostill nuked the spambot.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .