|
In the last few weeks I have had a few message postings flagged as "spam" - in every case I have no idea as to why? These have been in the Lounge, and I didn't see that I used anything inflammatory or self-marketing or anything else like that.
Moreover, I have no idea what happened to these messages. They were placed "in the moderation queue pending approval" - but it would be nice to know a) whether or not they were approved, and b) if not approved, why not? Some sort of follow-up message as to why such a message is spam, and its final disposition would be nice to know.
Thanks...
|
|
|
|
|
Generally speaking, you'll know if the message was not published because it was considered spam, because your account will be closed very shortly after! Since this clearly hasn't happened, I'd hazard a guess that they were let through...
And to be honest, it wouldn't be a good idea to let anyone why those message went moderation, or why it was rejected as spammers could easily use that information to get their next message through. We really don't want that!
You have several messages posted in the lounge over the last couple of weeks, so I'd guess they all got through.
The spam system is heuristic: it learns from what messages are and aren't considered spam, so it's not always obvious why it went to moderation even when we look at the specific terms it flagged - but it should learn what terms that it flags as "probably spam" are innocuous over time.
I know that doesn't help you, but it really is a vital system and under normal circumstances the moderation delay is a couple of minutes so it shouldn't inconvenience anyone too much.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the response, and I totally understand. But perhaps it makes sense to auto-generate a message (similar to what is initially sent when flagged as spam) to indicate a message was accepted and not punted as spam. At least then a person who does send a valid (non-spam) message knows if his message was posted.
Anyways, thanks again for dealing with this 
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like it might be a good idea - a message to say "sorry for the delay, it's posted now".
@Chris-Maunder
What do you think?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently there's a safe list - approach Chris to be asked to put on it and given your near 10 years experience I'm sure he will oblige.
|
|
|
|
|
No, no safe list. A safe algorithm, though. Of sorts.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
In my experience, the "AI" considers almost anything with a "proper name" and / or an acronym, in the middle of a sentence, as "spam"; regardless of who posted it.
Considering how "complex" it must be to deal with this case, I do not see a solution forthcoming.
|
|
|
|
|
Split a list into sublists of same outer type reference in LINQ[^]
This seemed like a valid question to me, even if a bit awkwardly worded (OP not a native English speaker ?), and I was going to reply with an explanation and code that demonstrated how to get a collection of all "columns" (IEnumerable of IEnumerables) of a given List<List<T>> using Linq.
OriginalGriff had responded with a substantial comment asking the OP to clarify.
I would like to see questions that have such detailed comments not be deleted so quickly.
thanks, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
Could it be possible that it has been deleted by the OP him(her)self?
You always obtain more by being rather polite and armed than polite only.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a good point, perhaps it was not removed by votes of other members.
thanks, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it isn't too much trouble, can we have all the Brexit related posts moved? Because there will be another messy election coming up and we don't want to set a precedent now, do we?
|
|
|
|
|
I vote no, to your request.
|
|
|
|
|
See my post in the lounge about this.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Did I miss your post? I don't see it anywhere in Lounge
Never mind.. I need more Coffee
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I just changed my login e-mail is that the same e-mail that is used for notifications
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
It should. I will send you an email confirmation request to make sure.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of questions, since I am suddenly blocked from voting since I need a "confirmed mail address":
1) How do I confirm my mail address? I've been a member here for years with the same address, and I remember having to do this a while back.
2) How often does the site insist that mail addresses be confirmed?
'PLAN' is NOT one of those four-letter words.
'When money talks, nobody listens to the customer anymore.'
|
|
|
|
|
When you signed up you would have received an email asking for email confirmation. It has a link you click and you're done. If you haven't confirmed in a while then a notice will appear at the top of this forum. It has a link that will trigger a fresh email to be sent.
It looks like you're email was confirmed a few days ago. We ask that emails haven't had any noticeable action be reconfirmed every few months.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I just clicked the unsubscribe link on a newsletter, and was greeted by a page with the usual stuff asking me to check the lists I don't want to receive anymore, along with a shocker.
There was a checkbox reading something along the lines of "Also, remove my account entirely".
 
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
So essentially you just went to the "My Settings" page... why is it a problem that there is an option to remove your own account?
|
|
|
|
|
CHill60 wrote: So essentially you just went to the "My Settings" page
I might have been away from this site for a while, but those two pages look completely different to me:
Unsubscribe from newsletter page[^]
My Settings page[^]
CHill60 wrote: why is it a problem that there is an option to remove your own account?
Now that I give it another look, I think the checkbox label might be slightly misleading. I presume that that checkbox means to say "remove me from all newsletters", instead of "remove my account entirely".
Should that not be the case, an option that might delete my account entirely in a page that reads "Please follow the instructions below to change your newsletter subscriptions" sounds f***ing insane to me.
modified 26-Jun-16 19:32pm.
|
|
|
|
|
For the past few days (not sure how many; maybe a couple of days or over a week), I have been receiving the Code Project | Offers newsletters, but the content and online link have been blank. I only bring this up because there have been a couple of headliners I was interested in - but there wasn't anything in the newsletter section. I have saved several of the emails and can forward them to someone for analysis, if wanted.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless I am mistaken, this is an active bug we are working on right now that pertains to members who opt to receive text-based emails. Our apologies. We are getting it sorted.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
The editor window allows you to expand/contract it vertically using the size-dingus at window lower-right.
What would be cool would be if you could also size the window width by dragging the dingus to the right, into what is now the vast, beckoning, white-space.
thanks, Bill
«There is a spectrum, from "clearly desirable behaviour," to "possibly dodgy behavior that still makes some sense," to "clearly undesirable behavior." We try to make the latter into warnings or, better, errors. But stuff that is in the middle category you don’t want to restrict unless there is a clear way to work around it.» Eric Lippert, May 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
