|
|
|
|
|
Spammer terminated.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spammer terminated.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spammer terminated.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
| .
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| .
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Spammer: Member 14840828 - Professional Profile[^]
Spam: Member questions & answers[^]
Joined today to post two identical solutions to the same question from 2014.
I almost thought they were a genuine answer, since the question hadn't previously been answered. Then I saw the last line of both, which is an unlinked-link to the website for his brand-spanking new software development company, registered on Tuesday:
D2DPT LIMITED : Companies House[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
modified 27-May-20 5:56am.
|
|
|
|
|
Good catch!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting irrelevant code (wrong language, doesn't do anything like the OP asked about, no explanation or formatting) to a 2011 question: Member 14840529 - Professional Profile[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
modified 22-May-20 10:29am.
|
|
|
|
|
Pushing his APK to a 2010 question: ki zack - Professional Profile[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
modified 22-May-20 10:30am.
|
|
|
|
|
There seems to be a growing incidence of people posting a few, or sometimes a lot of, lines of code, as a solution to an old QA. They are rarely formatted, sometimes just a copy of an existing solution, sometimes totally irrelevant to the question, and even the wrong language. Whilst not actual spam the post is not really a valid answer. I tend to vote them "not an answer" and move on, occasionally adding a spam vote to the user, whilst not reporting them (they may actually be a valid contributor elsewhere, though I doubt it).
So should we vote to kick them off or just leave them to continue with such actions, as it's difficult to keep tabs on them all?
|
|
|
|
|
If the answer is not related to the question in any way, or is just a copy of a previous answer, then clearly the account has to be reported as abusive.
When it is just a bad answer (inacurate/misleading/unclear/incomplete), then only the answer needs to be flagged; it can't be considered as abusive to be wrong/incomplete, or to omit formatting.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
If it's actually a copy of an existing answer, then I report the answer as "reposted", report the user as "abusive/trolling", and tend to report them here for plagiarism.
Otherwise, I tend to do the same as you: "not an answer" on the answer, possibly with a comment, and sometimes an "abusive" report on the user if they're a repeat offender.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
When you make your report on the individual, would you mind indicating these individuals somehow on the comments? I would report them as abusive and say, "irrelevant answers" or something like that.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
