Discussions

Minh wrote:


It's broken! I can't report my own post as spam?

I'm thinking that you are kidding... but just in case you aren't, that is correct... the report spam button is not shown next to your own posts and it is not shown at all if you are an admin.

In both cases it didn't seem necessary, but it also looked cruddy as well. In both of those cases you'd also see an 'edit' button, and the extra button was causing the whole button bar to wrap

 

Dylan C wrote:


OMG. Olive Garden's breadsticks PWN life itself.

Sometimes I think we go there just for the breadsticks... I order soup, my wife gets a salad... the kids get whatever, but all they really want to eat is the breadsticks.

Crack for those of us on low-carb diets

Siyavash wrote:

hm... wait a min, it is just a "mailto:" link! wtf ?... this kind'a sucks. Why use my mail client to report junk on a forum? I would rather have it built-in somehow so I don't need to start up my mail client every time I see a lunix troll or spam.

Wow, it is like you didn't read my comment at all

Seriously though, I agree with you 100% ... consider this as just one step above having nothing (which is what we had in place a few minutes before). And yes, it should be built-in and it should be done differently. This is not even a beta, this is a quick fix to get spammers found and shut down faster than they currently are.

littleguru wrote:

I reported my first SPAM a few minutes ago

What kind of SPAM does the team expect us to report? Just people SPAMing about their "cool products" or ...?

Report trolls too... report anything that you feel is inappropriate in the forum you are viewing. Of course, talking about Linux is perfectly appropriate, but pointless baiting and flaming might be worth reporting.

Definitely report any one just pimping their web url though, those posts are really starting to bug me.

Well, that didn't take you long to notice

I just pushed the update out. To be clear, this is a small update that only gives you a handy email link.

I would have rather gone all out and have you click to vote that you think a post is inappropriate... and then we'd get notified or have an RSS feed of inappropriate posts, perhaps after a certain threshold... but I also wanted to push something out today so that we can start jumping on some of the clearest examples of spam (anyone want some iPhone converter software?) and other forms of inappropriate content.

I'm also seeing it is as a bit of test to see how much garbage we get through this avenue... how many perfectly fine posts are reported as inappropriate, etc... and that info will help us to decide how best to implement the next level of moderation, banning, ignoring, etc...

Just a quick note, we are looking into this but some of your thoughts/guesses are probably correct.

All posts have a parent, which can be the original post or one of the replies. If you clicked reply on a spam post that we then deleted, the system would find your comments when doing a count (the "replies:12") but wouldn't be able to render them out correctly.

And littleguru, sorry about the various problems. For most of them they are just problems in the existing code base that have always been there, we just happen to have hit them more often in recent days.

Thanks again for your patience folks!

Probably related to my changes... seeing a cached version the second time. If you save your changes and then come back later (> 5 minutes) did your changes appear?

not suggesting that is ok, but just to confirm that the changes are definitely making it in there

and... it should be fixed now... please reply here to let me know if it is working as expected!

Sorry about that guys, we were seeing some crazy CPU usage on the SQL box and my fix had some unintended side affects

Nothing to do with your browser... I broke this guys... and I'll fix it up for you soon!

If you are interested in why, I added a couple minutes of caching into the system around post retrieval and that means that when you are viewing a post we are no longer making a database call to retrieve it... and that retrieval call was where it was marking it as read.

I'll get it back to the way it was as soon as I can.

The problem is that the error being received, in nearly every case, is a SQL timeout.... which is useful information, but what am I really working on figuring out is the underlying cause of the timeout.

Exception table doesn't really help with that, but I think we are getting closer to an answer