What is going with this spam detection here?

[Jakob]

I'm trying to ask a question about a crash I'm seeing with a very small code snippet, but somehow the question is blocked, without any explanation as to why.

Why? Why?

[mrjj]

if u add code and it looks a certain way, its considered spam :)

[Jakob]

@mrjj So what does 'a certain way' mean - can I find the rules somewhere, such that I can format the snippet differently?

[mrjj]

Hi
Not seen any info about it.
I just have tried myself being told it was spam when trying to post code. :)

[Jakob]

@mrjj Oke, a bit unfortunate that no more info is available, but fortunately there are code-paste bins all over the Internet!

[mrjj]

yeah its not mega show stopper
but kinda surprising when it happens.

[SGaist]

Hi,

Do you have small example that reproduces this ?

[mrjj]

i forgot what it was. Been a while since last time.
@kshegunov help at one point, maybe he can remember
as he found what part of code that triggered the spam checker.
( I asked him on chat)

[kshegunov]

@mrjj
It was Wieland's code and this triggered the spam filter (editing is not checked, so that's a workaround):

#include <QDebug>
#include <QQuickItem>
#include <QQmlContext>

[SGaist]

So writing includes ?

#include <QDebug>
#include <QObject>
#include <QWidger>

Makes it trigger ?
[edit: Fixed code after testing SGaist]

[SGaist]

Ok after a quick test, the includes themselves are innocent. It's the < > signs that triggers the detection. I think they might detected as html tags. A simple fix for that is to tell markdown that you are writing C++. Simply add c++ after the three ` when you write a code block and you're good to go.

[kshegunov]

@SGaist

It's the < > signs that triggers the detection. I think they might detected as html tags.

Not all headers trigger the anti-spam plugin. In my investigation from the 10-15 includes only this block appeared to be troublesome. If I had to guess, the combination of <, > and the words debug or object are the prime culprit.

Kind regards.

[Jakob]

@SGaist Hm, I tried that - didn't help

[Jakob]

@SGaist It is the exact code snippet that is now in the ubuntu paste bin, for which I posted the link.

[Jakob]

I adjusted the title a bit, now that I'm not so frustrated anymore. But in conclusion:

Number 1: I think it is a very good idea to have some protection on a forum like this.

However: introducing such a thing, without letting any user of the forum know, apparently without even some of the moderators(!!!!) knowing exactly about the details, to me, is a very, very bad idea. To the user it feels they are not taken seriously, and the maintainers of the forum just do whatever they like. That is a very, very uncomforting feeling to get from a forum in the 'Qt-world', where usually a high standard of professionalism is the standard.

[mrjj]

Hi
well considering I have posted around 2000 posts and been
hit 2 times, its not overly aggressive if u ask me :)

Also its VERY normal not to tell/make public available how to cheat a filter as it
then stops working very fast.

Also, it has been here all along. At least since I started. My first "SPAM" was
like in my first week.

But I agree. I would be nice to know WHY it triggers on pretty normal code.

[JKSH]

Pinging @tekojo -- the false positives with code snippets are still happening :(

[tekojo]

@JKSH
Hmm, I thought it was fixed.
Should be ok now.

[tekojo]

As for why it hits code snippets... I'm not completely sure. My feeling is that it mistakes them for some sort of scripting attack.

To be honest the main type of spam we have had, has mostly been chinese false educational spam and weird korean stuff.

[mariakatosvich]

I find the rules somewhere, such that I can format the snippet differently?I just have tried myself being told it was spam when trying to post code.
Thanks
My Expertise - setup nfs server Kubernetes