I am getting just a little pissed off
 
The post you are looking for is about my tea. No links, no images.
 
Again, please - remind me how this is better.

What was it about? Five a day?

SteveStrummerUK
 
 
I am getting just a little pissed off
 
The post you are looking for is about my tea. No links, no images.
 
Again, please - remind me how this is better.

I really have no idea why the forum software wants to eradicate your ability to post.
 
I found the post it recently flagged and deleted as spam, and it makes ZERO sense to me as to why it did so.  I did restore the post.
 
I am generally in the forums for large chunks of the day and most evenings, and I would be happy to restore posts that deleted by the spam detection software for you - but I do suggest you shoot me a PM when you become aware that a post needs restoration from the recycle bin.
 
We get NO notification whatsoever that a post or thread has gotten deleted as spam, and it may take me or other forum hosts some time to get into a particular forum where you have posted a thread about a post deletion, whereas I would see a PM much much quicker.
 
I will be sending a PM to Willy and Ryan, asking them to look into this latest spam deletion, in hopes they can somehow adjust things to where it stops hating you - or whatever its reasons are for deleting so many of your posts.
 
The only thing I see in any of these last ones I pulled up and looked at, or restored, is the link in the signature to the video, but even there, it is in threads/posts of yours that aren't deleted too - so if THAT is the reason it is spamerating you, it is at best inconsistent.
 
I will send a PM to you when I hear back from them on it.
 
Bob Bone
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I keep telling ya, the forum spam software has Steve's login hard-coded into it! 

Steve, try taking the video link out of your signature, to see if that's what Aksimet is getting hung up on.
 

bitflipper
Steve, try taking the video link out of your signature, to see if that's what Aksimet is getting hung up on.
 

maybe its is his shawn style sig block???

I am making an educated guess that Steve's linking several times to a lottery site reduced aksimet's confidence score with his user accout:

http://forum.cakewalk.com...spx?m=3137393&fp=1

Please note I'm just trying to make an observation as to what probably happened here nothing personal I'm sure it was a fraustrating experience.

The dilema is that if Askimet learns lottery sites are 'good' this opens the doors for people who spam lottery sites (e.g
You have won the microsoft lottery etc). So it might be best to avoid these sort of links in future.

 

CakeAlexS
I am making an educated guess that Steve's linking several times to a lottery site reduced aksimet's confidence score with his user accout:

http://forum.cakewalk.com...spx?m=3137393&fp=1

Please note I'm just trying to make an observation as to what probably happened here nothing personal I'm sure it was a fraustrating experience.

The dilema is that if Askimet learns lottery sites are 'good' this opens the doors for people who spam lottery sites (e.g
You have won the microsoft lottery etc). So it might be best to avoid these sort of links in future.

So, let me get this straight - what you're saying is that I have to effectively moderate myself because neither the forum software or the hosts are capable of moderating this place properly?
 
If the contents of my posts do not contravene the CoC, why the hell should I censor what I include in them?
 
Please explain to me how not being exposed to the odd spam post somehow makes the forum a better place than having to be constantly judicious about what one writes or includes in a post; or having to chase up a host to retrieve a post every time the forum software mistakes a genuine post for spam.
 
I wonder, was the spam that used to get through a serious problem, or (as I tend to believe) just a temporary nuisance?
 
You couldn't make it up.

I cannot speak accurately about spam volume before or after the creation of forum hosts, however Ryan from Cakewalk indicated he had been dealing with a pretty sizable amount of spam manually prior to the changes.  Additionally, there was a time when multiple forum folks would spend at times 20-30 minutes every morning wading through and manually flagging some idiot from India posting about voodoo love potions and all sorts of wild claims - he apparently had some sort of automated spam process that would just FLOOD the forums every day.
 
I don't know what can or cannot be adjusted within the spam detection functionality of the forum software, and can only hope that Ryan or Willy or someone can explain to all of us what the scoop is for what may be able to be done to get a better balance with it all.
 
We forum hosts can only go into the forum recycle bin and hunt down and restore posts one at a time, and I do not know if our doing that helps 'teach' the spam detection process that particular posts were not properly flagged, so that over time it learns and gets better at its decision making.
 
If there were more we could do as forum hosts, I would happily do so - I don't want to see folks get frustrated from trying to submit posts that fall within the defined acceptable bounds for posting in these forums.
 
So, please give it a little time - and let's see if Cakewalk staff can make some alterations to make things better, while still achieving their goal of reducing the amount of time they have to spend dealing with spam (that we never saw, but that cuts into their available time to spend working on development/issue-resolution).
 
And in the meantime, sending a PM to one or all of the forum hosts remains the quickest way for us to go in and restore posts that were wrongly detected as spam and deleted by the forum software.
 
Bob Bone