none
New SPAM filter is working against many people RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • I'll chime in (I know this isn't the right place, but I was got no response when I asked in the right place) that the alleged spam filter is highly overzealous for lots of people, and the alleged remedy (email "fissues" at microsoft) yielded no response.  People aren't gonna beg to use the forums, they'll just start using them less.
    Thursday, April 27, 2017 12:41 PM

All replies

  • Hi John,

    I think I am going to split your message and move to Forum's Issues. I do see a lot of new threads in regards to SPAM filter. 


    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Becker's Law


    My blog


    My TechNet articles

    Thursday, April 27, 2017 4:05 PM
    Moderator
  • I understand the frustration. All of the users I have seen that posted in this forum about their posts being flagged as spam have had zero recognition points. We advise them that most likely they need to have their account verified. They must post their request in the current sticky thread at the top of this forum.

    We cannot see who (or what) flagged any of their posts as spam, unless we happen to be a moderator in the specific forum. If the user links a thread, it seldom (maybe never) is marked abusive when we look, but we also cannot see who or what removed any abusive flag (if it really was flagged abusive).

    The regulars in this forum have concluded that when a new user posts, and it includes any links or images, the account just needs to be verified. But the message users get is very poorly worded. I have no idea why it mentions spam (although that is the purpose of requiring verification of new accounts). The users are directed to the "Forum Issues" forum, but the thread for requesting verification is not linked because it must change periodically. It gets so large it cannot be opened and must be replaced. Many users post their own request in the forum, and we need to ask them to instead post their request in the current sticky thread. This just further delays the process. If accounts don't get verified in a timely fashion, we might advise users to email fissues. I don't know how often the verification request thread is monitored.

    Are you seeing users with more than about 5 points complaining about their posts being flagged as spam? If so, maybe the spam filter needs more work.

    I will say we see a lot less spam in recent months compared to early 2016. And the spam we see gets deleted (and the accounts banned) in less than an hour after it is reported abusive in most cases.


    Richard Mueller - MVP Enterprise Mobility (Identity and Access)

    Thursday, April 27, 2017 5:08 PM
    Moderator
  • Isn't it time to escalate this beyond the moderators?  It seems like celebrating less Spam through more false-positives isn't exactly the best way out there to handle this.  And copy/pasting the same answer to everyone, when at least a lot of the time it doesn't apply also doesn't seem like the right way.  

    P.S. 1 Gold. 3 Silver. 11 Bronze. 3430 points and counting. It's time to escalate.  Clearly, the spam filter is not working.

    Thursday, April 27, 2017 5:38 PM
  • Are you saying that your posts have recently been flagged as spam by the spam filter? Can you provide links?

    Richard Mueller - MVP Enterprise Mobility (Identity and Access)

    Thursday, April 27, 2017 6:21 PM
    Moderator
  • I understand the frustration. All of the users I have seen that posted in this forum about their posts being flagged as spam have had zero recognition points. We advise them that most likely they need to have their account verified. They must post their request in the current sticky thread at the top of this forum.
    // ...
    The users are directed to the "Forum Issues" forum, but the thread for requesting verification is not linked because it must change periodically. It gets so large it cannot be opened and must be replaced. Many users post their own request in the forum, and we need to ask them to instead post their request in the current sticky thread. This just further delays the process. If accounts don't get verified in a timely fashion, we might advise users to email fissues. I don't know how often the verification request thread is monitored.


    Richard Mueller - MVP Enterprise Mobility (Identity and Access)

    As I, and others, have noted many times, this methodology of getting verification is completely absurd. The verification should be completely separate from the reportabug forum. Getting verified is not a bug, it's a feature (for once a true statement).

    If the verification must be done by forum, it should be in its own forum, and posts should be culled after some period, so the link does not have to change all the time (or each verification should be a separate message). Nobody needs to be reading these messages except the MS folks responsible for doing the verification.


    David Wilkinson | Visual C++ MVP

    Friday, April 28, 2017 9:42 AM
  • I see that moderators are frustrated too, so I won't bother taking my frustration out of you.  I'll just hit the development team with the ultimate insult: Hopefully, the humiliation will prompt them to do a better job.

    "Dear Forums Development team: You made the 'Windows 8' of Spam filters."

    Friday, April 28, 2017 2:02 PM
  • I am a moderator of a lot of MSDN forums, and probably get to see more "Marked Abusive by Auto Spam Filter" posts than average moderators. I'd suggest don't post a link or insert image if you are new, for the time being that is. 


    Visual C++ MVP

    Tuesday, May 2, 2017 5:52 PM
  • Let me repeat. I see no evidence that the spam filter is producing too many false positives. The problem is the message that users get when their account must be verified. I don't know the wording of the message, but it must be very confusing. It apparently implies that the post has been flagged as spam. But that is not the case. The solution would be for the forum admins (or the developers) to re-word the message.

    Richard Mueller - MVP Enterprise Mobility (Identity and Access)

    Saturday, May 6, 2017 1:49 PM
    Moderator
  • Apologize for a possibly stupid suggestion - but is their new solution sort of self-learning? Is it supposed to tune up and improve when you manually review marked posts?

    -- pa

    Saturday, May 6, 2017 2:10 PM
  • This is asinine! Member since 2008, 25,160 points, 2 Gold, 4 Silver, 11 Bronze, and today I had a post marked as spam. What is most aggravating is that when it happens, the post itself goes the way of the winds! I tend to spend a great deal of time, providing step by step instructions, when helping someone with an application. Instead of being able to possibly edit the damned post to bring it into compliance (with whatever arcane bloody criteria are being used to adjudge the spam-ness of the post), I would have to completely compose the entire damned post again. This is NOT cool, and discourages one from wanting to contribute to the forums at all! If nothing else, at least make it so that when the dialog is dismissed one is returned to the message editor window with the message intact, so that it might be edited into compliance without having to recompose the entire post!

    Please fix this!


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.


    • Edited by paladyn Sunday, May 7, 2017 9:42 PM
    Sunday, May 7, 2017 9:38 PM
  • This is asinine! Member since 2008, 25,160 points, 2 Gold, 4 Silver, 11 Bronze, and today I had a post marked as spam. What is most aggravating is that when it happens, the post itself goes the way of the winds! I tend to spend a great deal of time, providing step by step instructions, when helping someone with an application. Instead of being able to possibly edit the damned post to bring it into compliance (with whatever arcane bloody criteria are being used to adjudge the spam-ness of the post), I would have to completely compose the entire damned post again. This is NOT cool, and discourages one from wanting to contribute to the forums at all! If nothing else, at least make it so that when the dialog is dismissed one is returned to the message editor window with the message intact, so that it might be edited into compliance without having to recompose the entire post!

    Please fix this!


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.


    As to the suggestion I'd post it over here.

    https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/home?forum=suggest

    To the issue only moderators in that forum or forums admins can restore, so you can send an email to fissues [at] microsoft [dot] com to get it restored.

     

     



    Regards, Dave Patrick ....
    Microsoft Certified Professional
    Microsoft MVP [Windows Server] Datacenter Management

    Disclaimer: This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties or guarantees, and confers no rights.

    Sunday, May 7, 2017 10:00 PM
    Moderator
  • @paladyn: There is no support on the forums.  Moderators don't do anything and can't do anything worthwhile, and nobody from Microsoft watches or does anything about it.  R.M. here in this forum will tell you (as he does everyone) that your account needs to be verified (never mind your 25,000 points), then he'll mark his own response as the answer in a week or so.  It's almost pointless pushing for answers, you won't get any.

    Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 AM
  • I think the best way of action would be to report the issue to fissues at microsoft dot com. That's the best we can get, unfortunately.

    In ~99% of cases you'll get not very intelligible response from support engineers from India that they are aware of the issue or would involve the actual software engineers to work on it. In the latter case you will get about 50% rate of having the issue eventually resolved.


    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Becker's Law


    My blog


    My TechNet articles

    Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:44 PM
    Moderator