Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
How to handle correct answers that also include spam?
A recent answer on Software Development was correct, but was included spam / self promotion (unrelated to the question or the answer).
The answer was edited to remove the spam, but it was suggested to remove the entire answer (even if correct) to deter future answerers from spamming in their answers.
AFAIK these are very rare cases, as virtually all spam comes in AI generated answers that hardly address the question.
How should we proceed in these cases? I see the following options:
- completely remove the answer (deny rewarding to the answerer)
- remove only the spam part
combined with
- warn the user
- temporarily ban the user
4 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
It's a mistake to draw a general question based on this specific incident.
The spam in question has been posted to Codidact dozens of times, often in AI-generated texts. There is no reason to assume there was any good faith behind the answer. We know the "answer" part of the post, the one you've chosen to let remain on the site for now, only exists in order to spam.
You should nuke the account and delete the answer.
There is no proper credit for the non-spam of the answer. For all we know, it's either AI-generated or ripped off from somewhere else, without attribution. We do not host that sort of content.
Never, ever, edit spam out of posts unless it was a genuine mistake by an author with otherwise good intentions. Always delete the post in full.
Do not reward spammers by letting their content stay on the site, thus creating a false sense of legitimacy around the account posting it.
Aside, the spam is still present in the post history.
0 comment threads
In my opinion, there is a single appropriate response to any incident of obvious, commercial, off-topic spam: an immediate, unconditional, one-strike-and-you're-out, permanent ban of the user and the deletion of all their content.
There is no logic in trying to change the user's behaviour with warnings, temporary suspensions or words of advice, because they are not actually a user to begin with. They are either an AI bot or a human operator, paid by a commercial entity to spread as many spam links as possible, on whatever sites they can gain access to. They are not posting spam by accident or because they are unfamiliar with the rules; they are intentionally ignoring the rules in order to carry out their single, unchanging purpose of posting spam links.
If you warn spammers, they will ignore the warning. If you temporarily ban them, they will most likely move on to another site, but if they do return, it will just be to post more spam. In no case will they start participating in good faith, because that was never what they were here to do. Any non-spam "content" they appear to have posted should be assumed to be AI-generated or plagiarised, and posted for the sole purpose of making them seem like a genuine user for long enough to get a chance to post a spam link.
There may be borderline cases where a actual contributor posts a link to their own tool or service because they genuinely believe it will help answer someone's question. In this case, a warning about self-promotion and a request that they properly disclose their affiliation would be appropriate. But if they are posting links to porn or gambling sites, there is a 0% chance that they are a bona fide user, and they should be deleted immediately.
I think this is a judgment call.
-
If the answerer appears to be a human, you can caution them with How We Do Things Around Here and edit the answer.
-
If they do it again (and this user has), nuke 'em. Maybe it's feasible to dissociate the post to the Community user or something. Maybe it's not.
-
If the answerer appears to be a bot... AI policy applies, no?
0 comment threads
Blow it away if it's truly spam (the link is unrelated to the question topic). Any user who posts blatant spam should be disabled or deleted too.
If the link is proplerly labeled and goes to a product that is actually relevant to the question, then it can be OK. Any such answer should provide useful information apart from the link. If the answerer has a stake in the product or in any way benefits from the asker using the product, then this must be disclosed.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads