tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Spam)

quid comments on "Spam" (20992)

quid — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 02:38:23 -0800

Once more, Ray Narayan http://mathoverflow.net/questions/54430/video-lectures-of-mathematics-courses-available-online-for-free/117134#117134

Added: deleted.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20804)

Andy Putman — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:25:58 -0800

Ray Narayan just won't leave us the heck alone : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/1714/best-online-mathematics-videos/116238#116238

darijgrinberg comments on "Spam" (20664)

darijgrinberg — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:36:17 -0800

What's the difference between a spam broker and a spam bot?

Scott Carnahan comments on "Spam" (20663)

Scott Carnahan — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 20:10:24 -0800

I'm seeing a lot of spam flags for Porton's old questions. If you really want those questions out of the way, wouldn't it be more appropriate to close/delete them? Those of you with 10K+ points can see a list of which questions have accumulated votes to close, so if there is some momentum toward closure, you don't really need to worry about your votes being lost in the noise.

Scott Carnahan comments on "Spam" (20655)

Scott Carnahan — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 00:07:01 -0800

I've sent "him" an email asking "him" to refrain from posting ads. I could suspend the account, but banning has a somewhat limited effect on people who don't care about their reputation, since they can make new accounts. I recommend continuing as before: flag as spam and/or moderator attention.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20654)

Andy Putman — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 20:41:17 -0800

Some outright spam by Ray Narayan : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/54430/video-lectures-of-mathematics-courses-available-online-for-free/115467#115467

Please, ban him already!

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20646)

Ryan Budney — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:31:40 -0800

I'm a little concerned this reply of AndrewL's is getting flagged as spam.

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/34699/approaches-to-riemann-hypothesis-using-methods-outside-number-theory/34718#34718

I'll admit the initial response is of little value but the discussion in the comments IMO are very productive.

I can see the argument for deleting this answer but I can also see the argument in keeping it for the discussion. Usually I lean more heavily on the former, but here I feel more of the latter.

Asaf Karagila comments on "Spam" (20645)

Asaf Karagila — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 12:09:22 -0800

The link I posted earlier is back:

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/90876/what-would-be-some-major-consequences-of-the-inconsistency-of-zfc/115328#115328

Todd Trimble comments on "Spam" (20641)

Todd Trimble — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 04:03:38 -0800

Andy, of course, it's fine by me if AL's post is killed. But it's not something I'm personally fussed about. His posts usually elicit no more than a flicker of wry amusement from me.

Something I am fussed about happened to me a little while back, when I saw a really angry post by someone, clicked on a link provided (maybe from the user page), and was sent to a gay porn/shock video. I immediately back-treaded and didn't take make a note of it to bring to moderator attention, which I now regret since I won't be able to recall where that post was. I bring this up in case anyone else had seen it and wishes to do something about it.

Joel Reyes Noche comments on "Spam" (20639)

Joel Reyes Noche — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 21:01:05 -0800

Thanks for the clarification.

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20638)

Ryan Budney — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:59:48 -0800

It's deleted now. It's still there, but you need whatever rep it takes to vote to delete to see it.

Joel Reyes Noche comments on "Spam" (20637)

Joel Reyes Noche — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:57:59 -0800

I can't see AL's answer. Is it because I lack the reputation or is it because it has already been deleted?

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20636)

Andy Putman — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:56:26 -0800

@Todd Trimble : I agree that it is not spam; however, there is currently no way to "vote to delete" an answer except by flagging it as spam. I think that posts can be so bad that they reflect badly on MO and thus should be deleted. This one falls into this category not only because of its bad advice, but also because of the paranoia and nasty attitude displayed (mostly in the comments). And it doesn't help that (like often used to happen), AL defended his point with an anecdote that was almost certainly made up on the spot (or, at least, completely misunderstood by him). Is this the kind of answer we want people to see in the future when they are googling these topics?

Todd Trimble comments on "Spam" (20635)

Todd Trimble — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:10:35 -0800

Andy, if you're talking about AL's answer which was downvoted to -22, I don't really see what is so nasty about it. AL wasn't being rude or anything, however bad his advice might have been. And it's not spam in any way that spam is ordinarily understood. Could you explain?

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20633)

Andy Putman — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 14:40:18 -0800

It looks like Ray Narayan's post is gone. While we're at it, I noticed that a bunch of people have flagged as spam the following ancient nasty post :
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/24763/advice-on-changing-topic-for-thesis-problem/24827#24827
I don't think this post reflect well on this site, so I would be in favor of its deletion (ie let's flag it as spam until the system kills it).

Asaf Karagila comments on "Spam" (20632)

Asaf Karagila — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 14:34:20 -0800

While we're on topic of spam: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/115106/inconsistent-countable-set-in-zfc-closed.

voloch comments on "Spam" (20631)

voloch — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 14:26:34 -0800

I just flagged his latest answer for moderator attention and asked them to look here. Hopefully some moderator will come here and take notice. Otherwise we are just talking amongst ourselves.

Todd Trimble comments on "Spam" (20627)

Todd Trimble — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:27:42 -0800

I only saw the one video I mentioned earlier, and didn't know that was a link to his own company. If that's the case, and just one instance of behaviors of that type, then of course I agree that's spam pure and simple and a ban would seem to be appropriate.

Michael Greinecker comments on "Spam" (20626)

Michael Greinecker — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:01:41 -0800

How can someone doing essentially commercial spamming not be banned? I think there is such a thing as too much leniency. That the spammer dilutes the spamming by also giving uninformed and unqualified advice doesn't change the fundamental nature: This poster is on MO to do advertising and not to engage in mathematics.

DavidRoberts comments on "Spam" (20625)

DavidRoberts — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 00:43:35 -0800

I certainly wouldn't want a ban for the copyright advice. But the whole pattern of behaviour.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20622)

Andy Putman — Fri, 30 Nov 2012 21:42:23 -0800

I don't think he should be banned for the bad copyright advice. Rather, over a long period of time (with a break in the middle while he was suspended), he has posted a huge number of off-topic answers, many of which contain ads for his tutoring service. It's pretty much pure spam.

Todd Trimble comments on "Spam" (20619)

Todd Trimble — Fri, 30 Nov 2012 03:54:50 -0800

HJRW: I hadn't been following the activities of Ray Narayan, but the worst of the three I saw on this page was a link to a youtube video of an advertisement of an online tutoring service (via a terrible practice often seen in America where advertisements masquerade as news stories). That post might be considered spam. I've only seen the three of RN's posts listed on this page, but it's not clear to me those warrant a ban. He certainly doesn't seem malicious to me from what I've seen.

HJRW comments on "Spam" (20618)

HJRW — Fri, 30 Nov 2012 02:30:43 -0800

Giving bad copyright advice is not a reason to ban someone! Apparently Ray Narayan's crimes are greater, but as all his other posts have been deleted, those of use without 10000+ rep can't (and shouldn't) comment further.

DavidRoberts comments on "Spam" (20617)

DavidRoberts — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:27:40 -0800

I agree with Andy Putman. I wouldn't take legal advice on copyright from someone who essentially says "It's on the internet, go ahead and use it like you want, because that's clearly the intent of the author".

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20616)

Andy Putman — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:44:40 -0800

Another post by Ray Narayan : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/84982/permission-to-use-online-notes/114725#114725

I want to re-emphasize my call for the moderators to ban him.

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20614)

Ryan Budney — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:54:18 -0800

There's a 12 votes to close maximum per day. I discovered that today.

fedja comments on "Spam" (20593)

fedja — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 23:09:00 -0800

Wouldn't last on AoPS that long ;) I humbly suggest our mods use their powers with less hesitation in such clear cases.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20583)

Andy Putman — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:55:48 -0800

Ray Narayan continues his reign of terror : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/94467/math-circles-video-lectures-for-school-children/114485#114485

Why isn't banned?

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20543)

Yemon Choi — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 20:42:35 -0800

And he's back

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20534)

Andy Putman — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:22:53 -0800

Can people please flag as spam this post by the infamous Ray Narayan so that it gets deleted : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/9793/what-to-do-with-antique-math-books/112345#112345

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20466)

Yemon Choi — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:12:33 -0700

Ray Narayan is back.

Alberto GarciaRaboso comments on "Spam" (20465)

Alberto GarciaRaboso — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:40:04 -0700

One more by balan-antoine, this time in French: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/111314/algebre-de-clifford-modifiee

voloch comments on "Spam" (20464)

voloch — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 15:08:55 -0700

I am out of flags too. Today is bad.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20463)

Andy Putman — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 14:33:06 -0700

Yeah, it is getting bad. balan-antoine has another one : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/111308/ideals-of-the-ring-of-mesurable-functions now.

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20462)

Ryan Budney — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 14:28:44 -0700

We're having a little spam attack at the moment. I'm out of spam flags. This hasn't happened in a while.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20461)

Andy Putman — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:29:04 -0700

I agree that balan-antoine should be permanently banned. Here are two more junk posts of his from today to flag as spam : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/111252/nm-fermat-like-equation and http://mathoverflow.net/questions/111253/lebesgue-spaces-and-banach-algebras-closed

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20456)

Ryan Budney — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:31:46 -0700

As far as I know he hasn't been banned (?recently?). He just posts in an odd rhythm.

voloch comments on "Spam" (20454)

voloch — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:23:08 -0700

balan-antoine should be permanently banned from MO. He was quiet for a while and now came back. Was there a temporary ban?

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20453)

Yemon Choi — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:18:31 -0700

Am out of spam flags, could anyone help with http://mathoverflow.net/questions/111287/about-fermats-last-theorem-closed

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20437)

Yemon Choi — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:09:26 -0700

Just noticed this. Is it desirable, or even possible, to nuke this?

Michael Greinecker comments on "Spam" (20409)

Michael Greinecker — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:49:54 -0700

@HJRW I don't see how one can even see such an account in normal MO use. If the user makes useful contributions, the account isn't spam anymore. If the user makes only useless contributions, then that is the primary problem and not the account. If the user makes no contribution at all, the user is basically invisible anyways.

HJRW comments on "Spam" (20407)

HJRW — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 06:39:28 -0700

@geraldedgar - but the user account serves only to link to a website. The account itself is unquestionably spam.

geraldedgar comments on "Spam" (20406)

geraldedgar — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 06:36:30 -0700

@Yemon: I vote to keep user accounts such as that. Of course spam questions and answers should be deleted.

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20403)

Yemon Choi — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:58:14 -0700

This seems like spam

quid comments on "Spam" (20381)

quid — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 03:22:34 -0700

An "answer" that seems purely designe for link creation. Needs a couple of more flags. Thanks in advance.

Added: Done.

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20366)

Yemon Choi — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:10:02 -0700

A repeat offender, IIRC

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20293)

Yemon Choi — Sun, 07 Oct 2012 16:11:37 -0700

Smells Like Sock Puppets

Andres Caicedo comments on "Spam" (20282)

Andres Caicedo — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:15:32 -0700

An invasion. Three answers by the same author, http://mathoverflow.net/questions/10227/in-set-theories-where-continuum-hypothesis-is-false-what-are-the-new-sets

plhersh comments on "Spam" (20228)

plhersh — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 13:44:23 -0700

There is new spam at:

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/11735/what-can-mathematicians-can-do-to-help-the-people-of-haiti

as a new answer. I just flagged it and gather from Andy's various posts that it'd be helpful if other people do too.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20218)

Andy Putman — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:32:53 -0700

And, while we're at it, here's some other off-topic spammy answers : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/93828/how-large-is-tree3/108234#108234 and http://mathoverflow.net/questions/93828/how-large-is-tree3/107371#107371

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20217)

Andy Putman — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:29:26 -0700

Spam advertising a tutoring service here : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/1714/best-online-mathematics-videos/108327#108327

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20205)

Yemon Choi — Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:56:35 -0700

Spam, or else someone who doesn't understand the concept of answering a given question.

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (20182)

Yemon Choi — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 01:54:10 -0700

I think I preferred the author of this piece of spam/dribbling when he was terrorising Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman...

Will Jagy comments on "Spam" (20164)

Will Jagy — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:14:20 -0700

bsteinberg, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR30nKnE80g

which is youtube for a song by Laurie Anderson called Let x = x

I think they cut it a bit short. Not sure.

bsteinberg comments on "Spam" (20163)

bsteinberg — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:46:27 -0700

More spam. The newest answer to http://mathoverflow.net/questions/99506

Btw I have voted to close the question as no longer relevant.

quid comments on "Spam" (20143)

quid — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 06:58:35 -0700

While off-topic here I cannot help but notice what type of question attracted that users brilliant contributions.

Michael Greinecker comments on "Spam" (20142)

Michael Greinecker — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 05:56:53 -0700

This user spams a lot: http://mathoverflow.net/users/26426/philipsteele His worst post is http://mathoverflow.net/questions/24526/good-papers-books-essays-about-the-thought-process-behind-mathematical-research/106983#106983

Qiaochu Yuan comments on "Spam" (20122)

Qiaochu Yuan — Sun, 09 Sep 2012 10:54:34 -0700

Like Scott says, your best bet for deleting answers is flagging for moderator attention. This is generally what is done on math.SE, for example. If you wanted answers to be deleted more quickly the straightforward solution would be to elect one or two more moderators.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20116)

Andy Putman — Sat, 08 Sep 2012 16:26:32 -0700

A couple more spam votes should kill off this garbage : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106589/is-every-distance-regular-graph-vertex-transitive/106592#106592

EDIT: Done!

quid comments on "Spam" (20082)

quid — Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:38:31 -0700

Helping out Andy Putman a bit with waging war:

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/686/handling-arxiv-feeds-to-avoid-duplicates/106615#106615

answer seems purely for linkcreation to 'something' (I did not click through). Also linked on user page.

Added: Mission completed, thanks to all that helped.

Scott Carnahan comments on "Spam" (20041)

Scott Carnahan — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 02:22:21 -0700

You always have the option of flagging for moderator attention in extreme cases. Since the relative dearth of answer-deleters hasn't been a problem until now, I doubt it will be a problem in the near future.

Asaf Karagila comments on "Spam" (20038)

Asaf Karagila — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:14:59 -0700

Actually we have less. After the migration only 15 (or 16 maybe?) users will have 20k+ reputation. One of the results of the great rep. recalc (questions become +5).

To delete an answer three users is enough. It requires awareness and willingness of these users. In MSE we had a group of 20 or so 20k'ers and most of them didn't really bother with the moderation tools, or at least with the deletion tab there.

Also, note that this is "delete an answer" and not "close an answer".

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20036)

Andy Putman — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:03:40 -0700

Gerald makes a good point. We have fewer people with 20k+ than most stackexchange sites. Maybe we should petition to have the "vote to close answer" limit decreased to 15k?

geraldedgar comments on "Spam" (20034)

geraldedgar — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 06:33:18 -0700

We have 18 people with 20k or more. So we would need how many of the 18 to close an answer?

Asaf Karagila comments on "Spam" (20033)

Asaf Karagila — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 15:17:48 -0700

@Qiaochu: In the new Review page 20k users can cast delete votes even if the answer does not have a negative vote count.

I'm not sure if it's a bug or a feature, though.

Qiaochu Yuan comments on "Spam" (20032)

Qiaochu Yuan — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 15:08:00 -0700

@Andy: correct. On SE, users with 20,000 rep can vote to delete answers with a negative number of votes.

Will Jagy comments on "Spam" (20031)

Will Jagy — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 20:40:26 -0700

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20030)

Andy Putman — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 19:29:40 -0700

That's right. And spam/crackpot answers are in many ways worse than spam/crackpot questions since they 1. Irritate the OP, and 2. Appear in google searches for legitimate topics.

I believe that when we upgrade high-rep users will be able to vote to delete answers, which will be great. Until then, I use meta as a platform to wage war against answers that I think are particularly bad.

Will Jagy comments on "Spam" (20029)

Will Jagy — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:45:32 -0700

Andy, I think i get your point, a spammy question gets closed quickly enough and then in two days three votes for deletion are enough. But there is no mechanism for closing answers.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20028)

Andy Putman — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:32:49 -0700

The whole point of flagging things as spam is that once a certain number of flag are made, the system automatically deletes the post. For questions, one can eventually vote to delete; however, for spam or crackpot answers, the spam flag is the only way for us to get rid of them.

Will Jagy comments on "Spam" (20027)

Will Jagy — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:53:38 -0700

Ryan, you probably have it. There is now (new?) in the FAQ under reputation, after it says one can flag items with 15 points or whatever, a link to a stackoverflow meta talking mainly about the offensive flag, but giving your basic idea about locking. I actually went through the entire deletion history a few months ago, but as i was looking only for self-deleted questions I missed out on some detail.

Ryan Budney comments on "Spam" (20022)

Ryan Budney — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 15:45:59 -0700

Will, I think locked and deleted by MathOverflow means the number of spam flags was high enough for this to be triggered by the website. If a mod locked it, it would have said their names.

Will Jagy comments on "Spam" (20021)

Will Jagy — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 15:19:36 -0700

Now it says locked and deleted by MathOverflow, which i think is Scott M. or Anton.

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (20020)

Andy Putman — Sat, 01 Sep 2012 14:57:35 -0700

Some more spam that doesn't seem to be getting spam votes (high-rep users can see that this particular crank posted this also last Feb, when it was deleted) : http://mathoverflow.net/questions/74334/helmholtz-decomposition-on-compact-riemannian-manifolds/106107#106107

Harry Gindi comments on "Spam" (19912)

Harry Gindi — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 07:43:42 -0700

Bully beef!

Yemon Choi comments on "Spam" (19908)

Yemon Choi — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 00:37:39 -0700

More tinned meat from this user

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (19905)

Andy Putman — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:38:28 -0700

All gone!

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (19904)

Andy Putman — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:14:18 -0700

Six down, two to go.

DavidRoberts comments on "Spam" (19903)

DavidRoberts — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:56:54 -0700

Also, the website listed on the user's page is a page-rank inflator, so if a mod could get rid of that as well...

Andy Putman comments on "Spam" (19902)

Andy Putman — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:24:03 -0700

The user http://mathoverflow.net/users/25877/chanelbaggdgd has been posting tons of spam in the last couple of hours (currently, there are 8 posts). Can people please flag all of their posts? I'm out of flags for the day, and I want the software to delete this garbage posthaste.