In the past 8 days, we've had over 10 confirmed instances of spam posts abusing the ability to inline images, and these are just the ones that the smoke detector caught. It might be worth considering hiding inline images behind a spoiler button for users with <10 rep.
-
For those who aren't aware, Charcoal is the organisation behind the SmokeDetector community spam-detection bot.– ArtOfCodeOct 24, 2016 at 15:09
-
3But it's the text of the mail that positively matched spam, right? I don't think spoiler hiding image is user friendly at all!– JongwareOct 24, 2016 at 18:54
-
@RadLexus All these 10 images were very very inappropiate for users to be looking at (nsfw, all of them)– MagischOct 25, 2016 at 4:06
-
Not 100% positive, but I am rather sure this is something that we can not implement on this one stack only. I think meta.stackexchange is therefore the better place to ask. I'd vote to migrate, but the diamond behind my name would make that final :)– VincentOct 25, 2016 at 8:34
-
1@Magisch they are not all NSFW at all– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:40
-
@Cai The images in the confirmed spam instances are all NSFW.– MagischOct 25, 2016 at 10:42
-
2@Magisch actually I just checked the metasmoke logs and not a single one from the last week was NSFW– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:42
-
1unless you consider this nsfw– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:43
-
1I consider all of these highly NSFW. Imagine you'd have your boss walking over while looking at those.– MagischOct 25, 2016 at 10:45
-
2@Magisch that is nonsense– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:47
-
There is not 1 single image that was at all in any way NSFW in any spam (at least in the metasmoke logs) posted in the last week and saying so is very disingenuous– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:49
-
1Is this or this nsfw?– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:50
-
3um... because its not? It's a normal ad. the same as i would see walking down the street on a bus stop or anywhere. It's in no way nsfw, and even if it was it is a few posts that are at that level not all as you said– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 10:52
-
6The image itself is no more nsfw than the spam text is in the first place, but even if they are nsfw that is 3 out of 11 in the last week that are nsfw not all.– CaiOct 25, 2016 at 11:01
-
4@Magisch if stuff like that is grounds for firing where you work, then I sincerely hope you're not browsing Stack Exchange while at work. Sheesh, I'd be fired for opening my e-mail spam folder... Thankfully, my boss isn't a chat bot that fires based on keywords. It's spam yes, but I definitely wouldn't consider that NSFW.– JohnBOct 28, 2016 at 13:21
1 Answer
I've declined this request as it's mentioned in the comments one image was questionable. Furthermore, your request is subjected to only an eight day period and doesn't consider the entire spectrum length of this SE site and if I recall the percentage of questionable imagery is slim to none. That said, the system, as you've pointed out, does flag accordingly for review and the community itself is fairly good about flagging so I see no validation in your request.