Perhaps this site should have a policy like meta's that upvotes and downvotes indicate agreement or disagreement. If a spammer starts recommending his product, his product may initially have few votes, but if it's a truly bad product, eventually will get lots of downvotes. Let's say you also limit people to naming one product per post, with a motivation ...


The user had no other useful content so was removed. There's little chance we would add another spam flag where the likelihood is so low (one instance I can recall in 7+ years). There are many more ways to bring attention to unusual activity including meta posts like this, or the 'contact us' link at the bottom of the page.


I think there needs to be a no-exceptions policy that every recommendation much disclose the connection, whether that is "I wrote it" or "I just read the documentation".


I'd suggest to use specific flagging, similar to how things are done in StackOverflow. Users should be able to categorize certain questions and responses in categories that would appear when flagging posts. Here is my suggestion: Both Questions and Answers Harmful / Malicious software recommendation Malicious software, or other suggestions that are ...


I'm sorry, but that would not be appropriate. I can appreciate your need to find a community for this proposal, but that type of solicitation would not be appropriate within our existing sites. With the number of proposals that go through this forum, it would simply become untenable for our existing sites.


I think there are big examples we can follows. Google deals with spam every day while building it's SERP when it's queried. Also Wikipedia. I think the solution can come from many separate ways. Google uses complex alghoritmic solution, Wikipedia is wikified. For sure a constant monitoring will help a lot, but, at the same time the site should avoid the ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible