search

SOBotics / SOBotics.github.io

Blog site for the SOBotics chat room
https://blog.sobotics.org/
Other
1 stars 1 forks source link

Do we need any new bots? #17

Closed Filnor closed 6 years ago

Filnor commented 6 years ago

As far as I know, the coverage of StackOverflow's features by our bots is pretty high, and I can't imagine any new bots that need to be created.

Is my point of view direct?

BasicNullification commented 6 years ago

We could use a bot for catching socks and voting fraud.

adeak commented 6 years ago

@K-Davis1 I don't think so. Whatever results such a bot would provide would only be actionable by moderators, meanwhile opening the way to pitchfork-based actions by regular users. Whether true positive or false, regular users should not be provided with potential anomalous voting patterns.

ArtOfCode- commented 6 years ago

MOBotics wouldn't object to a voting fraud bot... provided it was actually accurate. Just scrape Magisch's query.

adeak commented 6 years ago

I'm fine with working on these things privately, and letting the bots roam in mod bot rooms. My issue is with public bots that readily give users pitchfork material. We all know a handful of users who will flag anything and will likely antagonize/attack whomever they think is in the wrong (even for false positives!).

rjrudman commented 6 years ago

@ArtOfCode- Is MOBotics a typo, or is there another channel I'm unaware of?

Bhargav-Rao commented 6 years ago

@rjrudman It's another room. Check this out. (And also sorry, won't be able to provide access as it's got some other mod-only data stored)

Bhargav-Rao commented 6 years ago

FWIW, I don't see a use for a voting fraud detection bot at the moment (not to disappoint you @K-Davis1, or @paper1111 who's working on one already). The reason is Magisch's SEDE scripts already work quite efficiently, and all the 25 moderators on Stack Overflow can handle them when a flag is raised. As of now the script is fine, and we should probably focus more on other core issues. But if we are building one bot, then yes, I'd agree with @adeak here. It should not be available in a public room. (One other similar bot which I wanted to write was one which detects potentially sensitive data in posts, which I thrashed because of the same fundamental issue)

FWIW, it is better to focus on other aspects of moderation at the moment, and also spend more time improving the current bots. One potential issue which I see is the burgeoning suggested edit queue, which actually caused the moderator election 2017, that issue is still present today, but just a bit smaller. Extending EditMonitor to do that would be a great idea.

NobodyNada commented 6 years ago

IMO, a bot to detect voting fraud is a good idea, but it should absolutely not be public. What about making the results available via a simple web dashboard that requires an invite to access, instead of public chat?

Filnor commented 6 years ago

@NobodyNada I prefer the way to "hide" the data behind authorization, but the Bot could still send a message if there are >N open reports (Or simplx maybe add it to Housekeeping/OpenReports).

double-fault commented 6 years ago

Would the moderators and community be fine with a private bot (especially one which hunts for fraud and socks)? How would we choose who to give access to?

adeak commented 6 years ago

There are two aspects here, I think. One is the source, the other is a running instance. Using a private dashboard would protect the instance, but if the source is public anyone can run their own instance. So I guess something like a private github repo would be necessary to be sure.

Filnor commented 6 years ago

@adeak I agree that the source should be private, but UserStalker is also public...

Papershine commented 6 years ago

@Bhargav-rao no problem. TBH I didn't know that Magisch's query existed when I started creating the bot. Also, I'm not sure that the bot could be accurate, since the filters that I had thought up of might not be able to catch anything actually. I'm fine with scrapping the bot anytime, Magisch's query is great enough.

I'm not able to participate in the room meeting next week (primarily because it's 4am for me), so let me point out a bot idea and see how you guys think:

A LQP Monitor: I got this idea from the SOBotics site. The size of the LQP queue is quite high, sometimes even more than the edit queue, so maybe a monitor is needed? (Something like EditMonitor but for the LQP queue)

Bhargav-Rao commented 6 years ago

Ah No, don't go to scrape. Try to analyze what it can do and then emulate the same using API. If you can't do it, then you can call it off as not accurate.

For the LQPQ Monitor, Petter and Floern have started some work (or rather lots of work). But as a SO mod, I'd meh. 2 days after election, it'll be empty. (Because 3 new mods, and they won't know how to handle anything apart from the NAAs). LQPQ is a bursty queue. Need to do something more than just a pure monitor. Something like Edit Monitor for the LQPQ would be good, but not something like SOCVFinder.

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:29 PM, paper1111 notifications@github.com wrote:

@Bhargav-Rao https://github.com/bhargav-rao no problem. TBH I didn't know that Magisch's query existed when I started creating the bot. Also, I'm not sure that the bot could be accurate, since the filters that I had thought up of might not be able to catch anything actually. I'm fine with scrapping the bot anytime, Magisch's query is great enough.

I'm not able to participate in the room meeting next week (primarily because it's 4am for me), so let me point out a bot idea and see how you guys think:

A LQP Monitor: I got this idea from the SOBotics site. The size of the LQP queue is quite high, sometimes even more than the edit queue, so maybe a monitor is needed? (Something like EditMonitor but for the LQP queue)

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SOBotics/SOBotics.github.io/issues/17#issuecomment-374420617, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKDxMuxS455f2l4kbGRC42OklfQ3AByyks5tgD9WgaJpZM4Sia-5 .

Bhargav-Rao commented 6 years ago

https://chat.stackoverflow.com/rooms/167761/conversation/2018-03-sobotics-room-meeting-topic-2