Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday, I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly to insert a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does result in taking longer to delete the spam post (sometimes as unnecessarily long as hours) by preventing the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures meant to nuke spam faster.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on Stack Exchange, be they official or community-maintained. I think we here at Stack Exchange should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I were to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria. Examples of edits that should break the grace period would be adding an extra link, or when the majority of the title or the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.

Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday, I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly to insert a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does result in taking longer to delete the spam post (sometimes as unnecessarily long as hours) by preventing the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures meant to nuke spam faster.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on Stack Exchange, be they official or community-maintained. I think we here at Stack Exchange should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I were to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria. Examples of edits that should break the grace period would be adding an extra link, or when the majority of the title or the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Or maybe just send the post to the realtime tab (155-questions-active) whenever it's edited, be it in grace period or not?

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.

Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday, I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly to post a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does result in taking longer to delete the spam post (sometimes unnecessarily long - hours) by preventing the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures against spam.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on Stack Exchange, be they official or community-maintained. I think we here at Stack Exchange should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I'm to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria. Examples of edits that should break the grace period would be: adding an extra link, or when the majority of the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.

Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday, I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly to insert a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does result in taking longer to delete the spam post (sometimes as unnecessarily long as hours) by preventing the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures meant to nuke spam faster.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on Stack Exchange, be they official or community-maintained. I think we here at Stack Exchange should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I were to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria. Examples of edits that should break the grace period would be adding an extra link, or when the majority of the title or the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.

Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly and inserted a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does make the post stay longer (sometimes unnecessarily long - hours) by prevent the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures against spam.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on SE, be it official or community-maintained. I think we SE should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I'm to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria, for example adding an extra link, or when the majority of the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.

Recently, spammers on WordPress Development discovered a "new" trick - the grace period. They post a spam post without the link and immediately edit it in.

Yesterday, I happened to spot yet another occurrence of this trick, and reacted quickly to post a comment that gracefully broke their trick, which resulted in the following scene (click to enlarge):

The original version of the post can be found on metasmoke.

The problem is, while the late-edit wouldn't change the outcome of the post when it's reviewed by humans, it does result in taking longer to delete the spam post (sometimes unnecessarily long - hours) by preventing the post from being autoflagged, or other automated measures against spam.

What's worse, it's a clear sign that big-time spammers are experimenting, trying to get around any spam filters on Stack Exchange, be they official or community-maintained. I think we here at Stack Exchange should always stay one step ahead of our rivals.

If I'm to say, I'd suggest that an edit shouldn't be considered "in grace period" if it meets certain criteria. Examples of edits that should break the grace period would be: adding an extra link, or when the majority of the body has changed (which will also effectively address this declined feature request).

Fun fact: the broken grace period earned that spammer a badge.