1

Today I saw a "do my homework for me" question that had been rightly been put on hold. (It has since been deleted.)

But the thing that alarmed me was that someone had commented (jokingly) with a link a site called "do-my-a$$ignment dot com" (URL deliberately mutilated ... for obvious reasons!!). It is a site that claims to do peoples homework for them for money. I don't know if it is a scam or for real. Either way it is BAD. (I suppose it could be a stale April Fools day joke ... but I couldn't see any clues pointing in that direction.)

As an erstwhile educator, I find that site extremely objectionable. So objectionable that I think that even a "joke" link to it is harmful. Not least because the OP might be tempted to use it!

So ... does StackOverflow have a filter for identifying links that are so objectionable that they should be nuked on sight ... or automatically flagged for moderator attention?

If so, could we add that site, and its associated sites? Please?

  • "So ... does StackOverflow have a filter for identifying links that are so objectionable that they should be nuked on sight ... or automatically flagged for moderator attention?" Yes. And you are in the right place to suggest an addition to it. – bjb568 Apr 3 '14 at 4:08
  • It's not a link, at least not directly. The users can replace s with $, or some characters with cyrylic/greek/Japanese ones that looks similar, how would you like to detect it all? – Danubian Sailor Apr 3 '14 at 9:59
  • 1
    @Łukasz웃Lツ - You don't get it. I've deliberately mangled the real URL so that I don't accidentally boost their search ranking. Obviously the original comment I was talking about used a real clickable URL ... and any filter would be for the real clickable URL. – Stephen C Apr 3 '14 at 13:14
  • 4
  • @RobertHarvey - I personally think they deserve not a scintilla of advertising revenue. But I mentioned that solely to explain my mangling. My real question is independent of that. I think links to that site should be nuked (i.e. totally removed) because of the harm that they will do to people who use their services. The advertising revenue is incidental, whether it is trivial or not. – Stephen C Apr 3 '14 at 22:28
  • 3
    Blacklisting is extremely expensive. It would have to be an especially egregious case, and I'm not sure your offended sensibilities as an educator rise to that level. – Robert Harvey Apr 3 '14 at 22:30
  • @RobertHarvey - Well, that at least is a well-founded reason. Thankyou. – Stephen C Apr 3 '14 at 22:31
3

Why should Stack Exchange go out of their way to black list every NSFW site on the internet? Just the idea of that seems like it is semi impossible.

Besides, there is already a course of action available for this type of content - after all the community does a lot of content maintenance.

Flag the comment as not constructive, it will get dealt with.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .