Complete rip with no attribution: http://www.hows.info/  related:    Here is "me": http://www.hows.info/users/561731/neal    Now that it has been undeleted, go here to vote:
2286
NB The following is a community-generated list of websites that republish Stack Exchange content without attributing it properly. It is no longer being maintained, because the procedure for reporting such sites has changed; see the duplicate for more information. There are a number of license-violating clones of Stack Exchange sites popping up that use Stack Exchange's  data without following our Creative Commons attribution terms. Those terms are , and are also included as a .txt file in every data dump we produce.  Google now has  in search results. Also, you can :  The option to block a site appears when you click a search result and then navigate back to the search results page. Click the &quot;Block&quot; link next to that result to block all pages within the site's entire domain.   This post was created as an attempt to organize information originally posted . You may also be looking for .
114537
Last year I was curious about some hat stats ().  Unfortunately, this data wasn't collectable at the time I asked.  Please consider collecting the data this year.  You could have an interesting blog post about the data analysis.   Things like:   Out of all the people who earned hats on the site, what percentage of users on Android.SE earned the different mobile app hats (and similarly for the Apple.SE) What is the ratio of "Crabby" people to "Red Shirt" (and "I Voted Today")? What was the long term effect of the Resolution hat? (How many comments were deleted? Did this cause any questions to become eligible for roomba deletion having fallen below the "keep because enough comments"?) What rooms had the most Sumo Judge hat recipients?   You know, that sort of thing.  There's a lot of data analysis possible to pull out of the hats and it would be really nice to either save and distribute this data or do it yourself (it could be fun).
43543
So, this guy has made . Making books of SE stuff is okay, but two rules need to be followed:   Attribution License the work under CC-BY-SA as well   This  claims that the books do attribute properly. I find it unlikely that he has properly licensed the books under CC-BY-SA though, given that he's selling them as eBooks. It's possible, but it's dubious (why do people buy them if they can get them for free?)  Could someone investigate. CC-BY-SA is important, it what keeps things open.  Again, I'm fine with him selling books, but not violating creative commons.  (P.S. The other problem I have with it is the covers are really bad.)
16586
is an example of the bug. It looks like this in regular chat:  That link points to: http://web.archive.org/web/20080409050311/http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/daryn.lehoux/Tropes.pdf  In the transcript, it looks like this:  That link points to: http://web.archive.org/web/20080409050311/%3Ca%20href=  ... which doesn't work so well! Could this be fixed? I'm not sure if this impacts links to elsewhere.
1839
It's    that posting links to your own website is ok, but should there be a line drawn? There were several spam flags today for 's recent posts, presumably because they all link to his website. Initially I disagreed because his answers seem for the most part relevant to the question, but then I looked into it more and realized there's three things that set this apart from most of the related cases that have come up:   This isn't an occasional thing -- he's posted  in the last year This isn't a random blog he writes for a fun, it's a for-profit company he  and makes money promoting I'm not willing to go through all 412, but from the sample I checked, he generally doesn't mention that the products he's recommending are his own. The site is linked from his profile, but most people aren't going to check that   Is all this considered acceptable use, or are the spam flags accurate?
28393
I asked , but within minutes, it was off the question list even though the question list went back an hour in time.  Is this some form of moderation?  If so, it seems weird that no comment was made within the thread that the question was deleted, moved, or otherwise removed from the question list.
19419
First of all, please note the precedent:  - Jeff himself has posted about a similarly troublesome account.  This is also tangentially related to   Check this guy out:    (no rhyme intended)  Over 9 pages of user accounts registered.  It looks like some have already been deleted, but type his name into the user search on SO right now and you'll see a full page of results, so there are at least 35 current accounts.  Let me be clear about this, I am very apprehensive about complaining about a specific user and would never start this type of discussion if I didn't think it was an extreme case.  People argue on SO (and probably the other trilogy sites), it's natural, and sometimes they get heated and/or spill over onto Meta - I'm not upset or offended by conflict, but this user's outbursts are completely random and unprovoked and usually off on a tangent, and I honestly think that the only logical conclusion here is that he/she/it is a serial troll.    Some of his answers (and note that these are all coming from different accounts):    Here he blasts the OP for "not knowing how to get anything done in Django" and picking the wrong tool, apparently.  This one is a random rant about error messages which has almost nothing to do with the question.  Another tirade, this time about surrogate keys, complete with cursing and anti-religion overtones.  Here he goes way off-topic, answering a question that the OP didn't ask.  Not so inflammatory this time but basically a non-answer, "you can't do it".  A less-useful (and wrong) duplicate of another answer, posted later.  I wonder who gave him the 1 upvote.  "The idiot who wrote this doesn't understand jack shit about the power of relational algebra." (Scary that this answer actually got 4 upvotes).  Basically a massive long-winded explanation of how what the OP wanted to do was impossible.  Posted 6 days after Quassnoi gave a perfectly serviceable answer that received 6 upvotes and an accept.  In here he basically says, several times, that everybody else is an idiot.  A rather pointless and unsubstantiated knock against OODBs.  Cursing and complaining about all the "mediocre" programmers.     So to summarize, we have someone who:   Answers with a combination of circumlocution, flowery prose, and four-letter words, typically only to explain that the question author is an idiot or that it's impossible to do what he's asking; Creates new accounts every day, sometimes multiple times per day, so it's not even worth the rep cost to downvote; Repeatedly posts comments as answers and even acknowledges that he's doing it and that it's frowned upon, but apparently doesn't seem to care. Actually has one account that's accrued over 500 rep (mostly from one-off upvotes), so he clearly knows how to register properly and even provide useful answers once in a while, but seems to create these rather obvious sockpuppet accounts to troll. Is submitting these troll answers to questions that are not even remotely controversial!   I suppose it's possible that whoever this is is creating all these accounts simply can't figure out how to use the login system properly, but seems more likely to me that he's creating throwaway accounts in order to escape culpability (downvotes) from his troll posts.    Thoughts?  Does my theory make sense?  Is it reasonable to want to do something about this, or am I making mountains out of molehills?  Assuming it's a reasonable complaint, can something be done about it, and is it appropriate to bring up the subject here on Meta?
77271
Can someone send me a link to the first question on SO?
48154
It shows no question owner, not even a simple name (without link).   What happened?
9762
While doing some flagging (yes, I'm a little bit addicted) I stumbled upon the user . At first the case seemed clear, Spammer, but...and that's a big one, he seems to be a productive member of SU and SO (his account on SF isn't there anymore, but it's still in the Data-Dump of the explorer, not sure what happened).  He does never seem to link against StarWind-Software, except with his name and profile. He also  that he's a developer there...so...at what am I looking here? I can't really place him somewhere.
29965
And by someone, I mean that evil feline WesleyDavid:        That screenshot was taken just before 4pm PST, i.e. just before 0000 UTC.  That shows KittehHead's votes for the month, which is the same as for the day since it's March 1st.  Just to be sure it wasn't that SE had the time wrong, I tried upvoting something and got the expected "Daily Vote Limit Reached, Please Vote Again in 6 minutes."  So how did Kitteh^H^H^H^H^H^HWesley get 42 votes in one day?  ADDED: It's getting worse... Now it's March 2nd, and Wesley/Cat has 3 extra votes:        Now I finally got an extra vote (take that evil kitteh!), but it hasn't helped me understand why:
49436
I already tried this  repository and couldn't get  it... This guy seems to have it:
18545
I was just reading , i.e., stop moderation and similar type duties, for some period of time to get the attention of the SE staff. It was only on the site for a few minutes, and I was just about finished reading it, when it was deleted. I assume the OP didn't delete it, so I suspect it was likely done by a moderator. I realize having somebody ask other people to take such actions would not be appreciated by SE, but I don't believe such censorship is warranted. As far as I know (but I'm not an expert), it didn't break any rules here.  I have seen from various recent posts and answers there's a lot of confusion, frustration and anger here, with people going to reduce or stop various moderation type activities regardless of whether or not any posts explicitly asking people to take such actions are removed. Actually, I would not be surprised if this post will also be removed just for me asking about it.
7283
Recently, Sara Chipps posted her message . After reading it, I wanted to compare it with . It turns out that she deleted it. Does anyone know why? It looks strange since (as far as remember) it was a sort of official position of SE. Why would such a statement be deleted?
2736
I was reviewing some stuff today, and I came across a rather ridiculous answer (see screenshot). I wanted to see the question and other answers, so I clicked on the link, and found that the answer I was reviewing was in fact deleted. Could someone take a look at it?
75916
Look  to see what I mean? Should I ask one of these guys to delete their answer (and merge whatever detail is missing into the other answer)? I'm aware of this , but it's a little different.
18067
I came across  and at the time there were no suggested answers. After reading Mark Hubbart's comment (at the time with four upvotes), which was the correct answer, and seeing that it had been over 30 minutes since his comment, I figured I would provide that answer in my own words, which I did. My answer is longer, and I think more rounded and more useful, but the core of the answer came from the comment. I have no idea if I'd have thought up the answer on my own--a definite maybe to that.  Now had I tried to be "honorable" or something, such as instead of answering, suggesting to the commenter that he make his comment an answer, I would only have accomplished giving away easy rep to some other user not as into gratuitous self-denial.  The commenter had merely to enter his comment into an answer box instead of a comment box! It was his choice! Whether he was too lazy or didn't think his answer worthwhile or some other reason is not my responsibility. Must I bend over backward to help him earn points that he so carelessly left lying around for another person to take? It just took a tiny bit of non-laziness on my part to get my text typed into the box that would reward me instead of the box that wouldn't.  If my perspective is incorrect and the community would rather see such answers-as-comments rewarded and supported, I will gladly accept that. In the meantime, I just want to shake off the tiny bit of guilt my overly-nice and overly-concerned-with-propriety self is feeling. :)