Odd watch match, error in bisect and/or anchoring logic?

[tripleee]

What problem has occurred? What issues has it caused?

The post https://metasmoke.erwaysoftware.com/post/353825 was reported as a title match, but !!/bisect et al. don't reveal why.

https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/60613689#60613689 shows several of us trying to figure out what caused it, but failing.

Eventually I hacked findspam.py to reveal which rule matched, and it came back with the watchlist after all. (Investigation still pending, though. This might still be a red herring.)

What would you like to happen/not happen?

Several things really.

• There should be a way to figure out why something matched. !!/bisect might be best left as it is, though then we'd want to have a separate troubleshooting command for chasing down the match from various regexes inside findspam.py.
• If there is a discrepancy between !!/bisect and the actual watch/blacklist logic, it needs to be found and corrected.
• Ultimately, this looks like a regex which at the very least should be isolated and assessed.

Sorry for the messy ticket, I'll hopefully be able to clean this up somewhat later on.

[stale]

This issue has been closed because it has had no recent activity. If this is still important, please add another comment and find someone with write permissions to reopen the issue. Thank you for your contributions.