Just a thought. It might be more useful to search for terms rather than only the word "programmers", so that you're more likely to only get comments referencing this site. I don't know how often programmers is mentioned on StackOverflow, but I imagine it can be quite often since it's a site based on programming.
For example, searching for the terms:
- "for programmers"
- "on programmers"
- "to programmers"
- "at programmers"
- "try programmers"
Would pick up comments like:
"@KirkStevenson - Quite often, it is much easier to learn about abstract concepts (like logic) by interacting with them. You can just as easily sit down with another human being, but humans tend to be quite subjective in their understanding of the truth. Programming languages offer a (relatively) infallible source of truth with which you can interact. In that vein, and due to it's popularity, python is a perfectly reasonable choice for your instructor. (Sorry for going so far off topic of the forum here). More questions in this vein belong on programmers.stackexchange.com — dwerner 47 secs ago"
"I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's not about programming. You can try discussing it on programmers.stackexchange.com — Eugene Mayevski 'EldoS Corp 33 secs ago"
"@EugeneMayevski'EldoSCorp If it's not about programming then why direct someone to Programmers? License questions are allowed at programmers but this question wouldn't fit there either. Programmers is for Q&A, just like the rest of StackExchange. Stack Overflow Chat is the place to go for discussions. — GlenH7 1 min ago"
"Not particularly, no. SO is not really made for getting inspiration for a project, perhaps a re-wording of your question would work on Programmers SE. — Elizion 1 min ago"
"@Elizion - project suggestions are off topic for Programmers. Stack Overflow Chat is the best place to ask questions like this. — GlenH7 1 min ago"
"Unless you have a specific programming question, conceptual/design questions are better suited for programmers.stackexchange.com — tnw 28 secs ago"
"@tnw - this wouldn't be a good fit on Programmers either. It will be closed quickly and likely heavily downvoted. — GlenH7 1 min ago"
"@tnw: This question would never pass muster on Programmers. — Robert Harvey ♦ 1 min ago"
"This is more about computer science theory and asymptotic analysis. It's more appropriate for Programmers SE. — franklin 18 secs ago"
and not:
"Is there a way I can change the default behaviour? is a terrible idea. Anyone who uses your assembly or new programmers will have no idea why a method that has always worked one way, now works another way. Instead write your own extension method ToScientificFloat() and/or ToScientificInt(). Now when people see this method, they instantly know it's doing something that is not default behavior. — Erik Philips 1 min ago"
"Well, not only will the HTML editors complain, but browsers will render it in unexpected ways. OP wants to know why, and I'm generally happier working with programmers who ask why instead of blindly going "you just can't, ok?" — ceejayoz 1 min ago"
"Thanks for all the input. What I hear J an David saying is "Just be careful and write the code right the first time." Maybe you guys are better programmers than me, but I don't like walking a tightrope without a net. I make mistakes. And I like to catch them before ship my code. — RobertFrank 2 mins ago"
"Note that it is a good idea to drop the inline from static inline: With static the compiler already knows that the given function is only ever used in the given translation unit and can make a better choice about inlining it than the programmer who adds the inline to the definition. Too much inlining hurts performance as much as too little inlining, and most programmers who add the inline keyword do not know or test whether inlining that function will indeed speed things up. Of course, if your tests(!) show that static inline is faster than static, go ahead and use it :-) — cmaster 1 min ago"
"This question is not a good format for Stack Overflow. This is intended to be a site for answering specific programming related questions, to help programmers solve their issues. It is not a discussion site to discuss perceived shortcomings with available software. — mason 55 secs ago"
I wouldn't expect it to completely keep false positives from showing, I imagine there will be the occasional comment that contains the phrase "for programmers" that isn't talking about this site, but I think it would cut out what looks like a third of the comments that are unrelated.
Note: I saw this posted earlier, which brings up some more 'rules' to add I think:
Hiya, this is an interesting question and the answers will be useful... but as you guessed, sadly it's not a good fit for Stack Overflow, where we prefer questions with a specific, right answer (rather than discussions about which tool might be better). In the past, such questions have led to debate, and flamewars and that tends to tear the community apart :( But you may yet find a better home for your question. Try the "programmers' stack exchange site: programmers.stackexchange.com — Taryn East 1 min
First, add the word "the" into the possible phrases (e.g. "try the programmers", "on the programmers", "at the programmers").
Second, if possible, remove punctuation from around the word "programmers" if it appears. That way people can't get around the script by adding quotes into their comments.
An alternative would be instead of only looking for terms that would make the comment likely to be referencing the site, to look for terms that would make it likely to not be referencing the site, meaning the comment could be ignored. I'm not sure that I'm seeing any common terms that would work for that though.
