Community-based question answering platforms can be rich sources of
information on a variety of specialized topics, from finance to cooking. The
usefulness of such platforms depends heavily on user contributions (questions
and answers), but also on respecting the community rules. As a crowd-sourced
service, such platforms rely on their users for monitoring and flagging content
that violates community rules.
Common wisdom is to eliminate the users who receive many flags. Our analysis
of a year of traces from a mature Q&A site shows that the number of flags does
not tell the full story: on one hand, users with many flags may still
contribute positively to the community. On the other hand, users who never get
flagged are found to violate community rules and get their accounts suspended.
This analysis, however, also shows that abusive users are betrayed by their
network properties: we find strong evidence of homophilous behavior and use
this finding to detect abusive users who go under the community radar. Based on
our empirical observations, we build a classifier that is able to detect
abusive users with an accuracy as high as 83%.Comment: Published in the proceedings of the 24th International World Wide Web
Conference (WWW 2015