On 16/04/13 22:53, Olemis Lang wrote:
On 4/16/13, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
On 16/04/13 17:17, Olemis Lang wrote:
[...]
right now it's incredibly important for us to attract user interest
than dealing with «non-significant» spamming threats .
It is impossible to know whether the non-significance of spam threats is
a result of the current policy.
It's good that you mention that . I'll clarify my statement . Even if
our time will be wasted , it will always be possible to remove
different kinds of spam . It will be much harder to make interested
parties return after giving up because of the disappointing
interaction with the site ... and we should focus on fostering user
interest on Bloodhound . That's top priority now. Should spam become a
serious issue then we apply further measures . That's what I meant .
Notice that «non-significant» word is highlighted ;)
I'm afraid that my eyes strip out all markup in emails; it is lost on me.
[...]
I think I have already mentioned that I am not a fan of capchas but that
is just me and clearly I will not have to be dealing with it!
/me neither . If you ask me I suggest granting read only access to
anonymous user .
I take that to mean that you would be relatively happy with the access
policy taken from apache's jira instance as long as it used OpenId. If
possible I would prefer something even more open if we could balance
ease of raising issues with encouragement to be involved and limited
worry about abuse. I am not entirely sure where that balancing point is
at the moment so it is nice to see other opinions and ideas.
Cheers,
Gary
