Re: [gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme?

2007-07-13 Thread Alin Năstac
Ken wrote:
> I may just be a lowly Arch Tester, but I don't necessarily see why
> individual dev's who are bothered by the noise can't just set up their
> own killfiles and filters. 
Do you have a solution to filter flamefests out of a ml? If you do,
please share it with the list.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme?

2007-07-13 Thread Ken
Thomas Tuttle wrote:
> Questions?  Comments?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Thomas Tuttle

How about no moderation at all? If you are going to go through the mess
of deciding what is a good post or spam, why not just go all the way and
 set up a global blacklist.

The blacklist could be set up to say only last a week for first time
offenders, and maybe the second or third offenders can get a permanent
spot in the blacklist. Maybe only have someone globally blacklisted if 2
or more dev's agree that way one disgruntled dev can't just globally
killfile someone they don't agree with.

I just don't see why we should waste more dev's time with a moderation
job when they already are complaining of noise when they could be working.

I may just be a lowly Arch Tester, but I don't necessarily see why
individual dev's who are bothered by the noise can't just set up their
own killfiles and filters. It would be a lot less work than having to
moderate a bunch of postings everyday, assuming any of the devs ever
take the time to moderate any postings at all.

Just my 2 cents.

-- 
Kenneth Prugh - Ken69267
Gentoo AMD64 Arch Tester



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme? (was: ML changes)

2007-07-13 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:46:56 -0400
"Thomas Tuttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Questions?  Comments?

How about NO MODERATION?

Or better yet, self-moderation? I will start doing that right now, and
stop feeding this thread. Yay! :)


Kind regards,
 JeR
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme?

2007-07-13 Thread Luca Barbato
Thomas Tuttle wrote:

> The only people eligible to moderate are devs in the whitelisted state.
> 
> Questions?  Comments?

I like it.

-- 

Luca Barbato

Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme? (was: ML changes)

2007-07-13 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:46:56PM -0400, Thomas Tuttle wrote:
> Questions?  Comments?

You're going to have a hell of a fun time to answer the question of
how a post is judged "good" or "spam".

  OG.
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



[gentoo-dev] Smoother moderation scheme? (was: ML changes)

2007-07-13 Thread Thomas Tuttle
Okay, I thought of a potential modification that might make this a
little more friendly.  Moderate all non-dev posts by default, but pass
their posts after a certain time period if nobody checks the queue, and
put a few people in charge of whitelisting positive contributors.  If
whitelisted posters create problems, move them to another moderated
state where their posts are not automatically approved and they do not
automatically gain whitelisted status.

This way, anyone who has productive things to say can contribute easily,
because of the automatic posting.  Regular, useful posters will soon be
freed from this delay, and will be able to post freely.  But anyone who
causes noise can be sentenced to permanent moderation (i.e., their posts
always have to be approved), and anyone who causes trouble can be
blacklisted.

Here's a detailed explanation:

If a poster is a dev (or an arch tester?), they start in the Whitelisted
state, otherwise start in the Lightly Moderated state.

In the following parts, "spam" is a post that, unquestionably, as a
matter of solid fact, is completely and *intentionally* off-topic, or a
flame/troll/etc... that does not also contain any useful discussion of
Gentoo.  Note that this does *not* include users who accidentally post
to the wrong list, or on-topic but nasty messages.  "annoying things"
are things like "Me too!" posts or threads that wander off-topic. 
Basically, "spam" is things that are totally worthless, and "annoying
things" are things that are somewhat on-topic but inappropriate for
other reasons.

In the Lightly Moderated state:
  All posts are moderated.
If a post is not approved within a certain amount of time, it is
automatically posted.
  If the poster:
1. posts a certain number of good messages,
2. is approved by a dev, or
3. becomes a dev,
  Then they go to the Whitelisted state.
  If the poster posts spam:
They go to the Blacklisted state.

In the Heavily Moderated state:
  All posts are moderated.
Posts do not automatically pass through after a delay.
  If the poster:
1. posts a certain number of good messages,
2. is approved by a dev, or
3. becomes a dev,
  Then they go to the Whitelisted state.
  If the poster posts spam:
They go to the Blacklisted state.

In the Whitelisted state:
  All posts are passed through automatically.
  If the poster posts annoying things:
They will go to the Heavily Moderated state.
  If the poster posts spam:
They go to the Blacklisted state.

In the Blacklisted state:
  All posts are dumped, period.
  The poster might return to the Heavily Moderated state after a delay.
Perhaps the delay doubles each time the poster is sent to the
Blacklisted state.

The only people eligible to moderate are devs in the whitelisted state.

Questions?  Comments?

Thanks,

Thomas Tuttle
-- 
Thomas Tuttle - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ttuttle.net/

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list