At bottom :-
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:15, CherianTinu Abraham
wrote:
> shirish,
Dear Tinu,
> I believe, your mail to Wikimedia-in-mum didn't go through because
> you have not subscribed to that list. I just checked
> from https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-in-mum
> Regards
> Tinu Cherian
That was not really my concern or that was not the reason why I bought
the topic to a national mailing list. My concern *is* the same as
others on the mailing list that when messages get moderated for any
reason, there should be automatic message made by the filter/bot
whatever explaining why the message is in 'moderation' with an link to
take down the message or let it remain in the moderation for the
moderator to do the needful.
This does two things, it says to the original message creator 'hey,
for x or y reason your message has got stuck in the moderation queue'
giving the message sender some kind of response .
Also it gives the moderators flexibility and breathing space in
dealing with the queue. As traffic grows, having more and more
moderators is not the answer because that also leads/or could lead to
loss in quality moderation and one or more bad moderations casts
aspersions on the whole moderation team. Take the recent example for
instance.
I am not really into moderation as I'm perhaps one of the *laziest*
moderator you could find. I'm only excited or prone to action when
some borderline stuff comes through otherwise it's all 'grunt work'
that really nobody wants to do.
Now if such a feature is built-in the current mailman configuration
and how the mails are treated then good, if not that *could* be a good
workflow model to follow.
Now its only the current list admins and mods who can share with us if
this workflow is followed or not. If it is followed then its 'A ok'
for me. If somethings are missing then it would be good to have it
evolve or do things in such a way. It could become a 'Todo' for the
list admins to take a look at, create consensus within both the admin
group and the community as a whole and then move forward.
Personally think that asking for more list admins is a very knee-jerk
reflexive statement.
There should be attempts more at finding solutions within the given
environment, for we may get more list admins who may no have idea of
the workload involved and lots of stuff which goes into the background
while maintaining lists.
One of the obvious good/bad things people are also not taking into
account is the kind of abusive and hate mail that the list admins/mods
do get esp. if its a *popular* mailing list or even not.
Also not everybody is going to be happy with the moderation choices
*all the time*.
I have barely scratched the surface.
I am sure that lot of people know this already. Just re-remembering
the same and putting it across so people who want to take this up bear
atleast these points in mind when taking up the mantle.
--
Regards,
Shirish Agarwal शिरीष अग्रवाल
My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
065C 6D79 A68C E7EA 52B3 8D70 950D 53FB 729A 8B17
___
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
