[Box-Admins] [Board] Request permission to moderate squeak-dev

[Levente Uzonyi]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>       On Fri, 10 Feb 2017, David T. Lewis wrote:
>
>             On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:38:18AM +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>                   On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>
>                         Dear all
>
>                         I request the permission to moderate squeak-dev.
>                         I want to:
>                          - approve ok pending messages
>                          - discard held messages that are spam etc.
>                          - add spammers to blacklists.
>                         So that the server stays more clean than it does currently:
>                          - 16 messages in the last 3 days AFTER I purged _all_ ~2000 held
>                            messages that accumulated over the years
>
>                         If approved, I'd also change the following options serverside:
>                          - discard mail from not subscribed people instead of holding
>                          - turn off password reminders (those are dagngerous..)
>                          - discard held messages after 30 days (currently indefinitely)
>                         And maybe apply this to all our lists.
> 
>
>                         Best regards
>                                 -Tobias
> 
> 
>
>                   +1
>
>                   - Bert -
> 
>
>             +1
>             Dave
> 
>
>             Just one question (not an objection, just a question):
>
>                          - discard mail from not subscribed people instead of holding
> 
>
>             Is this a good idea? I don't know if we have a problem with not
>             subscribed people posting to the list, but I would be generally
>             inclined to avoid adding any new restrictions unless they solve a
>             real problem. Again, I am not objecting, just asking because I do
>             not know.
> 
> 
> I dislike the idea to automatically reject those emails, because that breaks cross-list conversations. The current situation is no better
> (as Tobias described), but with proper moderation it would be better.
> 
> +1 on all the other things.
>
>       Levente
> 
> 
> Tobi was suggesting discarding, not rejecting (but possibly that was a typo). The difference is that the sender gets notified of their possibly
> honest mistake in one case, whereas it silently fails in the other.
> 
> I'd personally be in favor of rejecting, not discarding. The third option is holding, but that puts a lot of burden on the moderator, as you said
> there are dozens of spam mails each day. Perhaps we can hold only messages that pass a spam filter? In any case I'm happy to defer to Levente's
> opinion as box admins lead.

It would still break the cross-list conversation. So, if the number of 
emails to check is low enough, I'd rather hold them for moderation.

Levente

> 
> Except for this single issue, the board approves your request Tobi (there were a couple of +1 in this thread that didn't make it to the box-admins
> list).
> 
> And thank you for volunteering :)
> 
> - Bert - 
> 
> 
>