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

[Tobias Pape]

On 13.02.2017, at 18:24, Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:

> 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.

How so?


> So, if the number of emails to check is low enough, I'd rather hold them for moderation.

We have currently 23 hold messages, since I just meanly purged them a week ago.

> 
> 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 -