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

[Levente Uzonyi]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Tobias Pape wrote:

>
> 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?

You can't repeat your message with the same message id once your original 
mail has been discarded/rejected, can you?

>
>
>> 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.

So that's about 3 messages a day.

Levente

>
>>
>> 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 -
>
>