MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B6B1FF55-055B-41AF-BE4A-B78A99D11A59@excoventures.com>
References: <516C4833.2050805@dalibo.info>
	<CA+U5nMKRFBp9vhO_+Y4XJpvd00HDn4P0UDyoNDZ77=Bq8fVypg@mail.gmail.com>
	<516C5A96.4020006@agliodbs.com> <20130415195918.GA4602@momjian.us>
	<CABUevEyaP10u6ZYrRb+VHt7LW6+wdiSFj+58HbczrUfhzPYBxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130415201046.GD8626@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org>
	<CABUevEyp4mUmyc=ZZ6E++DL-yGJ2oqi9binN=BnNCiqva7rBhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<B6B1FF55-055B-41AF-BE4A-B78A99D11A59@excoventures.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:10:18 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CABUevExzutQiWf++WqkUgh5Jr9+JU2akf1L1FWvP+HGsWbbGeA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Stalled news about ora2pg 11 on pg.org
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jonathan.katz@excoventures.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
	Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Jonathan S. Katz
<jonathan.katz@excoventures.com> wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:19 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:52:54PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2ndQuadrant has experienced significant delays in at least 3 cases
>>>>>>> also. There is definitely a problem somewhere there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The delay is called "volunteer moderators who have day jobs".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps we should make all posts wait the same length of time, to
>>>>>>> allow reasonable time to decide whether posts are suitable? 72 hours
>>>>>>> seems like a reasonable time for this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who is going to do this strictly time-limited approving?
>>>>>
>>>>> So it auto-approves after 72 hours?  I found this proposal vague.
>>>>
>>>> If anything automatic were to happen after 72 hours, the reasonable
>>>> thing would be a rejection.
>>>
>>> ... but that's not more helpful than not doing anything, because then
>>> the submitter needs to submit again.  This creates a busy loop on which
>>> submitter needs to watch status of his submitted news until it gets
>>> approved.
>>
>> I agree. But it's the only thing we could do at all there.
>>
>>
>>> I think the idea behind 72-hour auto-approve is that if it's obvious
>>> spam someone will quickly reject it, and if it's not spam then it's not
>>> worth rejecting.  I don't think this is very palatable either.
>>
>> Given thta our moderators *clearly* don't have time to process it,
>> this is almost *guarantee* to get spam postings onto our site. It
>> won't work.
>>
>> I think recruiting more moderators, or somehow convincing our current
>> ones to actually moderate more often is the only way to go.
>
> If helping to alleviate some of the delay issues would be to have more moderators, I would be happy to volunteer my time.

We can certainly do with more moderators. Unless there are any
objections, I think adding Jonathan would be a good idea?


> Perhaps another initiative (though this is a tech suggestion) is to send a daily digest of news stories awaiting approval to the moderators so that way there is a constant reminder to review news items.

This is something we already do, since many years back.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/


-- 
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www