public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
To: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL WWW <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Stalled news about ora2pg 11 on pg.org
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:19:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CABUevEyp4mUmyc=ZZ6E++DL-yGJ2oqi9binN=BnNCiqva7rBhw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<CA+U5nMKRFBp9vhO_+Y4XJpvd00HDn4P0UDyoNDZ77=Bq8fVypg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CABUevEyaP10u6ZYrRb+VHt7LW6+wdiSFj+58HbczrUfhzPYBxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-www>

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> 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.

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


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

view thread (17+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Stalled news about ora2pg 11 on pg.org
  In-Reply-To: <CABUevEyp4mUmyc=ZZ6E++DL-yGJ2oqi9binN=BnNCiqva7rBhw@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox