[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: distributed moderation of mailinglist



* Geert Stappers (stappers@stappers.nl) wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 08:55:18AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > * Holger Wansing (hwansing@mailbox.org) wrote:
> > > Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl> wrote:
> > > > Posting of subscriber with establish repuation
> > > > go through without a delay. It skips "review queue"
> > 
> > Sure.
> > 
> > > > New subcribers will recieve postings. Their first
> > > > posting gets a delay  of N minutes.
> > > > 
> > > > The delay has a time-out. If no-one approved a posting
> > > > from the review queue, the posting goes through the ML.
> > > > Such "time-out-expired posting" tells that the pool of
> > > > moderators is too small.
> > 
> > Interesting idea..
> > 
> > > > Please share your idea of such mailinglist features.
> > > 
> > > The delay has to be something like 24h, not "N minutes".
> > > Otherwise this is a too high burden for the moderators.
> > 
> > Yeah, that doesn't strike me as a great approach either.
> 
>  :-)
> 
> When I wrote 'N minutes', I was thinking "configuration item
> in the manual page".  Yes, delays will typically be
> a multiple of  60 minutes.

Yeah, these things often need configuration. :)

> > The way this is handled in pglister (which is what the PostgreSQL.Org
> > mailing lists use, and we throw quite a bit of mail around)
> 
> I found https://gitlab.com/pglister/pglister 

Yup, that's it, and it's actively being used and developed.

> > is that non-subscribers and/or non-whitelisted folks do go to
> > moderation, but we have a number of moderators and we more-or-less
> > randomly pick the first moderator to email, if the mail isn't moderated
> > after 5 minutes or so, we randomly pick a different moderator to email,
> > and so on.
> 
> Nice algoritme,  nice load-balancer.

Thanks.

> > We don't have any "automatically let the email through" option today,
> > and we're pretty successfully able to moderate a lot of mail, let a
> > lot of mail through,
> 
> I do read "Many volunteers on guarding duty".
> Yes, that is truely distributed moderation.

More-or-less.

> > and have very very little spam get through (the little it does
> > happen is almost always due to a mistake by a moderator, which does
> > happen from time to time, of course).
> 
> Yes, human touch preferred.

Yup.

Thanks!

Stephen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: