Re: Moderation workbench for Whimsy?

[Roy Lenferink <rl...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

(Coming from the comdev mailing list where the same idea/feature request popped up.)

I think this is quite a good idea and I want to help out with this idea as well.

As I haven't worked on Whimsy before I first want to be familiar with the way of working for Whimsy. Is everyone having a local setup to use for developing, or is there a development VM available for Whimsy? It's not a problem to setup something locally though.

Are the files DEVELOPMENT.md [1] and CONFIGURE.md [2] still up-to-date to get started with developing on whimsy?

- Roy

[1] https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/master/DEVELOPMENT.md
[2] https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/master/CONFIGURE.md


On 2018/12/17 17:32:52, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> The current moderation system is quite inefficient as every moderator
> gets every mail and needs to review each one to decide what to do.
> 
> There's no sharing of effort.
> 
> This issue has been solved for the case of some ASF lists (announce,
> press, etc), by using a shared GMail account. However the solution
> only applies where all moderators are allowed access to all lists.
> Also it would not be scaleable for project lists.
> 
> So I've started looking at what might be required to use Whimsy to
> moderate mails, e.g. using a modified version of the Secretary
> workbench.
> 
> The workbench implements a dynamic list of unprocessed mails.
> As soon as a mail has been processed, it disappears from the list, so
> generally only one moderator would need to view each email.
> 
> There are potential advantages of using a custom solution (rather than GMail).
> 
> Many times, the same spam is sent to multiple lists. So there is scope
> for automatically detecting and ignoring all similar mails. And if a
> mail is manually detected as spam, all similar mails can be marked
> likewise.
> 
> Where an email is to be rejected (e.g. wrong list), it would be easy
> to provide template replies.
> 
> The workbench would receive all moderation requests, and only show
> those for which the user has karma. [There might need to be further
> filtering to reduce the load for ASF members.]
> 
> If the UI is carefully designed, I think this would make a moderators
> job much easier, and should mean fewer moderators are needed overall.
> 
> Some figures:
> 250-1000 mod requests per day; average around 700 across all lists
> (public and private)
> 150-200+ 'obvious' spam mails (duplicates across multiple lists)
> 
> Sebb.
> 

Re: Moderation workbench for Whimsy?

[Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>]

On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:52 AM Roy Lenferink <rl...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> (Coming from the comdev mailing list where the same idea/feature request popped up.)
>
> I think this is quite a good idea and I want to help out with this idea as well.
>
> As I haven't worked on Whimsy before I first want to be familiar with the way of working for Whimsy. Is everyone having a local setup to use for developing, or is there a development VM available for Whimsy? It's not a problem to setup something locally though.
>
> Are the files DEVELOPMENT.md [1] and CONFIGURE.md [2] still up-to-date to get started with developing on whimsy?

Short answer: the following is the most up to date:

https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/master/MACOSX.md

Longer answer: over the years, I've tried creating a VM (using
vagrant/chef), a Dockerfile, and generic (non-O/S specific)
instructions.  Other than one individual (Brett Porter) using the
Dockerfile a few times, none of these got much traction.

What did work was Mac OS/X specific instructions.  So, consider those
instructions tested, and any other instructions and "thought to work,
but untested".

What is your development O/S?

> - Roy
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/master/DEVELOPMENT.md
> [2] https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/master/CONFIGURE.md

- Sam Ruby

> On 2018/12/17 17:32:52, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The current moderation system is quite inefficient as every moderator
> > gets every mail and needs to review each one to decide what to do.
> >
> > There's no sharing of effort.
> >
> > This issue has been solved for the case of some ASF lists (announce,
> > press, etc), by using a shared GMail account. However the solution
> > only applies where all moderators are allowed access to all lists.
> > Also it would not be scaleable for project lists.
> >
> > So I've started looking at what might be required to use Whimsy to
> > moderate mails, e.g. using a modified version of the Secretary
> > workbench.
> >
> > The workbench implements a dynamic list of unprocessed mails.
> > As soon as a mail has been processed, it disappears from the list, so
> > generally only one moderator would need to view each email.
> >
> > There are potential advantages of using a custom solution (rather than GMail).
> >
> > Many times, the same spam is sent to multiple lists. So there is scope
> > for automatically detecting and ignoring all similar mails. And if a
> > mail is manually detected as spam, all similar mails can be marked
> > likewise.
> >
> > Where an email is to be rejected (e.g. wrong list), it would be easy
> > to provide template replies.
> >
> > The workbench would receive all moderation requests, and only show
> > those for which the user has karma. [There might need to be further
> > filtering to reduce the load for ASF members.]
> >
> > If the UI is carefully designed, I think this would make a moderators
> > job much easier, and should mean fewer moderators are needed overall.
> >
> > Some figures:
> > 250-1000 mod requests per day; average around 700 across all lists
> > (public and private)
> > 150-200+ 'obvious' spam mails (duplicates across multiple lists)
> >
> > Sebb.
> >