On 04/16/2013 09:10 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> 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?
+1
>
>
>
>> Perhaps another initiative (though this is a tech suggestion) is to send a daily digest of news stories awaiting
approvalto the moderators so that way there is a constant reminder to review news items.
>
> This is something we already do, since many years back.
yeah but the problem still is the same - most people do stuff in batches
(ie on a quick train ride or in a break) so the same time they read the
nagging mail the can just deal with the the real news item...
Stefan
