On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote: >..... > I agree with the others who've said that they don't think this is the > right solution. I've previously agreed we need moderation. I would > advocate that infra work on better moderation tools and/or mailing > list infrastructure that enables our use case.
As I read the lists on Gentoo, I note that there are actually only a few topics and/or contributors that make the lists noisy. A minimally robo-moderated list that initially filters non- developer posters, with an ability for any developer to clear or maintain moderation of a poster could work fairly easily. All developers would be initially clear of moderation while others would need to "earn" a clearance of being moderated, that is: new non-dev posters have to have some developer look at the post and pass it to the list if it seems appropriate, or they may reject it (with or without comment.) The robo-moderation would post a one-liner attention message, and any cleared list member (or any of a fairly large number of moderators) could engage the robot off-list to examine and approve/reject the message, and clear/maintain the posters moderation status. Additionally, any of the chosen type of moderators (all devs or selected moderators) could place non-dev posters back on moderated status as necessary. If a ban is needed, a proposal could be posted by the bot, and any interested devs could vote to the bot (off-list) within a given time period, and the plurality would determine a ban or not. Interactions with the bot would be off-list, and anyone would get a status report from it as desired. A full[er] specification of the moderation robot can be developed rather quickly if desired. -- G.Wolfe Woodbury redwo...@gmail.com
