On Sunday 01 August 2010, Lee Winter wrote: > > It means that we probably need a few more DD's to look at signalled > > spam for the debian-boot mailing list through > > I disagree. I believe the above fact indicates that we need a better > communication mechanism for reviewers, rather than more isolated and > thus un-coordinated effort.
Christian's comment is more about the last stage of the removal process (the final review that can only be done by DDs) than the searching for and reporting of spam. I also don't think it's a big problem as the review will get done eventually. This current focus on getting the spam cleaned out within the shortest time possible is unnecessary. d-boot is already by far the cleanest list in the archives. > For example, even with the first > reviewer's hint that he found 14 spam, I was not able to duplicate > reach that count despite several extra passes over the month. > > The simplest change I can think of is to allow people to see the list > of messages that have been nominated by other reviewers. One way to > do that would be to just make the information available. Another way > to do that would be to create a collaboration page whereupon reviewers > could deposit their nominations for the benefit of subsequent > reviewers. I strongly disagree. The spam review process is purposely based on the fact that spam messages are reported independently. Coordinating the reporting of spam to the extend you are suggesting would defeat the safeguards explicitly built into the process. I'm all in favor of continuing the process I started last year, but there's absolutely no need to be obsessive about it. It is better that some spams are missed and left in the archive than that the process is abused. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201008011410.50729.elen...@planet.nl