On Wed, Oct 31, 2018, 2:23 PM Daniel Alley <dal...@redhat.com wrote: > Maybe the first comment / issue posted by an account would need to be > approved, but once approved they could post subsequent comments / issues > without delay? > > @dalley, sounds right to me. I think this could be implemented using bmbouters b) option, with 1 difference. If the user can't even file until approved, I think we shouldn't do it. If the user can file an invisible issue, I'm ok with this.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:28 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> wrote: > b) create a "trusted users" group and have that allow users to either post > comments, post issues, or both and then disable those permissions for > "other accounts". This would prevent a new user from filing a bug in a > self-service way though. > b) Story >>> A new user is created, they file an issue. Issue is not visible until approved. When issue is approved, user is moved to "trusted user" group. Further issues are not delayed. This would fix the problem at the cost of delaying response to new contributors at a critical time, right after their first contribution. Using "trusted users" would allow us to filter out most issues, significantly reducing the workload to review for spam. However, we could also users "trusted users" as an invisible flag that makes no difference to the user. This would be the exact same amount of work as b) for us, but new contributor issues are always visible. So after all this, I'm leaning toward a) + 1/2 b) On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:28 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> wrote: > a) manage the spam better > a) Story >>> A new user is created they file an issue. Issue is visible immediately. Spam review must review every new issue from every user. a) + 1/2 b) Story >>> A new user is created, they file an issue. Issue is visible immediately. Issue is flagged internally for spam review, if not spam, user is added to trusted group. Further issues would skip this process. I have one last thought that might make b) more attractive, but its a shot in the dark. Since the spam is coming from humans, someone is paying them. If we never show the spam, we remove the incentive, and hopefully someone will notice and stop it. If y'all think this is how things woud go down, we could always do b) until the problem stops and switch to a) + 1/2 b).
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
