Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bugs in comment moderation scripts

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: Steve Simms <steve(at)deefs(dot)net>
Cc: Alexey Borzov <borz_off(at)cs(dot)msu(dot)su>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bugs in comment moderation scripts
Date: 2004-12-24 19:13:15
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
On Friday 24 December 2004 11:42, Steve Simms wrote:
> Alexey Borzov wrote:
> > No, there's no step missing, I expected someone to put a "canned" answer
> > in this place.
> Ok, that makes sense.
> > I don't think it's worth the effort to write an explanation for every
> > spam piece added via our comment interface. The better approach would be
> > to add a prominent warning to comment form and send a "you violated our
> > comment guidelines"-type email on comment rejection.
> Well, we do have the delete/reject distinction, where delete just
> removes the message without sending an E-Mail, and reject provides an
> explanation.
> Is it worth making that message customizable, given that?

Probably not.  I think we need to change the "friendly message" to state the 
reasons why someones comment would be rejected and leave it at that.  If 
someone is really compelled to give a reason you can direct email the person 
in question.  This would mean we "reject" comments for folks who are 
misguided, but "delete" messages that are totally inappropriate.  

Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: John HansenDate: 2004-12-24 20:35:50
Subject: Re: Missing archive entry
Previous:From: Steve SimmsDate: 2004-12-24 16:42:08
Subject: Re: Bugs in comment moderation scripts

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group