|
On 03/12/2015 09:45 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:27:58PM -0600, Pete Travis wrote: >> On Mar 11, 2015 3:01 PM, "Paul W. Frields" <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:28:05PM +0000, Ankur Sinha wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 11:58 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >>>> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4187 >>> >>> That's fine, but how does someone not familiar with ask.fp.o know to >>> do that? Why not change the link and investigate the problem in the >>> background? >>> >> We should definitely fix this, and probably add more signal to the >> feedback/help section. Many site moderators (as defined by contribution >> karma) don't idle in #fedora-ask - mostly just admins like myself or Ankur >> and a few others. I would rate this a lower priority than the askbot >> upgrade, though. > > Probably -- after the upgrade, if the link isn't magically fixed, :-) > I recommend changing it. > >>>> The moderation queue in the version we're using is quite badly designed >>>> - it's an upstream issue - that's how askbot is. All those posts aren't >>>> actually waiting for moderation - even if a mod approves a post, it >>>> still seems to show up in another mod's moderation queue :( >>> >>> OK, I understand. What should I do about the 10,000+ items in my >>> queue? >> >> Skim over the most recent ones for obvious dupes and offensive or harmful >> posts. Once you hit one that's already been approved or deleted (this is >> where I check the fedmsg links), it's fairly safe to assume all subsequent >> posts have been moderated. Askbot moderation means that each post must be >> moderated by each moderator; there is no shared moderation queue. However, >> anything you do to an already moderated post has no additional affect. >> Bonus, askbot defines new users as "watched users" and the can be >> administratively changed to "approved users" - which has no noticeable >> effect. We're really hoping the new version works better. > > Is there a way for me to clear from the queue the 9900+ items I'm > unlikely to skim? Or is it likely the upstream update will remove the > problem? I'll make time to update askbot in staging this weekend and let you know. (side note, if FAS hasn't been synced to staging in the last week or so, could someone please do that?) > >>>> We informed upstream about this and they've apparently rewritten the >>>> moderation part and made a new release. None of us have managed to find >>>> the cycles to update the package and test it out in staging so that we >>>> can update the production instance. It's high time I looked into it, >>>> though - it's been on my todo list for quite a while. >>> >>> I'm happy you are looking into it, and I see from your other post >>> there is an updated package. >>> >>> However, this raises a potential issue about future maintenance. It >>> appears the site gets quite a bit of visitors and use. What's the >>> plan to find cycles for the maintenance required for such a service? >> >> I found cycles to update the package and test locally, but haven't found >> time to test in staging yet. maybe this weekend, if I can work it in with >> the other Fedora commitments I've made. As for a plan... well, I keep >> adding to my reading list when you drop quotes, Paul, the secret has to be >> in there somewhere :) Joking aside, when the work required exceeds the >> available volunteer manhours, the plan is a best-effort endeavor and good >> communication. We can probably improve on the second part. > > This is an issue with any community-supported service, and that's a > reasonable response. However, to avoid the "kick the can down the > road" syndrome, I suggest setting some sort of review date for > assessing whether that improvement has happened. > > One additional item of interest, but this may go OT for the > infrastructure list: AIUI there is recent Docs team interest in how to > better focus on audience. Unless our project is radically different > from the rest of the Internet, I surmise users are looking for more > succinct help and answers in general. This means there might be a way > to build a sort of positive feedback loop into how we use ask.fp.o(*) > to (1) engage Docs team members, especially new people who pop up to > help; (2) deliver better answers to users; and (3) create content that > can be effectively reused elsewhere. > > (*) or something like it, depending on how its maintenance goes > > I think there are probably enough interested parties that more organized communication will help. A review date would be good, or a reference for who is doing what, or what needs to still be done, whatever. I just opened https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4686 for this. I do monitor ask.fp.o for 'common issues' to identify potential priorities for the docs team. The idea of using askbot as a formal feedback source or even a starting place for new writers is a good one - a few contributors have come over from being ask users to casual docs members already, so it works both ways. You're always welcome on the docs list, Paul, keep 'em coming! -- -- Pete |
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
