148563 - NOSPAM setting and warning (keyword for spam-infested bugs to warn users before commenting)

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(Bugzilla :: Creating/Changing Bugs, enhancement, P4)

Description

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

There should be a NOSPAM keyword or special setting for bugs (available only to
bug owners) that is default for all Mozilla installations. When this keyword is
detected, it should give all posters a warning (telling them what they were
going to post) and letting them know that this bug should only have "useful"
comments and not basic rants, etc - and asking whether they are sure they want
to post the comment. 

Hopefully, this keyword or special permission wouldn't be abused by bug owners
and only used on bugs that are spammed (such as the splash screen bug).

Comment 1

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

Also, there should be the ability to add a special additional reason why in the
warning.

I think in this case, it should definately be a special bug setting, denoted by
a checkbox.

(*) Leave as NEW
( ) Blah

[ ] Make this bug give a spam warning

Reason:
+------------------------------------+
|                                    |
|                                    |
|                                    |
+------------------------------------+

Comment 2

[Andreas Franke (gone)]

No, please not an extra text field that is only used for this reason. A magic
nospam keyword may be a good hack, though. I think the status whiteboard can
contain enough spam warnings for now. 

This problem may be solved (at least in part) by bug 99240: 'Add an editable
"long summary" field (useful for long bugs)'. In 99% of the cases, people would
read that long summary before commenting, so "nospam" warnings could go there,
as detailed as appropriate.

Comment 3

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

> In 99% of the cases, people would read that long summary before commenting, 
> so "nospam" warnings could go there, as detailed as appropriate.

You sure? :-)

I agree if that long summary was added, that any additional reasons for nospam
should go there.

I still think, though, that the proper way to do it would be the following:

(*) Leave as NEW
( ) Accept bug (change status to ASSIGNED)
( ) Blah

[ ] Make this bug give a spam warning

The reason I believe this should be the way to do it is because keywords
shouldn't be linked to functions, and it isn't something that many people will
need access to (only people with proper permissions), which should only be a few
people. I don't even know if bug owners should be given permission to do this.

Comment 4

[Jouni Heikniemi]

I don't think it's a good idea to implement magic keywords into the trunk; if
you want that for your installation then it's quite easy to pluck in. My problem
with the magic words is that they decrease the localizability and easy
understanding of Bugzilla among newbie administrators and users.

I also have doubts about a warning screen asking whether or not you really want
to submit this comment or not. There are enough clumsy screens. People are not
eager to abandon a comment they've spent time writing - so the spam warning
thing should be visible well before starting to write. 

I must wonder whether or not this is the right way to handle spamming in
bugzilla. I mean, if somebody abuses the system, I'd first look for ways to make
the persons stop. Do you consider them to be too ineffective?

Comment 5

[Bradley Baetz (:bbaetz)]

*** Bug 181384 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6

[Ben Bucksch (:BenB)]

> letting them know that this bug should only have "useful"
> comments and not basic rants, etc

Can all bugs have that NOSPAM keyword?

Comment 7

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

>I mean, if somebody abuses the system, I'd first look for ways to make
>the persons stop. Do you consider them to be too ineffective?

The grey area is the problem. Some people are blatant abusers like the guy who
made an account to advertise porn sites way back. Some people are commenting on
too many bugs and temporarily have their account disabled so they can be told
how to properly use Bugzilla.

What I'm talking about is when a user believes he or she is providing useful
information, but so did the 40 users before him or her. Its not an individual
user creating all the SPAM, its the popularity of the bug paired with 40 people
who feel they must advocate when it really creates noise that gets in the way of
development-related comments. These people aren't usually regular abusers of
bugzilla, its just one particular bug that they feel they must abdocate on. When
50 people do that only one time, you get bugspam.

Comment 8

[Doug Wright]

I'd prefer something like bug 181384 (which got duped to this) - not just a
warning, but a making a bug read-only unless a user has upgraded priveleges (ie
having demonstrated the art of responsible posting)

Bugs like bug 247884 and bug 38486 are what this is needed for - the ratio of
moans/noise to useful posts can get way out of control.

Comment 9

[u430950]

Comment tagging in 5.0 resolves this issue.