Jump to content

gv2

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About gv2

  • Rank
    Member
  1. spamcop.net search is google. the forum search was my "bulletin search engine". And my point was that there are so many of them and not just one. And that people have to spent time to get posts in this board nicer organized so that it does not become too chaotic. My point was that open bulletin boards are chaotic and a some web support tool would probably a better tool for the support related issues (that provide functions to do that organizing that people try to do here manually...)
  2. Best I can tell you, take yourself over to www.spamcop.net and try to follow the Help flow there, you'll find many FAQs already in existence. Fire up your newsreader and head on over to news://news.spamcop.net and pick your newsgroup to fire away in. If you care enough, check through the archives on the newsgroups for the traffic in reference to the creation and movement of support to this web-based thing. ... My point is that your statements appear to have been made without the apparent knowledge that this isn't the "only" place for issues, comments, thoughts, and discussions. But this is exactly what I am talking about: you have a mess of information at different places for different purposes and have to put a whole lot of manual work into getting things halfway organised and look good. (It requires a web browser, an internet search engine, the bulletin search engine, a news reader and a groups.google to search through all this information!!) I don't say that you are not doing a great and honourable job (just to make that perfectly clear...) I just say that your time spent for cleaning up the threads in this bulletin board is time that you could do much better things if spamcop was to employ other tools for support. One example that just comes to my mind because I have to use it so often lately is the Symantec support pages. Even if there are still many things to improve and far from perfect I think it is a good step in the right direction: You are guided through the FAQ pages and it collects necessary information for the support purpose. (Take Ellen's frequent answer: "I need you loginname and for spams the report id...") This is the web. It has links. Even without a intelligent agent picking the right topics for you this is mainly a problem of presentation. A tool would help a lot but would not necessarily be required. With that, support questions would go support including the necessary information after people had at least a brief look at the FAQs. And the newsgroups and bulletin boards could remain what their purpose is: for open discussion (and extremely messy... ;-) I did not really follow the bulletin board discussion but I am totally aware that there was a controversy. I usually prefer the newsgroups as you might know. Gerald
  3. The needs are for the public to post, as that who is supporting the product. Trouble ticket systems do not work with a publicly supported product. Most of the people here are simply other users who have been around and have picked up how things work. Even Wazoo is simply a volunteer moderator. There are a couple of deputies, who are paid to help support the product, but that is it. Trouble ticket systems were only an example. Just picking on that one point and example is somewhat misleading. And, trouble ticket systems do work with publicly supported products. The general support processes are always the same even if the crowd dealing with varies... And there are many more tools like bugzilla that help support. So, anyway, although you are right with all you write, still my point remains that the tools employed do not meets the needs. A bulletin board like this one does not suit for all purposes. And it definitively does not suit support purposes as used here when someone moves around posted articles to clean up the threads. (Well, this is not even a very good use of the bulletin board as this cries out for a moderated forum...) And I do not say that there is also a need for a general open forum or the newsgroup for everyone can post. But those places imply that people will as questions again and again. Having someone, that kind of "cleans up" to limit the number of threads is not part of that idea. Good proper design and choice of tools employed is always important, regardless if it is a commercial project or a publicly supported product. Using the wrong tools for the wrong purposes is always a bad idea in either way. Trying to force a unsuitable tool to be used for other purposes requiring manual intervention is generally destined to failed in the long run because it won't scale.
  4. Obviously, this isn't Usenet. .... In this medium, why allow 100's of "new" Topics to be started, when the contents already match an existing Topic? Someone looking for an answer should find it easier to get it by looking at the subject matter already discussed under one heading .. vice having to wade through 100+ one question/one answer Topics ..... And to go along with your comparison to Usenet .... the age old advice of read before posting also comes into play ... Well you are writing basically just show me one thing: you use the wrong medium for the wrong purposes. These bulletin boards are discussion forums. They are not made for support purposes, at least as long as anyone can post. They are not very good for FAQs either. (I don't even like them very much for discussions but that's my personal opinion). Information is not very clearly presented and with 10 or more messages on one page it is just awful to browse for any useful information. (You obviously noted these defiencies and have only one post in our pinned messages...) If you want to make sure that the number of threads/topics does not explode than you have to moderate the forum and let only that information be posted that is relevant. If you need something for support use an support tool. Depending on your needs use a for example trouble ticket systems. If you want to deal with FAQs and present them properly you'll find many good examples and systems out there. If you need more, build an interactive troubleshooting agent (or whatever you might call it) that guides through some major issues and FAQs but asking questions. Anyway, a plain two level system (forum & posts) is just inadequate. A discussion forum is just not right for your purposes if you do not want discussions (or at least not in threads/topics that you would like them to be). Discussions are free and that is what this system does. So, just use the proper tools for the right reasons and you won't need someone to clean up or move messages around... (Well, this goes so off topic as it only can be so I am really curious where this post might end up...)
  5. The first on from me in this topic. Originally, it was a new topic. Then it ended up in this thread. Gerald
  6. And there is no way to figure out that that was an answer to my post if I set up email notification and you move my post without telling my! I actually assumed you have just removed it and that really pissed my off for a while. So if you rename, move or delete posts of people: tell them! That's one of the reasons why there are these "email" and "pm" buttons! Even if the bulletin boards are yours and you can do whatever you like with it, just doing whatever you like to and ignoring any good rule that has been well established for USENET is unacceptable for me! Gerald
  7. Although my mailhosts configuration is working correctly for the last couple of weeks there are a few things that look strange on the mailhosts configuration page: What is it with the entries that have no hosts/domain or no relaying ip or in case of spamcop itself neither one? One of them without relaying IP is (one of the two) entries for GMX that looks even stranger: It lists mail.ries.homeip.net, zwick3.local and imap.gmx.net. Only the third host/domain has anything to do with gmx, the second one is not a proper host name. Gerald
  8. Is it possible to return two or more confirmation emails in one email, i.e. attaching all emails I get (as seperate attachment) in one e-mail as the recipient is always the same mhconf address?
  9. But this is not all: Do not convert to mailhosts as long as there are still messages in the quick reporting queue! Nobody tells you that all messages that you have just submitted with quick reporting (and haven't been processed yet) will go through the new system if you convert just after submitting. That is even worse. You do as you always do. Then, you see the new link, try it, and convert. 30 minutes or so later when you'll see your report log you'll know you have a major crisis because you have just reported your ISP 20 times...
  10. How do I configure mailhosts for configurations that contains a loop: e.g. server1 -> server2 -> spamcop -> server2 ? I use procmail to make sure that mail does not loop forever. And particularly, how do I do it correctly when server2 only forwards certain emails (those recognized by SpamAssasin on server2 with hits>0)? First, the default spamcop configuration of the system is wrong: I forward any email to spamcop to server2. Second: server2 has two appearances: it is either a forwarder to spamcop or the end of the chain. And even worse: both can appear in one email when spamcop does not recognize a spam mail and lets it through the filter. Right now, my configuration shows SpamCop forwards to server2 (for that, I removed and added spamcop again...) and server2 with no forward. As a result, spamcop reports server2 for any spam mail forwarded from server2 to spamcop (which is basically every single spam mail...)
×