MBS-9352: Disable public collections for limited users
Gentlecat
?
ah, no
unless OAuth on MB requires that
ruaok
ok, we should change that as well.
drsaunders joined the channel
I don't think so.
bitmap
well, we can join with editor_oauth_token to see if they've authorized anything
ruaok
I think we need to be a bit more drastic in our actions, then wait and see.
if they worked, we can consider easing up again.
with that in mind, I would really like to see two things: 1) now show /user and /collection to not logged in users. 2) Do not allow limited users to set website/bio.
yvanzo suggested that we could not even show link/bio until they are no longer limited users.
thoughts?
CatQuest
but implement it like a "you've leveled up" gamification
that's kidna important
to not discurage legit users
bitmap
is the idea just to reduce spammer motivation, or reducing lookups on those pages?
CatQuest
for now just make the wording like that
zas
I agree, and restrictions need to be explained during account creation process
Freso
I thought the not-showing-until-no-longer-limited was how it already worked. +1 from me.
ruaok
bitmap: it is both.
the only thing known to reduce spammers is to kill their motivation.
but it may not work right away.
CatQuest
and not shoing is not enough. not actually letting thmeadd it is important
ruaok
for instance, spammers may still set bio/link even if we don't show them.
that still pollutes our DB, even though they've become useless.
zas
About that, how is handled the "limited user" status for now ? a bool ? it could be useful to have more levels if we go the way to restrict features depending on user "experience" (levels!)
CatQuest
+1
ruaok
zas: it would be, but lets focus on that a little later on.
zas
k
CatQuest
this would make it much easier also to reward long standing users both auto and not who work hard on edits
righ
ruaok
yes, but that isn't our current goal.
our current goal is to get rid of that useless traffic that we're working so hard to serve.
CatQuest
yea i know, i jsut am typing slow becasue i am trying to not typo ;)
sorry
ruaok
no worries. just trying to keep focus.
CatQuest
i agree we need to focus on this *first*
bitmap
I only see /collection/create in the top URLs, which you have to be logged in to see anyway
Freso
bitmap: The /collection/ is mostly to prevent DMCA notices, I think.
CatQuest
imho it's important to explain restrictions on account creating, but I also thing it's important to do it in the "you have levels and for now oyu're a newbie account and when you do good edits you'll get more abilities!" sort of way
Freso
We've had a few DMCA takedown requests on user collections in the last couple of weeks.
ruaok
Freso: yes, but via discouraging spammers in the first place.
we still have a TON of collections and profiles with spam in them.
I'm totally open for opening things back up after we've cleaned up.
but for now I want to really shut things down might tightly and then clean up.
CatQuest
however. it might be an idea to allow bio entering for new accoutns. *provided* it goes through a fettering process and if certain key (secret!) phrases or words are in it, just make it completely invisible and notify account editors right away
.. after the clean up
ruaok
ok, any objections with the current immediate proposed bits? (Disallow setting bio/link for limited users, require login for /collection /user, add /collection /user to robots.txt)
Freso
+1
CatQuest
we should write *why* in these places too though
ruaok
any other comments?
CatQuest
else e are going to get loads of questions about why so and such
bitmap
I don't like it, but fine with doing it for now
CatQuest
+1 to the banner idea reo had
ruaok
which part do you not like? all of it?
CatQuest
i'm ok as long as its deff not permanent
Freso
I don't like /user and /collection requiring login. But I'm okay with it as a temp. measure.
CatQuest
to stop this happening right now so we cna clean up the mess witouth new mess showeling inn all the time
+1
bitmap
what Freso said, plus not indexing collections, but I'm okay with not indexing users
CatQuest
i don't see a reason to index collections
ruaok
> Actions to review after a period of time
CatQuest
+1
ruaok
is a new section in the doc.
ideally collections should be publicly viewable, I totally agree.
CatQuest
yea ut why does google have to index them?
ruaok
ok, I'll enter tickets for these items.
UmkaDK has quit
now, onward to automatic removal.
CatQuest
despite the serious amount of junk i am a littel bit sceptical to this
ruaok
each of the three proposed points should have a check for edits and votes.
if a user has an edit or a vote, they should NOT be removed.
I've reordered the list in that section, so it is roughly in order of priority
CatQuest
what about also querying for certain words/phrases and if they do include them they SHOULD be deleted? on top of the other checks
bitmap
I think the discourse one should just be "accounts with no oauth tokens", maybe
CatQuest
yes
lazka joined the channel
ruaok
oh, interesting. yes.
CatQuest
I also thing we should double check with critiquebrainz