 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Ross Crawford writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > > In lugnet.publish, Bruce Hietbrink writes:
> > > > is this the best solution?
> > >
> > > While it wasn't originally designed
> > > for kids, the fact is many children visit the Gallery each
> > > day. In light of that, there is no responsible option other
> > > than full moderation.
> >
> > Then could you *please* implement a facility to move pics / folders ASAP, as
> > I for one will find it a pain having to have stuff re-moderated just to move
> > it to a different folder.
>
> Maybe... BUT...
>
> Right now I'd rather he put time into making the moderating facility a bit
> more efficient for moderators, there is a terrific backlog of stuff to chew
> through... I was just in there doing some and it's a lot of work. My fingers
> are sore from all the mousing, some keyboard shortcuts might be nice.
>
> Also...
>
> Personally I'd like to be able to visit someone's folders while in moderator
> mode and approve them, one by one as I look in each one, rather than being
> presented them randomly.
>
> There are some key contributors I'd go moderate first.. for instance right
> now you cannot look at all of the work of James Mathis as not all of it has
> come up randomly yet. So I would go visit his and get them cleared away (and
> all of yours and all of Eric Sophies and and and, just to name a few heavy
> hitters at random from many that we have)
>
> Maybe for the older stuff the stuff that should be randomly presented should
> be drawn from the folders that have the highest number of hits???
Ok since you hit on the moderation process and the massive backlog, would it
be better if we didn't submit and new or updated images to Brickshelf at
this time? I had some updated instructions I was going to post, but if it's
going to cause someone else's older stuff to get delayed I would hold off.
Maybe if the process could be explained a bit more we would understand what
all you are up agaist.
jt
ps. if you need help with the moderation process I'd be glad to contribute
some time.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Ok since you hit on the moderation process and the massive backlog, would it
> be better if we didn't submit and new or updated images to Brickshelf at
> this time? I had some updated instructions I was going to post, but if it's
> going to cause someone else's older stuff to get delayed I would hold off.
I have 2 question/comments...
First I noticed that there seems to be newly uploaded files. Is this the
case? I would think/hope that the old 150 thousand pictures be given the
green light first before some new stuff gets added to the pile. How is this
working?
Second, do the moderators see what section the files have been put into? I
see one file that is not lego related and should be in off-topic....
( http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=20265 )
This picture appears to be in the MOC section(1), and it is misplaced and
IMHO should not have been given the 'OK' in the MOC folder. There are many
users that put pictures in the wrong folder and I am hoping the moderation
would fix this. Hopefully this will be addressed, I find it annoying to see
items in the wrong folders - there is a reason the folders were put into place.
Mark P
http://www.landofbricks.com
(1)I am assuming the MOC folder because when I clicked on the MOC recent
folder it was there.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, James Trobaugh wrote:
> Ok since you hit on the moderation process and the massive backlog,
> would it be better if we didn't submit and new or updated images to
> Brickshelf at this time? I had some updated instructions I was going
> to post, but if it's going to cause someone else's older stuff to get
> delayed I would hold off.
it doesn't matter if you submit new pictures up - the way the moderation
cgi works, it shows one of the (random) older folders first... so the
new folders will just get added to the queue, but probably not get
moderated until the older folders are done.
Dan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Dan Boger writes:
> In lugnet.publish, James Trobaugh wrote:
> > Ok since you hit on the moderation process and the massive backlog,
> > would it be better if we didn't submit and new or updated images to
> > Brickshelf at this time? I had some updated instructions I was going
> > to post, but if it's going to cause someone else's older stuff to get
> > delayed I would hold off.
>
> it doesn't matter if you submit new pictures up - the way the moderation
> cgi works, it shows one of the (random) older folders first... so the
> new folders will just get added to the queue, but probably not get
> moderated until the older folders are done.
Actually, the randomness is only to reduce the change of multiple
moderators working on the same folder. The subset of folders that
are randomized is selected from the newest folders. That way
new stuff and old stuff get moderated.
KL
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> Actually, the randomness is only to reduce the change of multiple
> moderators working on the same folder. The subset of folders that
> are randomized is selected from the newest folders. That way
> new stuff and old stuff get moderated.
sorry, my mistake. I thought you set it up to select from the oldest first,
so that the backlog will eventually diminish...?
Dan
| | | | | | |
