XSF Discussion - 2023-03-16

Re 377, I also asked recently in here the difference between abuse/spam, I think I'd like to suggest removing one of the other from the spec, just have one type of report. Some of these don't mean the same in different circles. And I'd argue admins would probably treat these in the exactly same queue.

Or.. allow the list to be extensible or sth, but that's.. maybe unnecessary trouble

The list is already extensible

The reasons are URIs, and there is a registry defined in the XEP

I generally agree with you that the current two options in the XEP are vague, but I'm not sure I would go as far as to remove them

Oh TIL about the registry thing

Well "more options for everyone" wouldn't help though

It's "the right options for this circle" :/

(can't reread the spec just now)

I'm not exactly sure what the problem is that you're trying to solve

"abuse" is generally referring to breaking ToS or other policies, and "spam" is about unsolicited advertising

Since spam is generally always against policies, and some non-advertising content can also be unsolicited and "spammy", I agree there is some overlap between the two

But I don't think that alone is reason enough to drop any attempt to provide some categories. Just bucket everything into 'abuse' if you don't care about it.

I'd classify as spam if it's a nuisance and as abuse if it's bullying or other attempts at suppression

fun

my reading a while back was abuse as "violating server use policies"

yeah, seems to be there needs to be a separate category for bullying people, as opposed to abusing a service

but bullying is also abuse!

everything is abuse.

yes

including spam

if it's merely a violation of the server ToS, I wouldn't even report it. Only if it actually affects a user

What I'm trying to solve is that a community may want to adapt these terms for their usage. I don't know why I get hanged up on this spec, it should be about the same for every other spec that exposes or encourages the use of specific terminology

I'm not sure why it matters, terms are nearly the same and the response to them is gonna be the same right? (Ban probably)

A community can adapt them or extend them, or whatever

So I don't see the problem

MattJ, how? Would they also have to fork clients? :/

If you want a different UI, sure?

And we all know how painful this is, maybe that's best if we can avoid it :P

Then don't :)

:/

I still don't see a problem that needs solving

Ok..

Well I'm not sure how to explain it better

MattJ: Who approves and publishes reports to the BL? And is there a process to report new JIDs to the list?

I suspect most apps will just pick one

Peter Waher, answered on https://xmppbl.org/

So I'll leave it at this until it bothers me even more and I find a solution I like (that isn't encouraging people to fork) or.. dunno ✏