[Rd] problem submitting R bug; bug plotting in tiling window manager
frederik at ofb.net
frederik at ofb.net
Sun Feb 7 00:25:44 CET 2016
Another suggestion would be to simply validate user input like most
websites, and reject invalid submissions immediately, rather than
blocking the user's account. I don't know what kind of spambots you
are up against, but unless they are very intelligent I doubt they'll
be able to understand a message like "You submitted a bug with no body
text, please enter something and try again." There may also be the
option of using Captchas.
Not sure how hard it is to get Bugzilla to do these things.
P.S. (I now see that all errors on the bug tracker are displayed with
a red background)
On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 03:00:21AM -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions.
> Duncan Murdoch
> On 05/02/2016 10:07 PM, frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> >Hi Duncan Murdoch,
> >Thanks for your time. I apologize for not telling you that my email
> >address on the bug tracker is slightly different -
> >"frederik-rproject at ofb.net" vs "frederik at ofb.net". I was going to
> >follow up with this information, but then I thought, he probably knows
> >how to find a tagged email address.
> >I do hope that you are able to fix the bug tracker. In particular,
> >people should be made aware that their account is blocked before being
> >invited to submit a bug. The error they get should be less rude - no
> >need to make it red - and the email address in the error should be
> >filled in. You complained about wasting time having to look for my
> >email address - well, I wasted time looking for yours. The error
> >message could even hint at what triggered the ban. I don't think that
> >you're going to get very far by trying to scare off actual spammers
> >with a big red accusation - I imagine they all have pretty thick skin.
> >Reading the first line of my bug report was generous of you, but if
> >you read the rest, you'll see that, indeed, after checking with the
> >knowledgeable i3 guys, it appears to be an R bug. So I would like to
> >submit it. What appears at the top of my bug report is a copy of the
> >original bug I posted to i3, at the linked URL (are links OK or will I
> >get banned again?).
> >The reason a bug appeared with the subject "til" is because I noticed
> >that when typing into the subject field, some "related bugs" come up.
> >However, this "suggestion" process appeared to be stalled when I typed
> >"til" (for "tiling" or "tilable"). I tried hitting "enter" and it
> >ended up opening a bug with that subject, which I never submitted,
> >because I clicked "back" and figured out that *four* characters are
> >actually necesary to start getting suggestions. The whole point of
> >doing this was to see if another bug had been submitted with the same
> >topic, and thereby save you time! I'm not going to try to reproduce
> >this error, because you said it will get me banned again, but I think
> >somebody should try to fix the site so that people don't get banned
> >for any content which is not submitted. Especially people with
> >months-old accounts, like me.
> >I definitely sympathize with the spam problem, and thank you for your
> >hard work. Best wishes,
> >On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 08:19:40PM -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> >>On 05/02/2016 7:26 PM, frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> >>>Dear Dirk Eddelbuettel and Duncan Murdoch,
> >>>Thank you for your work on the wonderful R project!
> >>>I recently attempted to submit a bug with your Bugzilla interface:
> >>>I created an account, typed in all my information, first checking
> >>>details with another project. Then I clicked submit, and was taken to
> >>>a web page with a big red banner, it said
> >>> Spammer
> >>> If you believe your account should be restored, please send email to explaining why.
> >>>What a hostile thing to say to your users! I tried resubmitting my
> >>>bug, but removing any links, and I still get the message - so it looks
> >>>like my account has really been blocked. Please do something to warn
> >>>your users about this so they can avoid the upset.
> >>Your account isn't blocked now, but it wasn't easy to unblock it: you used a
> >>different email address in the submission, not the same one you used in this
> >>email. At least one of the people who can deal with this kind of thing
> >>would now demand an apology from you before ever reading your email again.
> >>I won't do that, but I have to admit, I don't like the fact that you wasted
> >>10 minutes of my time. I'm Bcc'ing a couple of people who are working on
> >>putting together a better interface to the bug reporting system, so they
> >>know to deal with this kind of issue as well as all the others.
> >>I'm not hostile, I just sound that way, because I've wasted a lot of time
> >>this week on issues like this.
> >>Duncan Murdoch
> >>(Here's my previous email to you, for the benefit of those who are Bcc'd:
> >>>You posted a bug report, but it had no content other than "til". That's
> >>>what many abusers of the system have done, so you were blocked.
> >>>I have read the first line of your bug report, and it says " I'm not
> >>>sure if this is a bug with i3 or R ". If you're not sure if it's a bug
> >>>or not, then please post to R-devel. That's a moderated list so if this
> >>>is your first post, it may take a while to appear.
> >>>This probably seems unreasonable to you, but a lot of abuse is sent to
> >>>the bug list, so we block it quite early. I'll unblock you now, but
> >>>please don't post there again unless your discussion on R-devel
> >>>indicates this is a problem with R rather than i3.
> >>Duncan Murdoch
> >>>Well, I don't know what it means to "email to explaining why", so I
> >>>tried to subscribe to R-devel. However, it's been ten minutes and no
> >>>confirmation email. So I tracked down your email addresses from the R
> >>>website. I'm still cc'ing r-devel.
> >>>I hope it is OK to send the bug by email. I really want to get back to
> >>>what I was doing, but I don't want to lose the work I put into writing
> >>>this bug report, so I'm attaching it to this message.
> >>>Thank you,
> >>>Frederick Eaton
More information about the R-devel