- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:12:20 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>, <public-html@w3.org>
+1 JF > -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Tab Atkins Jr. > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 11:14 AM > To: public-html@w3.org > Subject: W3C Spec Comments Form > > Could we either remove the W3C Spec comments form, or at least > specially flag anything submitted through it so that it requires some > degree of moderation before showing up in the bug tracker? The bugs > created through it are overwhelmingly spam, as this bugzilla search > indicates: > > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_d > esc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&longdesc_type=substring&longdesc=Se > ction:+http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current- > work/%23top&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_white > board_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&key > words=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_st > atus=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED > &emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bug_id_type= > anyexact&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtyp > e=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0- > 0=noop&value0-0-0= > > (You can distinguish bugs submitted through the W3C spec form from > bugs submitted through the WHATWG spec form by the section - there is > no "top" section in the WHATWG spec, but the W3C spec form explicitly > sets the section to "top" in a hidden input.) > > Out of the 30 bugs that show up in this search while I'm writing this > message, 24 of them are spam. This form has only been active for > about a week, and constitutes the majority of the anon bugs submitted > during this time period. > > While I love seeing all the new bugs as they come in, this is > sufficiently spammy (80% spam!) that it's counterproductive. > > ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 19:12:58 UTC