Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow admin to censor public proposal #662

Closed
lukebp opened this issue Jan 7, 2019 · 11 comments
Closed

Allow admin to censor public proposal #662

lukebp opened this issue Jan 7, 2019 · 11 comments

Comments

@lukebp
Copy link
Member

lukebp commented Jan 7, 2019

Admins need to have the ability to censor a public proposal in the case where a proposal author edits the proposal and the new version doesn't adhere to Politeia proposal guidelines.

The full discussion can be viewed here:

https://matrix.to/#/!VFRvyndKpzcLrVslQD:decred.org/$15468747479815IPJTv:decred.org?via=decred.org&via=matrix.org&via=zettaport.com

@crypto-rizzo
Copy link
Contributor

I'll pick this one up!

@xaur
Copy link

xaur commented Jan 13, 2019

How about just routing all edits through admin review, like initial proposal submission? This will prevent bad content from ever appearing from the site, at the cost of more admin work. Admin work can be made more productive to some extent with a convenient diff viewer.

@lukebp
Copy link
Member Author

lukebp commented Jan 14, 2019

When we were originally implementing censoring we talked about whether each public edit needed to be reviewed by admins. We came to the conclusion that they didn't.

It would be a lot of additional work for the admins and I think it would be a premature optimization. If it ever became a problem we could address it.

@crypto-rizzo
Copy link
Contributor

Pretty close to finishing things up on the backend for this. It's going to take a few GUI changes to fully implement though. Writing up an issue for that now

@xaur
Copy link

xaur commented Jan 21, 2019

Another discussin here: unlike unvetted content which never makes it to public repo, vetted content that was later censored will forever be accessible in the public repo. It's not supposed to. The asymmetry here is that both unvetting and censoring content is based on the same moderation rules, but the latter stays available in the public repo. There's no way to solve it except manually approve all edits by admins.

There are several related issues:

  1. More admin work can be partially addressed by requiring users to pay proposal credits for edits (say 0.2). iirc currently edits are free, while initial submissions are not.
  2. Since humans are in charge, bad content can slip by mistake. So the feature to hide it from main site is still relevant.
  3. In any case bad content has a chance to end up in the public repo, which will serve the bad content via GitHub or other mirrors. Unlike "illegal pics" embedded in Bitcoin blockchain (which is decentralized), bad content can be used against Politeia or its Git repo (which is centralized).

@crypto-rizzo
Copy link
Contributor

Good writeup @xaur . After getting more familiar with how Pi and the Git repo work together, I don't think there's any workaround this aside from changing the system so that admins have to approve edits. While I see the benefit of implementing an additional fee for edits, I can see it being troublesome for users who are NOT trying to game the revision system (Which I imagine will be the vast majority).

I think we should have another discussion on this in the #politeia channel to see whether or not admins are open to this extra responsibility / work

@xaur
Copy link

xaur commented Jan 22, 2019

I was also going to suggest to give the fees to admins for their work. More review work done = more fees collected. A downside is an easy abuse vector where admins directly or indirectly submit multiple proposals to review them and get paid. Not sure if this is a concerns since admins are carefully selected due to the power (and responsibilities) they have. An alternative is to pay for admins work from Treasury just like everyone else.

@crypto-rizzo
Copy link
Contributor

@lukebp I think a new issue may need to be created if this functionality is still desired, or perhaps another discussion needs to be had in #politieia

As of now, I believe there is no way to allow vetted props to transition into censored props, that is without having admins to review every edit

@lukebp
Copy link
Member Author

lukebp commented Feb 6, 2019

@camus-code yeah, I think we need to put this on hold for right now. We'll need to add this feature at some point, but doing so will require further discussion.

We'll keep this issue open for reference.

@lukebp
Copy link
Member Author

lukebp commented Apr 25, 2019

Closing due to inactivity and no way to move forward.

@lukebp lukebp closed this as completed Apr 25, 2019
@xaur
Copy link

xaur commented May 15, 2019

I'll just leave here couple more ideas to address bad edits.

There is some middle ground between having admins to manually check each edit and having all edits go directly into public repo unchecked.

First tool that can be used is to delay the publishing of edits into the public repo by say 8 hours. If an admin is available to review the edit he can either approve it (which publishes it sooner) or block it (which prevents it from ever reaching the public repo). If no admin action is taken, the edit is published automatically after the deadline of 8 hours. This gives admins a window to review and block bad edits.

Second tool is to make pending edits publicly viewable. If anybody watching the stream of edits notices bad content he can raise the alarm and notify the admins to block the edit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants