Coding competition 2011 - mass emailing

Hi,

On 11/08/2011 05:17 PM, robert bauer wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Ferenc Szekely <ferenc@maemo.org
> <mailto:ferenc@maemo.org>> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On 11/08/2011 03:28 PM, robert bauer wrote:
> > Ferenc,
> >
> > Thanks for your message. If staggering the vote is not enough to
> reduce
> > server load, please go ahead and use a simple filter based on
> karma and
> > length of community membership so that the server load will be
> manageable.
> >
> Our community has 660 people with karma >= 100. That's a lot less than
> 57000. Tuning the mailing script (ie. 1 email per person) should not be
> a big deal, though I have not looked that part yet.
>
> > The other suggestions are appreciated. While there is merit in more
> > selectively reducing the email recipients to those N900 users most
> > likely to have tested the submissions, or at least those who are
> > currently active in the community, as indicated previously, the
> priority
> > now is to get the vote completed and those additional factors, even if
> > possible, are likely to burden and slow the process. Of course,
> if I am
> > mistaken in this regard, then Ferenc can point that out.
> >
> I can change the mailing script if the council agrees to introduce the
> karma filter.
>
> On behalf of Council, I authorize the karma filter.
>
>
OK, great. All eligible people will receive 1 email with 1 token, so
they can use that in all 9 votings.

I assume the Council has already agreed on the content of the email (aka
instructions) that is sent to the voters. I would need it now.

Br,
ferenc
--
maemo.org sysadmin, developer
email: ferenc@maemo.org

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Ferenc Szekely <ferenc@maemo.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 11/08/2011 05:17 PM, robert bauer wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Ferenc Szekely <ferenc@maemo.org
> > <mailto:ferenc@maemo.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 11/08/2011 03:28 PM, robert bauer wrote:
> > > Ferenc,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your message. If staggering the vote is not enough to
> > reduce
> > > server load, please go ahead and use a simple filter based on
> > karma and
> > > length of community membership so that the server load will be
> > manageable.
> > >
> > Our community has 660 people with karma >= 100. That's a lot less
> than
> > 57000. Tuning the mailing script (ie. 1 email per person) should not
> be
> > a big deal, though I have not looked that part yet.
> >
> > > The other suggestions are appreciated. While there is merit in
> more
> > > selectively reducing the email recipients to those N900 users most
> > > likely to have tested the submissions, or at least those who are
> > > currently active in the community, as indicated previously, the
> > priority
> > > now is to get the vote completed and those additional factors,
> even if
> > > possible, are likely to burden and slow the process. Of course,
> > if I am
> > > mistaken in this regard, then Ferenc can point that out.
> > >
> > I can change the mailing script if the council agrees to introduce
> the
> > karma filter.
> >
> > On behalf of Council, I authorize the karma filter.
> >
> >
> OK, great. All eligible people will receive 1 email with 1 token, so
> they can use that in all 9 votings.
>
> I assume the Council has already agreed on the content of the email (aka
> instructions) that is sent to the voters. I would need it now.
>
> I don't think Council needs to prescreen the email from the coding
competition. But if you think the email is objectionable for some reason,
please let us know and we will take a look at it.

Rob




> Br,
> ferenc
> --
> maemo.org sysadmin, developer
> email: ferenc@maemo.org
>

Hi,

On 11/09/2011 09:12 PM, robert bauer wrote:

<snip>

>
> I assume the Council has already agreed on the content of the email (aka
> instructions) that is sent to the voters. I would need it now.
>
> I don't think Council needs to prescreen the email from the coding
> competition. But if you think the email is objectionable for some
> reason, please let us know and we will take a look at it.
>
I think something went wrong with the attachment, I did not receive the
text. Do you have it online?

What is the criteria now? I have heard that you were discussing
somewhere to lower the karma filter to 10 and maybe incorporate stats
from talk.maemo.org. I could filter based on accounts too, but for that
I need a list from Reggie. Reggie, let's discuss in private how you
share that list (if needed at all). You upload it to one of our servers
via scp, or I download it via SSL?

So that list, plus the karma limit would be the base of filtering. Let
me know what you decided with the fellow council members and then we can
proceed.

> Rob
>
-ferenc

--
maemo.org sysadmin, developer
email: ferenc@maemo.org

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Ferenc Szekely <ferenc@maemo.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 11/09/2011 09:12 PM, robert bauer wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > I assume the Council has already agreed on the content of the email
> (aka
> > instructions) that is sent to the voters. I would need it now.
> >
> > I don't think Council needs to prescreen the email from the coding
> > competition. But if you think the email is objectionable for some
> > reason, please let us know and we will take a look at it.
> >
> I think something went wrong with the attachment, I did not receive the
> text. Do you have it online?
>
I don't have the text but I've asked the coding competition to
directly forward it to you.


>
> What is the criteria now? I have heard that you were discussing
> somewhere to lower the karma filter to 10 and maybe incorporate stats
> from talk.maemo.org. I could filter based on accounts too, but for that
> I need a list from Reggie. Reggie, let's discuss in private how you
> share that list (if needed at all). You upload it to one of our servers
> via scp, or I download it via SSL?
>
> So that list, plus the karma limit would be the base of filtering. Let
> me know what you decided with the fellow council members and then we can
> proceed.
>
> Neither I nor Council have discussed a karma filter of 10, or
any stats from t.m.o. other than the minimum number of months the accounts
must have existed. The Council's decision was to proceed with the vote as
soon as possible using a karma level (no higher than 100) and minimum
account age (measured in months) that will not overload the servers. These
two criteria are the only base of filtering. If a karma filter of 10 would
overload the servers, then use any higher karma number up to 100. We leave
it to your expertise to determine what will overload the servers and to
proceed as soon as possible.


> > Rob
> >
> -ferenc
>
> --
> maemo.org sysadmin, developer
> email: ferenc@maemo.org
>

robert bauer wrote:
> Neither I nor Council have discussed a karma filter of 10, or
> any stats from t.m.o. other than the minimum number of months the
> accounts must have existed. The Council's decision was to proceed with
> the vote as soon as possible using a karma level (no higher than 100)
> and minimum account age (measured in months) that will not overload the
> servers. These two criteria are the only base of filtering. If a karma
> filter of 10 would overload the servers, then use any higher karma
> number up to 100. We leave it to your expertise to determine what will
> overload the servers and to proceed as soon as possible.

Can this e-mail not be sent out in waves? Break 500,000 accounts into 10
groups of 50,000? Send out 1 group a day?

50,000 people do not want to get the email, and you'll only piss them off, alienate them and generate bad press and accusations of spamming if they do.


--
Andrew Flegg | mailto:andrew@bleb.org -- http://www.bleb.org/On 09/11/2011 20:18 Michael Cronenworth wrote:
robert bauer wrote:
> Neither I nor Council have discussed a karma filter of 10, or
> any stats from t.m.o. other than the minimum number of months the
> accounts must have existed. The Council's decision was to proceed with
> the vote as soon as possible using a karma level (no higher than 100)
> and minimum account age (measured in months) that will not overload the
> servers. These two criteria are the only base of filtering. If a karma
> filter of 10 would overload the servers, then use any higher karma
> number up to 100. We leave it to your expertise to determine what will
> overload the servers and to proceed as soon as possible.

Can this e-mail not be sent out in waves? Break 500,000 accounts into 10
groups of 50,000? Send out 1 group a day?

andrew@bleb.org wrote:
> 50,000 people do not want to get the email, and you'll only piss them off, alienate them and generate bad press and accusations of spamming if they do.

I don't get what the big deal is since Maemo.org has sent about 1 e-mail
out a year. It's for a legitimate reason for a Maemo.org event. If a
user doesn't want an e-mail about Maemo, why did they create a Maemo
account?

I've asked about karma =10 or higher (instead of 100) and
maemo.orgactivity within the last six months, because the userbase
with karma above
100 is in great part not active on tmo anymore or not interested in the
coding competition. the userbase which was active in the last six months on
the other hand is mostly interested in apps, which the coding competition
is about.

Best regards,
Cosimo

2011/11/9 Michael Cronenworth <mike@cchtml.com>

> andrew@bleb.org wrote:
>
>> 50,000 people do not want to get the email, and you'll only piss them
>> off, alienate them and generate bad press and accusations of spamming if
>> they do.
>>
>
> I don't get what the big deal is since Maemo.org has sent about 1 e-mail
> out a year. It's for a legitimate reason for a Maemo.org event. If a user
> doesn't want an e-mail about Maemo, why did they create a Maemo account?
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/**mailman/listinfo/maemo-**community<https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community>
>

Cosimo Kroll wrote:
> I've asked about karma =10 or higher (instead of 100) and maemo.org
> <http://maemo.org> activity within the last six months, because the
> userbase with karma above 100 is in great part not active on tmo anymore
> or not interested in the coding competition. the userbase which was
> active in the last six months on the other hand is mostly interested in
> apps, which the coding competition is about.

I don't mind that kind of filtering of accounts. I was just questioning
the filtering of accounts simply because it is "too many".

Is there an easy way to delete the account? I don't think so. Some of these accounts are over 6 years old, and the user may have got rid of their 770 in the meantime.

There has *never* been an unfiltered email sent out, and to do so now would not be because it's the right thing to do, but because if a lack of foresight and planning of the votinng process.

That's why having a filter is sensible. If my "karma decays" idea had been implemented, a threshold would tell you not only that someone had been active but whether it had been recently.

Cheers,

Andrew

--
Andrew Flegg | mailto:andrew@bleb.org -- http://www.bleb.org/On 09/11/2011 20:36 Michael Cronenworth wrote:
andrew@bleb.org wrote:
> 50,000 people do not want to get the email, and you'll only piss them off, alienate them and generate bad press and accusations of spamming if they do.

I don't get what the big deal is since Maemo.org has sent about 1 e-mail
out a year. It's for a legitimate reason for a Maemo.org event. If a
user doesn't want an e-mail about Maemo, why did they create a Maemo
account?