R devel - Feb 2016 - problem submitting R bug; bug plotting in tiling window manager

Ah, thank you for that explanation. I somehow didn't catch that my
Bugzilla account had been disabled by a human.

"Common pattern is to post ... something copied from a generic bug
report" - that sounds very annoying.

Frederick

On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:54:11AM +0100, peter dalgaard
wrote:
> Unfortunately, the spammers in question appear to be human (of sorts). 
> 
> We're not sure what they're up to, but a common pattern is to post
random text, or something copied from a generic bug report (like "able to
add 6 item"), later followed by a comment containing a link or a file
attachment.
> 
> Presumably, it is some sort of click-bait scheme, but it could also be a
covert channel for contrabande files. At any rate, it is very hard to
distinguish by mechanical means. So it is done by eye, with some risk of Type-I
error. Thus, the Bugzilla maintainers are pretty vigilant to stamp out spammers,
sometimes edging on being ham-fisted (er, -footed?).
> 
> -pd
> 
> 
> > On 07 Feb 2016, at 00:25 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> > 
> > No problem.
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Frederick
> > 
> > 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,
> >>> 
> >>> Frederick
> >>> 
> >>> 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:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 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
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >> 
> > 
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> 
> -- 
> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
> Phone: (+45)38153501
> Office: A 4.23
> Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

On 08 Feb 2016, at 18:34 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> Ah, thank you for that explanation. I somehow didn't catch that my
> Bugzilla account had been disabled by a human.
I like the notion that a somewhat rude message is ameliorated by the knowledge
that it was put there by a chronically annoyed human... ;-) We might still
consider rephrasing it though.

-pd

> 
> "Common pattern is to post ... something copied from a generic bug
> report" - that sounds very annoying.
> 
> Frederick
> 
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:54:11AM +0100, peter dalgaard wrote:
>> Unfortunately, the spammers in question appear to be human (of sorts). 
>> 
>> We're not sure what they're up to, but a common pattern is to
post random text, or something copied from a generic bug report (like "able
to add 6 item"), later followed by a comment containing a link or a file
attachment.
>> 
>> Presumably, it is some sort of click-bait scheme, but it could also be
a covert channel for contrabande files. At any rate, it is very hard to
distinguish by mechanical means. So it is done by eye, with some risk of Type-I
error. Thus, the Bugzilla maintainers are pretty vigilant to stamp out spammers,
sometimes edging on being ham-fisted (er, -footed?).
>> 
>> -pd
>> 
>> 
>>> On 07 Feb 2016, at 00:25 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
>>> 
>>> No problem.
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Frederick
>>> 
>>> 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,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Frederick
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> 
>> -- 
>> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
>> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
>> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
>> Phone: (+45)38153501
>> Office: A 4.23
>> Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
-- 
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Office: A 4.23
Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com

In case you still care, see 

https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16726

which even our very human spam detector hasn't decided to label as spam
(yet).

-pd
> On 08 Feb 2016, at 18:34 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> 
> Ah, thank you for that explanation. I somehow didn't catch that my
> Bugzilla account had been disabled by a human.
> 
> "Common pattern is to post ... something copied from a generic bug
> report" - that sounds very annoying.
> 
> Frederick
> 
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:54:11AM +0100, peter dalgaard wrote:
>> Unfortunately, the spammers in question appear to be human (of sorts). 
>> 
>> We're not sure what they're up to, but a common pattern is to
post random text, or something copied from a generic bug report (like "able
to add 6 item"), later followed by a comment containing a link or a file
attachment.
>> 
>> Presumably, it is some sort of click-bait scheme, but it could also be
a covert channel for contrabande files. At any rate, it is very hard to
distinguish by mechanical means. So it is done by eye, with some risk of Type-I
error. Thus, the Bugzilla maintainers are pretty vigilant to stamp out spammers,
sometimes edging on being ham-fisted (er, -footed?).
>> 
>> -pd
>> 
>> 
>>> On 07 Feb 2016, at 00:25 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
>>> 
>>> No problem.
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Frederick
>>> 
>>> 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,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Frederick
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>> 
>> -- 
>> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
>> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
>> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
>> Phone: (+45)38153501
>> Office: A 4.23
>> Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
-- 
Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
Phone: (+45)38153501
Office: A 4.23
Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com

That was an amusing bug.

I wish I had time to help more directly with this project, which has
been very helpful to me.

Frederick

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:04:40PM +0100, peter dalgaard
wrote:
> In case you still care, see 
> 
> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16726
> 
> which even our very human spam detector hasn't decided to label as spam
(yet).
> 
> -pd
> 
> > On 08 Feb 2016, at 18:34 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> > 
> > Ah, thank you for that explanation. I somehow didn't catch that my
> > Bugzilla account had been disabled by a human.
> > 
> > "Common pattern is to post ... something copied from a generic
bug
> > report" - that sounds very annoying.
> > 
> > Frederick
> > 
> > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:54:11AM +0100, peter dalgaard wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, the spammers in question appear to be human (of
sorts).
> >> 
> >> We're not sure what they're up to, but a common pattern is
to post random text, or something copied from a generic bug report (like
"able to add 6 item"), later followed by a comment containing a link
or a file attachment.
> >> 
> >> Presumably, it is some sort of click-bait scheme, but it could
also be a covert channel for contrabande files. At any rate, it is very hard to
distinguish by mechanical means. So it is done by eye, with some risk of Type-I
error. Thus, the Bugzilla maintainers are pretty vigilant to stamp out spammers,
sometimes edging on being ham-fisted (er, -footed?).
> >> 
> >> -pd
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On 07 Feb 2016, at 00:25 , frederik at ofb.net wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> No problem.
> >>> 
> >>> 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.
> >>> 
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> 
> >>> Frederick
> >>> 
> >>> 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,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Frederick
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 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:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>
https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> ______________________________________________
> >>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
> >> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
> >> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
> >> Phone: (+45)38153501
> >> Office: A 4.23
> >> Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> -- 
> Peter Dalgaard, Professor,
> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School
> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
> Phone: (+45)38153501
> Office: A 4.23
> Email: pd.mes at cbs.dk  Priv: PDalgd at gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>