EuroBillTracker

As a longtime allround volunteer at EBT, I would like to participate in the workgroup Communication of Phaseolus and workgroup Database of De-Jo

I would like to participate in the workgroup Database ...

I'd like to join the working group for internal and external communication.

I will to volunteer for the workgroup DATA BASE

I'd like to volunteer for the WG Database and possibly for the Communications WG (if I'm needed, since maybe jenny&me was also thinking about joining ).

Some thoughts on the Database WG ...
I like the idea of having people dealing with suspicious users of their own country. But would all these WG members have permission to delete entries from the database? In my opinion, we should keep the number of people that can actually delete notes small. On the other hand, we need a lot of people inspecting notes.

I propose something like this: members of the WG gather reports on suspicios notes and users from their own country. When a user is marked suspicious, the WG member communicates with the user, asking for an explanation. If there is no reasonable explanation, the WG member makes a report about his findings and sends it to another WG member from a different country, who double-checks the findings. If the second member confirms the report, it is sent to a member with deleting rights who presses the button and purifies the database

Also, we should have a standard form for communicating with suspicious users to avoid e-mails like "wtf do you think you are doing, bastard!"

tomaz79 wrote: Communications WG (if I'm needed, since maybe jenny&me was also thinking about joining ).

Yes, I will love to join the Communications WG and the Meeting WG (if exist)

as always I'll joing the communication WG

and I also want to help with everything that I can do as I was trying to do in the past

Hi,
I'm interested in the Workgroup Database of De-Jo.

Greetzz,
Craco

tomaz79 wrote:When a user is marked suspicious, the WG member communicates with the user, asking for an explanation. If there is no reasonable explanation, the WG member makes a report about his findings and sends it to another WG member from a different country, who double-checks the findings. If the second member confirms the report, it is sent to a member with deleting rights who presses the button and purifies the database

Asking for explanations from suspicious users isn't as good idea as some of you might believe.. I wrote this some two years ago:

avij wrote:

someone wrote:hang them, crucify them or just cut them in piece for feeding the lions ?

These are all good suggestions, but due to time constraints we haven't had the possibility to use these methods against fakers. The usual way to handle fakers is to delete the definitely fake notes and possibly some suspicious notes as well, and then inform the user that if he doesn't start behaving properly, all his notes will be removed. If he doesn't stop the abuse, all his notes are removed and another email is sent stating that fact. We haven't had many cases which would have continued past this point, so from that point on the issue is handled on a case-by-case basis if needed. Whenever an email is sent to the user, we usually notify other EBTers by posting a short message to the Suspicious users & notes topic.

We don't usually *ask* the user for an explanation for his actions, because if we do, he's likely to lie and then we'd be back to square one. All kinds of evidence provided by the user can be forged, including pictures of the notes he has allegedly entered. Therefore we rely mainly on the note database and other relevant logs when doing our decisions.

avij wrote: Asking for explanations from suspicious users isn't as good idea as some of you might believe..

I mentioned this because I assumed that you had been asking for explanations in the past. If you rely just on the database, even better. Speeds up the process.

tomaz79 wrote:

avij wrote:Asking for explanations from suspicious users isn't as good idea as some of you might believe...

I mentioned this because I assumed that you had been asking for explanations in the past. If you rely just on the database, even better. Speeds up the process.

I wonder if there have been cases of confirmed or suspected misinterpretation by the admins, I mean, notes being unregistered and then, after that, their user protesting and providing convincing explanations, or at least arguments that make admins wonder if they were write on the first place.

If there haven't been such cases in the past 6 years, I'd say this is a very solid method, provided the admins remain the same or the new ones keep the same criteria and judgement.

To prepare the real start u for the different working groups (or even for some the further continuation)
I've made up an overview of who joins what group till now.
Source is this topic, but also some pm's i received...
May be other members of the BOD received also pm's from members who are not in this list,
thank you for communicating me the names and groups.

name group country language remarks
Avij technical Finland Fi/Eng BOD
Nerzhul web development Germany Ger/Eng BOD
Phaseolus External communication France Fr/Eng/Nl/ BOD
de-jo Data-base Belgium Nl/Fr/Eng/ BOD
Licht & Feuer web development Germany Ger/Eng
magpie web development Germany Ger/Eng
suntzu Data-base Portugal Por/eng
wisi technical Germany Ger/Eng
Castanhola Data-base Portugal Por/eng
presidente Data-base Italy It/eng
sen-chuan External communication Italy It/eng
Pole Doctor technical France fr/Eng
klapotec technical Austria Ger/Eng
diogocanilho External communication Portugal Por/eng
-STAR- technical Austria Ger/Eng
ErGo Data-base Austria Ger/Eng
debemaks Data-base Italy It/eng/ger/Rus
klapotec Data-base Austria Ger/Eng
klapotec technical Austria Ger/Eng
Mr Euro External communication Belgium Nl/Eng/
Mr Euro Data-base Belgium Nl/Eng/
Yok's Data-base France fr/eng
Schlauchen External communication Germany Ger/Eng
eurofever Data-base Belgium
tomaz79 Data-base Slovenia Slov/eng
tomaz79 External communication Slovenia Slov/eng
jenny&me External communication Slovenia Slov/eng
N0W1K External communication Spain Sp/eng
Craco Data-base Belgium Nl/Eng/
Talking Head Data-base Belgium Nl/Eng/ pm
De Slak Data-base Belgium Nl/Eng/ pm

I would like to volunteer for web development working group. I could be of use in designing tasks and discussing how the specific tasks could be actually implemented etc. as I have worked as a programmer for almost a decade and even before that many years as a tester. I'm not sure if you'd actually let me do any programming as the languages I've used are mostly different (C++, SQL (MS SQL Server), Delphi, (MS) JScript, C#, Visual Basic, some JavaScript) but I could probably create reasonable and unreasonable testing scenarios. Graphical design is not my area, though.

de-jo wrote:I've made up an overview of who joins what group till now.
...
klapotec technical Austria Ger/Eng
...
klapotec Data-base Austria Ger/Eng
klapotec technical Austria Ger/Eng

Hmm, there's a bit of conflicting info in this thread where I want to put my weight, but some discussion with Nerzhul here...

klapotec wrote:

Nerzhul wrote:I think these ideas fit well into the web dev WG.

Hmm, well, then I'll probably have to apply there

...and at the EBTM showed me I (and my ideas) will fit in best with the web-dev WG, so put me in there.
I won't join the technical or database WG, since there's capable people I know (-STAR- and ErGo) already doing that.

de-jo wrote:Licht & Feuer web development Germany Ger/Eng

Licht & Feuer wrote:If it's possible to work in more than 1 WG, I also like to apply for the user-part of the database-group.