I hate automatic spam filtering

by jlundstocholm 23. November 2009 15:14

Every time you use a tool, you make a (conscious) decision to trust that tool to do what it says. This is true for closed source software and open source software alike (especially if you don't have the skills to plow through the source of whatever tool you use).

Most people use a generic blogging platform for their pieces of information that they wish to share with the world. Popular tools are Blogger by Google or WordPress. These tools often come with spam filtering and all sorts of other features intended to make your life as blog-owner more easy.

The catch you sometimes find yourself in, is that they don't work as they should. Spam is let through and non-spam is deleted. That can be a real pain in the ass - especially if you are not notified by this.

Now,

on Rob's blog I have been writing a bit with him and Luc. Rob moderates his blog (as most people, including me). We kind of have to - because blog spam is annoying and it disturbs not only the owner, but also everyone participating in the conversation if mail notification is enabled.

(as a funny side-note, I once promised never, ever to moderate my blog ... well, colour me stupid)

Embarassed

I think Rob has become a victim of too agressive spam filtering - it sems that two of my posts have been lost in cyber space - even though I have tried to repost them several times. Maybe it's my (grammer-error prone) English (or, "Dænglish", as we call it here) tricking something - I dunno.

Luckily I have an archive of the stuff I write (because Rob's blog is certainly not the only one suffering from this)

So to preserve our common digital legacy, here are my two posts that were erronously caught:

1.

Hi Rob,

<i>I suppose at some point Microsoft will approach us with a list of suggested additions to OOXML. That is the prerogative of any vendor or any national body.</i>
So if I coined this differently to e.g.

"I suppose at some point ECMA will approach us with a list of suggested additions to OOXML. That is the prerogative of any liaison or any national body."

... that would make your day?

I'd be happy to make that correction - just say the word.

"In any case, aside from being inaccurate, your comment is off topic. No more, please."

Well, it is your blog, so feel free to censor whatever you want. My point was to confirm parts of what Luc was saying - that indeed some of the extensions Microsoft has made to OOXML will likely be added to the standard.

How that can be OT is beyond me.

2.


Hi Luc,

<i>I agree, but then we must have a formal commitment by Microsoft that they will implement ISO29500 Strict within the coming 12 to 24 months latest.</i>

Yes, and I'd personally encourage them to make such a statement. But it is really out of scope of WG4 to do anything about it.

<i>I would recommend everybody to not invest one cent of their money or one second of their time improving it: it is lost time and money.</i>

Well, there are several tools one can use to push Microsoft to implement S - "not participating" is perhaps the least effective of those.

Smile

Comments

11/25/2009 2:37:20 AM #

Carlos

Rob... anything to say ?  I don't see Jesper comments are off topic. May be you are extra-moderating ? Calm down man... Take it easy. People sometimes disagree.

Disclaimer: i don't like the attitude of Jesper and Alex Brown: i'm refering to the i-always-defend-the-indefensible-(OOXML)-just-to-contradict-the-no-ooxml-guys  but ...

I prefer the *open* attitude regarding speech, i.e.:

If you receive ( respectful ) comments from Jesper, just show them. Let people decide if they are off or on topic.

Carlos United States |

12/7/2009 6:28:59 AM #

jlundstocholm

Hi Carlos,

Thanks for your comment.

Disclaimer: i don't like the attitude of Jesper and Alex Brown: i'm refering to the i-always-defend-the-indefensible-(OOXML)-just-to-contradict-the-no-ooxml-guys  but ...

Dammit ... is it that obvious?

Smile

jlundstocholm Denmark |

11/25/2009 8:57:55 AM #

Luc Bollen

@Jesper: "there are several tools one can use to push Microsoft to implement S"

Well, I'm not sure I want to push Microsoft to implement Strict.  I think that Microsoft must drop Transitional asap (it's called Transitional for a reason...) and that they must provide a true, high quality implementation of ODF (rather than the compatibility-breaking ersatz they currently use to contaminate the corpus of existing ODF documents).  I want to push them to move to ODF rather than pushing them to implement Strict.

But what is not acceptable is Microsoft's current game of telling the world that they are "improving OOXML", while in fact they improve the Strict specification but implement the crappy Transitional one.  As I already said: there is no point in improving the Strict specification if nobody implements it.

Luc Bollen Belgium |

12/7/2009 6:45:49 AM #

jlundstocholm

Hi Luc,

I think that Microsoft must drop Transitional asap (it's called Transitional for a reason...)

Yup - but to think that "transitional" was to be regarded as just 12 months, is beyond my immagination.

they must provide a true, high quality implementation of ODF (rather than the compatibility-breaking ersatz they currently use to contaminate the corpus of existing ODF documents).

Are you thinking about their disgarding of oooc-formulas? I completely agree - that is a stupid move.

But what is not acceptable is Microsoft's current game of telling the world that they are "improving OOXML", while in fact they improve the Strict specification but implement the crappy Transitional one.  As I already said: there is no point in improving the Strict specification if nobody implements it.

True - but those things are really out of our hands in WG4 (BTW, we had a great face-to-face-meeting in Paris this week), so if you want to have Microsoft implement strict - I suggest you do what you already do; keep the pressure on "them". Or have IBM, Sun/ORACLE or others implement S first. That would really be embarrassing to Microsoft. The differences between T and S are really not that big so I'd applaud any move in that direction.

Smile

PS: Carlos, Luc: I appologise for late feedback - your comments got buried in spam.

jlundstocholm Denmark |

12/7/2009 9:51:06 PM #

Luc Bollen

@Jesper: "Or have IBM, Sun/ORACLE or others implement S first. That would really be embarrassing to Microsoft." Yes indeed, it would be embarrassing to them.  But my goal is not to be embarrassing to Microsoft.  It is to have a good, single standard that everybody implements in an interoperable way.  And it seems obvious to me that the starting point to achieve this is ODF, not OOXML Strict.  We unfortunately have to be able to read OOXML files produced by Microsoft (which are neither ECMA 376 (e.g. macros) nor ISO 29500 T files, by the way), but I surely don't need IBM, Sun or anybody else (including Microsoft) starting to produce IS0 29500 S files.

BTW, nobody wrote yet about the WG4 meeting in Paris.  Is there a reason for this ? Has ISO anything to hide ? Or was the meeting so boring that nothing useful can be written about it ?

Luc Bollen Belgium |

12/8/2009 6:51:47 AM #

jlundstocholm

Hi Luc,

my goal is not to be embarrassing to Microsoft.  It is to have a good, single standard that everybody implements in an interoperable way.  And it seems obvious to me that the starting point to achieve this is ODF


Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on that one Smile

We unfortunately have to be able to read OOXML files produced by Microsoft (which are neither ECMA 376 (e.g. macros) nor ISO 29500 T files, by the way)

You do realize, that macros are not described in ODF as well, right?

BTW, nobody wrote yet about the WG4 meeting in Paris.  Is there a reason for this ? Has ISO anything to hide ? Or was the meeting so boring that nothing useful can be written about it ?

The meeting in Paris was by far the best we have had so far (if you ask me). We covered a lot of work and got to discuss a number of very important things.

It is true that noone has written about the days in detail yet, but you could get at glimpse of what we were talking about if you followed either me or the rest of the rat-pack (Alex, Murata-san and Doug) on Twitter. We were twittering like mad-men Smile

We usually use the tag #sc34 for any posts that are relevant to the work in WG4.

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=sc34

jlundstocholm Denmark |

12/9/2009 1:08:05 AM #

Luc Bollen

Jesper, I read with attention and interest the twitter messages, but they are are not exactly explicit about the decisions taken during the meeting...  e.g. what is the decision taken about the purpose and split of functionality between Transitional and Strict ?

Luc Bollen Belgium |

12/9/2009 8:41:55 PM #

jlundstocholm

Hi Luc,

what is the decision taken about the purpose and split of functionality between Transitional and Strict ?

We talked quite a bit on what to do and got close to an agreement. We are not there yet, but I suspect we will get there soon.

I will - in a few days - blog about what we talked about concerning this issue (S/T) and the comment disposition for the COR1-ballots.

Stay tuned Smile

jlundstocholm Denmark |

12/9/2009 11:05:42 PM #

jlundstocholm

Hi Luc,

It seems that Alex Brown beat me to it.

adjb.net/.../...G-meetings-in-Paris-last-week.aspx

Smile

jlundstocholm Denmark |

12/16/2009 6:58:32 PM #

hAl

Rob often censors comments on his blog if he does not agree with their content.
I found in the OOXML debate that all nearly parties agianst OOXML censored their comments and weeded out certain comments they did not agree with. Rob from IBM, nooxml, and groklaw for instance all censored on their comments page. Groklaw even made an IP comments trap hiding all comments from one of my IP adresses from other users (making you think you placed a reaction but the only one who sees it is you yourself).

People claiming to support openness in the debate I have found to be the most in favor of using censorship against opinions they do not support. On the other hand I found that the blogs from Microsoft employees and teams seem to have little or no censorship on them. They actually allow you to critisise ms products and only seem to remove comments if they have foul language in them.
MS employees seemed a lot more open on discussing matters than the supporters of opendocument are.

hAl |

Comments are closed