Sure, that seems like a good solution to me.
There already is an option to make an external link, which CAN be
curated by moderators. So just blocking active links in the description
would be perfect.
On 7/12/2019 1:28 PM, Josh Andler wrote:
> Hey Brynn,
> Given that Martin hadn't responded that I could see, I'm going based on
> the information that you provided.
> I do not believe that moderators should have the ability to modify the
> content of a user's gallery post or their description. However, given
> your stated concern and rationale, the ability to disable hyperlinks
> needs to be a way to balance that as a reasonable form of moderation.
> IMHO, there should be a moderation flag to disable hyperlinks in all
> text URLs in the description via 1-click (force the entire description
> into plaintext if need be). It may seem overbearing to disable all
> hyperlinks in a description if one is spam, but realistically, if we
> have clear guidelines on what is considered spam, it shouldn't be a
> problem... plus a plaintext copy of the URLs will still be right there,
> so what they posted is unadulterated, just no magic hyperlink is created
> Does that seem like it could be a reasonable solution? If anything, it
> seems like it might make it quicker/easier to moderate with a
> single-click rather than having to edit content. I'd be interested in
> people's thoughts.
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 2:28 AM brynn <brynn(a)frii.com
> <mailto:email@example.com>> wrote:
> Hi Friends,
> Reference the 3 images uploaded by this member:
> The images appear to be made with Inkscape, but in my
> opinion, the links
> in the description are spam. As a moderator, I would like to be
> able to edit
> the description (via Curate) and remove only the "www.". In that
> way, the
> description still tributes the inspiration for the images to that
> website (as
> the member appears to intend), without having an active link to the
> Breaking the link removes the spam.
> Martin and I have had an extended private discussion about
> this. But he
> disagrees with giving moderators the ability to edit the
> description. He says
> that we need to have a community discussion about it.
> I'll have to be honest and say that I don't understand his
> position, or
> even really know exactly what his position is. Even if I did, I
> wouldn't try to
> represent it. So he'll have to do that. Our discussion ranged far
> and wide
> over moderation subjects, but none of his arguments really hit home
> to me, as a
> good reason not to allow moderators to edit (curate) the
> description. So it
> seems we've hit a stalemate.
> I'll be honest again and say that I'm not sure if the
> purpose of this
> discussion is to repeat our discussion publicly, or just to get
> opinions on
> curating the description. Because a lot of his concerns seemed to
> be about
> potentially overly aggressive moderation. Or maybe it's both? But
> I think I'm
> a fair moderator and can train fair moderators, so I'm ready either
> way :-)
> Martin, I hope this is a fair introduction of the issue?
> All best,
> Inkscape Devel mailing list -- inkscape-devel(a)lists.inkscape.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to