| 23 May 2025 |
 KFears (they/them) | * I do somewhat struggle seeing anybody go through with it though, so it'll just end up being suffering and moderation burnout | 04:49:22 |
|  @zml:riot.firechicken.net joined the room. | 06:03:05 |
|  @carbolymer:matrix.org joined the room. | 06:03:17 |
|  BeatLink joined the room. | 06:09:22 |
| BeatLink | Can i get an invite to the new room? | 06:09:41 |
 uep | In order to prevent this room getting too large and drawing spammers attention, if you just came here for an invite, please consider leaving the room again. | 06:32:52 |
|  mjolnirchanged room power levels. | 06:34:08 |
 emily | should we consider an invites-specific room? | 06:41:36 |
| emily | mods could kick people after they're invited | 06:41:42 |
| emily | and it wouldn't get in the way of any discussion here | 06:42:13 |
| uep | yeah, perhaps. I keep trying to avoid making things that seem more permanent (and of course advertising to the spammers how to get in) | 06:43:59 |
| uep | (also, anyone can invite people, doesn't have to be a mod... any room member, in that room. Because that's the same as what knocking does, but ~no clients support knocking | 06:45:11 |
| uep | * (also, anyone can invite people, doesn't have to be a mod... any room member, in that room. Because that's the same as what knocking does, but ~no clients support knocking) | 06:45:18 |
| emily | yeah but only mods can kick :P | 07:04:57 |
| emily | we could have non-moderation-team trusted community members as mod in that room though | 07:05:14 |
| emily | who are willing to both triage invites and kick people | 07:05:20 |
| emily | agreed that I don't want this to be permanent, but I also don't know what our endgame actually is other than just hoping they get bored. | 07:05:36 |
| BeatLink | whats going on with this spammer thing? | 07:05:48 |
 @raboof:matrix.org | is there anything to track Matrix's progress on this? I found https://github.com/element-hq/element-meta/issues/2486 but that doesn't look very active. Commented that it's a current issue at least. | 07:08:14 |
| @raboof:matrix.org | (that also mentions emailing abuse@matrix.org, I didn't know that was a thing, have we been doing that?) | 07:09:00 |
| emily | they have posted about it on the matrix.org blog | 07:09:09 |
| emily | they are very aware of the problem | 07:09:12 |
| emily | unclear if they are doing anything except flailing | 07:09:16 |
 K900 | Their solution seems to be policy servers | 07:09:41 |
| emily | that's like, a pretty major architectural/engineering project right? | 07:10:01 |
| emily | a thing Matrix famously has a track record for completing on time and without issues? | 07:10:16 |
| K900 | Yes and I'm not even convinced it's a good idea | 07:10:17 |
| emily | "In my opinion, the most interesting part to talk about above is MSC4284: Policy Servers. If you haven't already, read the matrix.org blog post on Introducing Policy Servers. In short, they're servers on the internet where you can send events to and have them be checked for spam/illegal imagery/etc. before allowing the event to be sent down to your users. You can think of them like a SpamChecker Synapse module, but homeserver implementation agnostic." | 07:10:41 |
| emily | right. | 07:10:43 |
| emily | (https://matrix.org/blog/) | 07:10:44 |
