I think there needs to be some sort of enhanced notifications when someone other than the author or maintainers close an issue so it doesn't go unnoticed.
Also spam controls would need to be integrated. Wouldn't it be annoying if a bot closed all your open issue / proposals and opened random closed ones?
Whilst there is some merit to this approach it does seem to be fraught with problems. why deviate from the normal approach that users expect and has less problems?
Well, a bot could also just spam the repo full with nonsense proposals. I guess you'd need a repo whitelist/blacklist option, really, in ngit. Then each project could determine how to define that list. I wouldn't put it in the maintainers file, though.
Trying to account for malicious actors in each feature is too complicated.
Yes. I'm kind of new to spam prevention so the thought of working features around this excites me.
Users could opt in/out of the reports bans by the maintainers.
Although maybe a maintainer would prefer to manage these separately.
I think the whole site needs to be thoroughly debugged for reactivity issues like this.
I'm in the middle of a refactor so it will be best to do this after that.
certainly everyone doesnt need to see the same thing.
some spam prevention happens at the relay level.
some happens by your won block list / reports.
some happen via WoT blocks / reports.
this standard nostr spam prevention.
on top of this maintainers blocks / reports could optionally play a bigger role than just WoT.
I think some experimentation is needed.
It show as '[user] proposed status [status] if the user who tried to issue the status event isn't the author of the issue or a maintainer as listed in the issue. also gitworkshop doesn't present the change status option for anyone else.