Subject:
|
Re: The name/purpose of the QOTD group
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 May 1999 03:44:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
556 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, lar@voyager.net (Larry Pieniazek) writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> > Hey Lar,
> > You -do- know what's involved in moderating, right? You get mailed an
> > NNTP article via SMTP, which you then import into an editor, munge the
> > headers, add an 'Approved-By' header, and then repost via NNTP. There
> > are tools to help with this, but I can't guarantee that they work on an
> > MS OS.
>
> Yes. Long term you will probably provide an interface for members to do
> this easily. Till then, no problem. I'll have my lar@voyager.net account
> receive these. Munging the headers should not be a problem from there.
> It would be hard to do from Outlook so I would not bother to try.
>
> <snipped automoderation setup descriptions>
>
> I stick to my original assertion. A moderated group is the "best" way to
> do this. We actually need someone who uses a judgement call as to
> whether it's a QOTD, not just whether it mechanically meets the
> requirements of being a followup of a post from another group, not a new
> post, and not a reply to a post to it.
>
> And, let's face it. There's no one who's a better judge of this kind of
> humor than me. :-) Just ask me, I'll tell you.
There's another icky sticky problem with moderated groups. When you post to
one, your message disappears into the wild blue yonder. You don't find out
whether your post made it there or not until you either see it minutes/
hours/days later or receive a rejection mail from the moderator. This isn't
much of a problem on Usenet where people are used to long delays or groups
with pukey ".moderated" suffixes, but I think here they would just be a
constant headache.
It -might- be feasable, however, to report back some sort of specially-
worded NNTP error message to the poster for immediate feedback, while still
forwarding on the post to the moderator.
I'm beginning to like the suggestion someone made earlier of just canning
the group and letting these things fall where they may, or into .off-
topic.fun or .general or wherever the most appropriate place is in each
case.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The name/purpose of the QOTD group
|
| (...) Yes. Long term you will probably provide an interface for members to do this easily. Till then, no problem. I'll have my lar@voyager.net account receive these. Munging the headers should not be a problem from there. It would be hard to do (...) (25 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
