Subject:
|
Re: Proper place to post US S@H Phone Specials
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 2 Jan 1999 10:01:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1034 times
|
| |
|
|
cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com (Mike Stanley) writes:
> Gary Louie <GaryLouie@EarthLink.Net> wrote:
> > TODD: If we make a new news group, can it be made read only for
> > everyone except for the administrator and Mike Stanley? This would keep
> > the listings clean and allow going back for history.
>
> Hrmmm, interesting. I like it.
Yes, a group can be made to be read-only for everyone except the server
administrator and a moderator (or a set of moderators). I've never created
a moderated group before, but as far as I can tell, they're fairly easy to
set up inside the news server.
But on the client side of things, in terms of actual moderation, it sounds
like a pain in the butt for the moderator unless he/she has special software
tools for helping with the moderating -- and these are probably only worth
setting up if a lot of moderating is being done.
Basically, when someone posts an article to a moderated newsgroup, the news
server e-mails the article to the moderator, who then (if the article is
approved) has to massage the headers to clean up the article headers and add
the 'Approved:' and 'Sender:' lines, and then post the massaged article back
to the news server. Again, there are tools for this that a moderator can
ftp and compile (from source code) but they might require a separate e-mail
box and/or procmail customizations.
One nice thing about a moderated group for S@H specials is that follow-up
postings from other people about an item being sold-out or about an item
missing from the list could be approved or rejected by the moderator (e.g.,
Mike) -- I'm sure some follow-ups might be more generally useful than
others.
However, actual moderating may simply be overkill. If the intent is simply
to let Mike (and only Mike) post to the group, then there's something simple
that I can add at the server end of things which doesn't make extra work for
Mike. It could simply reject any messages not coming from Mike (using the
'From:' line rather than the 'Approved:' line). In practice, there probably
wouldn't be too many rejected messages if Mike always sets the
'Followup-To:' header to another group -- only people trying to start new
threads would get an error message.
BTW, there's another thing about moderated groups that weirds me out:
People are used to seeing articles appear instantly here because none of the
groups are currently moderated and everyone talks to the same server. If
someone posts a message to a moderated group and they don't know it's
moderated (and I *hate* .moderated on the end of group names, even though
it's helpful), they're likely to resubmit the article again and again until
they give up frustrated wondering where it went.
How much "unwanted" traffic do you think there would be if:
- there were a separate group (lugnet.market.lsahs) which accepted postings
from anyone and where followups to the weekly postings went to the same
group?
- there were a separate group which accepted postings from anyone but where
followups to the weekly postings went to lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade?
- there were two groups (lugnet.market.lsahs & lugnet.market.lsahs.announce)
with one for discussion and one for announcements, and both accepted
postings from anyone, and where followups to the weekly postings in the
lugnet.market.lsahs.announce group went to lugnet.market.lsahs?
Larger question: Is there a class of announcements of sales/specials that
needs an area within the .market newsgroup tree? What is the jist of what's
being announced to people?
--Todd
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Proper place to post US S@H Phone Specials
|
| (...) Yes, this was my intent. I was not suggesting a moderated news group. A moderated news group sounds like it is too much work. (...) Yes, I think it should work this way. Except, I suppose the original message would need to be posted to the new (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Proper place to post US S@H Phone Specials
|
| Todd Lehman wrote: <moderated technical difficulties> This is your server and you have the source. Why do it the conventional way? Instead of mailing the proposed article, save it on the server. Moderator then periodically uses the web interface to (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Proper place to post US S@H Phone Specials
|
| (...) I've re-read this a few times trying to come up with a lengthy response, but I'm really just too busy and tired right now to try to help make a decision like this. Basically, I'll do what you (collectively if it is to be a group-hashed out (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
29 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
|
|
|
|
