 | | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) I realize the desire here, but I'm sort of a stream of conscious person. Plus, as an NNTP user, I tend to go for a minimal number of posts. Until we have an ability to mass authenticate posts, it's just too much of a pain to authenticate a (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) The question is when you approve a posting setup (do you approve them? I thought so?), do you see what member ID submitted it? Do you verify that the email getting approved actually is one of the member? If not, then we shouldn't use that info (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) Not sure I undestand the question, but what from I get of it, I think Todd would have to answer. I have a favour to ask (again) Can we have one new/revived suggestion per post please rather than 3 paragraphs that have to be read closely to (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) Actually, I wasn't sure. After a bit of digging, it seems that members are associated with *one* posting setup - I assume after going through the posting setup while logged in. I'm not sure if that association is actually verified as part of (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Some suggestions
|
|
(...) What's the probability of hitting an auth string? It would be reasonable to only allow editing if logged on, or to re-authenticate the post. Hmm, definitely have to be logged on to see all the pending authentications, otherwise all you have to (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) Good point. Hmm, did we capture the suggestion that we should have logins for non-members so they can benefit from some of the post controls? (...) Aren't logged on members already associated with a posting setup? Frank (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: List of suggestions
|
|
(...) That's got plenty of wiggle... (...) I'm not sure I agree though, what's the value in posting a "we rejected this for technical reasons" with no more detail at all post at the tail end of the string if it shows rejected on the list, and if the (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
(...) I would recommend setting it up so only logged on users will be able to even see a button for canceling (only their) posts - otherwise you'd end up floodding people with "cancel requests" :/ I did look once to see how we can associate a member (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Some suggestions
|
|
(...) From a strictly paranoid point of view, that would be a bad idea. Right now, if I just randomly try auth strings until I hit one that's pending, all I get is the ability to approve/deny what the original author wrote (since the chance of me (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Hmm, another suggestion
|
|
I know in the past, we have asked for user cancel of web posted posts. I have noted that an NNTP cancel must be authenticated just like a regular post. It seems like it would be possible to have a cancel button in the web view that would generate an (...) (21 years ago, 30-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
