Hi Barbara, I believe there are multiple moderators.I am not sure about the ownership :)
As for allowing subsequent e-mails from the same address for the same thread, I think that is a feasible and practical solution. But I don't think the admin will have time before OOoCon to do this... :( I agree that there would be no real benefits of changing tag. Best Regards Varun Mittal <http://www.varunmittal.info> Google <https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87> <http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87> Twitter <http://twitter.com/varunmittal19> "Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE" On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Barbara Duprey <b...@onr.com> wrote: > Hi, Varun! Have you taken over from Paul? Is he still the owner, or are > you? > > What I meant is that *after* the post has been moderated and sent on to the > list, the account should be considered subscribed in some fashion that does > not send all the messages from the list but simply allows the posts to come > through unmoderated. Not exactly no-mail, but the only posts they should get > are the ones in the threads they've posted to. In any case, in my > experience spammers change the accounts they send from very frequently. > > I see no benefit in changing the tag text, it's pretty unambiguous and > almost everybody is used to it. Some may have filters set on it, though the > Delivered-To header would still be there and is more meaningful. > > > On 8/25/2010 9:23 PM, Varun Mittal wrote: > >> The problem with the suggested solution is that we have a lot of spammers. >> If we do it like treating subsequent posts from them as from subscriber, >> trust me everyone will be frustrated. I as the moderator see at least 15 >> spam mails per day on average. >> >> So I suggest we should let the existing mechanism be there as it is. >> However >> if people feel , we can think about renaming of moderated tag to non-sub. >> But the message approval mechanism from non subscribers should remain same >> >> Best Regards >> Varun Mittal<http://www.varunmittal.info> >> >> <http://www.varunmittal.info>Moderator >> >> >> All Mailing Lists, Marketing Project OOo >> >> Google<https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87> >> <http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> >> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> >> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87> >> Twitter<http://twitter.com/varunmittal19> >> >> >> "Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE" >> >> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Barbara Duprey<b...@onr.com> wrote: >> >> On 8/25/2010 4:16 PM, Carlo Strata wrote: >>> >>> Il 25/08/2010 17:43, Barbara Duprey ha scritto: >>>> >>>> On 8/25/2010 8:52 AM, Carlo Strata wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Il 24/08/2010 05:35, Gail Severin ha scritto: >>>>>> >>>>>> Where is the bar code for envelopes addresses in Word? I really need >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> bar codes option. If there is none on this program that I have, can >>>>>>> an >>>>>>> update be created adding that option? Thanks. Gail Severin >>>>>>> gvse...@suddenlink.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Gail, >>>>>> >>>>>> many answer to you only in the mailing list so that you didn't receive >>>>>> and read their useful answer, so subscribe this list for the future >>>>>> and/or browse directly here: >>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html#general >>>>>> >>>>>> and here for your thread (this one) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/BrowseList?list=users&by=thread&from=2405760 >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>> The main problem with an unsubscribed user trying to use the OOo >>>>> archive >>>>> is that it is not conversational. If a question is asked for clarifying >>>>> a problem, so a better answer can be provided, the unsub would really >>>>> have to copy the question into a new e-mail, add the response, and then >>>>> send the message to the list (messing up threading). Also, this >>>>> response >>>>> will continue to need moderation, adding the delay time into the >>>>> process. Using the list's thread command allows natural response, but >>>>> still has the delay, and subject line changes break the thread. So far, >>>>> the best technique I've seen is to use old.nabble.com (or Gmane, but >>>>> that seems more complicated); the first reply will require the unsub to >>>>> confirm the e-mail address is active, but thereafter their messages >>>>> will >>>>> be "injected" and not need any moderation. Still far from ideal, >>>>> primarily because OOo has no control. I'm hoping that the Kenai >>>>> implementation will solve this whole issue! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Barbara, >>>> >>>> A first good step would be to change "[moderated]" to, e.g., "[non sub]" >>>> or "[non subscriber]", and leave the "[moderated]" flag with his correct >>>> mean also if unused at this moment. Isn't it? >>>> >>>> Carlo >>>> >>>> The [moderated] tag *always* means the poster is not subscribed, and >>> that's >>> its only meaning, so that would not really add any information. And it >>> does >>> nothing for the majority of the unsubs, who write directly to the list >>> and >>> don't go through the path where that tag is attached. What I think really >>> should happen is that when an unsubscribed user posts, they should be >>> given >>> an option to receive any updates to their thread (like what happens when >>> you >>> file an issue), and their subsequent posts should be treated as if from a >>> subscriber without their getting the full list e-mails -- which many find >>> overwhelming. That would put the responsibility on them, and none of us >>> would ever have to know whether they were actually subscribed or not. >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org >>> >>> >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org > >
