Perhaps I did miss-attribute the material. Thank you for pointing it out. I offer my apologies for doing so. Sometimes the "quote levels" get confused and it is not easy to tell which author provided some particular text.
Since you appear to be the one responsible for the suggested behavior, would you please address the concerns that I raised about it.
In particular, consider what mechanisms would be needed to handle your item 2 below (Knowing changes ...)
What if there are multiple moderators who go on overlapping vacations?
On May 19, 2013, at 11:38 AM, varun sharma <varunsharmalive(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Richard,
> I think you have misunderstood my paragraph to be barry's. I was
> suggesting the adding up of pending tasks of moderators and list
> owners to their "ToDo" list during their vacation period with
> suspension of email.
> The phrase which you have mentioned, might be confusing. But actually
> i was talking about two different operations.
> 1. The mail delivery will be stopped for moderators as well as list
> owners. So the moderators should also not receive any "add request
> pending" email during the vacation period.The todo queue will remain
> 2. The second thing is some moderators might be interested in knowing
> the administrative changes done in their absence. So they should
> receive a summary of the tasks done(eg. users added) in their absence
> once they come back from vacation.This was what i was talking about in
> that paragraph.
> On 5/19/13, Richard Wackerbarth <rkw(a)dataplex.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry(a)list.org> wrote:
>>>> On May 13, 2013, at 10:52 PM, varun sharma wrote:
>>>> Question: Should you be able to add a vacation stop to moderator or
>>> I think the owner or moderators also should be allowed to use the in
>>> vacation suspension of mails from the mailing lists they moderate or own,
>>> given all the administrative tasks that need their attention must be
>>> to their ToDo queue.
>>> Lets say there is a mailing list that requires moderator's approval for
>>> new user to join. If one of the moderator has set "on vacation" for his
>>> account, then he should only get "pending approval request" in his ToDo
>>> task list. If some other moderator responds to that request, then it will
>>> be automatically removed from the ToDo list of all the moderators,
>>> including the one "on the vacation" and the moderator "on vacation" will
>>> never know if there was any request.
>>> Also there can be email alerts as soon as some task is added to the ToDo
>>> list but if the user is "on vacation" then he will not receive any of
>>> emails until he disables his "on vacation" flag. All the pending ToDo
>>> tasks/(tasks done in his absence) may be emailed him at once when he
>>> back from the vacation.
>> You have used some phrases that cause me to infer that the -core would have
>> to keep extensive information about moderation requests.
>> For example: "(tasks done in his absence) may be emailed him at once when he
>> comes back from the vacation."
>> I hope that you meant "tasks NOT done". Otherwise, someone would have to
>> maintain a history of the tasks. (Although such an archive would appear to
>> be a task more appropriate for the KittyStore and HyperKitty retrieval
>> Now, since "-core" maintains the queue of pending tasks and is also the
>> agent that sends out emails, do you propose the add an "on demand" type of
>> "digest" for the moderation queue?
>> We might think of this as a rendering of the current task queue in an
>> RFC-822-styled format analogous to the REST request that is delivered in a
>> JSON based format. Presumedly, since this is a "push" notification, the
>> "return from vacation" process could trigger this request.