How could this happen? - Post to moderated list
I have a list, with the following values: accept_these_nonmembers ^((^.*@lyricsemi.com)|(^.*@lyricsemiconductor.com)|(^.*@lyricsemiconductors.com)) Should accept all messages from anyone in my domain, regardless of whether or not the poster is subscribed.
Members: Includes joe.user@lyricsemiconductor.com
However, Joe User posted a message to the list, and he got the auto response "Awaiting moderator approval" and "Reason: Post to moderated list."
I noticed just now - When I look at the membership status, Joe User has the checkbox next to his name, under the "mod" column. Does this imply that he is being forcefully moderated? How could that checkbox have gotten set? I am the moderator, and I don't want him moderated, and I never set that box explicitly for him.
Obviously I got past the problem this time by simply accepting his message. But I'd like to know what caused it so I can avoid future issues.
Thanks...
on 2/20/09 11:48 AM, Edward Ned Harvey said:
I noticed just now - When I look at the membership status, Joe User has the checkbox next to his name, under the "mod" column. Does this imply that he is being forcefully moderated?
Yup.
How could that checkboxhave gotten set? I am the moderator, and I don't want him moderated, and I never set that box explicitly for him.
There is a "default moderation" check box that can be selected at the time the list is created, or can be applied to all new subscribers after it is selected.
For example, this option is now turned on for all new members of this mailing list, so everyone has to go through the moderation process at least once or twice (proving they're a real human being and also proving that they can post relatively on-topic messages and that they're probably not a spammer). Once you've posted to the list a couple of times, I usually remember to clear your moderation checkbox, and all future posts will bypass the moderation process.
Maybe you selected this checkbox and didn't know it, or maybe you didn't understand what it was. Or maybe the checkbox was selected by someone else who was involved in the list administration.
Your choices are to do as I do, by individually clearing the moderation checkbox for those users you want to allow, or you can de-select the checkbox that applies default moderation to all new members. Selecting or de-selecting that checkbox won't affect any current members, but it will affect new subscribers after that change is made.
Another option that's available is to use "emergency moderation" for all posts to the list, which forces everyone to always go through the moderation process for each and every post. This is usually only used in dire circumstances, such as when some sort of mail loop has managed to get past the extensive defenses that Mailman has, or there is a massive flame war, etc....
Obviously I got past the problem this time by simply accepting his message. But I'd like to know what caused it so I can avoid future issues.
Most likely the default moderation issue.
-- Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org> If you like Jazz/R&B guitar, check out LinkedIn Profile: my friend bigsbytracks on YouTube at <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu> http://preview.tinyurl.com/bigsbytracks
How could that checkboxhave gotten set?
There is a "default moderation" check box that can be selected at the time the list is created, or can be applied to all new subscribers after it is selected.
It is conceivable, although unlikely, that the user became "moderated" early on, if he subscribed in the very beginning of the history of the list, before I disabled the default moderated checkbox. It is also conceivable, but unlikely, that somebody other than myself could have set this user's "moderate" bit accidentally. The list admin does in fact use a password that users other than myself know.
Is there any other way for this user's "moderate" bit to have gotten set? Perhaps -
I know at one point, he mailed the list with an attachment that was too large, so that message got held. Does this ever set (and leave set) the moderate bit?
Thanks again...
on 2/21/09 3:37 PM, Edward Ned Harvey said:
Is there any other way for this user's "moderate" bit to have gotten set?
Unlikely.
I know at one point, he mailed the list with an attachment that was too large, so that message got held. Does this ever set (and leave set) the moderate bit?
That would cause the one message to be held, but it wouldn't change the moderation bit for that user.
-- Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org> If you like Jazz/R&B guitar, check out LinkedIn Profile: my friend bigsbytracks on YouTube at <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu> http://preview.tinyurl.com/bigsbytracks
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
I know at one point, he mailed the list with an attachment that was too large, so that message got held. Does this ever set (and leave set) the moderate bit?
As Brad said, no.
But, assuming you have not rearranged GLOBAL_PIPELINE, this says at the time of that post, the user was not moderated, otherwise the post would have been held as "post from moderated member" rather than as "too big".
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
participants (3)
-
Brad Knowles -
Edward Ned Harvey -
Mark Sapiro