[Mailman-Users] newbie question

[Mark Sapiro]

C. Jon Hinkle wrote:
>
>In any event, I can see from the List Admin manual that I can set up
>moderators and they would have full rights and set the rest as users and
>make their replies be moderated, but having 30 moderators seems
>unwieldy.  For instance, who would actually moderate the postings from
>the 110?

This is a bit confusing and perhaps not well documented. The term
'moderator' is not really well defined. Putting a persons e-mail
address in the list's 'moderator' field only means that that person is
notified when posts are waiting moderator approval. Generally, only a
few people would be listed as owner or moderator. What enables a
person to actually approve posts is knowledge of the list's moderator
password. This is what actually enables a moderator to log in and
perform moderator actions.

Again, designating an address as a 'mdoerator' doesn't by itself confer
any rights. What you want is the 30 to be unmoderated and the 110 to
be moderated. Then any of the 30 can post without moderator approval.
Posts from the 110 have to be approved by someone who knows the list
admin or the list moderator password. The difference is the moderator
password only allows moderator actions. The admin password allows that
plus admin actions like mass subscribing and changing list settings.

>If I set first_strip_reply_to to YES and then set reply_goes_to_List to
>POSTER, the reply would go to the original poster, but not to the entire
>list?  Is that different than setting first_strip_reply_to to NO and
>having the original reply-to be in force?

Yes it's different and setting first_strip_reply_to to NO is better.
This way if the poster has set a Reply-To: which is different from her
From:, it won't be stripped and lost. In general, the only time you
might want first_strip_reply_to to be Yes is when you are setting
reply_goes_to_list to List.

>In either instance, how do I account for worthwhile replies that would
>be beneficial for the entire list to see?

The person replying decides by choosing 'reply' to reply to the poster
or 'reply all' or 'group reply' to reply to the poster and to the list.

>Am I taking the wrong tack here?  Is this better done with something
>like default_member_moderation?  I could set the flag to off for the 30
>and on for the rest and then set the action to Hold.  Then, if the
>posting/reply was worth seeing on the list, it could be approved by a
>single moderator, and if not then it gets rejected and the poster gets a
>notice.

default_member_moderation only determines whether new subscribers have
their moderation bit on to begin with or not. It has no effect on
existing subscribers. It is a list setting, not a per member setting.
The setting you want is the moderation bit per user as I indicated
above.

--
Mark Sapiro <msapiro at value.net>       The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan