I was moderated at one point on Wikipedia-l.
My experience there was that my responses and my posts never went
through, no matter how tame and unoffensive they were.
It's basically like a pet vs. a wild animal - a pet must wait for its
owner to feed it, whereas a wild animal gathers its own food. In the
same manner, being moderated, you have to wait for the list admin to
approve anything you say.
Mark
On 26/09/2007, Monahon, Peter B. <Peter.Monahon(a)uspto.gov> wrote:
Earlier:
"...I have been put under
moderation months ago. I request
to be unmoderated...Waerth..."
There are 418 responses to a search for "Waerth" at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/mmsearch/foundation-l
It is my understanding that moderated posts merely await moderator
approval, and if Waerth has sent in anything that is not spam, not
vandalism(?) and not off-topic (though meta-topic discussions like this
one - discussions about our discussions - are a presumed function for
any group), then all the current moderator has to do is to approve that
post. I also presume that any moderator who "feels" that a
contributor's posts are consistently in accordance with
no-spam/no-vandalism/no-off-topic policy, then they can change the
poster's membership to unmoderated, then the posts will go through
without delay. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.