Allan Hansen writes:
Not sure what is the difference between ‘emergency moderation’ and ‘Hold for moderation.’ It appears redundant.
It is redundant. But conceptually, "emergency moderation" is a flag set on the list, for situations where a flamewar (or spam via spoofed users) is getting out of hand. "Hold for moderation" is set on individual users. Of course the latter can be used to implement the former, but from the moderator's point of view they're used in rather different situations.
Desiring consistency between the lists, I don’t want to turn all the moderators into owners who can change list settings.
Reasonable. This is why Mailman restricts the operations moderators can perform in the first place.
Many of my moderators keep asking me to see the list of members and to subscribe and remove members. I end up servicing those requests. So...
a. Moderators should be able to unsubscribe and subscribe members.
Reasonable, but traditionally (ie, in Mailman 2) they can't, and this might be inappropriate for some lists. So for backward compatiblity, we probably need to make this a list owner option (or maybe domain owner, but if a list owner wants it I don't see why they shouldn't have it, and denying it creates some perverse incentive to give list owner credentials or permissions to moderators).
I could see defaulting it on eventually, though.
b. Moderators should be able to set the member’s moderation status. c. Moderators should not be able to see/modify any other member settings.
Not sure if there are other settings "somebody" might want to give to moderators, but we should remember you definitely don't want moderators to have them, and make them owner options.
Steve