On 18/9/21 14:29, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Guillermo Hernandez (Oldno7) via Mailman-users writes:
On 18/9/21 7:10, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Guillermo Hernandez (Oldno7) via Mailman-users writes:
But? I'm talking about a moderator can put a member mails in hold when it is marked to accept. To prevent putting more gas in the fire.
Not sure what you want here. I don't see how this is supposed to work -- if a subscriber is set to accept, the moderator will never see the posts until they're distributed to the subscribers.
I'll try to explain:
In my experience, the most useful tool to cool down a thread that has converted in a flame is to stop free distribution (hold) new mails coming from some suscribers
That's what I was missing. You want moderators to be able to set the moderation flag on a particular member, or several members.
Yes. Exactly. That's the unique capability for moderators (that admins have) that I think mailman lacked ever.
From my perspective: there is two complementary "sides" when it comes to managing a list: the admin tasks, configuring, setting rules of suscribing, acceptation mails, etc. AND the management of the flux of messages. Thats what I call "moderation". Warning suscribers when a thread overheat, and being capable to set off a member when his behaviour makes it neccesary.
Good you have understand me despite muy poor explanations.
In mailman2 I have this second part covered via python scripts (and login via special account from moderators), and I will do in mailman3. If I cannot succeed via python, I'm planning doing it via DDBB. Let's see.
A moderator doesn't have to be capable of configuring lists, but they would have to be capable to moderate the flux of mails when it's necessary.
As I wrote before, I think this needs to be an option controlled by the owner, which makes implementation more complicated. But we'll see what the rest of the core thinks.
Steve