In article
Galen Hekhuis writes:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:37:18 GMT, (Drew Lawson) wrote:
Um, just so you know, moderated Usenet groups are entirely based
on an "email type scheme." New posts are diverted to the standard
moderation email address for the group.
I am aware of that. What I was trying to say (unsuccessfully in this
case) is that there are several email based moderation schemes, as
opposed to web based moderation schemes. It is the moderation, not
the operation of the newsgroup, which makes use of email for
moderation undesirable in this particular application.
Gotcha. That got clearer to me in some of the additional posts.
I will note, since you are on the threshold of paying for this
again, that your selected software also has a strong tendency toward
false positives with no helpful messages. I have yet to get a post
through to the moderation queue. (Unless this one happens to work.
I keep trying... Nope. Have to hotwire it yet again.)
This is one of the advantages of having an unmoderated somewhat
"parallel" group (rec.ponds). One can quickly determine if the
problem is with the moderated group by posting identical articles to
both groups (no cross-posting, as that is automatically rejected by
the moderation software). Identical posts made through the same ISP
at the same time should yield identical results. If the results are
not the same (a post showing up in rec.ponds but not
rec.ponds.moderated) one may reliably assume that something in the
moderation chain is responsible.
Oh, it is quite clear. I get the standard form message from devnull
at whereever, telling me that I must have used prohibited words
(without telling me what they are) and that I can resubmit it if I
think there is an error. (I never crosspost.)
Every post.
I suspect that it is objecting to somethnig (still no guesses as
to what) in the message headers. I'd wondered if it hated my domain
name, but your post quotes that, so it probably isn't the issue.
I know enough about Usenet to work around this, but I dislike doing
so. So I usually just don't post. I don't like that solution, as
I plan on putting a pond in this spring and may have design questions
over the winter.
We are currently trying to figure out and track down the problem of
"missing posts." Simply saying to the operator of the server that
hosts the moderation software that some of our posts are missing
doesn't bode well for resolution of an intermittent problem. It would
be far, far better to provide examples (complete with full headers).
Mine aren't missing, just blocked/bounced.
--
Drew Lawson | Radioactive cats have
| 18 half-lives
http://www.furrfu.com/ |