Anne,
anne-ology wrote > Just one point which you - & others - seem to be unaware: if I had > merely accepted this 2-day old message then it could have been even longer > before the questioner received a reply. Granted some of you may spend all > your time on the computer, but I'm in that group which turns off the > computer to attend to many off-line activities. I feel that if someone > has > a query, to which I might be able to help, then it's my duty to do so > without further delay. > > With deepest apologies if my duty-bound attitude offends some, The issue is never that you take the time to respond, rather it is frequently that your responses are not processed correctly by the maillist (ML) servers. The correct action as moderator IS to approve or reject a message, and allow it to turn through the ML If a response is necessary--do so against the now correctly processed ML thread. That is mostly what folks continue complaining about--not that you help, just that you need a better understanding of the proceedural context of moderation. If you are unable to follow the process--your effectiveness as a moderator as well as a contributor to the ML is hampered. Perhaps you should consider resigning the moderator role, and then help with ML threads that have been correctly moderated and distributed. Stuart -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/in-response-tp4206600p4206685.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
