The problem with the suggested solution is that we have a lot of spammers. If we do it like treating subsequent posts from them as from subscriber, trust me everyone will be frustrated. I as the moderator see at least 15 spam mails per day on average.
So I suggest we should let the existing mechanism be there as it is. However if people feel , we can think about renaming of moderated tag to non-sub. But the message approval mechanism from non subscribers should remain same Best Regards Varun Mittal <http://www.varunmittal.info> <http://www.varunmittal.info>Moderator All Mailing Lists, Marketing Project OOo Google <https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87> <http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87> Twitter <http://twitter.com/varunmittal19> "Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE" On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Barbara Duprey <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8/25/2010 4:16 PM, Carlo Strata wrote: > >> Il 25/08/2010 17:43, Barbara Duprey ha scritto: >> >>> On 8/25/2010 8:52 AM, Carlo Strata wrote: >>> >>>> Il 24/08/2010 05:35, Gail Severin ha scritto: >>>> >>>>> Where is the bar code for envelopes addresses in Word? I really need >>>>> the >>>>> bar codes option. If there is none on this program that I have, can an >>>>> update be created adding that option? Thanks. Gail Severin >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi Gail, >>>> >>>> many answer to you only in the mailing list so that you didn't receive >>>> and read their useful answer, so subscribe this list for the future >>>> and/or browse directly here: >>>> http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html#general >>>> >>>> and here for your thread (this one) >>>> >>>> http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/BrowseList?list=users&by=thread&from=2405760 >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>> >>> The main problem with an unsubscribed user trying to use the OOo archive >>> is that it is not conversational. If a question is asked for clarifying >>> a problem, so a better answer can be provided, the unsub would really >>> have to copy the question into a new e-mail, add the response, and then >>> send the message to the list (messing up threading). Also, this response >>> will continue to need moderation, adding the delay time into the >>> process. Using the list's thread command allows natural response, but >>> still has the delay, and subject line changes break the thread. So far, >>> the best technique I've seen is to use old.nabble.com (or Gmane, but >>> that seems more complicated); the first reply will require the unsub to >>> confirm the e-mail address is active, but thereafter their messages will >>> be "injected" and not need any moderation. Still far from ideal, >>> primarily because OOo has no control. I'm hoping that the Kenai >>> implementation will solve this whole issue! >>> >>> >> Hi Barbara, >> >> A first good step would be to change "[moderated]" to, e.g., "[non sub]" >> or "[non subscriber]", and leave the "[moderated]" flag with his correct >> mean also if unused at this moment. Isn't it? >> >> Carlo >> > > The [moderated] tag *always* means the poster is not subscribed, and that's > its only meaning, so that would not really add any information. And it does > nothing for the majority of the unsubs, who write directly to the list and > don't go through the path where that tag is attached. What I think really > should happen is that when an unsubscribed user posts, they should be given > an option to receive any updates to their thread (like what happens when you > file an issue), and their subsequent posts should be treated as if from a > subscriber without their getting the full list e-mails -- which many find > overwhelming. That would put the responsibility on them, and none of us > would ever have to know whether they were actually subscribed or not. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
