No, you weren't. I didn't realize that a moderator has to repost an article.
I was under the impression that an article simply picked up an appropriate
header and then became "posted", so that moderators don't repost anything.
In other words, I thought that if I submitted something to a moderated
newsgroup (like *.answers), moderator approval did not require that the
moderator repost the article. I agree that making the moderators post
something *for* you is needless, but I didn't understand that that's
how moderation *worked*.
I figured this out from the other replies about a week ago; for some
reason this particular message was held up for over a week by mit.edu.
Sorry to appear to be beating a dead horse here.
>PS to moderators: evidently the section of the intro documents covering
>this stuff is still not clear enough. I realize that you are loathe to
>explain the approval-forgery bit in publicly posted documents, but perhaps
>you could find the time to go over those paragraphs again...
I second this; There will be misunderstandings about how it works,
unless you explain it more clearly.
In a separate message I've suggested a way of doing this which doesn't
make "approval-forgery" a blatantly obvious concept, while still providing
an FAQ maintainer with the appropriate information about the process.
*************************************************
Robert F. Heeter, rfheeter@pppl.gov
Graduate Student, Princeton University Plasma Physics Lab
Conventional Fusion FAQ maintainer.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved