On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Michael Johnson wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Michael Johnson wrote:
> > Send= Private,Editor appears to result in filtering out non-subscriber
> > posts and trapping REVIEW subscribers' posts for moderation.  Does that
> > behavior you describe apply only to 1.8e?  My default option for new
> > subscribers is REVIEW, not NOPOST.
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Dennis Budd wrote:
> > That is the same behavior that you obtain by using "Send= Private",
> > without the "Editor".  Looks to me like it's using "Private", ignoring
> > "Editor", and not flagging this as an error, which it really should be
> > doing.
>
> If the list is ignoring "Editor", then why am I still being asked to
> moderate posts from subscribers set to REVIEW, and why are subscribers not
> set to REVIEW being asked to approve their own messages?

The first is what setting a subscriber to REVIEW does.  Period.  In
any list configuration.

The second setting is what obtains when "confirm" is added to the
Send= setting.  Once again, that has nothing to with the "editor"
setting.

If "Editor" were being used in your configuration, *you* would be
getting asked to approve all the subscribers' messages, not the
subscribers themselves.  That's the way it works.  If the list is
"self-moderated", i.e., all subscribers are implicitly defined as
editors, as I have done on one of my lists, then *no* non-Review
subscriber is asked to approve his own post (and people on Review come
to you for approval).  That is, unless you add "confirm"  to the
setting, in which case all non-Review subscribers will have to approve
their own posts.

>
> The documentation did not explicitly forbid "Private,Editor", but neither
> did it explicitly define the expected behavior of such a combination.

Unfortunately, it has been my experience that there is a lot of
behavior that Listserv exhibits that is not defined in the
documentation.  I have more than once had to figure this stuff out for
myself.

>
> In my less than 48 hours of experience with "Private,Editor", that
> combination does not behave identically to how you describe "Private" or
> "Editor" alone.  What I'm seeing is a desirable (IMHO) blend of both.
>
> --
> Michael
>