> But it doesn't make sense for one person to be able to send the OK for
> a message that was originally meant for someone else to OK.  That defeats
> the purpose, Roger.
 
If I were commenting on the general OK cookie mechanism, that would be true.
But I was commenting on alternative procedures for how moderating could
work.  Therefore, I think your criticism was off the mark.
 
> I'll document it--it's a good point--but it sure seems pretty obvious
> to me.
 
I'm sure that it's obvious to those who thoroughly understand and use the
cookie mechanism regularly.  But to many list-owners, especially newbies
who are the people who would find the Listowners Manual the most valuable,
it is likely not obvious at all.  If we excluded everything that was
'obvious', I expect there would not be any need for any Listowners Manual at
all.
 
I'll also make a broader comment that the use of ridicule to respond to
suggestions from rank and file list-owners, such as myself, will tend to
discourage such suggestions in general.  I have an impression that
Listserv has been improved and strengthened in part due to suggestions
from the average user.  If suggestions are not appreciated, then, just like
shareware that's never paid for, "it will go away".  I hope that this
will be considered as the future development of Listserv is contemplated.
 
>  In a discussion of the OK mechanism (which I do need to write)
> it would be quite clear that person B can't OK person A's editorial
> submissions.
 
In a separate discussion of the OK cookie mechanism, I'm glad to know that
that will be clear.
 
However, I hope that aspect will be mentioned again in any separate
discussion of the Send= Editor,Hold procedure, since from the perspective
of a newbie who is studying Editor,Hold but who has not otherwise read
word one about the OK mechanism, it will not be intuitive that editorial
OKs cannot be shared among editors.  (In fact, I'll suggest that the
opposite would be the intuitive assumption.)
 
Eric -- thanks for your clarification of the difficulty that would be
involved in altering the OK mechanism radically from its current set-up.
Although I think the suggestions made by myself and others about what may
be the preferences of editors are reasonable, I understand that there are
limits to what may be feasible from the perspective of the programmer/
developer.
 
-- Roger Burns    [log in to unmask]