At 09:13 AM 8/17/2006 -0700, Patrick B. O'Brien wrote:
>I'm trying do more clearly understand the rights of the owner, editor
>and the moderator.
>
>I know the owner holds all of the rights the moderator and editor hold.
>Also, if you are a moderator, you should be an editor.
>
>But what about the editor, how are those rights different from the
>owner?

Editors can't do anything but approve postings.  Owners can add and 
delete users, change list settings, and so forth.

>How are the editor's rights different from the moderator?

They aren't, really.  The primary reason for having the Moderator= 
keyword is to allow more than one person to see postings that need to 
be approved.

If all you have defined are Editors, then only the first defined 
Editor will ever see postings for approval.

Moderators, if defined, get postings for approval in either a 
round-robin fashion, or, if "ALL" is specified, all moderators get 
all postings for approval.

Basically Moderator= was added to provide for sites where either a) 
the moderation load is heavy enough to warrant splitting it up among 
multiple moderators (round robin), or b) multiple people needed to 
see all postings before they were approved (when "ALL" is specified).

I hope that makes sense.  Bottom line, non-owners who are editors 
and/or moderators do not have any authority over the list except to 
approve postings.  They can't edit the list header or the membership 
or anything like that.

Nathan