[libreoffice-users] Re: in response ...

Anne,


anne-ology wrote
>        Just one point which you - & others - seem to be unaware: if I had
> merely accepted this 2-day old message then it could have been even longer
> before the questioner received a reply.  Granted some of you may spend all
> your time on the computer, but I'm in that group which turns off the
> computer to attend to many off-line activities.  I feel that if someone
> has
> a query, to which I might be able to help, then it's my duty to do so
> without further delay.
>
>        With deepest apologies if my duty-bound attitude offends some,

The issue is never that you take the time to respond, rather it is
frequently that your responses are not processed correctly by the maillist 
(ML)  servers.

The correct action as moderator IS to approve or reject a message, and allow
it to turn through the ML

If a response is necessary--do so against the now correctly processed ML
thread.

That is mostly what folks continue complaining about--not that you help,
just that you need a better understanding of the proceedural context of
moderation.

If you are unable to follow the process--your effectiveness as a moderator
as well as a contributor to the ML is hampered. Perhaps you should consider
resigning the moderator role, and then help with ML threads that have been
correctly moderated and distributed.

Stuart 





--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/in-response-tp4206600p4206685.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted