1. Specifically, for what reason(s) do my posts need approval from a moderator?

I think it is the 5 posts before you get out of moderation. A lot of people post things, so it may take time for the mods to see your posts and approve them.

the first several posts of all members have to be approved before they become visible. we do it mainly to help combat spam.

-M

I think it is the 5 posts before you get out of moderation.


the first several posts of all members have to be approved before they become visible. we do it mainly to help combat spam.

-M

Hence my confusion.

Of my thirty three posts (http://www.okctalk.com/search.php?searchid=431438), which ones have been spam?

dunno... vbulletin seems to think you've only made four posts, hence the approval requirement.

-M

Well, over the years I've had perfectly civil posts that met the standards of the board but for some reason were not approved. I had assumed the moderation process was yet another attempt at censorship.

What I find odd is that my posts are posting directly on this forum, yet on the other forum does it require moderation.

Secondly, since my posts have posted directly, my post count has gone up. I think there's something linked between a post requiring moderation and the amount of posts posted...unless we most in multiples of seven.

EDIT:

Even with 5 posts (really 35+ but who is counting), moderation is still required. It is extremely difficult to hold a dialogue when the other party waits hours for your response.

So, I'll ask again? What are the specific reasons?

well, over the years i've had perfectly civil posts that met the standards of the board but for some reason were not approved. i had assumed the moderation process was yet another attempt at censorship.

the software doesn't show that any of your posts were not approved.


what I find odd is that my posts are posting directly on this forum, yet on the other forum does it require moderation.
you are correct; this particular forum is exempt from the approval process.


secondly, since my posts have posted directly, my post count has gone up.
i believe the error was linked with a bug in a past upgrade... however, as you've noted, your post count is going up... which means that the software is currently working correctly... so i doubt many more of your posts will require moderation.

-M

Even with 5 posts...

Noob!

I'm just kidding. Hopefully, you will soon be able to post freely on the other forums. Welcome back.

the software doesn't show that any of your posts were not approved.

Just as this same software shows I've posted only 5 posts.


however, as you've noted, your post count is going up... which means that the software is currently working correctly... so i doubt many more of your posts will require moderation.

-M

The increase in my "post count" is proportional to only the non-moderated posts. In other words, these posts on this forum. In other forums, after my responses are posted, it does not add.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa190/gr72149/Jesuslovesthelittlechildrenofthewor.jpg


I'm just curious...after 2 years (Feb. 2007) and only 35 or so posts, why are you suddenly asking about "moderating?"

just as this same software shows i've posted only 5 posts.


true, but the piece that counts posts is automatic while the approval part is done by hand. if there was a post that didn't get approved, we'd know about it.

regardless of what software problems were occurring when you previously visited okctalk, it appears that your post count is currently incrementing in all forums. as such not too many more of your posts will have to be reviewed before becoming visible.

i'd suggest that you concentrate on enjoying the site instead of looking for or trying to create controversy.

-M

i'd suggest that you concentrate on enjoying the site instead of looking for or trying to create controversy.

-M

What makes you think I'm looking for or trying to create controversy? Let's hear it.

if you're looking for a fight, you're not going to get one. enjoy the site.

-M

if you're looking for a fight, you're not going to get one. enjoy the site.

-M

Do I need to ask again or does asking questions constitute a threat?

i believe that i've adequately explained why your posts were not showing up immediately. i believe that i've adequately explained that this is only temporary and that this is in no way directed towards you or any opinion you may stand for... yet you seem to persist in trying to find some sort of conspiracy or something to be upset about.

seriously... start posting. start participating. nobody's preventing you... just use the site. -M


edit: as of the last couple messages, i don't think your posts are even going through approval anymore.

i believe that i've adequately explained why your posts were not showing up immediately. i believe that i've adequately explained that this is only temporary and that this is no why directed towards you or any opinion you may stand for... yet you seem to persist in trying to find some sort of conspiracy or something to be upset about.

So, you are suggesting that I was "trying to find some sort of conspiracy or something to be upset about" instead of just simply inquiring as to why my posts were requiring approval - especially that your responses were, in fact, inadequate. It is a very simple concept, you had maintained that after either 5 or "several" posts, subsequent contributions no longer require moderation, right?

I had 33 posts at the time of this thread and yet my posts were still requiring moderation. Why would any reasonable person not wonder the same? Simply charging 'software issues' is fine so as long as software issues is the issue. At the time of my persistence, even after having vBulletin recognize more than 5 posts, it wasn't.


seriously... start posting. start participating. nobody's preventing you... just use the site. -M

Seriously, I am. I was previously going to acknowledge that the phantom problem (I write 'phantom' because no problem existed, it was all just an elaborate conspiracy theory based on forged post counts and non-existent clandestine operations) seemed to have been resolved.

I just asked a reasonable question and persisted when your answers failed to satisfactorily address the issue.

Thank you for your time, though.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa190/gr72149/Jesuslovesthelittlechildrenofthewor.jpg

I'm just curious...after 2 years (Feb. 2007) and only 35 or so posts, why are you suddenly asking about "moderating?"

He stopped posting here two years ago because of his inability to communicate without moderation, which seemed to apply only to him. Observing an earlier request, he returned to forums only to find his posts still required approval from administrators. An inquiry was sent privately to a moderator, but no response has been provided. When one is having difficulty with a feature of the board, asking a question in the Help Desk and Suggestions forum, after privately contacting an administrator, is certainly within reason.

I hope that sufficiently answered your question. By the way, your sign is a perfect illustration of why we need to keep religion out of our faltering school system.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa190/gr72149/Jesuslovesthelittlechildrenofthewor.jpg


I'm just curious...after 2 years (Feb. 2007) and only 35 or so posts, why are you suddenly asking about "moderating?"

I'm not suddenly asking about "moderating".

Two years ago, after my posts failed to be approved and I was effectively censored, I began asking about the moderation process but to no avail.

I then took my dialogue to another forum and so happened to return 2 years later. I hope I quenched your curiosity as further inquiries will result in you being dubbed a conspiracy theorist.

i just asked a reasonable question and persisted when your answers failed to satisfactorily address the issue.

i just want to point out that your posts are showing up just as i said they would. there's absolutely no need for you to be a jerk about it.

-M

i just want to point out that your posts are showing up just as i said they would.

And I just want to point out that my posts were not showing up as you said they would (without moderation) - You previously contended that subsequent posts of five (or "several") required no moderation and I effectively demonstrated, by way of 28+ posts, that your contention was false. Now that the moderation feature has been disabled, you are claiming victory and suggesting that you wholly answered my question. You cannot count the hits and ignore the misses. If anything, this inconsistency was enough reason to have further inquired the litigating circumstances regarding the capricious moderation of my posts.

I would also like to point out that my chief complaint was not that my posts weren't "showing up" but rather that they were being excessively moderated. That my posts have "shown up" (perhaps in consequence to our exchange) doesn't address why they were being needlessly moderated - which, if your read the previous posts, is what I asked.


there's absolutely no need for you to be a jerk about it.

I am not being a jerk about anything and I would be most appreciative if you refrained from inane and fallacious suggestions such as this.

well allow me to retort...

enjoy your ban.

-M

I think I understand what he was trying to say? He was saying he made around 30 posts and still required moderation approval.

JLFY, even tho you made that many posts, it didn't appear automatically after the first 5, because 5 posts was not approved yet. There are a lot of people on this site and a whole bunch of posts. It happens that some posts needing to be approved by a new member can be overlooked.

Everything is fine now. Don't worry about your old posts still awaiting approval. Just enjoy the site.

well allow me to retort...

enjoy your ban.

-M

Perhaps this is the censorship he was implicating in his unanswered questions. I suppose, rather than address a valid inquiry, it is best to silence the individual making it.

He had valid points.
1. You never answered his original question.
2. Your explanation does not account for the restrictions that existed before he brought his concerns of censorship into the public forum.
3. He noted that your response of, "there's absolutely no need for you to be a jerk about it", was fallacious and unnecessary.

1. You never answered his original question.
2. Your explanation does not account for the restrictions that existed before he brought his concerns of censorship into the public forum.
3. He noted that your response of, "there's absolutely no need for you to be a jerk about it", was fallacious and unnecessary.

1. yes, i did... multiple times in fact. all new users are subject to moderator approval.

2. yes, it did. as i explained, there was a glitch in the software. two years ago, his posts weren't being counted so the software perpetually thought he was a new user. it affected multiple users at the time. it has since been fixed. in fact, after making a few posts, jlfy's posts started showing up as they should.

3. i'm sorry... he was being a jerk. to multiple people. i think he just wanted to stir up controversy... it looked as if he came here just to start a fight.

-M

Whoa, take a deep breath everyone.

First off, no one that I know of has censored or not approved any posts.

If you recall, the ownership a few years ago was a bit different.

There is a blip in the software that prevented post counts showing so it left some posts awaiting Moderation. Now it has been brought to our attention, we've been working to rectify the issue.

Let's all remain calm and civil and proceed with respect. Thanks!

Folks the guy was looking to pic a fight with a mod. Simple as that. The policies are there for a reason and in this case, I think they worked effectively. He's gone, we can relax and enjoy the thought that another troll didn't get through.