On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:37:19 +0000, Tom Crispin wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:35:07 +0000, Pedt <"\"@
> @\""@some.oddities-etc.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>You appear to be suggesting that urcm operates on a) You're on the
>>auto/pass list and your post goes through on the nod (unless you hit a
>>trigger word perhaps, it's not been mentioned about triggers);
>>b) if you are not in a) then your post goes through a moderator who
>>makes a decision on the post;
>>c) people can be put on a watch list over and above b) d) blacklisted.
> 
> That is how I interpreted Simon's explanation.

That's correct.

-- 
stillyet@googlemail.com (Simon Brooke) http://www.journeyman.cc/~simon/
It's much better if the moderators are mysterious and arbitrary, and 
every moderation decision is unexplained and final.