Richard,

Would you be willing to allow original Date: lines of post submissions to
remain in moderated news posting headers, preferably as the actual Date:
line, but at least as an X-Original-Date?

Thanks for your consideration.

Tony

Wed, 1 Mar 2006 10:11:26  
uk.net.news.moderation Anthony R. Gold 

>Richard,
>
>Would you be willing to allow original Date: lines of post submissions to
>remain in moderated news posting headers, preferably as the actual Date:
>line, but at least as an X-Original-Date?
>
>Thanks for your consideration.

I think there are some things to think about here.

Q: since all our postings go through moderation in one form or another 
is the date and time we said what we did important?

A: Yes, sometimes, but mainly for the person posting rather than the 
person reading.

Q: Should the person reading or the person writing be more important?

A: The person reading (if only because there are a lot more of them).

Having asked and answered I think Tony does have a point.  I am guessing 
that Tony like me and other moderated posters saw a posting, replied and 
then found something else written by someone else got there first.

Perhaps the person that "got there first" was whitelisted and possibly 
wrong?

Having the date and time of any original posting would be useful.

I support Tony.  Please consider it, RichardA.

-- 
Wm ...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days from date of posting

In uk.net.news.moderation on Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:11:26 -0500, "Anthony R.
Gold"  wrote:

}Would you be willing to allow original Date: lines of post submissions to
}remain in moderated news posting headers, preferably as the actual Date:
}line, but at least as an X-Original-Date?

It was in fact always there, as X-Original-Date and it is in the headers as
I send them to the Server. 

However it seems that some servers strip off X-Original-Date, which in my
opinion is a bit naughty. I have made the header for the original date
different and it is now being posted.

Sorry about that, should have been there for years but wasn't :(

{R}

}Thanks for your consideration.
}
}Tony

On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:58:03 +0000, {R}  wrote:

> However it seems that some servers strip off X-Original-Date, which in my
> opinion is a bit naughty. I have made the header for the original date
> different and it is now being posted.

I now see your X-Posted-Date: which is sailing through fine.

Many thanks.

Tony

On 02 Mar 2006 {R}  wrote in
news:goqd02h18o4o09ps0oe0ufhrvokjnd4h1d@4ax.com: 

> However it seems that some servers strip off X-Original-Date,
> which in my opinion is a bit naughty. I have made the header for
> the original date different and it is now being posted.

Out of interest do you know which server is doing the stripping?

-- 
Graham Drabble
http://www.drabble.me.uk/

On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 14:43:44 GMT, Graham Drabble 
wrote:

> On 02 Mar 2006 {R}  wrote in
> news:goqd02h18o4o09ps0oe0ufhrvokjnd4h1d@4ax.com: 
>
>> However it seems that some servers strip off X-Original-Date,
>> which in my opinion is a bit naughty. I have made the header for
>> the original date different and it is now being posted.
>
> Out of interest do you know which server is doing the stripping?

Before Richard settled on X-Posted-Date I saw this one:

From: {R} 
Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated
Subject: Re: More tests
X-Origin-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:52:02 +0000
Date: Thu,  2 Mar 2006 12:52:21 +0000

Tony

In uk.net.news.moderation on Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:38 -0500, "Anthony R.
Gold"  wrote:
}On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 14:43:44 GMT, Graham Drabble 
}wrote:
}
}> On 02 Mar 2006 {R}  wrote in
}> news:goqd02h18o4o09ps0oe0ufhrvokjnd4h1d@4ax.com: 
}>
}>> However it seems that some servers strip off X-Original-Date,
}>> which in my opinion is a bit naughty. I have made the header for
}>> the original date different and it is now being posted.
}>
}> Out of interest do you know which server is doing the stripping?

news.gradwell.net which is typhoon certainly does, I don't think supernews
does.

}Before Richard settled on X-Posted-Date I saw this one:
}
}From: {R} 
}Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated
}Subject: Re: More tests
}X-Origin-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:52:02 +0000
}Date: Thu,  2 Mar 2006 12:52:21 +0000

Yes, it didn't look to good so I changed it :)

{R}

On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:05:22 +0000, {R}  wrote:

> In uk.net.news.moderation on Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:38:38 -0500, "Anthony R.
> Gold"  wrote:

> }X-Origin-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:52:02 +0000
> }Date: Thu,  2 Mar 2006 12:52:21 +0000
>
> Yes, it didn't look to good so I changed it :)

You must have the soul of an artist.  I assume that all of these:

X-Ulm-Original-Date:
X-Comment-Original-Date:
X-Robomod-Original-Date:

Would also work, but be assured X-Posted-Date: is great with me.

Tony

"Anthony R. Gold"  wrote:
|
| Richard,
| 
| Would you be willing to allow original Date: lines of post submissions to
| remain in moderated news posting headers, preferably as the actual Date:
| line, but at least as an X-Original-Date?

I've always been of the opinion, partly because I thought it was
established practice, that moderation never changes any part of a post
without a Very Good Reason, so Date should be what the poster sent.
Discuss, ha!

--
Patrick Herring, http://www.anweald.co.uk/ph

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 19:12:18 +0000, Patrick Herring put finger to
keyboard and typed:

>"Anthony R. Gold"  wrote:
>|
>| Richard,
>| 
>| Would you be willing to allow original Date: lines of post submissions to
>| remain in moderated news posting headers, preferably as the actual Date:
>| line, but at least as an X-Original-Date?
>
>I've always been of the opinion, partly because I thought it was
>established practice, that moderation never changes any part of a post
>without a Very Good Reason, so Date should be what the poster sent.

I agree. The date is the date it was posted by the poster, not when it
was approved by the moderator.

Mark
-- 
Visit: http://names.orangehedgehog.com - British surname distribution profiles
Listen: http://www.goodge.co.uk/files/dweeb.mp3 - you'll love it!

In  Patrick Herring  writes:

>I've always been of the opinion, partly because I thought it was
>established practice, that moderation never changes any part of a post
>without a Very Good Reason, so Date should be what the poster sent.
>Discuss, ha!

Indeed so, unless it is more than, say, 3 days stale, when it may be
better to change it.

The new USEFOR (if/when it gets accepted) provices for both a Date header
and an Injection-Date header, and gives clear rules as to what moderators
may/should do with each.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5