Should a logged in user need to wait for moderation?

We run SourceForge discussions with one group set for Allow Anonymous, and only anon posts require moderation. Logged in users don't require approval. And anon can't post to the other discussion groups, only the Help getting started forum.

Can Fossil forum be set up that way? Waiting is less than optimal.

Have good, make well

Should a logged in user need to wait for moderation?

It's not as simple as "logged in" or not:

1. Users are distinct from subscribers. You might not be a "user" in this forum's view at all, in which case you are never "logged in". You might merely have a cookie identifying you as a particular subscriber.

2. You might think you have a user login on this repo because you may be one of those authorized on the Fossil source code repository, but realize that fossil-scm.org is hosting the forum and Fossil source repositories separately. I don't believe they're set up with login groups, so a user login on one doesn't give you a user login on the other. (That belief is an inference from the outside based on the fact that I've got a wyoung login on both, but they've got different passwords.)

3. Fossil's forum-related capability set is not a single Boolean flag. You need to not only be a logged-in user, you also need "WriteTrusted Forum" capability to get the behavior you're expecting.

Can Fossil forum be set up that way?

Yes: convince drh to give you a user login with "WriteTrusted Forum" capability on this forum repo.

Oh, I forgot to mention that it's set up that way very much on purpose. If all a person had to do was subscribe to the forum to get their posts immediately sent out to all users, we'd be open to spammers again, just as with the old mailing list.

This is why "WriteTrusted Forum" capability is not assigned automatically.

There's a currently-unused forum-related capability called "Supervise Forum" which is intended to grant that user the ability to grant "WriteTrusted Forum" capability to other users, but that capability bit (g.perm.AdminForum) isn't checked in the current software, and there's no UI to back it.

Yeah, I think Warren covered it pretty well here. Since the forum has been created, I haven't rejected any spam from non-legitimate posts, so it seems to work well for drh's goal. I doubt Warren or drh have encountered any as well.

On your own forum, you're free manage it how you see fit, including unmoderated posting from anonymous users.

It seems like the forum has been very active over the last couple weeks - lots of good questions and collaboration between everyone, even with moderation in place of the majority of the users.

Further improvements would be helpful, I think. In particular I want to activate the feature where certain moderators can easily mark users as "trusted" and no longer in need of future moderation. Improvements to the display on narrow-screen mobile devices would also be useful.

But I would like to hold off on unnecessary enhancements until after the 2.7 release.