XPost: alt.comp.software.thunderbird, news.software.readers   
   From: mariasophia@comprehension.com   
      
   Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   > You wrote a followup to my article that commented on nothing I had   
   > written.   
      
   Ah, but I did. Look at the sig. :)   
      
   >   
   >>Since privacy is everything on the Internet, I think now that the standard   
   >>process each newsreader uses likely maintains the privacy change all along.   
   >   
   >>This is the flow I'm belatedly beginning to understand better:   
   >> user > nntp server > smtp server > moderator > acceptance > posting   
   >   
   >>If that's the correct typical flow, and given the fact that it's publicly   
   >>accepted to obfuscate identity on Usenet, since email is required in that   
   >>flow, what smtp and nntp server does the moderator's process utilize?   
   >   
   > The user did not send an email message and isn't using an SMTP server.   
   > His privacy in the use of SMTP to forward the proto article isn't at   
   > issue. The moderation process is a mail2news gateway, either manual on   
   > the moderator's host receiving an email message, adding the Approved   
   > header, then using a newsreader to send the approved article to a News   
   > server where it's injected. The gateway may be remote to the moderator,   
   > like use of the complicated WebSTUMP application.   
   >   
   > The moderator's News server is in the headers.   
   >   
   > Since the user is involved in nothing after composing the proto article,   
   > what the hell is the privacy concern? You keep claiming to have privacy   
   > concerns. You never state what they are.   
      
   I'm working on understanding that which I didn't even know existed prior.   
   I saw your response and that from Marco Moock on n.a.p just now also.   
      
   While I had looked for alt.test.moderated, Marco suggests   
   misc.test.moderated since alt.test.moderated doesn't seem to exist.   
      
   Most moderated groups do not require a real or working email address.   
   Usenet has a long tradition of allowing obfuscated or nonfunctional   
   addresses because of spam concerns.   
      
   Typical bogus examples:   
   nobody@example.invalid   
   user@nowhere.net   
   name@remove-this.example.com   
      
   Based on my googling, what moderators usually care about:   
   1. The post is on topic.   
   2. The post follows the group's rules.   
   3. The post is not spam or abusive.   
   4. The post is understandable without needing to contact the sender.   
      
   When a real address might matter:   
   1. The moderator needs clarification before approving the post.   
   2. The group has a special rule requiring real identities.   
   3. The post looks suspicious and the bogus address adds to that impression.   
      
   What happens if our fake address bounces when a mod tries to contact it.   
    a. The moderator may approve the post anyway.   
    b. The moderator may reject it only if they needed to reach us.   
    c. Apparently many moderators ignore bounces entirely.   
      
   Hence, a bogus email address is acceptable for many moderated groups.   
   But apparently a few specialized groups expect a real, reachable address.   
      
   Moderated Usenet posting flow with bogus email address privacy   
   -------------------------------------------------------   
   Step 1: You post from your newsreader   
   You compose a message and post it to a moderated newsgroup.   
   Your news server sees that the group is moderated and does not inject   
   the article directly into the group.   
      
   Step 2: Your server forwards the post to the moderator   
   The server sends your post, usually as email, to the moderator's   
   submission address for that group.   
   Your From header may contain a bogus or nonworking email address.   
   This is normally acceptable and common on Usenet.   
      
   Step 3: Moderator reviews the submission   
   The moderator reads your post in their moderation queue.   
   They mainly care about:   
   1. Whether the post is on topic.   
   2. Whether it follows the group's rules.   
   3. Whether it is not spam or abusive.   
   A real, working email address is usually not required.   
   A bogus address is only a problem if the moderator needs to contact you   
   for clarification or the group has special rules about real identities.   
      
   Step 4: Moderator approves and reposts with an Approved header   
   If the moderator decides to accept your post, they or their software   
   reinject the article into Usenet.   
   During this reinjection, an Approved header is added to the article.   
   Example:   
   Approved: moderator@example.org   
      
   This Approved header is what tells Usenet servers that the article is   
   authorized for that moderated group.   
   The moderator's system posts from a trusted host or authenticated   
   account, so servers accept the Approved article.   
      
   Step 5: Usenet servers distribute the approved article   
   Because the article now contains a valid Approved header and comes from   
   a trusted injection point, Usenet servers propagate it normally.   
   Your original From header, even if it contains a bogus email address,   
   is usually preserved unless the moderator changes it.   
   --   
   The people most vehement against privacy are those who least understand it.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)