[META] Is there some delay with messages?

28 views
Skip to first unread message

Antoine LECA

unread,
Feb 24, 2015, 7:59:59 AM2/24/15
to min...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

I noticed that some messages appear with a noticeable delay on the
board. For example, Sara's message was delayed 56 hours according to the
headers (read from bottom to top; each mail server traversed adds two
lines) on some server probably internal to Google (IP 10.x.x.x)

Received: by 10.152.21.130 with SMTP id v2ls468163lae.98.gmail;
Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:01:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.152.45.7 with SMTP id i7mr1569979lam.9.1424718096301;
Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:01:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.15.65 with SMTP id v1mswjc;
Sat, 21 Feb 2015 02:44:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.140.109.181 with SMTP
id l50mr26767qgf.3.1424515440316;
Sat, 21 Feb 2015 02:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 02:43:59 -0800 (PST)


Is it part of some anti-spam device which somehow blocks messages from
the new posters?


Antoine

David van Moolenbroek

unread,
Feb 24, 2015, 8:12:04 AM2/24/15
to min...@googlegroups.com
Hey Antoine,


On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 1:59:59 PM UTC+1, AntoineLeca wrote:
Is it part of some anti-spam device which somehow blocks messages from
the new posters?

Well observed. As you may know from the group's banner message, we have opted to approve every poster's first message in order to keep out spammers. This involves a tiny bit of manual effort on our side, but that has never been much of a problem. However, the email notifications from google that alert (at least) me that new messages are awaiting approval, have apparently started to be dropped by a spam filter over which I have no control. So, I had no idea that any messages were pending - I only found out by accident when visiting the google group's web interface yesterday. Hence the sudden burst of messages.

I apologize to the new posters for the delay, and will try to check with the web interface more often from now on. Perhaps it's also time to get more people in the loop for approval, or even revise our current policy altogether. Thoughts welcome.

Regards,
David
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages