Re-Moderation when correcting an already approved blog post

[andreas_goeb]

Hello,

I just published my first blog post last Wednesday, and it was approved almost instantly. Unfortunately, I found that the graphics I included were too wide for the fixed layout, so I edited the post and provided smaller pictures. Unfortunately, now the post is back to "Waiting for moderator approval". Is this intended?

I can fully understand the restrictions posed on new users in order to avoid spam or other types of misplaced content. Having already spread the word (and the link), I was quite surprised that my post is now unavailable again. Do you think it is possible to either keep the already approved version available or allow slight improvements to published content without having to do a complete moderation roundtrip? Making the content unavailable seems confusing to me (and potentially everybody who tried to open the link I sent them last week).

Best regards,

Andreas

[former_member183424 · Accepted solution]

The reasons are explained in this document

[andreas_goeb · Accepted solution]

Thanks for pointing me to that document. I had already read it before asking this question, but I could not find any explanation there. The only two scenarios mentioned for post-release moderation are moving the content to a new space and abuse, neither of which applies in that case.

Further the FAQ states: "Additional rules and filters may cause your content to be moderated [...] If you are still unsure, create a discussion in SCN Support.", so I did.

To be clear: This was neither a complaint nor do I try to push somebody for a quick approval. I was just wondering whether it is intended that already approved and published content is completely removed if some minor changes need approval again. If so, I suggest adding this as a third bullet to the last question in the FAQ.

Best regards,

Andreas

[JasonLax · Accepted solution]

You post has cleared moderation.

The moderation rules are reapplied to new and also edited content when republished. If this weren't the case, there would be a loophole in the moderation process.

[andreas_goeb · Accepted solution]

Thanks for clarification. You might still consider adding that information somewhere in the FAQ.

[JasonLax · Accepted solution]

Okay, I've added something at the end. Thanks.

[andreas_goeb · Accepted solution]

Thank you! I appreciate your responsiveness.