I don’t know if there is a way to expose site/plugin settings to non-admins.
The plugin could be extended to add a button to user profile screens to toggle forced moderation on and off for the displayed user. That would make it possible for moderators to use it.
Realistically, I don’t know if I will have time to add that to the plugin myself in the near future, but I’d take a pull request if someone else wants to.
Would it be difficult to implement a function where posts rejected have a reason text field that’s PM’d to the user?
Great plug in by the way @LeoDavidson 
That would probably be best as a separate plugin, since it would be useful as a general part of the moderation queue functionality in Discourse.
This plugin just puts messages into the moderation queue (if the username matches) and doesn’t change how anything after that works.
Can this plugin be applied to a Group?
Does this plugin even work under the new reviewables design in Discourse 2.3 @eviltrout? I think it is unlikely…
It still works, at least on my v2.4.0.beta1 forum. (It did break when v2.3 was released, but I fixed it.)
It only checks usernames at the moment but I might be able to add that if I can find some spare time. How much do you need it?
Has it been updated to use the review queue? Or does it have a different mechanism for review? I can help upgrade it if not.
I’m not sure, to be honest. I haven’t really explored the new review queue feature.
When I fixed it for v2.3, I had to change it so it returned either :trust_level or :skip instead of true or false. Don’t know if anything more is needed?
I’m not sure how many customer requests we get for per-user moderation but it might be worth a quick look to scope the task if we ever do.
I just reviewed the code and was surprised to see it’s nice and simple! It uses the existing post queuing methods so it automatically uses the review queue and nothing more should need to be updated.
I’m looking for the opposite feature: any user that appears in a small list of users won’t get their posts moderated. (Some posts are getting held because of watched words that spammers tend to use, and it’s annoying a few long-time users.)
If I fork and modify this plugin, is there something that I could return on line 19 that would ensure that the matching users don’t get their posts moderated? (maybe something like :skip instead of :trust_level?)
What trust level are these users?
They are between TL2 and TL4.
I was going to see if this code works later today, but I’m not sure if it’s correct.
It seems to work. I put the plugin code here in case anyone else has a use for it. Any user in the list bypasses moderation.
Does this plugin work with the current Discourse version?
What would happen if the plugin were to stop working in future? Would it just cease to hold the users’ posts for moderation, or could it break other things?
To test it after an upgrade, could I just try to post as a dummy TL0 user and see what happens?
It took me a while to find these today, so I hope it helps to add the details here. You can find the settings by searching for “approve” (rather than “moderate” or “moderation”) or by looking on the “Posting” tab. The most relevant setting seems to be approve unless trust level.
I’m still using it, and haven’t had any issues or reports of problems.
It would probably just not do anything, with behavior reverting to how it worked without the plugin, but it’s difficult to guess as it would depend on how things changed.
Try posting as someone that isn’t in the plugin’s config, and then as someone who is, and check that one goes through without any (extra) moderation while the other’s post is added to the moderation queue for review.
This plugin is well appreciated and it still works after all the years without updates.
We still saw the posts as visible and I tested in a private browser to exclude my staff status. However, I read up on flags, moderation and hiding and then put the hiding sensitivity to high.
I’m not sure high-sensitivity will do the job or not because our “friend” is silenced (twice) and on a pathway out.
If you ever want to make an update, this hiding feature without adjusting global sensitivity might be useful. Perhaps the plugin can be a “staff user” that flags. I think that staff flags automatically hides it. I’m not totally sure how the flagging and hiding works though. We are a new group and only needed this with one person who has been silenced twice already. A droplist to search and select users would also be nice, but manually entering the name works. The plugin does the job.
As we say in the Buddhist world
Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu. Great job!
We are also grateful for the Discourse Team for FOSS and revealing how to self host for us smaller groups which also allows us to add plugins.
I don’t know if anything has changed recently but the way the plugin and then-current versions of Discourse worked the last time it was triggered on our forum, the flagged posts would be held in the moderation queue and only visible to staff/admins.
As far as I’m aware, I haven’t changed any Discourse settings to make that happen.
Perhaps you can test.
However, from what I could see, our “friend” was still showing up after he was “flagged”.
I could see in a private browser so that my god-status was not revealed to discourse.
I looked into this in settings and it seems that default for hiding posts is “Medium”
I then changed this to High which probably hides on the first flag.
It seems that “moderation” is technically called a “flagged”, but could be wrong. I’m new to all of this.
