<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Exchange 2010: Moderation and Nested Bypass	</title>
	<atom:link href="/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/</link>
	<description>David Szpunar: Owner, Servant 42 and Servant Voice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2012 21:17:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: David Szpunar		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-17789</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Szpunar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2012 21:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-17789</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Rich, it would be set on the parent I believe, though it&#039;s been a while since I&#039;ve looked at this...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rich, it would be set on the parent I believe, though it&#8217;s been a while since I&#8217;ve looked at this&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Rich		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-17788</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rich]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-17788</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[So this needs to be set on the parent or the child?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So this needs to be set on the parent or the child?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Szpunar		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15588</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Szpunar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 19:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-15588</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15584&quot;&gt;Paul Borgen&lt;/a&gt;.

I run an Exchange server with a similar employee count. I find it to be cost-effective, especially since we can get charity pricing on Exchange from Microsoft. If you have a virtualized environment, your actual hardware costs for running Exchange are much lower (or at least, are spread out across multiple servers). However, there are a lot of churches looking at using Google Apps as an alternative since it&#039;s free for non-profits. There are certainly arguments for both. We&#039;ve been running Exchange since long before Google Apps was an option.

You may find some useful information at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://citrt.pbworks.com/Google-Apps-Pros-Cons-Other&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Church IT Roundtable Google Apps vs. Exchange discussion page&lt;/a&gt;. Another option is to use Google Apps in &quot;dual delivery&quot; mode so email goes both to Exchange and Google Apps; this can be used as a backup if your Exchange server is down (although depending on the setup, incoming email won&#039;t work while Exchange is down since it&#039;s pointed at your Exchange server), or you can have some users on Exchange and some using Google Apps. This of course requires you to license and set up/maintain Exchange as well so it&#039;s not as much of a cost saver as it is a backup (business continuity/disaster recovery) strategy or nice setup for people who like the Gmail interface more than they like Exchange.

What are you using for email now? Once you get past the learning curve of Exchange 2010 (or 2007) or you have someone set it up for you, it really doesn&#039;t require that much maintenance, especially if you put an antispam/antivirus filtering company (MXlogic, Postini, ExchangeDefender or Reflexion are all good examples) in front of them (note that I sell ExchangeDefender on the side and it can provide a web interface to your email when your server is down much like Google Apps can, in addition to the spam filtering--I like it a lot).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15584">Paul Borgen</a>.</p>
<p>I run an Exchange server with a similar employee count. I find it to be cost-effective, especially since we can get charity pricing on Exchange from Microsoft. If you have a virtualized environment, your actual hardware costs for running Exchange are much lower (or at least, are spread out across multiple servers). However, there are a lot of churches looking at using Google Apps as an alternative since it&#8217;s free for non-profits. There are certainly arguments for both. We&#8217;ve been running Exchange since long before Google Apps was an option.</p>
<p>You may find some useful information at the <a href="http://citrt.pbworks.com/Google-Apps-Pros-Cons-Other" rel="nofollow">Church IT Roundtable Google Apps vs. Exchange discussion page</a>. Another option is to use Google Apps in &#8220;dual delivery&#8221; mode so email goes both to Exchange and Google Apps; this can be used as a backup if your Exchange server is down (although depending on the setup, incoming email won&#8217;t work while Exchange is down since it&#8217;s pointed at your Exchange server), or you can have some users on Exchange and some using Google Apps. This of course requires you to license and set up/maintain Exchange as well so it&#8217;s not as much of a cost saver as it is a backup (business continuity/disaster recovery) strategy or nice setup for people who like the Gmail interface more than they like Exchange.</p>
<p>What are you using for email now? Once you get past the learning curve of Exchange 2010 (or 2007) or you have someone set it up for you, it really doesn&#8217;t require that much maintenance, especially if you put an antispam/antivirus filtering company (MXlogic, Postini, ExchangeDefender or Reflexion are all good examples) in front of them (note that I sell ExchangeDefender on the side and it can provide a web interface to your email when your server is down much like Google Apps can, in addition to the spam filtering&#8211;I like it a lot).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Paul Borgen		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15584</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Borgen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:49:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-15584</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I support a company with 30-40 employees some off site and some on site. Just wondering if I should setup an exchange server?

I am just having trouble seeing the benefits and how it can make some of my administration tasks easier or non-existent.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I support a company with 30-40 employees some off site and some on site. Just wondering if I should setup an exchange server?</p>
<p>I am just having trouble seeing the benefits and how it can make some of my administration tasks easier or non-existent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Szpunar		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15581</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Szpunar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:23:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-15581</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the comment E.J., I see the original article has been updated already! Thanks for being proactive and for taking the time to let me know. I&#039;m enjoying the Moderation feature immensely! The only issue I&#039;ve run into seems to be that as a Domain Admin/Exchange Admin, even if I remove myself as the list Manager and Moderator of an all-staff group we have, it&#039;s not holding my emails for approval. Not sure what else to do but it&#039;s not terribly hard to work around--and it works for everyone else at least :-)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comment E.J., I see the original article has been updated already! Thanks for being proactive and for taking the time to let me know. I&#8217;m enjoying the Moderation feature immensely! The only issue I&#8217;ve run into seems to be that as a Domain Admin/Exchange Admin, even if I remove myself as the list Manager and Moderator of an all-staff group we have, it&#8217;s not holding my emails for approval. Not sure what else to do but it&#8217;s not terribly hard to work around&#8211;and it works for everyone else at least :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: E.J. Dyksen		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15577</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[E.J. Dyksen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-15577</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi David,

I&#039;m the Program Manager in Exchange for the moderation feature (among others), and the author of the blog post cited.

Thanks for the heads up on the typos and confusion. As you know, PowerShell parameters tend to be verbose, and we wrestled with the best name for this one. We did have a couple of names for this before settling on BypassNestedModerationEnabled, and docs/blog post seem to reflect that churn.

I&#039;ll make sure the original post is updated for accuracy, as well as the docs.

Thanks for the great post about this piece of moderation!

--ej]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi David,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m the Program Manager in Exchange for the moderation feature (among others), and the author of the blog post cited.</p>
<p>Thanks for the heads up on the typos and confusion. As you know, PowerShell parameters tend to be verbose, and we wrestled with the best name for this one. We did have a couple of names for this before settling on BypassNestedModerationEnabled, and docs/blog post seem to reflect that churn.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll make sure the original post is updated for accuracy, as well as the docs.</p>
<p>Thanks for the great post about this piece of moderation!</p>
<p>&#8211;ej</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Nill Smith		</title>
		<link>/2009/11/11/exchange-2010-moderation-nested-bypass/comment-page-1/#comment-15575</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nill Smith]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:14:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infotech.davidszpunar.com/?p=425#comment-15575</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Everyone,

G&#039;day!

Good to know is GeoTrust SSL certificates are compatible with Exchange server 2010. You can read more about GeoTrust SSL certificates at ClickSSL.com

GeopTrust ClikSSL Discount Coupon Code: CSGQ149]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Everyone,</p>
<p>G&#8217;day!</p>
<p>Good to know is GeoTrust <span class="ubernym uttInitialism" onmouseover="domTT_activate(this, event, 'content', 'Encryption method used to secure network traffic, often HTTP but many other protocols as well','caption', 'Secure Sockets Layer' );"><acronym class="uttInitialism">SSL</acronym></span> certificates are compatible with Exchange server 2010. You can read more about GeoTrust <span class="ubernym uttInitialism" onmouseover="domTT_activate(this, event, 'content', 'Encryption method used to secure network traffic, often HTTP but many other protocols as well','caption', 'Secure Sockets Layer' );"><acronym class="uttInitialism">SSL</acronym></span> certificates at ClickSSL.com</p>
<p>GeopTrust ClikSSL Discount Coupon Code: CSGQ149</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
