On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Pete Weiss wrote:

>
>We do too, but also NOPOST.  I.e., when we "suspend" distributions for
>offenders e.g., OOOers, we set both since this allows us to: prevent
>useless messages from said subscriber back to the list "why aren't I
>receiving" (they get a automated LISTSERV(R) nastygram to which they will
>typically mailto:OWNER-listname@listhost); also allows us to later
>interrogate subscription options and realize that we (the list-owners)
>had set NOMAIL/NOPOST for a previous e-mail "problem"  (I sometimes call
>this a "message under a rock").
>
>YMMV
>
>/Pete
>

I also do automatically set to NOMAIL, but mine is implemented as a list
exit. It does content filtering, header scanning (for braindead mailers
that spit a posting back to the list), and scans for "banned" subjects. I
also have it scan for excessive quoting and send the user a nastygram
and/or reject the posting. Its a C program along with a Unix shell script.
I wrote this pre-1.8e.

Darren