One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have the
number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is having
this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is below:
-----Original Message-----
From: arne jerx <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, September 16, 1998 1:56 PM
Subject: problems with tarot list
>I have a question regarding the Tarot list - I get mails with 2 headers in
>it, and it says that there is a number of mails - but that number never is
>the actual number I get. I have after this pasted an example to show what I
>am talking about - I just did cut and paste it all directly into this mail
>- so this is how it is looking.
>Yours
>arne jerx
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 00:00:22 +0200
>Reply-To: The Tarot Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: The Tarot Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Automatic digest processor <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: TAROT-L Digest - 14 Sep 1998 to 15 Sep 1998 (#1998-210)
>To: Recipients of TAROT-L digests <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 00:00:22 +0200
>Reply-To: The Tarot Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: The Tarot Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Automatic digest processor <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: TAROT-L Digest - 14 Sep 1998 to 15 Sep 1998 (#1998-210)
>To: Recipients of TAROT-L digests <[log in to unmask]>
>
>There are 31 messages totalling 1371 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
> 1. If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . . (2)
> 2. TAROT and the MILLENNIUM--review
> 3. Fw: Re: If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . .
> 4. Help with Spreads?
> 5. Crystals and cleansing....
> 6. Apology
> 7. Crystals & Cleansing decks
> 8. terminology (2)
> 9. POMO (3)
> 10. Jamie Shea's take on "If You Were A Tarot Deck" (2)
> 11. Response to George - NOT Phil's original thread (5)
> 12. If I were a tarot deck continued-Jamie's posting of a private exchange
> 13. Generalities (4)
> 14. 8 and 11
> 15. high priestess
> 16. Everybody play nice...
> 17. Those 2 Extra Cards and Storage
> 18. If I were a tarot deck
> 19. Cleansing Rituals
>Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 20:02:47 EDT
>From: Phil Naunton <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . .
>
>Have a nice day
>arne
>***************************************************************
>arne jerx
>mailto:[log in to unmask]
>ICQ:4329145 - IRC: danbear/axbear
>http://home3.inet.tele.dk/arnejerx/
>at my job as webmaster at Tornved Bibliotek/Library
>http://www.tornvedbib.dk - mailto:[log in to unmask]
>***************************************************************
>
Michele's Tarot Page
http://www.erols.com/jacksn
-----Original Message-----
From: Automatic digest processor <[log in to unmask]>
To: Recipients of LSTOWN-L digests <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, September 14, 1998 6:27 PM
Subject: LSTOWN-L Digest - 13 Sep 1998 to 14 Sep 1998 (#1998-228)
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 02:19:36 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Stan Ryckman <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Chocolate chips
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 09:53 PM 9/16/98 -0400, Stanley Horwitz wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Jill D. Horton wrote:
>>
>> Webtv does not support cookies!
>>
>> There is no hard drive on our systems!
>
>FYI: I believe that the new generation of the WebTV has a built in
>hard drive so it presumably will support cookies.
Now that I think of it, it should not require a hard drive to
support cookies for the duration of a *session* (which was where
the problem lay). UNIX-based lynx, in fact, does just that--
it remembers cookies in memory, then loses them when you exit
(at least that's the default).
(As someone pointed out earlier, it's probably "floating proxies" that
are the problem.)
Cheers,
Stan
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 07:57:02 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Steve Howie <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD) wrote:
> People,
>
> I've just spotted a user exhibiting very suspicious tendencies: He has
> subscribed, reviewed and unsubscribed most of our public lists within
> a twenty minute period at approximately 8AM GMT. I have written a brief
> note to him asking of his intent, but if (as I suspect) he is trolling
> for email addresses then I doubt I'll get much out of him. You may
> want to watch out for this address:
>
> [log in to unmask] Valaki Valami
>
Even more justification to make your public lists Review= Owner, and
Subscription= Open, confirm
Scotty
--
Steve Howie [log in to unmask]
Netnews and Listserv Admin 519 824-4120 x2556
University of Guelph
"If it's not Scottish it's CRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPP!"
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:19:25 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 2:11 -0400 9/17/98, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD) said:
>People,
>
>I've just spotted a user exhibiting very suspicious tendencies: He has
>subscribed, reviewed and unsubscribed most of our public lists within
>a twenty minute period at approximately 8AM GMT. I have written a brief
>note to him asking of his intent, but if (as I suspect) he is trolling
>for email addresses then I doubt I'll get much out of him.
IMO, there is very RARELY the need for anyone other than the list owner
to ever be able to access the subscriber list. In other words, it is an
egregious error on the part of the list owner to leave the subscriber
list "in the open" -- even if it's available only to subscribers. If
this is the case, then you can prevent further trawling (slightly
different from trolling ;-) by setting:
* Review= owner
HTH.
- Vince
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 07:29:02 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "J. Lyle" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The number of messages in a digest
In-Reply-To: <02ee01bde201$8d86ac60$0ef9accf@michele>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Michele Jackson wrote:
> One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have the
> number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is having
> this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is below:
>
> >There are 31 messages totalling 1371 lines in this issue.
> >
> >Topics of the day:
> >
> > 1. If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . . (2)
> > 2. TAROT and the MILLENNIUM--review
> > 3. Fw: Re: If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . .
> > 4. Help with Spreads?
> > 5. Crystals and cleansing....
> > 6. Apology
> > 7. Crystals & Cleansing decks
> > 8. terminology (2)
> > 9. POMO (3)
> > 10. Jamie Shea's take on "If You Were A Tarot Deck" (2)
> > 11. Response to George - NOT Phil's original thread (5)
> > 12. If I were a tarot deck continued-Jamie's posting of a private exchange
> > 13. Generalities (4)
> > 14. 8 and 11
> > 15. high priestess
> > 16. Everybody play nice...
> > 17. Those 2 Extra Cards and Storage
> > 18. If I were a tarot deck
> > 19. Cleansing Rituals
Have you explained to your subscriber that 19 here is the number of
*topics*, not the total number of posts? If there is more than one post on
a topic, there will be more total posts than total topics. The heading
"Topics of the Day" indicates only the different subject lines represented
in this digest, not the total number of posts on those 19 topics.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 05:46:34 PDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jim Lewis <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
Content-Type: text/plain
>
> I know the manual for 1.8c discussed gatewaying a list to a
newsgroup, but
>recall a posting indicating that a public gateway (was it American
>University?) was discontinuing its public availability. So, I shelved
my
>idea of gatewaying my lists.
So . . . MY list used to have a newsgroup gatewayed through American
University. Some time ago, the link "broke." Now, newsgroup posts go
sporadically to our list, but the list cannot respond to the news group.
Repeated requests to AU to either fix the link or completely sever the
gateway have not been responded to.
I "inherited" the list, so had nothing to do with setting up the link
and do not know how it was done (and the manual doesn't seem to give
many details -- altho I may have missed it).
Does ANYone have a suggestion of something I could do on my end to cut
the link?
[log in to unmask] -- Tallahassee, FL
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:14:55 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|Does ANYone have a suggestion of something I could do on my end to cut
|the link?
Assuming that your list is NOT * SEND= PUBLIC, the first thing to do
would be to:
DEL listname NETNEWS@*AMERICAN.EDU
This should stop:
1) your list from sending the NETNEWS gateway any messages
2) the newsgroup from actually distributing any messages to the list
No doubt you will aggravate a number of USENET posters
BIT.LISTSERV.listname since it will NOT be clear to them that there are
now two independent entities and never the 'twain will meet.
YMMV -- kids, don't try this at home without adult supervision.
--
mailto:[log in to unmask] Tel: +1 814 863 1843
31 Shields Bldg; University Park, PA 16802-1202 USA
Powered by: LISTSERV, Eudora, Netscape, mIRC, FreeAgent
http://www.psu.edu/Year2000/
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:19:12 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.95.980917075510.3406C-100000@ccshst03>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|Even more justification to make your public lists Review= Owner, and
|Subscription= Open, confirm
Also either:
* SEND= PRIVATE
or
* SEND= EDITOR
* EDITOR= your_real_RFC822_addr,(listname)
e.g., if it were my list
* EDITOR= [log in to unmask],(ERAPPA-L)
This (kind of EDITORship) requires a little more work on the owner's part
since mutations of the original subscribe address (unless aliased with
the 1.8d beta feature) will generate a diagnostic message.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:40:56 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephens, Larry V" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: LSTOWN-L Digest - 13 Sep 1998 to 14 Sep 1998 (#1998-228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have the
> number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is having
> this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is below:
>
>
[snip]
FWIW:
I get a lot of these same complaints. I *think* it is a problem with
their email program not being fully MIME compliant.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 10:02:35 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Judith Hopkins <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
Comments: To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Like Jim Lewis I had a list that was gatewayed to a newsgroup via American
University. After our messages asking for a fix were ignored we too asked
that the link be severed and again were ignored. So we removed the
subscription we had for the American University gateway. That prevents
anything posted on the newsgroup from being forwarded to the list but it
doesn't remove the newsgroup which still exists. I monitor it and find
that it rarely receives anything; when it does the message falls into one
of two categories: spam and messages mistakenly addressed that were
intended for the AutocaD list (we are are AutocaT)
At this point I really would not recommend anyone gatewaying a list to a
newsgroup, at least not via American University, and that was the only
gateway I knew of. The reason we felt the tie had to be cut was the
increasingly unreliable service. Although the gateway was supposed to
be bi-directional and had worked well in the beginning when Jim Macintosh
was running it, after he left many messages posted to the list never
turned up on the newsgroup, while messages posted to the newgroup didn't
get to the list. The newsgroup began to have an increasingly higher
proportion of spam to real messages. All in all I felt that those
interested in library cataloging (the focus of my list) who depended on
the newsgroup for their information were being cheated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judith Hopkins, Listowner of Autocat
[log in to unmask]
My home page: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh
AUTOCAT home page:
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/autocat/
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Jim Lewis wrote:
>
> So . . . MY list used to have a newsgroup gatewayed through American
> University. Some time ago, the link "broke." Now, newsgroup posts go
> sporadically to our list, but the list cannot respond to the news group.
> Repeated requests to AU to either fix the link or completely sever the
> gateway have not been responded to.
>
> Does ANYone have a suggestion of something I could do on my end to cut
> the link?
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 10:32:03 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Margaret King <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 09:14 AM 9/17/98 -0400, you wrote:
>DEL listname NETNEWS@*AMERICAN.EDU
>
>This should stop:
>
>1) your list from sending the NETNEWS gateway any messages
>
>2) the newsgroup from actually distributing any messages to the list
Are you sure about (2)? Seems like the postings show up as being
from the individual poster, not from American.... (I actually
don't know for sure because the list where we have had the most
concern with this is Send=Public.... But they sure -look- like
they're from the individual posters!)
One approach being tried around here is the above step -plus-
change the address of the list, tell subscribers they MUST use the
new address, and then we send anything with the old address to
a bit bucket. In our case that is not as drastic as it sounds since
we were moving to a new system anyway. :-) Otherwise, to change
the address I guess we'd have had to change the name of the list.
We also set up a gateway to the new address with Newsguy.
Margaret King ([log in to unmask])
Michigan State University
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 11:37:56 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Andrew Morrow <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: LSTOWN-L Digest - 13 Sep 1998 to 14 Sep 1998 (#1998-228)
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Stephens, Larry V wrote:
> > One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have the
> > number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is having
> > this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is below:
> I get a lot of these same complaints. I *think* it is a problem with
> their email program not being fully MIME compliant.
Actually, the problem may be that their e-mail program *IS* fully MIME
compliant. There is a known problem in LISTSERV that did not protect a
line of 32 dashes from being mis-interpreted as a digest terminator. It
was fixed a couple of months ago but I don't know how the fix is
distributed.
Andrew.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Morrow home:[log in to unmask] office:[log in to unmask]
Member of the Pegasus Mail Support Group
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:23:09 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: John Roraback PhD <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Variations on quick command addreses?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 98-09-16 16:10:33 EDT, [log in to unmask] writes:
> Another excerpt from the forthcoming 1.8d Release Notes:
>
> ***********************************************************
> * Support for listname-subscribe-request, etc., mailboxes *
> ***********************************************************
>
> Version 1.8d now supports the following generic -request mailboxes for
lists:
>
> listname-subscribe-request@...
> listname-signoff-request@...
> listname-unsubscribe-request@...
>
> (where "listname" is the name of the list in question). Mail sent to these
> addresses will be interpreted as explicit SUBSCRIBE, SIGNOFF, or
UNSUBSCRIBE
> commands, respectively, for the list in question, regardless of the text
> contained in the body of the mail message (which will simply be discarded).
Given the poor spelling skills, or propensity to make typographical errors, of
the seemingly many people who try to use the unsupported "susribe, subsrive,
subsribe or subsribe" commands ( and their "un" variations), may I suggest
that the following generic -request mailboxes be added to the above?
listname-sub-request@...
listname-unsub-request@...
listname-join-request@...
listname-leave-request@...
These are a little harder, though not much, to screw up.
And if the task is something that would be easy to accomplish while adding
these, perhaps adding other commands/addresses -- such as the ones below --
might be useful, though these would certainly not be as high on my priority
list; e.g:
listname-nomail-request@...
listname-mail-request@...
listname-index-request@...
listname-digest-request@...
listname-query-request@...
Thanks,
John Roraback
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:53:57 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 13:23 9/17/98 EDT, John Roraback PhD said:
|In a message dated 98-09-16 16:10:33 EDT, [log in to unmask] writes:
|
|> Another excerpt from the forthcoming 1.8d Release Notes:
|>
|> ***********************************************************
|> * Support for listname-subscribe-request, etc., mailboxes *
|> ***********************************************************
|>
|> Version 1.8d now supports the following generic -request mailboxes for
|lists:
|>
|> listname-subscribe-request@...
|> listname-signoff-request@...
|> listname-unsubscribe-request@...
|>
|> (where "listname" is the name of the list in question). Mail sent to these
|> addresses will be interpreted as explicit SUBSCRIBE, SIGNOFF, or
|UNSUBSCRIBE
|> commands, respectively, for the list in question, regardless of the text
|> contained in the body of the mail message (which will simply be
discarded).
|
|
|Given the poor spelling skills, or propensity to make typographical
errors, of
Most of these constructs are probably going to be used by
point-and-shoot(myself-in-foot) types. The actual spelling won't matter.
Hopefully the instructions surrounding the clickable area will be sufficient.
As it is, many modern day mail programs support clickable email
constructs (even though they might not be formally adopted) e.g.,
mailto:[log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 11:57:47 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: MIKEHOLLOWAY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
Comments: cc: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
A search of the archives on this subject might not give the correct answers
since my posts from this July relating my experiences with switching
gateways from American University to Newsguy don't seem to be in the
archives. I had my doubts at the time that the posts were being
distributed as well since I received error messages from LSOFT.COM that the
message had to be reposted.
Since Jim MacIntosh left American University there has been a very slowly
evolving admission from the news and system admins there that American
University is slowly getting rid of the gatewaying service. They will, in
fact, process your requests, but only after weeks of no response. The
person I've sort of corresponded with is Peter M. O'Donnell
<[log in to unmask]> who seems to be in charge of the news systems.
Messages to the department head, [log in to unmask], will be responded to
quickly, but only with the information that it has been forwarded to
Herschel Browne <[log in to unmask]>, systems admin, where it will either
be forwarded to Peter O'Donnell, or it will fall into a black hole. It's
hard to tell which because each step will encountered weeks of no response.
Most likely, this is all by design.
However, last month AU finally severed all ties, and the gateway set up for
us by Mike D'Alessandro <[log in to unmask]> at Newsguy has been working
flawlessly for several months now. Before AU finally got around to
removing our newsgroup I just had to deal with duplicates being sent to me
for approval. If posting to your list is subscriber only then newsgroup
posts will be sent to you for approval, unless the poster's address is
subscribed. The only problem still remaining is the transfer of admin
authority for the bit.listserv.* newsgroups. AU indicated last month that
they wanted to watch for awhile to be sure that things were working right
at Newsguy before transferring authority changing, or terminating
newsgroups. I don't know what would happen if you tried to create a
newsgroup in that hierarchy without AU.
Mike Holloway
[log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 14:47:15 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:23:09 EDT from <[log in to unmask]>
I don't think we have much choice. If I'm not mistaken this is per a
standard, but I can't remember at this late date for sure.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 14:58:09 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Subject: Re: Gateway to Newsgroups
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I've gotten no response, even from Peter O'Donnell. I have resorted to
blocking SMTP from their server to my listserv machine as of today.
I think that will get someone's attention :-)
Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:40:19 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Paul Karagianis <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
...and then there's the all-purpose listname-dwimnwis-request@... ;-)
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:50:33 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>In a message dated 98-09-16 16:10:33 EDT, [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>> Another excerpt from the forthcoming 1.8d Release Notes:
>>
>> ***********************************************************
>> * Support for listname-subscribe-request, etc., mailboxes *
>> ***********************************************************
>>
>> Version 1.8d now supports the following generic -request mailboxes for
>lists:
>>
>> listname-subscribe-request@...
>> listname-signoff-request@...
>> listname-unsubscribe-request@...
>>
>> (where "listname" is the name of the list in question). Mail sent to these
>> addresses will be interpreted as explicit SUBSCRIBE, SIGNOFF, or
>UNSUBSCRIBE
>> commands, respectively, for the list in question, regardless of the text
>> contained in the body of the mail message (which will simply be discarded).
>
>
>Given the poor spelling skills, or propensity to make typographical errors, of
>the seemingly many people who try to use the unsupported "susribe, subsrive,
>subsribe or subsribe" commands ( and their "un" variations), may I suggest
>that the following generic -request mailboxes be added to the above?
>
> listname-sub-request@...
> listname-unsub-request@...
> listname-join-request@...
> listname-leave-request@...
>
>These are a little harder, though not much, to screw up.
If your site administrators think this is desirable, they can create their
own mailing aliases locally that forward to the full addresses.
Probably the best use for them would be in the header or footer or in the
welcoming message, where you could do something like:
To leave the mailing list, send a blank message to <a
href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">
[log in to unmask]</a>.
I think most of the big mail clients would allow you to just double-click
on the mailto address, getting around the typo problem.
-jwgh
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 15:56:34 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Randy Porter <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Restricting who can see the list header
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail addresses
when someone does a review of the list. The review is already set to
owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list owners
addresses still appear in the header.
Any info on this would be helpful.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:22:59 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Editing Posts
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
My forums are all "edited," in the Listserv sense (meaning I must approve
postings before they are sent to the list). I realize that under 1.8c it
was possible to edit postings and send them on to the list as though they
originated from the original person who posted. However, it required an
email client which support "resent" (or was it "redirect"?) headers. None
of the major email clients (Netscape, Explorer, Eudora) supports this
requirement, I've been told. It's just not practical to edit a posting and
then simply forward it to the list, since it then appears to be coming from
me and not the original person who posted. Thus, for all pratical reasons,
Listserv 1.8c simply did not support editing of postings.
The ability to use Eudora or any of the major email clients would be of
tremendous utility to me -- and to my co-moderators on my various lists.
Does 1.8d provide a practical means to accomplish the editing of postings?
Will it?
Stephen C. Nill, J.D.
CharityChannel, the Internet Discussion Forums
of American Philanthropy Review
[log in to unmask]
http://CharityChannel.com/
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:18:15 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Bustamante, Susana" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Randy,
The following is the response I obtained from Nathan Brindle (from LSoft
support) regarding the question that you have. I hope it helps.
Susana R. Bustamante
University of Miami
Department of Information Technology
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: (305)284-3915
>With the keyword REVIEW=Owners, the subscribers can send a "REVIEW
>listname" command and get ONLY the header file information. Is there
>anyway to set up LISTSERV so that even subscribers can not see the
>header file information when they send the REVIEW command?
You can set something like
* Confidential= Service
in the list header, but note that this removes the list from the
CataList
(not necessarily a good thing for a public list). Alternately you can
hide all but the title line of the header by using the new .HH ON and
.HH OFF formatting directives (requires 1.8d beta), so that it doesn't
really matter if they can review the header to start with. With the
formatting options you'd do something like
* Title of my list
* .HH ON
* Owner= [log in to unmask]
* (more header lines you don't want people to see)
* .HH OFF
*
* My list is devoted to blah blah blah.
In this case only the title line and the descriptive comments are
visible
on a REVIEW or via CataList. The REVIEWer would see something like
this:
* Title of my list
* {4 lines hidden}
*
* My list is devoted to blah blah blah.
Nathan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Porter [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 1998 4:57 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Restricting who can see the list header
>
> I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail
> addresses
> when someone does a review of the list. The review is already
> set to
> owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list
> owners
> addresses still appear in the header.
>
> Any info on this would be helpful.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 14:34:33 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dan Lester <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 03:56 PM 9/17/98 -0500, you wrote:
> I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail addresses
> when someone does a review of the list. The review is already set to
> owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list owners
> addresses still appear in the header.
Personally, I don't think it SHOULD be possible to do this. A listowner
should always be available for contact to handle problems of various sorts.
I'm frequently contacted by members who have had their email addresses
changed (frequently without advance warning, and/or without their knowledge
at all) who need to be renewed, set to no mail, etc, etc.
If you're worried about spam or harrassment, use an account that you use
ONLY for list management instead of giving your "regular" email address.
cheers
dan
--
Dan Lester, 3577 East Pecan, Boise, ID 83716-7115 USA 208-383-0165
[log in to unmask] http://www.84.com/ http://www.idaholibraries.org/
http://library.idbsu.edu/ http://cyclops.idbsu.edu/ http://www.lili.org/
Sent me a postcard of a library yet? You'll get something nice in return.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:51:05 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
1.8d beta
.HH ON
* headers to be hidden
.HH OFF
HH -- means Hide Headers
At 15:56 9/17/98 -0500, Randy Porter said:
| I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail addresses
| when someone does a review of the list. The review is already set to
| owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list owners
| addresses still appear in the header.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:58:03 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:18:15 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
Just remember that .HH is only available under the 1.8d beta. Anything
earlier, it won't work.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 15:32:16 -0700
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Liz Marr <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Computing Connection
Subject: Re: LSTOWN-L Digest - 13 Sep 1998 to 14 Sep 1998 (#1998-228)
On 17 Sep 98, at 11:37, Andrew Morrow wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Stephens, Larry V wrote:
>
> > > One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have the
> > > number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is having
> > > this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is below:
>
> > I get a lot of these same complaints. I *think* it is a problem with
> > their email program not being fully MIME compliant.
>
> Actually, the problem may be that their e-mail program *IS* fully MIME
> compliant. There is a known problem in LISTSERV that did not protect a
> line of 32 dashes from being mis-interpreted as a digest terminator. It
> was fixed a couple of months ago but I don't know how the fix is
> distributed.
There has also been problems with some email that if a message is in a
digest the is formatted for HTML, the digest WILL NOT SHOW any mail past
the end of the message that has the HTML end tag. If it is saved to disk and
read using a text editor or word processor, the whole digest will be there. In
this case, the poster that is using "rich text" (which becomes HTML in some
readers) needs to be educated not to use that feature.
Liz Marr
--
mailto:[log in to unmask] KA7MYM
http://cc-ent.com ICQ 4014832
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Liz & the Terv herd - somewhere on the southern Oregon coast!
Working Labradors, Siberians, Tervuren
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day
of salvation. 2 Corinthians 6:2b
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 15:36:25 -0700
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Liz Marr <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Computing Connection
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
On 17 Sep 98, at 16:51, Pete Weiss wrote:
> 1.8d beta
>
> .HH ON
> * headers to be hidden
> .HH OFF
>
> HH -- means Hide Headers
I have this setting on all of my lists. We block anything that contains
addresses - the owners, quiet owners, and filters. It has dramatically
reduced the amount of spam mail received by myself and my co-owners.
Don't forget to use the .HH OFF before any HTML code that you have for
CATALIST to read.
Liz Marr
--
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^
SAR-Dogs Discussion List
[log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 09:13:54 +1000
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Paul Wayper (DPI ISD)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.95.980917075510.3406C-100000@ccshst03> from "Steve
Howie" at Sep 17, 98 07:57:02 am
Content-Type: text
> Even more justification to make your public lists Review= Owner, and
> Subscription= Open, confirm
Not very surprisingly at all, a large number of these lists _are_ set
Subscription= Open,Confirm. This didn't stop whoever it is - they were
sending in the correct confirmation messages as well.
As for Review= Owner, I'm having this debate out on my own list-owner's
list. I don't like the idea, as it stops friendly people trying to
find out who's on the list (and it stops you trying to find out what
address you're using to subscribe to the list. That can be a problem
if you use the web address, as many of our people do).
Thanks anyway,
Paul
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 20:09:19 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dan Lester <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
Comments: To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 01:22 PM 9/17/98 -0700, Stephen C. Nill wrote:
> My forums are all "edited," in the Listserv sense (meaning I must
>approve
>postings before they are sent to the list). I realize that under 1.8c it
>was possible to edit postings and send them on to the list as though they
>originated from the original person who posted. However, it required an
>email client which support "resent" (or was it "redirect"?) headers. None
>of the major email clients (Netscape, Explorer, Eudora) supports this
>requirement, I've been told. It's just not practical to edit a posting and
I just redirected this very message to Mr. Hill with Eudora's "redirect",
which appears to do what he wants.
>then simply forward it to the list, since it then appears to be coming from
>me and not the original person who posted. Thus, for all pratical reasons,
>Listserv 1.8c simply did not support editing of postings.
The Eudora redirect showed:
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]> (by way of Dan
Lester <[log in to unmask]>)
doesn't that do what you need?
> The ability to use Eudora or any of the major email clients would
be of
>tremendous utility to me -- and to my co-moderators on my various lists.
>Does 1.8d provide a practical means to accomplish the editing of postings?
>Will it?
If this doesn't do it, what will?
dan
--
Dan Lester, 3577 East Pecan, Boise, ID 83716-7115 USA 208-383-0165
[log in to unmask] http://www.84.com/ http://www.idaholibraries.org/
http://library.idbsu.edu/ http://cyclops.idbsu.edu/ http://www.lili.org/
Sent me a postcard of a library yet? You'll get something nice in return.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:22:14 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Review=Owner (was: Possible spammer)
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 19:13 -0400 9/17/98, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD) said:
>As for Review= Owner, I'm having this debate out on my own list-owner's
>list. I don't like the idea, as it stops friendly people trying to
>find out who's on the list (and it stops you trying to find out what
>address you're using to subscribe to the list. That can be a problem
>if you use the web address, as many of our people do).
Nope, I disagree -- it doesn't stop a friendly person from getting
that information. It merely slows the process a little, and keeps him
from accessing information that he -- friendly or otherwise -- doesn't
need to see.
The answer is that he needs to contact the list owner, and let the
owner track down the info and get back to him. Yes, it's a little more
work for list owners, but this is part and parcel of responsible list
ownership.
As someone who has all twelve of his mailing lists set to review=owner,
I can also vouch for the fact that legitimate user inquiries are VERY
rare -- requiring very little extra effort on the part of the list
owner, but providing, in return, a MUCH more secure list environment.
I have yet to hear a justification for permitting anyone other than
the list owner to access subscription lists in non-closed environments.
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 21:22:46 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Ben Parker <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:22:59 -0700, "Stephen C. Nill"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Thus, for all pratical reasons,
>Listserv 1.8c simply did not support editing of postings.
No. The mail clients you cited do not support Resent-xxx: headers that are
documented in RFC822. LISTSERV complies with the RFC, those mail clients do
not. PC-Pine and Pegasus do support this, but ONLY if you do not edit or
change the message, not even to 'touch-up' a subject line. The fundamental
problem is RFC822 requires the From: to reflect the originator of the message.
However, if you edit the message it is no longer that person's message, it is
now yours because you have changed it, however little. This leads to a
contradiction. Resent-xxx only works if you don't change the message and the
From: remains intact. If you edit it, these programs (Pine and Pegasus) won't
let you use Resent-xxx because they insist the From: must be changed to
reflect the new authorship. Even if you could 'spoof' the From: address, and
resend it to the List, it will still come back to you for approval because the
Resent-xxx lines are absent. If you then use the 'bounce/resend' feature it
will work. the 2nd time around but this can get tedious for any volume of
work.
The resent-xxx headers were a feature of several mainframe text editor/mail
programs and this is LISTSERV's heritage. Nowadays we suggest you use Send=
Editor,Hold and simply approve/not approve messages and send it back to the
author for changes. Or get a mail program that lets you create your own
headers... (I don't know of one).
So, these mail clients support this
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 23:01:36 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Roger Fajman <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: changed names
> It's my experience that it's not always -- or even mostly -- that
> ISPs have changed the names, but that users change mail programs (for
> instance, start using Netscape Mail) and inadvertently change the
> return address when they configure it. And I don't see how the
> ALIASES NAMES list will help with this, since, I assume, you have to
> know the address has been changed and add it to the list manually.
> What usually happens on my lists is that someone suddenly discovers
> she's unable to post (or, more likely, unable to unsubscribe) from
> the invisibly altered address.
>
> -- Russ
What I am looking for will not help that situation. But we have a
database of equivalent email addresses for our own users that we could
make available to our LISTSERV. Yes, it would only help our own users
on our own LISTSERV, but that's important to us. The majority of the
lists on our LISTSERV are internal to our organization.
I think there are a lot of organizations that have such data bases.
Anybody with a mail forwarder such as CCSO/ph has one. Such a
forwarder sends mail addressed to some-name@domain to
[log in to unmask] There are over 300 CCSO/ph servers on
the Internet.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:35:59 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "J. Lyle" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Ben Parker wrote:
> No. The mail clients you cited do not support Resent-xxx: headers that
> are documented in RFC822. LISTSERV complies with the RFC, those mail
> clients do not. PC-Pine and Pegasus do support this, but ONLY if you do
> not edit or change the message, not even to 'touch-up' a subject line.
That's interesting. I use Pine, and I cannot properly redirect mail to my
Listserv list. I can redirect it anywhere else, and I could redirect it to
the same list when it ran on Listproc. But when I redirect it (unchanged,
just a simple redirect) to my Listserv list, it appears to have come
directly from me. In the archives, more headers are revealed, and there it
shows that I am not the original sender--but I am still in the "from"
line, so those posts are archived under my name.
Does anyone have any advice on things I could try? I sent a request for
help to the university list administrators, but with the new school year
under way, they are swamped with much more important problems. I do find
this extremely frustrating, however, because there is an active
contributor to my list who, because of some strange problems on his end,
is unable to post to the list. Thus he sends his posts to either me or my
co-owner to be redirected. My co-owner, who uses Eudora, can redirect them
just fine. But when I do it, my address appears in the "from" line.
Thanks for any help.
Jane
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 21:02:06 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: Randy Porter <[log in to unmask]> "Restricting who can see the list
header" (Sep 17, 3:56pm)
On Sep 17, 3:56pm, Randy Porter wrote:
} Subject: Restricting who can see the list header
} I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail addresses
} when someone does a review of the list. The review is already set to
} owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list owners
} addresses still appear in the header.
}
} Any info on this would be helpful.
}-- End of excerpt from Randy Porter
Surround the parts you want hidden with ".hh on" & ".hh off" pairs.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:01:51 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Adam Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
On 9/17/98 3:34 PM, Dan Lester <[log in to unmask]> wrote...
>If you're worried about spam or harrassment, use an account that you use
>ONLY for list management instead of giving your "regular" email address.
That's what listname-request is for. I encourage its use on many of my
lists, as I am able to change where it points to when I need to switch
addresses or even give the duties over to an assistant while out of town.
--
Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois
[log in to unmask] | "Logic is the art of going wrong with
[log in to unmask] | confidence." - George Bernard Shaw
Finger for PGP | http://www.tezcat.com/~adamb/
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:02:09 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Adam Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
On 9/17/98 6:13 PM, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD)
<[log in to unmask]> wrote...
>As for Review= Owner, I'm having this debate out on my own list-owner's
>list. I don't like the idea, as it stops friendly people trying to
>find out who's on the list (and it stops you trying to find out what
>address you're using to subscribe to the list. That can be a problem
>if you use the web address, as many of our people do).
There's no question that, in a perfect world, allowing subscribers to
REVIEW a list is generally a good thing. Those who don't want to deal
with it can set themselves to CONCEAL.
But with rampant email abuse these days that's simple out of control, I
don't blame lots of people for not wanting to have their address out in
the open like that.
One option is to leave Review=Private put set Default-Options=CONCEAL.
Let people who don't mind having their address out in the open actively
set themselves to NOCONCEAL.
--
Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois
[log in to unmask] | "Logic is the art of going wrong with
[log in to unmask] | confidence." - George Bernard Shaw
Finger for PGP | http://www.tezcat.com/~adamb/
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 13:40:00 +1000
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Paul Wayper (DPI ISD)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
In-Reply-To: <v0311074db227732a1e86@[207.252.88.49]> from "Vince Sabio" at Sep
17, 98 10:22:14 pm
Content-Type: text
Whilst casually engaged in some idle pheasant plucking, Vince penned:
>
> Nope, I disagree -- it doesn't stop a friendly person from getting
> that information. It merely slows the process a little, and keeps him
> from accessing information that he -- friendly or otherwise -- doesn't
> need to see.
That's a good point - I'll mention it to the list owners.
Paul
P.S. Like the interior decorating tip.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 23:27:06 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Glenn Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner (was: Possible spammer)
In-Reply-To: <v0311074db227732a1e86@[207.252.88.49]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Vice Sabio wrote:
>I have yet to hear a justification for permitting anyone other than
>the list owner to access subscription lists in non-closed environments.
I can give you one, and I can tell you how to go about setting it up, as I
recall having done the last time such a query came up here.
My list is set to
* Subscription= By Owner
* Review= Owner
in addition to
* Confidential= Yes
* Validate= Yes
As a result, any command I send to listserv must be accompanied with a
listserv password (created with the PW ADD command). Additionally, I do
not add subscribers to my list without first "screening" them to make sure
they are really going to be appropriate people for my list. This usually
involves a give and take of 2 or 3 e-mails to verify that I have the right
e-mail address, to verify that there is a 2-way gateway between me and
that other address funcitoning properly, and to verify that the potential
subscriber is not attempting to spoof somebody else's e-mail address, in
addition to verifying the appropriateness of the person joining my list.
Now, all of this boils down to the fact that people can not get the list
of addresses by themselves. However, by the nature of some of our
discussions, it is often helpful for two or more people to communicate
amongst each other "off the list" per se, either because they do not wish
to go over old turf which is extremely familiar to them but perhaps not to
the rest of the list, or because the appropriateness of their discussions
are really not for the list anyway. That said, I do sporadically post the
list of subscribers to the list itself. For all intents and purposes,
because it is a subscribe by owner list and a confidential=yes list and a
review by owner list, the only people who are able to view the list of
subscribers are the people already subscribed to the list and either have
access to the list archives or who see the list posted whenever I post it
to the list. Actually, it is probably time I should post another of these
to my list. It has been a few months since the last time I did that.
Glenn, whose list is set to
*Subscription= By Owner Review= Owner Confidential= Yes
and who has no worries of spammers as a result
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 00:28:23 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
Comments: To: Ben Parker <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Ben Parker wrote:
> not. PC-Pine and Pegasus do support this, but ONLY if you do not edit or
> change the message, not even to 'touch-up' a subject line. The fundamental
unix pine does not allow editing og "bounces" either, but one can save
to an editing folder, get out of pine, open the file with an editor and
do exactly as one pleases (long as you don't violate the features that
identify it to pine as email), exit the editor and reenter pine, then
bounce. works every time unless careless; header, text, doesn't matter,
can change it then bounce. unless they've stuck you on an imap system,
which may mean further workarounds.
douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:07:17 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: rex <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Ben Parker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:22:59 -0700, "Stephen C. Nill"
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>Thus, for all pratical reasons,
>>Listserv 1.8c simply did not support editing of postings.
>
>No. The mail clients you cited do not support Resent-xxx: headers that are
>documented in RFC822. LISTSERV complies with the RFC, those mail clients do
>not. PC-Pine and Pegasus do support this, but ONLY if you do not edit or
>change the message, not even to 'touch-up' a subject line. The fundamental
>problem is RFC822 requires the From: to reflect the originator of the message.
>However, if you edit the message it is no longer that person's message, it is
>now yours because you have changed it, however little. This leads to a
>contradiction. Resent-xxx only works if you don't change the message and the
>From: remains intact. If you edit it, these programs (Pine and Pegasus) won't
>let you use Resent-xxx because they insist the From: must be changed to
>reflect the new authorship. Even if you could 'spoof' the From: address, and
>resend it to the List, it will still come back to you for approval because the
>Resent-xxx lines are absent. If you then use the 'bounce/resend' feature it
>will work. the 2nd time around but this can get tedious for any volume of
>work.
I use Yarn in a DOS box under Win95. It follows RFC822 and supports
Resent exactly as you describe, which is fine as long as the message
does not need to be altered.
However, about half of the messages posted to the my list need to be edited
and still show as coming from the original sender. To do that in one
step, I forward (not resend) the message to the list and edit as
needed, adding "X-fwd: rars" to the header. After Yarn is exited a
post-processor that I wrote looks for "X-fwd: rars" in the header of
each message. If it finds that string, the "From: ..." line is replaced
with the "From: ..." line from the forwarded header info in the body of
the message, the appropriate "Resent-from: ..." and "Resent-to: ..."
header lines are added, an "X-editor: rex" line is added (to let
anyone who is curious know that I edited the message), and all
forward information in the body of the message is stripped.
This sounds complicated but it's easy to use. Any incoming message
that needs editing is simply forwarded to the list (with an alias so
only two keystrokes are required), edited as necessary, and the
"X-fwd: rars" added to the header (with a macro to minimize keystrokes).
When Yarn is exited, the post-processor automatically runs and
transparently fixes up all the messages. Since the appropriate Resent
lines are present the message goes directly to the list without coming
back for approval and the message appears to come from the original
poster, not from me.
The same idea should work with any email client that uses SOUP or
Unix mailbox format for outgoing mail, but the reader would probably
need to be exited to run the post-processor. I just now tried editing
Eudora's out.mbx while it was running and it allows it, but Eudora
gets unhappy later. Too bad. As a guess, it looks as if the program would
need to know the format of out.toc and fix that up whenever out.mbx was
altered.
-rex
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:36:45 -0500
Reply-To: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
Comments: To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <v03110710b226faba5da8@[206.152.10.82]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
it may be just me, but this seems just more to confuse the subscriber.
i mean, sometimes it seems a full time job explaining listname@...
listserv@... , listname-request@... , owner-listname@..., and no,
listname-request@... on majordomo is not the same as listname-request@...
on listserv, and for listproc that should be...
if we have trouble getting them to distinguish between the list address
and the listserv address, because they insist on calling the list a
listserv, will there not be more confusion with this? for listserv
has it not always been that listname-request@... is for getting in
touch with a live body rather than a computer program, and this is
exactly the opposite?
douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 02:02:53 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> > I am looking for a way to conceal the list owners e-mail addresses
> > when someone does a review of the list. The review is already set to
> > owners, so subscriber addresses are not given, but the list owners
> > addresses still appear in the header.
>
> Personally, I don't think it SHOULD be possible to do this. A listowner
> should always be available for contact to handle problems of various sorts.
i have no problem with hiding certain elementsof the list header, but
i must agree with Dan that never should that include the listowners.
if you do not want people to know you are responsible for your list
perhaps you should turn it over to someone else; a subscriber who cannot
locate his listowner when he has a problem can be quite a forlorn soul.
the only thing I've ever wanted to hide in the list header is my filters.
been meaning to try that, just haven't gotten around to it.
douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 07:59:04 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask] >
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 01:36 9/18/98 -0500, Winship said:
|it may be just me, but this seems just more to confuse the subscriber.
|i mean, sometimes it seems a full time job explaining listname@...
|listserv@... , listname-request@... , owner-listname@..., and no,
|listname-request@... on majordomo is not the same as listname-request@...
|on listserv, and for listproc that should be...
They probably are NOT being designed to be typed by Real People, but used
by some GUI.
Press <here> to Format disc.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 08:42:24 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Steve Howie <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Possible spammer
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LISTSERV list owners' forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Paul Wayper (DPI ISD)
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 1998 7:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Possible spammer
>
>
> > Even more justification to make your public lists Review= Owner, and
> > Subscription= Open, confirm
>
> Not very surprisingly at all, a large number of these lists _are_ set
> Subscription= Open,Confirm. This didn't stop whoever it is - they were
> sending in the correct confirmation messages as well.
>
That's right - you can still do hit and run spamming by signing up
legitimately with Open,Confirm in effect. Setting Review=Owner is a much
more effective way to prevent list email address culling.
Scotty
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:58:23 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
My appreciation to both the on- and off-list suggestions I've received on
this. Unfortunately, none of them solves the need to have a means of
simply stripping off quoted bottom banners from subscribers' replies and
similar minor edits of postings.
The suggestion to use, say, Eudora's forwarding feature won't work because
it is forwarding the approval message from Listserv; sure, I can manually
strip off the instruction language at the top and make other edits before
sending on to the list, but the message appears to be coming from Listserv
(i.e. the source of the approval message) and not the person who posted the
message. Sure, the Eudora forwarding feature is great if someone happens
to send me the message intended for the list, rather than posting directly
to the list, since by using the forwarding feature the posting appears to
be coming from the originator and not me (though Eudora does insert an
acceptable notation that it was forwarded by me). But this circumstance is
quite rare and not the need I'm trying to address.
Suggestions to become an email client contortionist -- I'm more or less a
consumer, not a programmer -- are beyond my expertise and in any case miss
the central point of my posting, which, enlightened by the helpful replies
thus far on the thread, is as follows: Do the good folks at LSoft intend
-- or can they be persuaded -- to include in 1.8d a feature that enables
list editors to make modifications to postings? I realize that there are
RFC822 standards; it seems to me though that an editing function from
within Listserv can be created which does not do violence to these
standards. These are, after all, external standards, are they not?
Stephen C. Nill, J.D.
CharityChannel, the Internet Discussion Forums
of American Philanthropy Review
[log in to unmask]
http://CharityChannel.com/
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 09:24:20 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "J. Lyle" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Deleting posts from the archives
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Is there a relatively easy way to delete individual posts from the
archives? One of our subscribers accidentally misdirected something to the
list yesterday, and she is quite agitated about it. It was part of a
freelance assignment for which she signed some sort of oath of secrecy.
(Well, it wasn't that dramatic, but she could be fired for this.) Thus she
obviously would prefer not to have it available on the Web for anyone to
see. We also had a subscriber accidentally send a .jpg to the list a while
back--a .jpg of two naked women, no less. So we would also like to know
how to delete posts in case something like that ever happens again!
Thanks.
Jane
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 10:36:41 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Deleting posts from the archives
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask] .edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The answer is yes and no, but mostly no.
There are probably 1k discussions in the lstown-l archives about this
(UNLESS ERIC DELETED THEM -- just kidding).
Do you know where the archives are kept? Via the WEB interface
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com
/Pete
At 09:24 9/18/98 -0500, J. Lyle said:
|Is there a relatively easy way to delete individual posts from the
|archives?
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 07:53:11 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Clark Pickett <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:50:33 -0400, Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]> said:
<snip>
>
> If your site administrators think this is desirable, they can create their
> own mailing aliases locally that forward to the full addresses.
>
> Probably the best use for them would be in the header or footer or in the
> welcoming message, where you could do something like:
>
> To leave the mailing list, send a blank message to <a
> href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">
> [log in to unmask]</a>.
>
> I think most of the big mail clients would allow you to just double-click
> on the mailto address, getting around the typo problem.
>
> -jwgh
I would suggest a variation of what Jacob suggested. If your ISP provides
you with the availability of aliases, you can get around the long string
command by assigning aliases for these functions. We have unlimited
aliases included with the level of service we have with our ISP. We use
short aliases for the much longer commands for all of our lists. We also
include these aliases in the Bottom Banner of the lists, so that they are
available on every list message.
After reading Ben's original message yesterday, I set up and tested two
new aliases:
[log in to unmask]
for
[log in to unmask]
and [log in to unmask]
for
[log in to unmask]
Both aliases and the related functions worked as expected.
I noticed two byproducts of the use of these commands.
For the subscribe command, there is no ability to add a "Real Name" entry,
since LISTSERV doesn't read the body of the message. For those of us who
require "Real Name" entries, this is a problem we must deal with. I
purposely entered a fictitious name in the message body. LISTSERV did
ignore that, and it picked up my name entry from my e-mail program setup.
This may be OK if the person enters their real name in the setup.
However, many people use some type of nickname or pseudonym in their's.
Also, you run into the problem with AOL subscribers and the like whose
e-mail software doesn't retain and send any name entry.
For the signoff command, it generated a Command Confirmation Request. I
had to send the OK reply message in order for the request to be processed.
Apparently, LISTSERV is treating this type of signoff message the same
way that it does with those generated by the web interface.
I have a related question for Ben Parker or whoever else can answer it.
Is this functionality available in LISTSERV-Lite, or is it only in the
full LISTSERV product? We are operating several of our lists on our own
server under LISTSERV-Lite. I just set up aliases for one of these lists
and attempted to use the subscribe command. I received this error message:
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
[log in to unmask]
(expanded from: <[log in to unmask]>)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 weecare-l-subscribe-request@eeadopt.org... User unknown
Since it worked on the other address, which is run on the full version of
LISTSERV at SJU, I would assume that the reason this didn't work is
because of LISTSERV-Lite. Is this correct?
==
Best wishes,
Clark Pickett <[log in to unmask]>
Co-Administrator, EEAC Web Site and mailing lists
http://www.eeadopt.org
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 11:51:58 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|After reading Ben's original message yesterday, I set up and tested two
|new aliases:
|
| [log in to unmask]
| for
| [log in to unmask]
When you start advertizing local alias conventions to the
world-community, it has the unintended consequence of making folks think
that this is a standard further obfuscating correct syntax and semantics.
/P
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 13:37:21 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: John Roraback PhD <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Douglas Winship writes:
> > Personally, I don't think it SHOULD be possible to do this. A listowner
> > should always be available for contact to handle problems of various
sorts.
>
> i have no problem with hiding certain elementsof the list header, but
> i must agree with Dan that never should that include the listowners.
> if you do not want people to know you are responsible for your list
> perhaps you should turn it over to someone else; a subscriber who cannot
> locate his listowner when he has a problem can be quite a forlorn soul.
I include the <listname-request@domain-name> address (and instructions that
the list owner can be contacted at this address) outside the list header's
HHON/HHOFF limiters so that list members or others can always contact me for
assistance. This way I do not have to deal with spammers or others gleaning my
personal e-mail address from the list header.
John Roraback
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 13:44:14 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Restricting who can see the list header
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|I include the <listname-request@domain-name> address (and instructions that
|the list owner can be contacted at this address) outside the list header's
|HHON/HHOFF limiters so that list members or others can always contact me for
|assistance. This way I do not have to deal with spammers or others
gleaning my
|personal e-mail address from the list header.
There are different strokes for different folks ... and the needs of
owners/operators. This is a design/religion argument.
Some support lists don't want an individualized email address displayed
for the owner for various reasons e.g., vacation issues, alternative
assignment issues, anonymity issues.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 11:57:42 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Ben Parker <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Fri, 18 Sep 1998 07:53:11 -0700, Clark Pickett <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>Is this functionality available in LISTSERV-Lite,
Yes. But you have to have a recent enough build (later than Feb 1998) I'm
running the Aug 19 1998 build of Lite and it is there, as are all of the WWW
admin functions. This is beta after all, different builds are allowed to have
different functions... 8-)
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 14:01:53 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Jill D. Horton" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: WEBTV plus
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
fhas a little amount of hard drive space but most people are on the
classic edition and this is a New Problem in getting into the archives
to do list management; as I have been doing it for months without a
squeak!
Jillie
WECARE12steps
BTW I have to choice a server for my new 'puter and cannot make up my
mind with all the pluses and minuses out there.
Is it better to go Local or with something national wide like MSN or
AT&T????
....wouldn't you like to get away......you wanna go where everybody
knows your name......and they're always glad you came......
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 14:40:38 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Deleting posts from the archives
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To: "J. Lyle" <[log in to unmask]> "Deleting posts from the archives"
(Sep 18, 9:24am)
On Sep 18, 9:24am, "J. Lyle" wrote:
} Subject: Deleting posts from the archives
} Is there a relatively easy way to delete individual posts from the
} archives? One of our subscribers accidentally misdirected something to the
} list yesterday, and she is quite agitated about it. It was part of a
} freelance assignment for which she signed some sort of oath of secrecy.
} (Well, it wasn't that dramatic, but she could be fired for this.) Thus she
} obviously would prefer not to have it available on the Web for anyone to
} see. We also had a subscriber accidentally send a .jpg to the list a while
} back--a .jpg of two naked women, no less. So we would also like to know
} how to delete posts in case something like that ever happens again!
Its fairly easy if you have a text editor that can handle a large ascii
text file. NOT a word processor. Kedit would be ideal.
Just GET the archive, edit it, and PUT it back. If its the active
archive, it would be safest to HOLD the list first and FREE it when
done.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 15:48:58 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Glenn Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FACEBLIND: error report from AMD.COM
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
This error message seems rather confusing to me. Aside from the fact that
the message itself has remained "undeliverable", I dot not understand why
the connection would have been refused by this server when I have not had
similar trouble in teh past. Any ideas?
Glenn Alperin
________________________________________________________________________________
The enclosed message, found in the FACEBLIND mailbox and shown under the spool
ID 10839273 in the system log, has been identified as a possible delivery error
notice for the following reason: "X-Report-Type:" field found in the mail
header.
------------------------ Message in error (107 lines) -------------------------
Received: from amdext2.amd.com by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 6:19:08 -0500
Received: from amdint2.amd.com (amdint2.amd.com [163.181.250.1])
by amdext2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with ESMTP id FAA08018
for <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 05:19:03 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost)
by amdint2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with internal id FAA09901;
Fri, 18 Sep 1998 05:19:02 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 05:19:02 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[log in to unmask]>
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
boundary="FAA09901.906113942/amdint2.amd.com"
Subject: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (warning-timeout)
This is a MIME-encapsulated message
--FAA09901.906113942/amdint2.amd.com
**********************************************
** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY **
** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE **
**********************************************
The original message was received at Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:18:37 -0500 (CDT)
from amdext2.amd.com [163.181.251.1]
----- The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors -----
xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxx@txexmta4
(expanded from: <[log in to unmask]>)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxx@txexmta4... Deferred: Connection refused by txexmta4.amd.com.
Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours
Will keep trying until message is 1 day old
--FAA09901.906113942/amdint2.amd.com
Content-Type: message/delivery-status
Reporting-MTA: dns; amdint2.amd.com
Arrival-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:18:37 -0500 (CDT)
Final-Recipient: RFC822; <[log in to unmask]>
X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; [log in to unmask]
Action: delayed
Status: 4.4.1
Remote-MTA: DNS; txexmta4.amd.com
Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 05:19:02 -0500 (CDT)
Will-Retry-Until: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 01:18:37 -0500 (CDT)
--FAA09901.906113942/amdint2.amd.com
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from amdext2.amd.com (amdext2.amd.com [163.181.251.1])
by amdint2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with ESMTP id BAA26689
for <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:18:37 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from maelstrom.stjohns.edu (maelstrom.stjohns.edu [149.68.1.24])
by amdext2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with ESMTP id BAA19269
for <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 01:18:36 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from maelstrom.stjohns.edu by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 2:18:21 -0500
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 02:17:46 EDT
Reply-To: faceblind The Face Blind Folks <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: faceblind The Face Blind Folks <[log in to unmask]>
From: xxx xxxxxx <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: mighty metaphors
To: [log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 14:35:26 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Dan Lester <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FACEBLIND: error report from AMD.COM
In-Reply-To: <B159ZXOLMW44Z*/R=DANIEL/R=A1/U=GALPERIN/@MHS>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 03:48 PM 9/18/98 -0400, Glenn Alperin wrote:
>This error message seems rather confusing to me. Aside from the fact that
>the message itself has remained "undeliverable", I dot not understand why
>the connection would have been refused by this server when I have not had
>similar trouble in teh past. Any ideas?
The basic answer is "don't worry about it". Your server will keep trying.
Whatever is the problem with the server on the other end, there is nothing
you can do about it. Not your problem.
cheers
dan
--
Dan Lester, 3577 East Pecan, Boise, ID 83716-7115 USA 208-383-0165
[log in to unmask] http://www.84.com/ http://www.idaholibraries.org/
http://library.idbsu.edu/ http://cyclops.idbsu.edu/ http://www.lili.org/
Sent me a postcard of a library yet? You'll get something nice in return.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 15:57:11 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Glenn Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FACEBLIND: error report from CAEXMTA2.AMD.COM
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
To go along with the message I just sent out, Ihave no idea what this
message even means! What exactly does
The recipient was detected looping within the message transfer service
MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:AMDUS1:TXEXMTA0
mean?
Glenn Alperin
________________________________________________________________________________
The enclosed message has been identified as a delivery error for the
FACEBLIND list because it was sent to
[log in to unmask]
------------------------------ Message in error -------------------------------
Received: from amdext2.amd.com by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS
v1.1a) with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep
1998 7:16:34 -0500
Received: from amdint2.amd.com (amdint2.amd.com [163.181.250.1])
by amdext2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with ESMTP id GAA11641
for <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:16:28 -0500
(CDT)
Received: from txexmta0.amd.com (txexmta0.amd.com [163.181.3.91])
by amdint2.amd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AMD) with ESMTP id GAA12331
for <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:16:23 -0500
(CDT)
Received: by txexmta0.amd.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
id <T1A4HDMF>; Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:16:21 -0500
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Undeliverable: Re: Professional Poker
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:16:19 -0500
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BDE2CB.DA9BE450"
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------ =_NextPart_000_01BDE2CB.DA9BE450
Content-Type: text/plain
Your message
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Professional Poker
Sent: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 00:14:24 -0500
did not reach the following recipient(s):
xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxx on Fri, 18 Sep 1998 06:16:16 -0500
The recipient was detected looping within the message transfer service
MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:AMDUS1:TXEXMTA0
------ =_NextPart_000_01BDE2CB.DA9BE450
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
From: [log in to unmask]
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Professional Poker
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 00:14:24 -0500
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
X-MS-Embedded-Report:
Content-Type: text/plain
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 17:19:51 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: FACEBLIND: error report from CAEXMTA2.AMD.COM
In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 18 Sep 1998 15:57:11 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
I think that means that there are two aliases in the remote MTA that point
to each other, and the MTA has figured that out and doesn't know what to
do with the mail...sort of a tail recursion I guess...
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 19:02:15 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Jill D. Horton" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: subscriber on comcat.com
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
I have a subscriber on comcat.com who gets regular mail from the
listserv@StJohns... except from another subscriber at erols.com in
NYC>
She never gets any of his mail alone that go thru the listserv for some
crazy reason yet he gets all of her posts thru Maelstrom@stjohns..
Any ideas??
Jill HOrton
WECARE12STEPS
....wouldn't you like to get away......you wanna go where everybody
knows your name......and they're always glad you came......
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 21:21:15 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Mary Schweitzer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The number of messages in a digest
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
There are some mailservers that will truncate the digest if it is too
many lines long, rather than rejecting it.
If what she means is there are MORE posts than 19, then the problem is
that the list does not include multiple posts on the same subject. If
the problem is that she is receiving FEWER posts than 19, then her
server is probably truncating the digest.
Mary
Michele Jackson wrote:
> One of my subscribers is complaining that her disgest does not have
> the number of messages advertised. She seems to be the only one who is
> having this problem. Any ideas? Thanks in advance. Her example is
> below:
>
>> There are 31 messages totalling 1371 lines in this issue.
>>
>> Topics of the day:
>>
>> 1. If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . . (2)
>> 2. TAROT and the MILLENNIUM--review
>> 3. Fw: Re: If You Were A Tarot Deck. . . . . . .
>> 4. Help with Spreads?
>> 5. Crystals and cleansing....
>> 6. Apology
>> 7. Crystals & Cleansing decks
>> 8. terminology (2)
>> 9. POMO (3)
>> 10. Jamie Shea's take on "If You Were A Tarot Deck" (2)
>> 11. Response to George - NOT Phil's original thread (5)
>> 12. If I were a tarot deck continued-Jamie's posting of a private
>> exchange
>> 13. Generalities (4)
>> 14. 8 and 11
>> 15. high priestess
>> 16. Everybody play nice...
>> 17. Those 2 Extra Cards and Storage
>> 18. If I were a tarot deck
>> 19. Cleansing Rituals
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 18:21:05 -0700
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Liz Marr <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Computing Connection
Subject: Re: Variations on quick command addreses?
On 18 Sep 98, at 7:53, Clark Pickett wrote:
>
> For the subscribe command, there is no ability to add a "Real Name" entry,
> since LISTSERV doesn't read the body of the message. For those of us who
> require "Real Name" entries, this is a problem we must deal with. I
> purposely entered a fictitious name in the message body. LISTSERV did
> ignore that, and it picked up my name entry from my e-mail program setup.
> This may be OK if the person enters their real name in the setup.
> However, many people use some type of nickname or pseudonym in their's.
> Also, you run into the problem with AOL subscribers and the like whose
> e-mail software doesn't retain and send any name entry.
>
In the list that I am most likely to use thes "aliases" - subscription is by
application, so I don't need the "Firstname Lastname" part as they are going
to get a membership form anyhow and then be hand added using the
resonse form generated by Listserv ("so-and-so has requested to join")
Liz Marr
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 00:15:47 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Roger Fajman <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Posts
> No. The mail clients you cited do not support Resent-xxx: headers that are
> documented in RFC822. LISTSERV complies with the RFC, those mail clients do
> not.
RFC 822 describes the Resent-xxx headers, but there is no requirement in the
RFC that they be used. They are entirely optional.
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 02:44:55 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: FACEBLIND: error report from CAEXMTA2.AMD.COM
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, Nathan Brindle wrote:
> I think that means that there are two aliases in the remote MTA that point
> to each other, and the MTA has figured that out and doesn't know what to
> do with the mail...sort of a tail recursion I guess...
what i immediately thought was maybe teh person tried to put in an
auto-forward and, well, carelessly inserted the address he is forwarding
*from* as the address to be forwarded *to*
is that another way of saying the same thing? would be recurssive,
a loop setup, wouldn't it?
douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 03:45:54 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: subscriber on comcat.com
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 18 Sep 1998, Jill D. Horton wrote:
> I have a subscriber on comcat.com who gets regular mail from the
> listserv@StJohns... except from another subscriber at erols.com in
> NYC>
>
> She never gets any of his mail alone that go thru the listserv for some
> crazy reason yet he gets all of her posts thru Maelstrom@stjohns..
would seem to me someone, somewhere, should be getting error messages.
have any samples?
for one list there is a subscriber in s. america who's text is always
in us-ascii, but he has an auto-sig which is not us-ascii. one or two
subscribers never see his material, their systems reject his postings
as errors due to the non-ascii material. one character in his surname
in his autosig and the whole thing is rejected, every time.
is something like that a possibility?
if you are not getting the error messages, and the others aren't getting
any, it makes it difficult. if you are not getting errors for this,
but one of them is, ask for full copies, may explain the problem
quite quickly.
douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 18:25:42 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Jill D. Horton" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: comcat.com
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Dear Winston and others,
She simply never receives his mail from the list. He receives her mail.
He is on erols.com in NYC.
I receive no error messages from Maelstrom.
Do all the messages go thru Maelstrom and then distributed?/
If he emails her privately, she gets his messages, but not from
[log in to unmask]
I sit like an intermediary, forwarding all his messages to her!
very perflexing for Sherlock and Watson.!
I unscubscribed her yesterday and re-scribed her..but alias nothing
changed!
A problem for a Listserv@maelstrom sPECIAList!
Love Jillie
....wouldn't you like to get away......you wanna go where everybody
knows your name......and they're always glad you came......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 15:49:42 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Customizing the Web Interface
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I had been running an earlier iteration of 1.8d (Win95) and under that
version the only apparent way to customize the web-based interface was to
go directly into the html templates and make the changes. I did so.
I've just downloaded and installed the latest iteration of 1.8d and see
that it's provided, through a server administration page, a means to
customize the various view of the web interface.
Does the "Customize site-wide static web pages and banners" link to a
means to customize the headers and footers? If so, when I click it is
"blank," meaning that there are no choices in the drop-down menu. Is this
the result of my earlier manual html customization?
If so, is there a quick way to restore the original html so that I may
proceed via the administration page?
Stephen C. Nill, J.D.
CharityChannel, the Internet Discussion Forums
of American Philanthropy Review
[log in to unmask]
http://CharityChannel.com/
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 18:58:04 -0500
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Angus <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Down On DaFarm
Subject: Re: comcat.com
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Do all the messages go thru Maelstrom and then distributed?/
Only if the list is on maelstrom and the post sent through the list.
> I sit like an intermediary, forwarding all his messages to her!
She's not getting any via the list???
> A problem for a Listserv@maelstrom sPECIAList!
That would be Paul, [log in to unmask]
Cleo [log in to unmask]
One tin soldier
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 19:30:26 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: crossposting problems
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hiya,
Something strange is happening.
Recently I've had some subscribers swear that they
addressed their mail to one of the free e-groups lists
(see http://www.egroups.com/index.html) and it ended
up being crossposted to both that group and to my listserv
group.
The problem seems to have resolved for one subscriber.
The second is pretty clueless and I haven't gotten much out
of him in terms of what he's doing. He sent a test
message to my list and it showed up on both lists. He's
apparantly using Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-AtHome0404 (Win95; U).
The third is someone from AOL.
I'm talking to the fourth person from a foreign node who's
mail header says he's using Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I)
who swears that he manually addressed the test mail
to the e-group list *only*, but that mail showed up on my
list too.
Here's what the headers look like after coming thru my list
(sex-l). I also included the bottom portion of the header
from my mail to the list that followed. Check out the last
two lines of all the mail headers. I have to wonder if it's
a Netscape mail bug as this message the foreign guy manually
addressed the message only to the other list and the Comments
and To fields appear to be on one line. However, it's also
consistant with the header from an AOL subscriber.
Note I have the foreign guy set to review and I didn't see
a Comments field in the message in the editor account before
I released it to the list, and I didn't see a Comments field
in his private mail to me, however I do see a Comments field
after it comes thru the list.
Also note that my list is set to
* Reply-to= Sender,Ignore
So subscribers have to do something other than simply
hit the reply button to send mail to my list.
Any suggestions as to what's happening would be appreciated.
Out for now,
Betty
-----The second guy's mail header
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-AtHome0404 (Win95; U)
>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 23:22:26 -0700
>Reply-To: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>From: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>Organization: @Home Network
>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
------------The foreign guy's mail header
>Approved-By: [log in to unmask]
>Mailing-List: contact [log in to unmask]
>X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/exhibitionists/
>X-Mailing-List: [log in to unmask]
>Delivered-To: [log in to unmask]
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I)
>Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:57:49 +0000
>Reply-To: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>From: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>Comments: To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
----The AOLer's header
>X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 52
>Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 18:09:01 EDT
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>From: XXXXX XXXXX <user @AOL.COM>
>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] Re: OOOooHhoooo
>Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
--My mail header
>Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 18:15:53 -0500
>Reply-To: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>To: [log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 17:34:46 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: crossposting problems
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Did you check your subscriber list to see if the other list address is
subscribed to your list?
Stephen Nill
At 07:30 PM 9/19/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Hiya,
>
>Something strange is happening.
>Recently I've had some subscribers swear that they
>addressed their mail to one of the free e-groups lists
>(see http://www.egroups.com/index.html) and it ended
>up being crossposted to both that group and to my listserv
>group.
>
>The problem seems to have resolved for one subscriber.
>
>The second is pretty clueless and I haven't gotten much out
>of him in terms of what he's doing. He sent a test
>message to my list and it showed up on both lists. He's
>apparantly using Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-AtHome0404 (Win95; U).
>
>The third is someone from AOL.
>
>I'm talking to the fourth person from a foreign node who's
>mail header says he's using Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I)
>who swears that he manually addressed the test mail
>to the e-group list *only*, but that mail showed up on my
>list too.
>
>Here's what the headers look like after coming thru my list
>(sex-l). I also included the bottom portion of the header
>from my mail to the list that followed. Check out the last
>two lines of all the mail headers. I have to wonder if it's
>a Netscape mail bug as this message the foreign guy manually
>addressed the message only to the other list and the Comments
>and To fields appear to be on one line. However, it's also
>consistant with the header from an AOL subscriber.
>Note I have the foreign guy set to review and I didn't see
>a Comments field in the message in the editor account before
>I released it to the list, and I didn't see a Comments field
>in his private mail to me, however I do see a Comments field
>after it comes thru the list.
>
>Also note that my list is set to
>* Reply-to= Sender,Ignore
>So subscribers have to do something other than simply
>hit the reply button to send mail to my list.
>
>Any suggestions as to what's happening would be appreciated.
>
>Out for now,
>Betty
>
>-----The second guy's mail header
>>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-AtHome0404 (Win95; U)
>>Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 23:22:26 -0700
>>Reply-To: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>>From: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>>Organization: @Home Network
>>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>>Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>------------The foreign guy's mail header
>>Approved-By: [log in to unmask]
>>Mailing-List: contact [log in to unmask]
>>X-URL: http://www.egroups.com/list/exhibitionists/
>>X-Mailing-List: [log in to unmask]
>>Delivered-To: [log in to unmask]
>>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (Win95; I)
>>Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:57:49 +0000
>>Reply-To: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>>From: XXXXX XXXXX <[log in to unmask]>
>>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>>Comments: To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>----The AOLer's header
>>X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 52
>>Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 18:09:01 EDT
>>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>>From: XXXXX XXXXX <user @AOL.COM>
>>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] Re: OOOooHhoooo
>>Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>--My mail header
>>Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 18:15:53 -0500
>>Reply-To: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sender: For General Discussion of Sexual Issues <[log in to unmask]>
>>From: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
>>Subject: [SEX-L] [The Exhibitionists] test
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:34:23 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
In-Reply-To: <B125ZXOKXWNNM*/R=DANIEL/R=A1/U=GALPERIN/@MHS>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 23:27 -0400 9/17/98, Glenn Alperin said:
>Vice Sabio wrote:
>
>>I have yet to hear a justification for permitting anyone other than
>>the list owner to access subscription lists in non-closed environments.
>
>I can give you one, and I can tell you how to go about setting it up, as I
>recall having done the last time such a query came up here.
[snip]
>Now, all of this boils down to the fact that people can not get the list
>of addresses by themselves. However, by the nature of some of our
>discussions, it is often helpful for two or more people to communicate
>amongst each other "off the list" per se, either because they do not wish
>to go over old turf which is extremely familiar to them but perhaps not to
>the rest of the list, or because the appropriateness of their discussions
>are really not for the list anyway. That said, I do sporadically post the
>list of subscribers to the list itself.
[snip]
Nope, that's not a justification. If anyone needs to contact a specific
list member off the list, he must necessarily *first* know that the other
list member exists. The only way that this happens is if the other list
member has posted to the list -- in which case, he has already voluntarily
revealed his presence on the list, anyway. But on *most* lists, this
represents only about 5 to maybe 20 percent of the subscribers. Thus, you
are "revealing" the addresses of 80 to 95 percent of the subscribers who
would otherwise be anonymous -- and some of those people might prefer to
retain their anonymity.
Now, if you warn people that you do this *before* you subscribe them to
the list, then at least you are giving them the option of not subscribing
(though I still don't see the necessity of posting the addresses of
subscribers who have never posted to the list). However, in that case, I
would argue that you no longer have a "non-closed environment" (see my
initial comment, above).
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 13:55:11 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Glenn Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
In-Reply-To: <v03110763b22adc94c4a5@[207.252.88.49]>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
I wrote:
>>Now, all of this boils down to the fact that people can not get the list
>>of addresses by themselves. However, by the nature of some of our
>>discussions, it is often helpful for two or more people to communicate
>>amongst each other "off the list" per se, either because they do not wish
>>to go over old turf which is extremely familiar to them but perhaps not to
>>the rest of the list, or because the appropriateness of their discussions
>>are really not for the list anyway. That said, I do sporadically post the
>>list of subscribers to the list itself.
>[snip]
and Vince Sabio responded:
>Nope, that's not a justification. If anyone needs to contact a specific
>list member off the list, he must necessarily *first* know that the other
>list member exists. The only way that this happens is if the other list
>member has posted to the list -- in which case, he has already voluntarily
>revealed his presence on the list, anyway. But on *most* lists, this
>represents only about 5 to maybe 20 percent of the subscribers. Thus, you
>are "revealing" the addresses of 80 to 95 percent of the subscribers who
>would otherwise be anonymous -- and some of those people might prefer to
>retain their anonymity.
Perhaps I should have explained some of the specific dynamics of my list
which might help clarify this a bit. For example, it is list policy that
after a period of 2 weeks, if you have not done so already, you MUST
submit an introduction to the list describing who you are and why you
wanted to join my list, and any other relevant information about you that
you want the other list members to know about. I make it very clear when
I subscribe people to the list (I have mentioned my screening policy
previously) that this is part of the deal with being on my list. If they
do not follow this rule, they will be unsubscribed from the list after
their lurking time has expired. Also, I send reminder messages after a
week to new subscribers who have not yet posted an introduction just to
remind them that they need to post an introduction and to warn them that
they will be unsubscribed if they do not do so.
The nature of anonimity is an interesting question. For most lists, I
agree, some people would wish to retain their anonimity. However, for a
list like mine, where the very people joining it are people who, for all
intents and purposes, live in an anonymous society as they can not
recognize other people in the first place, if people were allowed to
retain their anonimity, my list would quickly deteriorate into a less than
useful list for all the people involved in it. We must all be able to
trust each other to some degree, and that we know who is on the list via
the introduction process I just described is our way of gaining trust in
each other on my list. Additionally, I require that anybody joining my
list must also provide both a first and last name to me and to the rest of
the people on the list in their introduction.
>Now, if you warn people that you do this *before* you subscribe them to
>the list, then at least you are giving them the option of not subscribing
>(though I still don't see the necessity of posting the addresses of
>subscribers who have never posted to the list).
It should now be rather clear from my list description that this event
does not occur for more than about two weeks at a time. If it did, the
person would no longer be on the list.
I should further add that all of this information is given to the person
before I even add them to the list, which also gives me a chance to verify
that I have a proper e-mail address so we don't start generating random
error messages, and also it allows me to prevent any possibility of
spoofing of e-mail addresses. I do require a response to my message to
them before I add them to the list.
>However, in that case, I
>would argue that you no longer have a "non-closed environment" (see my
>initial comment, above).
It is certainly closed to anybody not on the list, but as I said above, if
anonimity were to be preserved in a list like mine, the list itself would
cease to exist. The very nature of our list, the topic of which is
prosopagnosia (which basically means that all of us on the list are unable
to recognize the faces of people we have seen before) causes this to occur
for us in our every day life. People who come to my list do not generally
wish to remain anonymous in my list, and if they do, they are discouraged
from joining the list.
Some time back, I recieved an e-mail from a person who wanted to join the
list under a pseudonym as the person had been harassed previously by their
spouse and had recieved an unaffective restraining order against the
spouse. (Restraing orders are rarely ever worth the paper they are
written on.) The person had moved out of state and had attempted to begin
a new life in their new location. They had asked that I add them to the
list under their pseudonym. At that point in time, I did not know how I
wanted to deal with the situation. I understood this person's concerns,
but I did not want to unilaterally make the decision. I asked the people
on the list at that time for input, and it was eventually decided, about a
week later, that we were not going to allow pseudonyms on our list.
I have not heard back from this person since I sent the idea of that
decision along to the person. I regret that the person was not able to
join our list as the person might have gained quite a bit from it, but
list anonimity does not at all fit within the nature of a list based upon
trust and openness.
Glenn Alperin
list-owner (in name only, as all such decisions based upon list conduct
are made through discussion on the list) of faceblind
For more information about prosopagnosia (face blindness), check out
http://daniel.drew.edu/~galperin/folks.html
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:17:34 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
In-Reply-To: <B167ZXONKKPOO*/R=DANIEL/R=A1/U=GALPERIN/@MHS>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 13:55 -0400 9/20/98, Glenn Alperin said:
>>However, in that case, I
>>would argue that you no longer have a "non-closed environment" (see my
>>initial comment, above).
>
>It is certainly closed to anybody not on the list, but as I said above, if
>anonimity were to be preserved in a list like mine, the list itself would
>cease to exist. The very nature of our list, the topic of which is
>prosopagnosia (which basically means that all of us on the list are unable
>to recognize the faces of people we have seen before) causes this to occur
>for us in our every day life. People who come to my list do not generally
>wish to remain anonymous in my list, and if they do, they are discouraged
>from joining the list.
Yes, I understand (I think) why anonymity (and lurking) can be problematic
-- but it is certainly a VERY closed environment that you have created,
primarily because of your screening process and introduction requirement,
and thus does not fall under the heading of "non-closed mailing lists."
(I'd use the term "open mailing lists," but someone would call me on it.)
Note that "closed environment" is not being used in a pejorative manner;
it is not synonymous with "closed mind" or "closed circuit" (whoops,
wrong example), but simply describes an environment in which all
participants can be said to have some meaningful knowledge of each
other. An example of this is a mailing list for a college course;
certainly, in this case, the instructor can make the subscription list
accessible by the members of the class, to help facilitate study groups
and the like. (Though it seems to facilitate dating more than anything
else -- but hey, at least it's productive in some manner. <g>)
My comment related specifically to lists that have more-or-less "open"
(there's that word again) subscriptions. Certainly, in a closed
environment, access to the subscriber list is not as significant an
issue. I still, however, have yet to hear any justification for
permitting anyone other than the list owner to access the subscription
list in a non-closed environment.
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:26:17 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Roger Fajman <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
>Nope, that's not a justification. If anyone needs to contact a specific
>list member off the list, he must necessarily *first* know that the other
>list member exists. The only way that this happens is if the other list
>member has posted to the list -- in which case, he has already voluntarily
>revealed his presence on the list, anyway. But on *most* lists, this
>represents only about 5 to maybe 20 percent of the subscribers. Thus, you
>are "revealing" the addresses of 80 to 95 percent of the subscribers who
>would otherwise be anonymous -- and some of those people might prefer to
>retain their anonymity.
LISTSERV does have the CONCEAL option for people who wish to stay out of
REVIEW.
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:59:48 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Review=Owner
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 15:26 -0400 9/20/98, Roger Fajman said:
>>Nope, that's not a justification. If anyone needs to contact a specific
>>list member off the list, he must necessarily *first* know that the other
>>list member exists. The only way that this happens is if the other list
>>member has posted to the list -- in which case, he has already voluntarily
>>revealed his presence on the list, anyway. But on *most* lists, this
>>represents only about 5 to maybe 20 percent of the subscribers. Thus, you
>>are "revealing" the addresses of 80 to 95 percent of the subscribers who
>>would otherwise be anonymous -- and some of those people might prefer to
>>retain their anonymity.
>
>LISTSERV does have the CONCEAL option for people who wish to stay out of
>REVIEW.
Yes, and I set my LISTSERV lists to default to that option -- but that
is not the topic under discussion. IMO, CONCEAL simply provides another
layer of security -- like, for example, the time that one of my co-owners
thought that he could update the list header himself, and removed the
Review=Owner line by mistake. (d'oh!)
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 09:08:23 +1000
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Paul Wayper (DPI ISD)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Deleting posts from the archives
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]> from "Pete Weiss"
at Sep 18, 98 10:36:41 am
Content-Type: text
> /Pete
> At 09:24 9/18/98 -0500, J. Lyle said:
> |Is there a relatively easy way to delete individual posts from the
> |archives?
> Do you know where the archives are kept? Via the WEB interface
> http://peach.ease.lsoft.com
One of my list-owners has been GETting the <listname> LOGyymm files,
editing as appropriate (messages are suffixed by a line of minus signs)
and PUTting them back.
Apart from the ethical points (which as Pete says have been done to
death) that's about it. You may need a PW=xxxxxxxx keyword in the PUT
command for permission to put it back.
Paul
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 08:29:33 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Aaron Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Postings to a moderated list are submitted to the list moderator(s) with
(in part) the following message:
> This message was originally submitted ... You can approve it using
> the "OK" mechanism, ignore it, or repost an edited copy....
My question concerns the reposting of an edited copy. If I edit the
original and resubmit it, the posting then gets distributed to the list
with me as the author and a subject header of "NO SUBJECT". Is there a
way a for moderator to edit and resubmit AND keep the original author and
subject headers intact?
Thanks in advance.
Sincerely,
Aaron Morris
BEE-L Owner/Editor
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 12:05:00 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Mary Schweitzer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I'd like to add to this by saying the TYPE of editing I would like to do
and be able to continue to have it say it is "from" the original poster
-- things like reformatting, getting html language out of there, cutting
over-long echoes of previous posts. Basic EDITING stuff, not anything
that changes the content.
But I already know the answer to this one.
Just wanted to add my "I wish" to it.
Mary Schweitzer
The CFIDS/M.E. (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) Information Page:
http://www.cfids-me.org/
Sasyfras: discussion list for patients with CFIDS/M.E., Fibromyalgia,
other related illnesses -- for info,
http://www.cfids-me.org/sasyfras.html
Disinissues: discussion list for disability insurance benefits issues,
particularly for people with neuro-immunological illnesses,
http://www.cfids-me.org/disinissues/list.html
Also ME-FMS-CAN, a Canadian list for people with the disease(s).
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 10:03:48 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Stephen C. Nill" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Aaron Morris wrote:
>My question concerns the reposting of an edited copy. If I edit the
>original and resubmit it, the posting then gets distributed to the list
>with me as the author and a subject header of "NO SUBJECT". Is there a
>way a for moderator to edit and resubmit AND keep the original author and
>subject headers intact?
Aaron,
This is the exact question I just posted to the list, and, unfortunately,
the answer is "no."
Stephen C. Nill, J.D.
CharityChannel, the Internet Discussion Forums
of American Philanthropy Review
[log in to unmask]
http://CharityChannel.com/
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 14:40:34 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
In-Reply-To: Stephen C. Nill's message about Re: Resubmitting an edited copy
to a moderated list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>Aaron Morris wrote:
>>
>>>My question concerns the reposting of an edited copy. If I edit the
>>>original and resubmit it, the posting then gets distributed to the list
>>>with me as the author and a subject header of "NO SUBJECT". Is there a
>>>way a for moderator to edit and resubmit AND keep the original author and
>>>subject headers intact?
It sounds like your mail program is replacing or adding a 'From:'
and 'Subject:' header instead of or above the ones from the
original message.
On September 22, on [log in to unmask], Stephen C. Nill said:
>> Aaron,
>>
>> This is the exact question I just posted to the list, and,
>>unfortunately, the answer is "no."
I know of a mail package that will allow you to do this (at least
up to LISTSERV 1.8c; that's the version running on my lists' host
system). It's called 'vm,' it's written in lisp, and runs from
within an Emacs session. Which means that it will only help you
if you are running on a UNIX platform. Unless some one knows of a
up-to-date version of Emacs that runs on a Windows platform (I'd
be -very- interested if you know of such a version). VM is not
easy for the novice to use.
In vm you have considerable control over the message and its
headers when resending. This has been my mail program of choice
for more than 6 years. And I have had no problems resending
messages which I have edited to remove HTML markup or attachments
- either messages sent to me directly or messages that need
approval (by the resent method).
FYI: I NEVER edit the content of a message. I just remove
mailer-generated extraneous stuff such as HTML markup attachments
or other attachments. Attachments are against my list's posting
rules.
-Debbie Douglass
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| No flames were thrown in the creation of this email message. |
|--------------------------------.------------------------------------|
[log in to unmask] \ May your sword always be within |
|Systems Administrator \ reach and may your Foe's skill |
|GTE Government Systems, Needham, MA\ and luck be less than your own.|
`------------------------------------`--------------------------------'
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 11:04:28 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: rex <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Aaron Morris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>My question concerns the reposting of an edited copy. If I edit the
>original and resubmit it, the posting then gets distributed to the list
>with me as the author and a subject header of "NO SUBJECT". Is there a
>way a for moderator to edit and resubmit AND keep the original author and
>subject headers intact?
Yes. I do it many times a day with a program I wrote.
However, the repetition of the question prompted me to see if it can be
done with Eudora. It can:
Eudora has the feature of allowing the insertion of ExtraHeaders in
every message. Edit eudora.ini and add the line:
ExtraHeaders=Resent-From: you@yourISP\r\nResent-To: your_list@where_it_is
below the [Settings] line.
Now when you get a message for approval, use Eudora's "Redirect"
(or better, "Redirect-to" to avoid having to type in the list address).
You can then edit the message as desired and Eudora will not alter
the "From: ..." line. When the message is sent to LISTSERV it will
be sent directly to the list without sending it back to you for a second
approval step, and it will appear to have come directly from the original
poster.
You obviously don't want these extra headers to be added except when you
are acting as list editor -- forgetting to turn them off would be an
excellent way to send personal mail to the list -- so you need a way to
turn the feature on and off. One way to do that is to copy the original
eudora.ini to mylist.ini, edit mylist.ini and insert the line above so
the file looks like:
[Settings]
ExtraHeaders=Resent-From: you@yourISP\r\nResent-To: your_list@where_it_is
.
.
.
Then make an icon for the list version of Eudora and set the properties
so Eudora uses mylist.ini instead of eudora.ini. Click on the shortcut
tab of the eudora properties and edit the line to the right of
"Target" to read:
C:\eudora\eudora.exe c:\eudora\mylist.ini
(alter the drive and path to suit your installation)
If you have multiple lists, you can make a Eudora icon for each
and mylist1.ini, mylist2.ini,... files with the appropriate
ExtraHeaders line for each.
Using alternate *.ini files is documented in Help, as is ExtraHeaders.
Hope this helps,
-rex
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 15:18:11 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Steve Howie <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Listserv and Qmail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Anyone out there running Listserv with Qmail? I need to get some of your
thoughts on this combination. One of our prime motivations for considering
dumping sendmail is the lack of per-user checkpointing. We get MANY
instances of multiple messages because of the brain-dead manner in which
sendmail retries delivery. With Listserv using sendmail this can be a
rather major problem.
Any thoughts/ideas/caveats would be most appreciated.
Thanks!
Scotty
--
Steve Howie [log in to unmask]
Netnews and Listserv Admin 519 824-4120 x2556
University of Guelph
"If it's not Scottish it's CRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPP!"
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 15:17:04 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Kris Van Hees <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv and Qmail
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.95.980922151407.5839A-100000@ccshst01>; from "Steve
Howie" on Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 03:18:11PM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Sep 22, 1998 at 03:18:11PM -0400, Steve Howie wrote:
> Anyone out there running Listserv with Qmail? I need to get some of your
> thoughts on this combination. One of our prime motivations for considering
> dumping sendmail is the lack of per-user checkpointing. We get MANY
> instances of multiple messages because of the brain-dead manner in which
> sendmail retries delivery. With Listserv using sendmail this can be a
> rather major problem.
I am currently running a Listserv Lite (Free edition) with QMail. It took
a bit of testing to get it going, but it has been working for the longest time
now, without any glitches. The clue was mostly to use preline to process
incoming messages, because otherwise important information was getting lost.
If you need any specific help, or info, please let me know, and I will try
to help.
Kris
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 19:26:35 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
Comments: To: Aaron Morris <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Equivocal answer is it depends on your system. Basically you have
to change it to a non OK item, and to preserve the original
From: and Subject: you need the ability to edit anything in the
item, including the email header.
A few days ago I gave a brief synopsis of how it can be done with UNIX
Pine, should be in the archives.
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 21:56:06 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Betty Harris <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hiya,
Aaron Morris <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>My question concerns the reposting of an edited copy. If I edit the
>original and resubmit it, the posting then gets distributed to the list
>with me as the author and a subject header of "NO SUBJECT". Is there a
>way a for moderator to edit and resubmit AND keep the original author and
>subject headers intact?
and Mary Schweitzer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I'd like to add to this by saying the TYPE of editing I would like to do
>and be able to continue to have it say it is "from" the original poster
>-- things like reformatting, getting html language out of there, cutting
>over-long echoes of previous posts. Basic EDITING stuff, not anything
>that changes the content.
Gosh... You guys are *sure* nice. or you must have
more spare time than I do. My list has about 800 or
so people on it and we see up to 150 posts per day.
It's not moderated, tho I do screen several posts from
newbies to make sure they have read the list guidelines.
After that probationary period, I set them to where they can
post directly to the list and remind them using a custom
mail template that it's *their* responsibility to keep
the list a cool place to interact. I insist that my list
members quote sparingly and edit out all the extra
header/footer info and that they don't send html to
the list or images or attachments and that they
communicate without becoming verbally abusive (That's
all in my list guidelines). What's pretty cool about that
is since people who have been on list for any length of
time understand why it's a good thing to do this stuff
(Because it makes it easier to not waste time looking for
what someone has said), they actually help me keep the
list from getting cluttered up. Heck, they even get irate
when people get too sloppy, etc. But then I guess it depends
on who your list membership is (e.g., Is the membership too
transient for it to develop into a cohesive group with
shared norms about communication, or perhaps whether the
members are people that you *have* to baby like that as a
result of their status in the organization, etc.). I'd
encourage you to monitor and teach and encourage them
to be responsible for their contributions rather than doing
it for them. :)
Out for now,
Betty
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 23:35:04 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: The word "From"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
OK, LSoft, I've already tested this problem enough to know how to
duplicate it:
I've noticed recently that Listserv has a habit of inserting the
">" character whenever a paragraph in the message begins with the
word "From" (with an uppercase "F"). Thus a sentence that started
with "F" now starts with ">F".
By the way I'm running 1.8d.
Why does Listserv have this "feature" ?
George Buckner
Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 21:08:44 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Chris Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The word "From"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
I don't believe that LSoft does this. It's a feature of sendmail. Unix
mail messages are separated by the "From " line. Unfortunately, when a
line starts with a "From ", then sendmail changes it to ">From " so that
a new mail message is not "begun" midstream.
--
Chris Anderson
Director, Technical Support
Unify Corporation
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Buckner [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 1998 8:35 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: The word "From"
>
>
> OK, LSoft, I've already tested this problem enough to know how to
> duplicate it:
>
> I've noticed recently that Listserv has a habit of inserting the
> ">" character whenever a paragraph in the message begins with the
> word "From" (with an uppercase "F"). Thus a sentence that started
> with "F" now starts with ">F".
>
> By the way I'm running 1.8d.
>
> Why does Listserv have this "feature" ?
>
> George Buckner
> Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
>
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 00:07:04 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: The word "From"
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 23:35 -0400 9/22/98, George Buckner said:
>OK, LSoft, I've already tested this problem enough to know how to
>duplicate it:
>
>I've noticed recently that Listserv has a habit of inserting the
>">" character whenever a paragraph in the message begins with the
>word "From" (with an uppercase "F"). Thus a sentence that started
>with "F" now starts with ">F".
>
>By the way I'm running 1.8d.
>
>Why does Listserv have this "feature" ?
Don't blame LISTSERV, blame your MTA. Since any line starting with
"From " (note the missing colon) denotes the start of a new mail
message in the spool file, the MTA will insert a ">" in front of
the word "from" when it appears at the start of a record; this
prevents the MUA (or POP gateway) from misinterpreting the line as
the start of a new mail message.
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 21:17:38 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: rex <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Winship <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Equivocal answer is it depends on your system. Basically you have
>to change it to a non OK item, and to preserve the original
>From: and Subject: you need the ability to edit anything in the
>item, including the email header.
No, you only need to be able to add Resent-xx and leave the "From:.."
line intact. Eudora (AFAIK) will not allow you to edit the header,
but it will allow you to add Resent-xx, which combined with its
"Redirect" capability, is enough.
-rex
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 01:39:45 -0500
Reply-To: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Resubmitting an edited copy to a moderated list
Comments: To: rex <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, rex wrote:
> No, you only need to be able to add Resent-xx and leave the "From:.."
> line intact. Eudora (AFAIK) will not allow you to edit the header,
> but it will allow you to add Resent-xx, which combined with its
> "Redirect" capability, is enough.
That may work fine in Eudora, I don't know as I've never used Eudora.
UNIX Pine and Elm have a built-in "resend" which works fine, but
nothing can be edited, the item is resent as is. So, I do it as I
have described. I can then do things like put in a From: field
for someone whose system can't do that in a manner LISTSERV will
accept, change the date stamp for someone whose system insists the
current date is March 9, 1995, etc., etc., etc.
I'm not saying it's quick, though it doesn't take all that long
once once has the technique down, and I use it only in special
instances. When I do use it, though, 99% of the subscribers
never realize the was ever *anything* in that posting that needed
to be fixed, be it HTML, lousy date/no date, no From:, whatever.
It works with UNIX Pine and Elm (which of course has some handy
features Pine does not) and it does all the things the people
were asking for, though it isn't as convenient as they would
like and it is not a LISTSERV feature, which I have gotten the
impression is what they really want. It is a highly flexible
procedure and it fits the way I work and my needs.
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 10:23:13 +0100
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Gary Crighton <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: deleting the archives
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi
I am about to launch a list late this month/early next. At present the
web-archive shows test mails for June & August - is there any way to
delete these mails from the archive?
Thanks
Gary Crighton
Digital Media Centre
Dublin
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 09:02:18 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: The word "From"
In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 22 Sep 1998 23:35:04 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
Sorry, that's not a LISTSERV "feature". That's a well-known sendmail
"feature".
On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 23:35:04 -0400 George Buckner said:
>OK, LSoft, I've already tested this problem enough to know how to
>duplicate it:
>
>I've noticed recently that Listserv has a habit of inserting the
>">" character whenever a paragraph in the message begins with the
>word "From" (with an uppercase "F"). Thus a sentence that started
>with "F" now starts with ">F".
>
>By the way I'm running 1.8d.
>
>Why does Listserv have this "feature" ?
>
>George Buckner
>Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 09:22:21 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: deleting the archives
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To: Gary Crighton <[log in to unmask]> "deleting the archives" (Sep
23, 10:23am)
On Sep 23, 10:23am, Gary Crighton wrote:
} I am about to launch a list late this month/early next. At present the
} web-archive shows test mails for June & August - is there any way to
} delete these mails from the archive?
Send to the listserv:
Put Listname-L.LOGxxxx
with nothing following it. No signature.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 11:08:43 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Sai Boppana <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: problems
Hi i am facing a uniqe problem can any one help me out.We have a list by
name [log in to unmask] but when i send a message to
[log in to unmask] i get the following message(attached).Can
any one help me out.Thanks in advance
Regard
Sai
begin 600 winmail.dat
M>)\^(BX/`0:0"``$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y`0```````#H``$(@`<`
M&````$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`06``P`.````S@<)`!<`
M"P`(`"L``P`V`0$@@`,`#@```,X'"0`7``L`"``K``,`-@$!"8`!`"$````Q
M,S<U1#E$,#0P-3)$,C$Q.3`W.#`P-#!&-D0T134V,P#7!@$$@`$`"0```'!R
M;V)L96US`&0#`0V`!``"`````@`"``$#D`8`%`<``#(````#``6`""`&````
M``#`````````1@````!2A0``\!,``!X`&H`((`8``````,````````!&````
M`%2%```!````!````#@N-0`+`$&!""`&``````#`````````1@`````&A0``
M``````,`"8`((`8``````,````````!&``````&%````````"P``@`@@!@``
M````P````````$8``````X4````````+`!Z`""`&``````#`````````1@``
M```.A0````````,``H`((`8``````,````````!&`````!"%`````````P`?
M@`@@[log in to unmask]""`&``````#`````
M````1@`````4A0````````,`(8`((`8``````,````````!&`````!B%````
M````'@`P@`@@!@``````P````````$8`````-H4```$````!`````````!X`
M,8`((`8``````,````````!&`````#>%```!`````0`````````>`#*`""`&
M``````#`````````1@`````XA0```0````$`````````"P`^@`L@!@``````
MP````````$8``````(@````````+`$"`"R`&``````#`````````1@`````%
MB`````````(!"1`!````8P$``%\!```2`@``3%I&=20$`$@#``H`<F-P9S$R
M->(R`T-T97@%00$#`??_"H`"I`/D!Q,"@`_S`%`$5C\(50>R$24.40,!`@!C
M:.$*P'-E=#(&``;#$27V,P1&$[<P$BP1,PCO"?>V.Q@?#C`U$2(,8&,`4+,+
M"0%D,S864`NG8P$P$"!(:2`=0&%M()9F`-`+@&<=<"!U`P"P<64@<`-@`F!E
M'9!F8P.1`'!Y(`(@'H!H,&5L<"`'@!^0=71D+E<?P6%V'H`>(&SK!``%0&(?
M@&X=@!Z`&"!`<7,M;$!B';!R.&US+@ZP'N`)P&%P+&@N!:`=D&(@<"!WSQ_@
M`Z`=0!00;F0>$0>!R'-A9QZ`=&\B#R,:]QU`)[log in to unmask]<#\!WQ
M)/4H80)``-`?X+!D*2Y#'S\@1%03X)QN:P0@"X`=<&1V`'#L8V4*H@J`4B,@
M"Q,L<A<&$`"@+&-]+A``'@!P``$````)````<')O8FQE;7,``````@%Q``$`
M```6`````;WF_'"56@"(F%+N$=*KXP"@=J"H.````P`F```````#`#8`````
M``L``@`!`````P#>/Z]O``!``#D`$+RJ#03GO0$#`/$_"00``!X`,4`!````
M"0```%-"3U!004Y!``````,`&D``````'@`P0`$````)````4T)/4%!!3D$`
M`````P`90``````#`/T_Y`0```,`@!#_____`@%'``$````V````8SU54SMA
M/2`[<#U#;VUP=71E8VAC;W)P.VP]0D5!5$Q%4RTY.#`Y,C,Q-3`X-#-:+3(R
M-3`````"`?D_`0```%0`````````W*=`R,!"$!JTN0@`*R_A@@$`````````
M+T\]0T]-4%5414-(0T]24"]/53U414Q%1U)!4$@O0TX]4D5#25!)14Y44R]#
M3CU30D]04$%.00`>`/@_`0````P```!386D@0F]P<&%N80`>`#A``0````D`
M``!30D]04$%.00`````"`?L_`0```%0`````````W*=`R,!"$!JTN0@`*R_A
M@@$`````````+T\]0T]-4%5414-(0T]24"]/53U414Q%1U)!4$@O0TX]4D5#
M25!)14Y44R]#3CU30D]04$%.00`>`/H_`0````P```!386D@0F]P<&%N80`>
M`#E``0````D```!30D]04$%.00````!```<P4%YRZ0/GO0%```@PL)/8#03G
MO0$>`#T``0````$`````````'@`=#@$````)````<')O8FQE;7,`````'@`U
M$`$````_````/#<Q0D8Y.#,T1C8Y140P,3$Y,#(Y,#`T,$8V1#1%-38S,4,V
M03)!0&)E871L97,N5&5L96=R87!H+F-O;3X```L`*0``````"P`C```````#
M``800J.1^0,`!Q#.`````P`0$``````#`!$0`````!X`"!`!````90```$A)
M24%-1D%#24Y'055.25%%4%)/0DQ%34-!3D%.64].14A%3%!-14]55%=%2$%6
M14%,25-40EE.04U%4D514RU,0$)&05)-4U1%3$5'4D%02$-/34)55%=(14Y)
M4T5.1$%-15,``````@%_``$````_````/#<Q0D8Y.#,T1C8Y140P,3$Y,#(Y
M,#`T,$8V1#1%-38S,4,V03)!0&)E871L97,N5&5L96=R87!H+F-O;3X``(A7
M`@*[log in to unmask](``@```````]!`(0@`$`%````%5N=&ET;&5D($%T
M=&%C:&UE;G0`<@<"$H`#``X```#.!PD`%P`+``<`,@`#`#P!`A.``P`.````
MS@<)`!<`"P`'`#(``P`\`0(1@`8`N`D```$`"0```]P$`````"$$``````4`
M```)`@`````%`````0+___\`I0```$$+Q@"(`"``(```````(``@```````H
M````(````$`````!``$````````!`````````````````````````````/__
M_P``````/.@&``8```#0COH`Y;L_;@@`^```````,'<_;@```````````0``
M````````````V&%B;P``````````````````````````H%IB;P$`````\6AO
M`@$C:`$````(D@,!Z!=B;P$```"`#B4``````##I!@`0@`,!R$%D;_______
M____________________P````\````/````#P````\````/````#P````\``
M``/````#P````\````/````#P````\````/````#P````\````/````#P```
M`\````/````#________________________________(00``$$+1@!F`"``
M(```````(``@```````H````(````"`````!``@````````$````````````
M````````````````````@```@````("``(````"``(``@(```,#`P`#`W,``
M\,JF`/#[_P"DH*``@("`````_P``_P```/__`/\```#_`/\`__\``/___P``
M``````"```"`````@(``@````(``@`"`@```P,#``,#<P`#PRJ8`\/O_`*2@
MH`"`@(````#_``#_````__\`_P```/\`_P#__P``____`````````(```(``
M``"`@`"`````@`"``("```#`P,``P-S``/#*I@#P^_\`I*"@`("`@````/\`
M`/\```#__P#_````_P#_`/__``#___\`````````@```@````("``(````"`
M`(``@(```,#`P`#`W,``\,JF`/#[_P"DH*``@("`````_P``_P```/__`/\`
M``#_`/\`__\``/___P````````"```"`````@(``@````(``@`"`@```P,#`
M`,#<P`#PRJ8`\/O_`*2@H`"`@(````#_``#_````__\`_P```/\`_P#__P``
M____`````````(```(````"`@`"`````@`"``("```#`P,``P-S``/#*I@#P
M^_\`I*"@`("`@````/\``/\```#__P#_````_P#_`/__``#___\`````````
M@```@````("``(````"``(``@(```,#`P`#`W,``\,JF`/#[_P"DH*``@("`
M````_P``_P```/__`/\```#_`/\`__\``/___P````````"```"`````@(``
M@````(``@`"`@```P,#``,#<P`#PRJ8`\/O_`*2@H`"`@(````#_``#_````
M__\`_P```/\`_P#__P``____`````````(```(````"`@`"`````@`"``("`
M``#`P,``P-S``/#*I@#P^_\`I*"@`("`@````/\``/\```#__P#_````_P#_
M`/__``#___\`````````@```@````("``(````"``(``@(```,#`P`#`W,``
M\,JF`/#[_P"DH*``@("`````_P``_P```/__`/\```#_`/\`__\``/___P``
M``````"```"`````@(``@````(``@`"`@```P,#``,#<P`#PRJ8`\/O_`*2@
MH`"`@(````#_``#_````__\`_P```/\`_P#__P``____`````````(```(``
M``"`@`"`````@`"``("```#`P,``P-S``/#*I@#P^_\`I*"@`("`@````/\`
M`/\```#__P#_````_P#_`/__``#___\`````````@```@````("``(````"`
M`(``\/O_`*2@H`"`@(````#_``#_````__\`_P```/\`_P#__P``____````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,```````,
M$P\3$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$P\3$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$PP```````P3$Q,3$Q,3#Q,3$P\3
M$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$P\3#```````#`<3$Q,3#Q,3$P\3$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$P\3$P<,
M```````,$P<3#Q,3$P\3$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$P\3$Q,'$PP```````P3#P<3$Q,3
M$Q,/$Q,3#Q,3$P\3$Q,/!Q,3#```````#!,3$P<3$Q,/$Q,'!P<'!P\3$Q,/
M$P<3#Q,,```````,$Q,3$P</$Q,3!PP,#`P,!P</$Q,'#Q,3$PP```````P3
M$Q,/$P<3$P<,$Q,3$Q,,!P<3!Q,3$P\3#```````#!,3$Q,3#P<'#`\3#Q,/
M$Q,,!P<3$P\3$Q,,```````,$Q,3$Q,3!PP3$Q,3$Q,3#Q,,!P\3$Q,/$PP`
M``````P3$Q,3$P<,$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$P\,!Q,/$Q,3#```````#!,3$Q,'#!,3
M$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,,!Q,3#Q,,```````,$Q,3!PP3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,/$Q,,
M!Q,3$PP```````P3$P<,$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3#Q,,!P\3#```````#!,'
M#!,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$P\,!Q,,```````,!PP3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3
M$Q,3$Q,3$Q,,!PP```````P,$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,/$Q,,#```
M````#!,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3$Q,3#Q,,```````,#`P,#`P,#`P,
M#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P,#`P`````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M```````````````````````````````````````````#```````[^@(/@`8`
M&@```$U!4$D@,2XP(&5M8F5D9&5D(&UE<W-A9V4`)0@"!9`&`%`\```0````
M`P`A#@`````#``LW_____P,`(`YW&````P#W#P````!```<P0&Y`[@/GO0%`
M``@P0&Y`[@/GO0$#``4W!0```!X``3`!````+P```%)%45,M3#H@97)R;W(@
M<F5P;W)T(&9R;VT@0D9!4DU3+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT``$``^W\`0-VC5T6S
M#`(!`C<!`````````$``_'\`0-VC5T6S#`,`_7\``````P#Z?P`````+`/Y_
M``````(!^0\!````$````!1UV=!`4M(1D'@`0/;4Y6,-``$W`0```&H[```'
M`P(``````,````````!&>)\^(BX/`0:0"``$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````
MY`0```````#H``$(@`<`&````$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(
M`0"```!;````!`!;`"@`(P!,+5-O9G0@;&ES="!S97)V97(@870@0V]M<'5T
M96-H("@Q+CAC*0``4TU44#I,25-44T525D!"1D%235,N5$5,14=205!(+D-/
M30```````````$87`0R``@":(0``5&AE(&5N8VQO<V5D(&UA:6P@9FEL92!H
M87,@8F5E;B!I9&5N=&EF:65D(&%S(&$@9&5L:79E<GD@97)R;W(@9F]R(&QI
M<W0-"E)%45,M3"!B96-A=7-E(&ET('=A<R!S96YT('1O('1H92!R97-E<G9E
M9"`G;W=N97(M<F5Q<RUL)R!M86EL8F]X+@T*#0HM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM
M+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2T@365S<V%G92!I;B!E<G)O<B`M+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM
M+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM#0I296-E:79E9#H@9G)O;2!B9F%R;7,N5&5L
M96=R87!H+F-O;2!B>2!B96%T;&5S+E1E;&5G<F%P:"YC;VT@=VET:"!33510
M#0H@("`@("`@("`@*$UI8W)O<V]F="!%>&-H86YG92!);G1E<FYE="!-86EL
M(%-E<G9I8V4@5F5R<VEO;B`U+C`N,30U-RXW*0T*"6ED(%1.-U985E)#.R!7
M960L(#(S(%-E<"`Q.3DX(#$P.C4Q.C0R("TP-#`P#0I$871E.B`@("!7960L
M(#(S(%-E<"`Q.3DX(#$P.C4V.C0P#0I&<F]M.B`@("!,25-44T525B!33510
M(&EN=&5R9F%C92`\;W=N97(M3$E35%-%4E9`8F9A<FUS/@T*4W5B:F5C=#H@
M56YD96QI=F5R960@;6%I;`T*5&\Z("`@("`@;W=N97(M<F5Q<RUL0$)&05)-
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M(")-/BE<7%XH06`N8#`Z,%PB8&`D8&!@8&!@8"%@8"1@8#`^,"%`8"A@8&!@
M66`P8&!@8&!@8"-(8&`D*"(E8#Q@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/
M30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A
M9&1R97-S.B`\(DT^*5Q<7BA!8"Y@,#HP7")@8"1@8&!@8&!@(6!@)&!@,#XP
M(4!@*&!@8&!98#!@8&!@8&!@(TA@8"0H(B5@/&`N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN
M3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B329@8&!@)$4P,S)9+3HV+5([
M5RU/.4<P0#,V)4D[7")9+CM7,45@(R0H8#`V8&!08"Y@8&!@4R(E/"E@(3Q@
M+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R
M;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DTF8&!@8"1%,#,R
M62TZ-BU2.U<M3SE',$`S-B5).UPB62X[5S%%8",D*&`P-F!@4&`N8&!@8%,B
M)3PI8"$\8"Y"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT^#0H-"D5R<F]R+49O
M<CH@(")-7")`8%%@8%A@8%`A(6`P)$!`8"Q@(T!@8&`L6"=<(C!@-V!@2&`L
M,&`O8&`L8#`B)20A(CA@(6`B)&!@8&!8+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94
M+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE
M9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DU<(D!@46!@6&!@4"$A8#`D0$!@+&`C0&!@8"Q8)UPB
M,&`W8&!(8"PP8"]@8"Q@,"(E)"$B.&`A8"(D8&!@8%@N0DE43D540$))5$U!
M24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B33!#/%0Q(T4D+",P4"TS
M*20L0R11+C-@5RXC8%`M(R$F+40P5#$S-%8L4"-,(4`D)"(E8"1@(3!@8&`F
M44DN0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%
M<G)O<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB33!#/%0Q(T4D
M+",P4"TS*20L0R11+C-@5RXC8%`M(R$F+40P5#$S-%8L4"-,(4`D)"(E8"1@
M(3!@8&`F44DN0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&
M;W(Z("`B33Q7,&!/8"0A(SA@)&!@*&!@8&!<(F!@*&!@,"XP(4!<(B(E(5!@
M8"PP8&!@8"Q@(3A@*"[log in to unmask]&!@8&!@8"Q@8"Y"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&
M5"Y#3TT-"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M
M960@861D<F5S<SH@/")-/%<P8$]@)"$C.&`D8&`H8&!@8%PB8&`H8&`P+C`A
M0%PB(B4A4&!@+#!@8&!@+&`A.&`H*&`X8&!@8&!@+&!@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-
M04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@(DU@8&!@8&`A)F!@8&!@
M)2HE8&`C4"108&`G0&`Z0&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@8"0X8&!@8&`U
M*#1@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*
M17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DU@8&!@8&`A
M)F!@8&!@)2HE8&`C4"108&`G0&`Z0&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@8"0X
M8&!@8&`U*#1@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M
M1F]R.B`@(DU@4&`I0&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@8"0X8&!@8&[log in to unmask]@
M8&!@8&!@8"M@8")@(B)@)F!@8&!@8"-@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94
M+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE
M9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DU@4&`I0&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@8"0X8&!@
M8&[log in to unmask]@8&!@8&!@8"M@8")@(B)@)F!@8&!@8"-@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,
M+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@(DU@8&!@8&!@8#$B)6!@8&!@
M(T$P8&!@8&!@8&!,8"=(8"@H8#A@8&!@8&`L8&!@8&!@8&`A)F!@8&!@8%HE
M+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R
M;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DU@8&!@8&!@8#$B
M)6!@8&!@(T$P8&!@8&!@8&!,8"=(8"@H8#A@8&!@8&`L8&!@8&!@8&`A)F!@
M8&!@8%HE+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R
M.B`@(DU@8&!@8&!@8&!08%PB0&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@8"0X8&!@
M8&`D*#1@8&!@8&!@8"-@(5Y@(B)@)BY"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#
M3TT-"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@
M861D<F5S<SH@/")-8&!@8&!@8&!@4&!<(D!@0$`A(B5@8&!@8&!08&!@8&!@
M8&`D.&!@8&!@)"@T8&!@8&!@8&`C8"%>8"(B8"8N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN
M3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B36!@8&!@8"-@8&!@8&!@8&`Q
M(B5@8&!@8#%!,&!@8&!@8&!@+&`H.&`H*&`X8&!@8&!@+&!@8&!@8&!@(28N
M0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O
M<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB36!@8&!@8"-@8&!@
M8&!@8&`Q(B5@8&!@8#%!,&!@8&!@8&!@+&`H.&`H*&`X8&!@8&!@+&!@8&!@
M8&!@(28N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z
M("`B36!@8&!@(4(E8&!@8&!@8&`G0&!00&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@8&!@8&!@
M8"0X8&!@8&`M2#1@8&`D8&!@8"$N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-
M#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D
M9')E<W,Z(#PB36!@8&!@(4(E8&!@8&!@8&`G0&!00&!`0"$B)6!@8&!@8%!@
M8&!@8&!@8"0X8&!@8&`M2#1@8&`D8&!@8"$N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/
M1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B36!@8#Y@(RI@7")<(F`F8&!@8&!@
M(V!@8&!@8&!@8#$B)6!@8&!@6$$P8&!@,&!@8&`D8&!@8&!@8&!@(E!@7BY"
M251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT-"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R
M+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@861D<F5S<SH@/")-8&!@/F`C*F!<(EPB
M8"9@8&!@8&`C8&!@8&!@8&!@,2(E8&!@8&!803!@8&`P8&!@8"1@8&!@8&!@
M8&`B4&!>+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R
M.B`@(DU`8$Q`(4!@8&!@8&!08&!@8&!@8&`D.&!@8&!@8"@B)6!@8&!@8&!@
M*V`D(F`B4F`F8&!@8&!@(V!@8&!@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/
M30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A
M9&1R97-S.B`\(DU`8$Q`(4!@8&!@8&!08&!@8&!@8&`D.&!@8&!@8"@B)6!@
M8&!@8&!@*V`D(F`B4F`F8&!@8&!@(V!@8&!@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ3
M3T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@(DU@8&!@,2)`8&!@8&`E0F!@8&!@
M8&!@8"@A(C%@(6!@8&`E4"A@8"$L(F!@(D%@4&!@,R5))CT^+"Y!*CPC#0I%
M<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E
M<W,Z(#PB36!@8&`Q(D!@8&!@8"5"8&!@8&!@8&!@*"$B,6`A8&!@8"50*&!@
M(2PB8&`B06!08&`S)4DF/3XL+D$J/",^#0H-"D5R<F]R+49O<CH@(")-8&!(
M8#Q&+5`Y4R12+3XH4F!4+50Y-T`E,#`D(V`_/U]<(DA@7"))8"]$(5$L7"(B
M)6!?4V`E8"0U0UPH-3`^4BY"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT-"D5R
M<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@861D<F5S
M<SH@/")-8&!(8#Q&+5`Y4R12+3XH4F!4+50Y-T`E,#`D(V`_/U]<(DA@7"))
M8"]$(5$L7"(B)6!?4V`E8"0U0UPH-3`^4BY"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&
M5"Y#3TT^#0H-"D5R<F]R+49O<CH@(")-)#(T+C0P+"%@0"%#.BXD*E`G+44]
M(R@F8&`[(R0R-U8L4#$F)%L\4"1"4#$L4$-/7"(_/E8N42(E/R-#8%4N0DE4
M3D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU4
M97AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB320R-"XT,"PA8$`A0SHN
M)"I0)RU%/2,H)[log in to unmask],D,C=6+%`Q)B1;/%`D0E`Q+%!#3UPB/SY6+E$B)3\C
M0V!5+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@
M(DTX-TE:.V`R,"102D)<(DA@2B@A720T1C513B<U23PB)3Y@8$-@)"@F)"4P
M)R0H-"954#TP6E`D76`R*[log in to unmask]"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT-
M"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@861D
M<F5S<SH@/")-.#=)6CM@,C`D4$I"7")(8$HH(5TD-$8U44XG-4D\(B4^8&!#
M8"0H)B0E,"<D*#0F55`],%I0)%U@,B@W8#LN0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/
M1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B32$[8"(E/"9$(B@A6SP[5SU.-#`R
M,"\R(5,A3B%0(DLA3B<F)6`C2V`^2&!'8#@W(4@[0E@E2"(C)2$Z)5`N0DE4
M3D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU4
M97AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB32$[8"(E/"9$(B@A6SP[
M5SU.-#`R,"\R(5,A3B%0(DLA3B<F)6`C2V`^2&!'8#@W(4@[0E@E2"(C)2$Z
M)5`N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B
M320L(4,I3"1&-"%;/%Q<,#8B0#M&.4E@,&`B+&`\42A1(2XS0ET]+#)@04@F
M.5DH42$Y/E`^,"=-429@46`G#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU497AT
M.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB320L(4,I3"1&-"%;/%Q<,#8B
M0#M&.4E@,&`B+&`\42A1(2XS0ET]+#)@[log in to unmask],"=-429@46`G
M/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B32LR13!%4BPP*B-@55Q<7")0."@G+5`A.2-*
M/2%;/CU`0C`]4BPP*F`P2U<_5"E<7"[log in to unmask])3`C/S(N0DE43D54
M0$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU497AT
M.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB32LR13!%4BPP*B-@55Q<7")0
M."@G+5`A.2-*/2%;/CU`0C`]4BPP*F`P2U<_5"E<7"[log in to unmask])3`C
M/S(N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B
M32A@(TDA5&!,/&`T,#U#/D$G35!+,"%94",^8%-<7#(E42E<(B%0/%)06CQ2
M,"(E*R0D8"]6(2%()C%"7B8D3"Y"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT-
M"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@861D
M<F5S<SH@/")-*&`C22%48$P\8#0P/4,^02=-4$LP(5E0(SY@4UQ<,B51*5PB
M(5`\4E!:/%(P(B4K)"1@+U8A(4@F,4)>)B1,+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ3
M3T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@(DTU4CI@)TU0)#A2(5`A.V!/*%$P
M0T-2,C\G4"5=,5!@8"<B)2%08&`D8&!@8"5@8&[log in to unmask]@8&!@8&`B+D))
M5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/30T*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M
M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A9&1R97-S.B`\(DTU4CI@)TU0)#A2(5`A
M.V!/*%$P0T-2,C\G4"5=,5!@8"<B)2%08&`D8&!@8"5@8&[log in to unmask]@8&!@
M8&`B+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@
M(DU@-R1@8#!@8&`A.&!@8&`A3SX[64XC.U)@2U=>-$XP,51*3T-@*B%62"HB
M)5A@8&`C8"(X8&!@8&!@8"Q@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94+D-/30T*
M17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A9&1R
M97-S.B`\(DU@-R1@8#!@8&`A.&!@8&`A3SX[64XC.U)@2U=>-$XP,51*3T-@
M*B%62"HB)5A@8&`C8"(X8&!@8&!@8"Q@+D))5$Y%5$!"251-04E,+DQ33T94
M+D-/33X-"@T*17)R;W(M1F]R.B`@(DTM0&!@8&!@8%PB4&!<(F!@)&!@8&`C
M8"U87TM67%Q@8"1@8"XP(S!%554U8#X^76`P+&!<7#-<7"DA8&!@)R(E8%$N
M0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O
M<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E<W,Z(#PB32U`8&!@8&!@7")0
M8%PB8&`D8&!@8"-@+5A?2U9<7&!@)&!@+C`C,$55535@/CY=8#`L8%Q<,UQ<
M*2%@8&`G(B5@42Y"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT^#0H-"D5R<F]R
M+49O<CH@(")-+25(32Q#*%,M(B5@8&!@*"%>,UPA8&!@8#5@8&!@8&!@8&`C
M/$E4(RA0)"@P)DLR62)@8$LK7B8B8#!@8"Y"251.151`0DE434%)3"Y,4T]&
M5"Y#3TT-"D5R<F]R+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M
M960@861D<F5S<SH@/")-+25(32Q#*%,M(B5@8&!@*"%>,UPA8&!@8#5@8&!@
M8&!@8&`C/$E4(RA0)"@P)DLR62)@8$LK7B8B8#!@8"Y"251.151`0DE434%)
M3"Y,4T]&5"Y#3TT^#0H-"D5R<F]R+49O<CH@(")-+3%@(6!@8&`O4&!@8"-0
M5RPT*28N,R)`4RTD.%8N-#4D+",D42XS8%(N,V!0+2,A)BU$,%0Q,S16+%,E
M(PT*17)R;W(M0V]D93H@,PT*17)R;W(M5&5X=#H@-34S(&UA;&9O<FUE9"!A
M9&1R97-S.B`\(DTM,6`A8&!@8"]08&!@(U!7+#0I)BXS(D!3+20X5BXT-20L
M(R11+C-@4BXS8%`M(R$F+40P5#$S-%8L4R4C/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B
M36!08"8D+5$I6S(P(V!@/#!#0"1@8&`L8"0A8&!@8&!@8%!@,21@8&!@8&`^
M8&`B)3!@,&!@8"8T8&!@(3`N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N0T]-#0I%
M<G)O<BU#;V1E.B`S#0I%<G)O<BU497AT.B`U-3,@;6%L9F]R;65D(&%D9')E
M<W,Z(#PB36!08"8D+5$I6S(P(V!@/#!#0"1@8&`L8"0A8&!@8&!@8%!@,21@
M8&!@8&`^8&`B)3!@,&!@8"8T8&!@(3`N0DE43D540$))5$U!24PN3%-/1E0N
M0T]-/@T*#0I%<G)O<BU&;W(Z("`B33-5*3`P5%TM*D19+V!@8&!@8"@A/U!@
M(6!@8&`O4&!@8"-05RPT*28N,R)`4RTD.%8N-#4D+",D42XS8%(-"D5R<F]R
M+4-O9&4Z(#,-"D5R<F]R+51E>'0Z(#4U,R!M86QF;W)M960@861D<F5S<SH@
M/")-,U4I,#!472TJ1%DO8&!@8&!@*"$_4&`A8&!@8"]08&!@(U!7+#0I)BXS
M(D!3+20X5BXT-20L(R11+C-@4CX-"@T*17)R;W(M16YD.B`@,C@@97)R;W(H
M<RD@<F5P;W)T960-"@T*+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2T@
M56YD96QI=F5R960@;65S<V%G92`M+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM+2TM
M+2TM+0T*4F5C96EV960Z(&9R;VT@0D9!4DU3+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT@8GD@
M0D9!4DU3+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT@*$Q)4U1315)6+51#4"])4`T*("`@("`@
M("`@(')E;&5A<V4@,2XX8RD@=VET:"!S<&]O;"!I9"`P,3$T(&9O<B!215%3
M+4Q`0D9!4DU3+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT[#0H@("`@("`@("`@5V5D+"`R,R!3
M97`@,3DY."`Q,#HU-CHS."`M,#0P,`T*4F5C96EV960Z(&)Y(&)E871L97,N
M5&5L96=R87!H+F-O;2!W:71H($EN=&5R;F5T($UA:6P@4V5R=FEC92`H-2XP
M+C$T-3<N,RD@:60-"B`@("`@("`@("`\5$XW5EA64D(^.R!7960L(#(S(%-E
M<"`Q.3DX(#$P.C4Q.C,X("TP-#`P#0I8+5!R:6]R:71Y.B`S#0I8+4U3+51.
M148M0V]R<F5L871O<CH@/#<Q0D8Y.#,T1C8Y140P,3$Y,#(Y,#`T,$8V1#1%
M-38S,4,V03(W0&)E871L97,N5&5L96=R87!H+F-O;3X-"E@M36%I;&5R.B!)
M;G1E<FYE="!-86EL(%-E<G9I8V4@*#4N,"XQ-#4W+C,I#0I-97-S86=E+4E$
M.B`@/#<Q0D8Y.#,T1C8Y140P,3$Y,#(Y,#`T,$8V1#1%-38S,4,V03(W0&)E
M871L97,N5&5L96=R87!H+F-O;3X-"D1A=&4Z("`@("`@("`@5V5D+"`R,R!3
M97`@,3DY."`Q,#HU,3HS-B`M,#0P,`T*4F5P;'DM5&\Z("`@("!297%U:7)M
M96YT<R!A="!#;VUP=71E8V@@0V]P;W)A=&EO;B`\4D514RU,0$)&05)-4RY4
M14Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-/@T*4V5N9&5R.B`@("`@("!297%U:7)M96YT<R!A="!#
M;VUP=71E8V@@0V]P;W)A=&EO;B`\4D514RU,0$)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!4$@N
M0T]-/@T*1G)O;3H@("`@("`@("!386D@0F]P<&%N82`\<V)O<'!A;F%`5$5,
M14=205!(+D-/35!55$5#2$-/4E`N0T]-/@T*4W5B:F5C=#H@("`@("!S87`-
M"E1O.B`@("`@("`@("`@4D514RU,0$)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-#0H-
M"G1H:7,@:7,@82!S86UP;&4@<&]S=&EN9PT*`/F-`0F``0`A````0S(W-$0Y
M1#`T,#4R1#(Q,3DP-S@P,#0P1C9$-$4U-C,`YP8!!X`&``$````A(0`!!H`#
M``X```#.!PD`%P`*`#,`+P`#`&0!`2"``P`.````S@<)`!<`"@`S`"\``P!D
M`0$%@`,`#@```,X'"0`7``H`.``I``,`8P$!!(`!`"\```!215%3+4PZ(&5R
M<F]R(')E<&]R="!F<F]M($)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-`'H.`0V`!``"
M`````@`"``$$D`8`Z`````$````*````'@`!,`$````,````4V%I($)O<'!A
M;F$`'@`",`$````%````4TU44``````>``,P`0```"4```!S8F]P<&%N84!4
M14Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-4%5414-(0T]24"Y#3TT``````P``,``````"`?8/`0``
M``0``````````P`5#`$````"`0LP`0```"H```!33510.E-"3U!004Y!0%1%
M3$5'4D%02"Y#3TU0551%0TA#3U)0+D-/30```!X`(#H!````#````%-A:2!"
M;W!P86YA``L`#PX!````"P!`.@``3$42)0$#D`8`/!<``#L````#`/T__PX`
M`$``.0"`FCQ?`N>]`0(!00`!````8@````````"!*Q^DOJ,0&9UN`-T!#U0"
M```!`$PM4V]F="!L:7-T('-E<G9E<B!A="!#;VUP=71E8V@@*#$N.&,I`%--
M5%``3$E35%-%4E9`0D9!4DU3+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT````>`&0``0````4`
M``!33510`````!X`90`!````'@```$Q)4U1315)60$)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!
M4$@N0T]-````'@!"``$````G````3"U3;V9T(&QI<W0@<V5R=F5R(&%T($-O
M;7!U=&5C:"`H,2XX8RD``!X`,4`!````'@```$Q)4U1315)60$)&05)-4RY4
M14Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-`````@$[``$````C````4TU44#I,25-44T525D!"1D%2
M35,N5$5,14=205!(+D-/30```P`:0````0`>`!X,`0````4```!33510````
M`!X`'PP!````'@```$Q)4U1315)60$)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!4$@N0T]-````
M'@`:#`$````G````3"U3;V9T(&QI<W0@<V5R=F5R(&%T($-O;7!U=&5C:"`H
M,2XX8RD``!X`,$`!````'@```$Q)4U1315)60$)&05)-4RY414Q%1U)!4$@N
M0T]-`````@$=#`$````C````4TU44#I,25-44T525D!"1D%235,N5$5,14=2
M05!(+D-/30```P`90````0`#`#8```````,`!A"`OAKK`P`'$$$7```>``@0
M`0```&4```!42$5%3D-,3U-%1$U!24Q&24Q%2$%30D5%3DE$14Y4249)141!
M4T%$14Q)5D5264524D]21D]23$E35%)%45,M3$)%0T%54T5)5%=!4U-%3E14
M3U1(15)%4T525D5$3U=.15(M``````,`$!```````P`1$``````"`0D0`0``
M`*4-``"A#0``&"4``$Q:1G6+2G;6`P`*`')C<&<Q,C7B,@-#=&5X!4$!`P'W
M_PJ``J0#Y`<3`H`/\P!0!%8_"%4'LA$E#E$#`0(`8VCA"L!S970R!@`&PP*`
MMQ$S".\)]SL5OPXP-1$B'0Q@8P!0"PD!9#,V,`L#,0O%8P$P(%1H99H@"?!C
M%5`4$&0@`,"]`Q%F`Q`:\!/@!"!B">'\(&D!``(P!I`(D!N`'%%$82`!`&QI
M=@20>7T;`'(#8`7``A`%P!WP<P9T"J(*@%)%45,MXDP<<6-A=100',`%0(YW
M'%$4$`(P('1O(4`W&N$5P!00<AX0&X`G;Q1W;@20+17`<7,MS&PG&Y,&X'@N
M'T0?1!XM)(\E6@70!Y!S86=_('$#H!YD)5\H;!]%!9!EN1X!9#H;X`-A''!F
M"L!0;7,N5!W@90G`87AP:"X%H"JA'D`<@&$^=!P0*QX#\"&`!@!-5,I0'T0@
M+I<H30W@`V!$<V\!@"!%>!/1;OTFP4D",`21%"`%T!NR!F%V=@W@&O!6!)``
MD`(@(``U+C`N,30U-W@N-RDCQ0&1',$:P$X`-U985E)#.R!"5PF`+"`R,P91
M<"`@,3DY.#4P,#H0-3$Z-!1`+3`TUC`!0!]31"Q@92I0+I';-(\UDC8UX#9E
M1@-A-Q,`3$E35%-%4E;?+>,FX3"1*M`QH3PB9#GF"D`JQ#X?1%-U8FKE!9!T
M*E!5;AW5&W4?1!Q4;S<3+I`B:D!"1@Q!4@7@*R!%3$5'`%)!4$@N0T]-_2/*
M02<&(,(!``ZP/8`;<?1W:!P"<`-@*?`$$`N`[F<A<QL8)H0N$,`>\S^@=F8?
M1"&"80$@0X05P&-?!2`(D`(P!"`"$&P54'=_*Q`:P00`1F1)<2;Q';!S_G!(
M(0=`'K(`P"$Q$^`?-?\'0$CR.=@A42!`(5!+(0W@]TP!'D`!D&M'83V`,A(R
M(8\+@`6A2!$%0&%D9"'!]Q00*Q`CS#XOT!YS`0`$],TR$3H?1%%#+48%L#<1
M&")-/C+P4\%>*$$88"Y@-:`!0%PB8"Q@)%3`5/,A5,,P/J`P(4!@*%3R6510
M"53U(TA4P2@B)6"2/%0P0DDSX$540'`!5^!-04E,+DQ3^$]&5$&(4L0(4`$`
M*E#^,U)J*S`.T"I0&``TX`#`WFQ*\AU23[0J4#Q3CU2??U6O5K]7SUC6/,52
M;U-Q)@%>DB1%,#,R62T`.C8M4CM7+4^0.4<P0!G`)4D6T,E>0%DN9:`Q16"@
M8/"U7?`V7F!07=%>D5-A$/P\*5[P84]8OUG/6M];[_]<\V2O9;]FSV??:.]B
MSU+;JUXQ7Z!17F!8<.$A7P#H,"1`7Z`L8*!?H%Y@V"Q8)UXQ8#`W7F!@P#HL
M8#`O=M%=\&$0)"'4(CA>\2)>@UAR#VFO_VJ_:\]LWUT1=4]V7W=O>'\'>8]S
M3U*],$,\5#$`(T4D+",P4"T$,RF&D$,D42XS$&!7+B-P\"TC(1`F+40PAE`S
M-%:0+%`C3%^0)"1A$<5>@"%@,B9128+O>F__>W]\CWV?71&&+X<_B$^)7Z>*
M;X1O4OD\5V`P3UYP_"$C@C!>@5_#7C-?P3)P]U^!7C%A$"%Q`(%"@%)>\/V"
M,"A?P((P7I.`$''_BO__C`^-'XXO70*6CY>?F*^9OQ^:SY2/4KU>I6X38"4J
M4V$@8*!0)*)Q)[log in to unmask]]?H'_@@A"H45Z2HG%>E"3QHX0U*#2D'YN?G*^=O_^>
MSUT"IV^H?ZF/JI^KKZ6O^Z:Z<0`ILG^SBJ-PM&!>E?XK7F!>4*(PDP!@5;1_
MK#__K4^N7Z]OL'.WW[CON?^[#R^\'[8?ILY>8#'!I2-!>6`V8$RR(&#`HUNP
MNV#\6B7$[[ROO;^^S[_?L(?_R(_)G\JOR[_%O\;/Q]MP\3]^T\%_LZA@\,-'
MD0`A7O_$$]5/S0_.'\\OT#_12=D/_]H?VR_</]8?UR^G&9$`T7[V,=*(@!`H
MHSVPMN7OW8__WI_?K^"_L(?IC^J?ZZ_LOV?FO^?/IQ@A0N,ULA-0L^+?LXHM
M2,-"7H,A]D__[@_O'_`O\3^PAOG?^N_[_Z_]#_</^!^G!SY@H"JA,O=>,L17
MT7Y8TH-@,UZ&P^']<0!>!J_^;_]_`(\!G["$_PH?"R\,/PU/#E\('U+J7Z#^
M3`1`@$($OUZ180+#9Y)@_8)@4A1<%X\/#Q`?$2\2/_]MX1K/&]\<[QW_'P\9
M#^A]4]'P)&0E0N'W*((0,4M>\K%A4%_!(2Q>42(+7<"B<3-OL"8]/BS@+D$J
M/",@+R$_(D__`AXK;RQ_+8\NE"E_ILI@P``\1BU0.5,D4A51$"@F\%0PT#DW
M0(PE,'_`D0`_/U]>,0M@P%XQ28%P1"%1+#&B$V!?4[%P7G`U0^E=8"@U7V!2
M)^\?KR^/_S"?,:[log in to unmask]\ZKSN_/,\#*1]2KB0R-"XT,`8L7P`$0$,Z+B0J
M@%`G+44](RAN$1([<(`R-Y'A,28D]%L\L>!"2["1\#X`7C$@/SY6+E%A$#\C
M^$-@549O/;\^SS_?0.__;>%)KTJ_2\],WTWO1\\9^X`X-TE:.V`R?\`H4$I"
M1"-*-%!=)``T1C513B<U2?5MX"43H&!6T&#P54!#D`(GY*$F55`],%K5L>!=
M6I`H@0`[5P].K_]/OU#/4=]MX5I/6U]<;UU_-UZ/6&\9^R%C\'&!)D3.(C10
M56!O$#U.4U!D$$`O,B%3(4ZB8"*22VQP)R9%4"-+$Y`%@3!'HW`W(4@[0J!8
M)4@B(Z)0.C3P_V>O7T]@7V%O8G^/06KO:_\_;0]N'V\O:2](^E-P0REP3"1&
M-'31H4"A0#!B-G[P.T8Y1*"!8"(A@!`\42A1!I`S0@!=/2PR8$%()H0Y67U!
M.3Y0/F9@]$U1L2!1LB!P3W%?<F]_4EM[7WQO?7]^BGF?&B@KH#)%,$52HJ`J
MD0!&58/RH4%0."A4(%"1?F`C2CUTT#X]>'`,,#V),A9`2U<_5`(I@_(F,%M'
M4E$(1&`Y=%$P(S\R_W@/;\]_WX#O@?]C@8COB?]_BP^,'XTO>0^'OR/PHV`C
M2$DA5-,0/&!34#U(0SY!?L!02Z'@61)0-J!@4X/R,B51A96Q(J)@/%)06IS0
M$C!%0"LD%J`O5B'A=R`F,4)>54".$)<?_XY?CV^0?Y&/FB^;/YQ/G5^'GF^8
M'YDO3352.K(@6Z3PL]!2=>!T,4^%,#``0T-2,C\G4"5\73&R`D5`=>`6A01S
M._`F15,]%N6H#Y]_H(__H9^BKV.!JT^L7ZUOKG^OCUNIC^AZ-Q:A%A(A]2,A
M@$\^.UE.(SLF\`&5<%XT3C`Q5$J"3U;0*B%62"I%0/I8Y2,B]27TD;AOL"^Q
M/_^R3[-?\D*[O[S/O=^^[[__^[G_&B@M)&63LN*2%H630&`M6%]+5H/R%H,N
MHY;`DN!55343D#YG,-]38.*1E>#"((/Q*32BMI'_?P#(S\"/P9_"K\._8X',
M#__-'\XOSS_03\E_RH_+EG=PP$TL0RA3+01D-%#>7MG1-*/9`.37/-M05&"!
M9Q`H,"9+,EDU8?Q+*Z?`%$`6$=K/T;_2S__3W]3OU?+>']\OX#_A3^)?%]Q/
MRUHTA2\DTB-05^@L-"GV,#,S,.?0)6`Y5F`T-8,P5,#:L#-@(T90\.!0+2/V
M("U$(#!4,3,T50!3)?\N[^1_Y8_57.Z?[Z_PO_''K^S?"4G6T%5`+:8`6V00
MM131/+6P0!:BR*`D-*.])*,Q%J5EP9:A%D,F!@+\(3#K3^+_\N_S__4/$T)_
M^]_\[_W__P\`'_H?&B@S!%4I0Z!472TJ1/19+S/V/];0]G_WC_B2_P$O`C\#
M3V+Z#"\-/PY/^#@C"G\0D$5N9%GQ,CB$(&408BAS*2!C(-IP$(!T8L`7RBT;
M3QP)A"!5&/!E;&EV&7"'8L%BL&-`86=E(!P/PQ\J#_1296-E'7$9`0)F$'!M
M($)&05*`35,N5$5,198PB$%02`#B(&)Y(7^!(H,H3$E35%.2\()6$=!#4"])
M4`_TATE@);9C(&QE87,>0!`Q+CAC&>!W:70(:"!S&B!O;"!I,V+0QM`Q-"$@
M$(`@4G1%4>?03`E0(Q\!`#NU)5Y78L`L&3`28%,:$`DFP#DY&5`Q,#HU2#8Z
M,QE0+3!34#"K(#XBT6(F@'0F<',AX`$F86=R87!H+F,3(5$G,TEN&E!R;F5@
M="!-86DGP"O@<JQV:2"P)$`UV)`N*#"\-3>%8!G@)^`E7CP)$.%4\%A64D+&
M`"M?+&/*,2S-6$*`<FD0@"=`_GD0]S:0(T`1T`D@0G`0L,\08!U0+J"[,CPW
MIZ"$@,(X^:!&-CE%\:`H(!XY=5`Z,"T1.;!$-$5!+*`S,4,V053@0/\NCR^2
M%[4WP3#1&7!9\#`_BS%/#_1-'?0M2419\>\Y+SH_.T\\7T1#\!#A*N]%--TV
M+/QP;'D1T&]C1=0@D'%U:1+1/A!S1V+@/G`0L&UP=1I08]\G8!"P&B%#\#;0
M;L2P**__(B@7M33`'3%9XDE?2F]+?]M,CPIF1B%!1=A3/J`B\)-0D!``;F'$
ML'-B5)220"'[4%4A\$-("D#CIH!-:G5B:B"@$A$EL_T>$'`/]$DF3I517R.W
M%\K])U!I3Y!<H53@'A!0`"9P2B`:('-0X&YG#_1]`5YP````'@!]``$```#B
M`0``4F5C96EV960Z(&9R;VT@8F9A<FUS+E1E;&5G<F%P:"YC;VT@8GD@8F5A
M=&QE<RY496QE9W)A<&@N8V]M('=I=&@@4TU44"`H36EC<F]S;V9T($5X8VAA
M;F=E($EN=&5R;F5T($UA:6P@4V5R=FEC92!697)S:6]N(#4N,"XQ-#4W+C<I
M#0H):60@5$XW5EA64C$[(%=E9"P@,C,@4V5P(#$Y.3@@,3`Z-3$Z-#,@+3`T
M,#`-"D1A=&4Z("`@("`@("`@5V5D+"`R,R!397`@,3DY."`Q,#HU-CHT,2`M
M,#0P,`T*1G)O;3H@("`@("`@("`B3"U3;V9T(&QI<W0@<V5R=F5R(&%T($-O
M;7!U=&5C:"`H,2XX8RDB#0H@("`@("`@("`@("`@(#Q,25-44T525D!"1D%2
M35,N5$5,14=205!(+D-/33X-"E-U8FIE8W0Z("`@("`@4D514RU,.B!E<G)O
M<B!R97!O<G0@9G)O;2!"1D%235,N5$5,14=205!(+D-/30T*5&\Z("`@("`@
M("`@("!386D@0F]P<&%N82`\<V)O<'!A;F%`5$5,14=205!(+D-/35!55$5#
M2$-/4E`N0T]-/@T*6"U,4U8M3&ES=$E$.B!.;VYE#0H-"@````L`'PX!````
M'@!P``$````O````4D514RU,.B!E<G)O<B!R97!O<G0@9G)O;2!"1D%235,N
M5$5,14=205!(+D-/30```@%Q``$````6`````;WG`:XIT-ETPU)`$=*0>`!`
M]M3E8P``0``&#E`;1K`!Y[T!`@$_``$```!4`````````-RG0,C`0A`:M+D(
M`"LOX8(!`````````"]//4-/35!55$5#2$-/4E`O3U4]5$5,14=205!(+T-.
M/5)%0TE0245.5%,O0TX]4T)/4%!!3D$`'@!U``$````%````4TU44``````>
M`'8``0```"4```!S8F]P<&%N84!496QE9W)A<&@N8V]M<'5T96-H8V]R<"YC
M;VT`````'@!```$````,````4V%I($)O<'!A;F$`'@`T0`$````)````4T)/
M4%!!3D$``````@%1``$````[````15@Z+T\]0T]-4%5414-(0T]24"]/53U4
M14Q%1U)!4$@O0TX]4D5#25!)14Y44R]#3CU30D]04$%.00```P`;0``````"
M`4,``0```%0`````````W*=`R,!"$!JTN0@`*R_A@@$`````````+T\]0T]-
M4%5414-(0T]24"]/53U414Q%1U)!4$@O0TX]4D5#25!)14Y44R]#3CU30D]0
M4$%.00`>`'<``0````4```!33510`````!X`>``!````)0```'-B;W!P86YA
M0%1E;&5G<F%P:"YC;VUP=71E8VAC;W)P+F-O;0`````>`$0``0````P```!3
M86D@0F]P<&%N80`>`#5``0````D```!30D]04$%.00`````"`5(``0```#L`
M``!%6#HO3SU#3TU0551%0TA#3U)0+T]5/51%3$5'4D%02"]#3CU214-)4$E%
M3E13+T-./5-"3U!004Y!```#`!Q```````L`5P`!````"P!8```````+`%D`
M`0````(!^3\!````5`````````#<IT#(P$(0&K2Y"``K+^&"`0`````````O
M3SU#3TU0551%0TA#3U)0+T]5/51%3$5'4D%02"]#3CU214-)4$E%3E13+T-.
M/5-"3U!004Y!`!X`^#\!````#````%-A:2!";W!P86YA`!X`.$`!````"0``
M`%-"3U!004Y!``````(!^S\!````5`````````#<IT#(P$(0&K2Y"``K+^&"
M`0`````````O3SU#3TU0551%0TA#3U)0+T]5/51%3$5'4D%02"]#3CU214-)
M4$E%3E13+T-./5-"3U!004Y!`!X`^C\!````#````%-A:2!";W!P86YA`!X`
M.4`!````"0```%-"3U!004Y!`````$``!S`002FN`>>]`4``"#"@N$>P`>>]
M`1X`'0X!````+P```%)%45,M3#H@97)R;W(@<F5P;W)T(&9R;VT@0D9!4DU3
M+E1%3$5'4D%02"Y#3TT```L`&PX``````P`C#A%@```>`#40`0```#\````\
M-S%"1CDX,S1&-CE%1#`Q,3DP,CDP,#0P1C9$-$4U-C,Q14%"03-`8F5A=&QE
M<RY496QE9W)A<&@N8V]M/@```P#T#P([log in to unmask]@X```L`2F8`````E(0`
#`&V\
`
end
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 08:55:30 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Randy Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Our-Kids
Subject: Re: The word "From"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Your mail program is inserting the > in front of the word From if it begins on
a line by itself.
That word is used by the mailer to Parse messages (determine the beginning of a
mail message) from your mail file. Some mailers automatically stick in the >
so that the mail reader program won't start parsing the messsage as a new
message when the see the "From" as the first word on a new line.
On a sun workstation, the sendmail configuration file is modded to force a
placement of the > so the mail reader program won't improperly start a new
message.
Randy
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 19:45:50 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: From The word "From" to REPRO
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks to the folks who know this stuff a lot better than I (and
apologies to LSoft). It's easy to forget all the components that
play a role in how well this works. This was the first time I
had encountered this problem.
But I'd still like to know why people on REPRO often don't get
REPROed. Ben Parker reported the same problem with my test list,
and in fact I had the same problem with his.
Any ideas?
George Buckner
Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 08:52:37 +10
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <wilsond@pophost>
From: Debra Wilson <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: NSW Agriculture
Subject: Re: problems
Comments: To: Sai Boppana <[log in to unmask]>,
LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
>Hi i am facing a uniqe problem can any one help me out.We have a list by
>name [log in to unmask] but when i send a message to
>[log in to unmask] i get the following message(attached).Can
>any one help me out.Thanks in advance
>Regard
>Sai
Apart from not being able to read the attached message in most parts, have you
looked at your aliasing for that list??
Debra
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 08:41:30 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: From The word "From" to REPRO
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 19:45 9/23/98 -0400, George Buckner said:
|But I'd still like to know why people on REPRO often don't get
|REPROed. Ben Parker reported the same problem with my test list,
|and in fact I had the same problem with his.
REPRO also interacts with any topic filtering i.e., one only gets a REPRO
copy of their posting if they have a SUBJECT: topic that matches their
subscription options.
Let's say I had a list X with TOPICS ABC,DEF and my personal subscription
options were REPRO and TOPIC: ALL,-OTHER. If I were to post
TO: X@listhost
SUBJECT: this is a test
test
--
I would NOT receive the REPRO copy.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 08:22:37 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Joe Georges <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask] om>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Has anyone else noticed an apparent increase during the last few weeks of
bounces of list messages to subscribers with aol addresses? I am getting
error messages saying that the users are unknown.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 11:34:25 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Chris Pepper <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Deleting posts from the archives
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
At 9:08 AM +1000 09/21/98, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD) wrote:
>One of my list-owners has been GETting the <listname> LOGyymm files,
>editing as appropriate (messages are suffixed by a line of minus signs)
>and PUTting them back.
Assuming I have direct access to the archive directory, and a text
editor that can leave line breaks as-is, can I open the logs directly, edit
in-place, then save and restart LISTSERV to ensure it picks up the changes?
Or would this cause other difficulties?
Thanks,
Chris Pepper
--
Chris Pepper | National Audubon Society: Web & List Manager
212 979 3092 | <http://www.audubon.org/staff/pepper/>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 12:09:43 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Deleting posts from the archives
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 24 Sep 1998 11:34:25 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
On Thu, 24 Sep 1998 11:34:25 -0400 Chris Pepper said:
>At 9:08 AM +1000 09/21/98, Paul Wayper (DPI ISD) wrote:
>>One of my list-owners has been GETting the <listname> LOGyymm files,
>>editing as appropriate (messages are suffixed by a line of minus signs)
>>and PUTting them back.
>
> Assuming I have direct access to the archive directory, and a text
>editor that can leave line breaks as-is, can I open the logs directly, edit
>in-place, then save and restart LISTSERV to ensure it picks up the changes?
>Or would this cause other difficulties?
You would also have to delete the web archive index(es) corresponding to the
notebook(s) in question and let LISTSERV rebuild them (this can be done
by simply PUTting the list header, BTW; it does not require a restart).
You should also erase the listname.db* files in the Notebook= directory;
LISTSERV will rebuild them the next time someone does a search.
One thing that is recommended if you do have to edit archives is that you
do not edit the current notebook until after the next notebook is started.
This is because it is possible to get the notebook out of sync with the
digest, which can cause the digest not to be issued.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 14:36:46 +0100
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Carolyn Schaffner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Yes! and full mailboxes!! I get more error messages from AOL than from
anywhere!! My subscribers tell me that last year, they didn't have a
problem being away from the computer for three days, this year. kapow!
and the messages/day has not changed.
And no such address when there certainly is, and on and on !!
Carolyn Schaffner in Buffalo, NY
Joe Georges wrote:
>
> Has anyone else noticed an apparent increase during the last few weeks of
> bounces of list messages to subscribers with aol addresses? I am getting
> error messages saying that the users are unknown.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:14:29 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 08:22 9/24/98 -0700, Joe Georges said:
|Has anyone else noticed an apparent increase during the last few weeks of
|bounces of list messages to subscribers with aol addresses? I am getting
|error messages saying that the users are unknown.
Yes and it has been reported to AOL who has responded. ...
On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 18:12:51 EDT, in bit.listserv.ibmtcp-l Phil Wilkin
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 12:41:55 EDT John Hammond said:
>If anyone hears from AOL, please let the list know what they have to say.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 12:14:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Scott Crain (AOL Postmaster)" <[log in to unmask]>
To: Phil Wilkin <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: 501 Data format error
AOL did a configuration change that resulted in refusal of all
source-routed addresses. You have a couple options... 1: Wait 'til we
back
it out, which is in planning now, or change your mailserver to use a
non-source-routed address in the MAIL FROM: SMTP envelope.
SCott
--
Scott Crain
AOL/GNN Postmaster
Internet Development Outreach & Technology Group
America Online, Inc.
email: [log in to unmask]
On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Phil Wilkin wrote:
> Our email to aol.com from radar.bgsu.edu via trapper.bgsu.edu is being
> rejected with a 501 Data format error. Why?
>
> Phil Wilkin, Postmaster for Radar
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:08:11 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Judith Hopkins <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
My experience is the opposite. With a subscription list of 3200 (of
which about 85% is from the US and with only 30-35 having AOL addresses)
the AOL subscribers cause me very few problems. In August one was
auto-deleted. So far in September one has had a full mailbox. And
that's all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judith Hopkins, Listowner of Autocat
[log in to unmask]
My home page: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh
AUTOCAT home page:
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/autocat/
On Thu, 24 Sep 1998, Carolyn Schaffner wrote:
> Yes! and full mailboxes!! I get more error messages from AOL than from
> anywhere!!
>
>
> Joe Georges wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone else noticed an apparent increase during the last few weeks of
> > bounces of list messages to subscribers with aol addresses? I am getting
> > error messages saying that the users are unknown.
>
>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 13:39:42 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Sherry Beauchamp <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
My experience mirrors Judith's. I use Auto-Delete on my lists, and now
that AOL's bounces are compliant, they cause me very little problem.
Sherry Beauchamp
>My experience is the opposite. With a subscription list of 3200 (of
>which about 85% is from the US and with only 30-35 having AOL addresses)
>the AOL subscribers cause me very few problems. In August one was
>auto-deleted. So far in September one has had a full mailbox. And
>that's all.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Judith Hopkins, Listowner of Autocat
> [log in to unmask]
> My home page: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh
> AUTOCAT home page:
> http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/autocat/
>
>
>On Thu, 24 Sep 1998, Carolyn Schaffner wrote:
>
>> Yes! and full mailboxes!! I get more error messages from AOL than from
>> anywhere!!
>>
>>
>> Joe Georges wrote:
>> >
>> > Has anyone else noticed an apparent increase during the last few weeks of
>> > bounces of list messages to subscribers with aol addresses? I am getting
>> > error messages saying that the users are unknown.
>>
>>
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 16:45:09 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Bill Verity <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Multi-day digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Strange thing. A busy edited list went without digests for several days
and then we got a digest with the subject:
TRDEV-L Digest - 20 Sep 1998 to 23 Sep 1998
What would cause this? Other digests were produced for other lists over
these days.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 17:24:17 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Multi-day digest
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 24 Sep 1998 16:45:09 -0400 from <[log in to unmask]>
On Thu, 24 Sep 1998 16:45:09 -0400 Bill Verity said:
>Strange thing. A busy edited list went without digests for several days
>and then we got a digest with the subject:
>
> TRDEV-L Digest - 20 Sep 1998 to 23 Sep 1998
>
>What would cause this? Other digests were produced for other lists over
>these days.
* list was held on 20 September and released on 23 September
* list was not posted to on the 20th through 22nd
Those are the two reasons I can think of off the top of my head.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:54:06 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Sherry Beauchamp <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Odd bounces
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Is there a reason why addresses with an underscore in the domain name would
suddenly begin bouncing? We just reinstalled 1.8c (we were using an early
build of 1.8d, but our server melted down and had to be replaced ...).
Sherry Beauchamp
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry Beauchamp Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
[log in to unmask] http://www.SSRN.Com
Leading Social Science Research Delivered to Your Desktop Daily
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 19:15:44 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: From The word "From" to REPRO
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Pete:
>At 19:45 9/23/98 -0400, George Buckner said:
>|But I'd still like to know why people on REPRO often don't get
>|REPROed. Ben Parker reported the same problem with my test list,
>|and in fact I had the same problem with his.
>
>REPRO also interacts with any topic filtering i.e., one only gets a REPRO
>copy of their posting if they have a SUBJECT: topic that matches their
>subscription options.
Thanks for the reminder, but that isn't the case here. None of my
lists use TOPICS. What I had noted specifically is that some of my
subscribers had complained that REPRO doesn't seem to be working.
When Ben offered to look into my "From" problem, I subscribed him to
one of my lists and set him to repro. He reported not receiving any
copies. He then subscribed me to his list with options set to repro,
and I had the same problem.
Any suggestions from LSoft?
George Buckner
Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 01:58:03 +0200
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Uzi Paz <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: From The word "From" to REPRO
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 19:15:44 -0400
> From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Thanks for the reminder, but that isn't the case here. None of my
> lists use TOPICS. What I had noted specifically is that some of my
> subscribers had complained that REPRO doesn't seem to be working.
> When Ben offered to look into my "From" problem, I subscribed him to
> one of my lists and set him to repro. He reported not receiving any
> copies. He then subscribed me to his list with options set to repro,
> and I had the same problem.
>
> Any suggestions from LSoft?
A question, do those subscribers who do not receive repro of their
postings, have this working for them on other lists?
This is a guess, but it might be that an ISP in order to prevent loops,
rejects messages from the outside of a subnet, that have a message-id that
suggests that the message was generated from within the subnet.
Such a filter may help in preventing loops, but may cause a lot of other
problems: for example if you have an account in such a subnet, and have a
forwarding address outside the subnet, you cannot check if it works.
These users may do the last thing in order to check.
Uzi
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 09:15:02 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Odd bounces
In-Reply-To: <v0310289bb2307db258c7@[209.180.215.128]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 15:54 9/24/98 -0700, Sherry Beauchamp said:
|Is there a reason why addresses with an underscore in the domain name would
|suddenly begin bouncing? We just reinstalled 1.8c (we were using an early
|build of 1.8d, but our server melted down and had to be replaced ...).
"Who" is doing the "bouncing?" It is my understanding that an
under_score in a domain name is illegal. Obviously some systems will be
more tolerant than others.
The hosts involved (and the systems/networks that they depend upon) in
the LISTSERV(R) Distribute Backbone could be different from list
distribution to list distribution, day-to-day, and month-to-month.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 19:17:06 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Odd bounces
In-Reply-To: <v0310289bb2307db258c7@[209.180.215.128]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Is there a reason why addresses with an underscore in the domain name would
>suddenly begin bouncing? We just reinstalled 1.8c (we were using an early
>build of 1.8d, but our server melted down and had to be replaced ...).
>
>Sherry Beauchamp
The real question is why it would have accepted it previously. Underscores
aren't generally allowed in domain names. I did a search in the LSTOWN-L
archives and found the following in a message from one Melvin Klassen:
>According to Internet RFC 1912 ("Common DNS Operational and Configuration
>Errors", February 1996, D. Barr, The Pennsylvania State University):
>
> Allowable characters in a label for a host name are only ASCII letters,
> digits, and the "minus" character. ....
> The presence of underscores in a label is allowed in [RFC 1033],
> except [RFC1033] is informational only, and was not defining a
>standard. ...
> Note that the rules for Internet host names also apply to hosts and
> addresses used in SMTP (See RFC 821).
A few years back Eric Thomas said that LISTSERV itself wouldn't have a
problem with domain names with underscores in them but most SMTP servers
would, but of course I don't know whether this is still correct.
-jwgh
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:15:08 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Matagiri Perkins <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Jaya Communication and River School
Subject: Excede archive space
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-user-defined
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi,
possibly a dumb question, but if it's the middle of the night when you
first excede your archive space, and the list gets held, is there a way
to free it? I will tell them in the morning to charge me for more space,
and I have tried the "FREE LIST" command with only moderate success, and
it would be nice not to have to wait til morning. Is there a way?
MG Perkins
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:22:34 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Bounces from AOL addresses increasing?
In-Reply-To: Sherry Beauchamp's message about Re: Bounces from AOL addresses
increasing?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On September 24, on [log in to unmask], Sherry Beauchamp said:
>>My experience mirrors Judith's. I use Auto-Delete on my lists, and now
>>that AOL's bounces are compliant, they cause me very little problem.
This is news to me. I get several error reports a DAY about
unknown users or full mailboxes but an AOL address has yet to
show up in my daily error monitoring reports. My lists run on a
1.8c server.
-Debbie Douglass
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| No flames were thrown in the creation of this email message. |
|--------------------------------.------------------------------------|
[log in to unmask] \ May your sword always be within |
|Systems Administrator \ reach and may your Foe's skill |
|GTE Government Systems, Needham, MA\ and luck be less than your own.|
`------------------------------------`--------------------------------'
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 07:37:46 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Joe Georges <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Odd bounces
Comments: To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <v031107b9b23081772bec@[206.152.10.82]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 07:17 PM 9/24/98 -0400, Jacob Haller wrote:
>>Is there a reason why addresses with an underscore in the domain name would
>>suddenly begin bouncing? We just reinstalled 1.8c (we were using an early
>>build of 1.8d, but our server melted down and had to be replaced ...).
>>
>>Sherry Beauchamp
>
>The real question is why it would have accepted it previously. Underscores
>aren't generally allowed in domain names.
Could there be a problem with underscores in list names, as distinguished
from underscores in
domain names?
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:47:17 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Stanley Horwitz <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Excede archive space
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 25 Sep 1998, Matagiri Perkins wrote:
> possibly a dumb question, but if it's the middle of the night when you
> first excede your archive space, and the list gets held, is there a way
> to free it? I will tell them in the morning to charge me for more space,
> and I have tried the "FREE LIST" command with only moderate success, and
> it would be nice not to have to wait til morning. Is there a way?
Changing the list's header to reflect "Notebook= No" would probably
accomplish what you but, but it depends on exactly how the Listserv
administrator configured that system. If the Listserv's entire filesystem
is full, then this will not work. If that's the case, you just have to
wait until the system admin fixes the problem.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:04:25 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Excede archive space
In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:47:17 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
On Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:47:17 -0400 Stanley Horwitz said:
>On Fri, 25 Sep 1998, Matagiri Perkins wrote:
>> possibly a dumb question, but if it's the middle of the night when you
>> first excede your archive space, and the list gets held, is there a way
>> to free it? I will tell them in the morning to charge me for more space,
>> and I have tried the "FREE LIST" command with only moderate success, and
>> it would be nice not to have to wait til morning. Is there a way?
>
>Changing the list's header to reflect "Notebook= No" would probably
>accomplish what you but, but it depends on exactly how the Listserv
>administrator configured that system. If the Listserv's entire filesystem
>is full, then this will not work. If that's the case, you just have to
>wait until the system admin fixes the problem.
In this case I suspect the list is an EASE-HOME list on L-Soft's
HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM server and the problem is that the list has run
up against its quota. In that case, no, there is no way for the
list owner to automatically reset things and you must send a message
to the appropriate person (Jeni I assume) to get your quota raised.
The bottom line is that L-Soft's EASE-HOME customers:
a) Have their own mailing list for support concerns,
[log in to unmask] , which is where this question
probably should properly have gone
b) Have an easy way to check on their quotas at any time to see if
they are in danger of hitting the limit: the SHOW QUOTA command.
We suggest to all of our EASE-HOME customers that this command be
issued on a regular basis so that there are no nasty surprises.
If the list owner in question is not one of L-Soft's customers then
I apologize for any confusion, but as far as I am aware there is only
one host other than L-Soft who is running with the quota system
enabled.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:21:49 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Excede archive space
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask] e.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|Changing the list's header to reflect "Notebook= No" would probably
|accomplish what you but, but it depends on exactly how the Listserv
|administrator configured that system. If the Listserv's entire filesystem
|is full, then this will not work. If that's the case, you just have to
|wait until the system admin fixes the problem.
I was given to understand that changing (some of?) the values of *
NOTEBOOK= is prohibited in the current beta version.
The other thing that could be done is to MOVE (GET and PUT) the oldest
archive, thus freeing up space.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 11:13:32 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Excede archive space
In-Reply-To: Matagiri Perkins <[log in to unmask]> "Excede archive space"
(Sep 25, 11:15am)
On Sep 25, 11:15am, Matagiri Perkins wrote:
} possibly a dumb question, but if it's the middle of the night when you
} first excede your archive space, and the list gets held, is there a way
} to free it? I will tell them in the morning to charge me for more space,
} and I have tried the "FREE LIST" command with only moderate success, and
} it would be nice not to have to wait til morning. Is there a way?
What I would suggest (YMMV) is to do a GET of the oldest archive or 2,
save them locally, delete them from the server, and then free the list.
When you have more space, you can then replace the older ones.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 17:25:42 -0500
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Angus <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Down On DaFarm
Subject: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
We've been slowly working on Listowner Info Pages .. two new ones [of many
to come] are now up .. may need some spell checking and polishing ;-)
We tried to make these pages and instructions as easy to follow and
understand as possible .. there are already a number of complicated,
incomprehensible howto pages on the net.
Step by Step instructions on how to edit Archives ..
http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/archive-edit.html
All of this was just done today on an active list's archives and ..
via get Listname LogXXXX command and via the web interface .. worked
beautifully immediately after the edited log was PUT.
Cheat Sheet of the most frequently used Listowner and Subscriber commands.
http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/cheat.html
Again, all of these commands were tested just today.
We are sure open to comments and suggestions ;-))) If you find anything that
is just flat wrong [ie: doesn't work or has unintended or unwanted side affects]
.. or you can think of more to add, or better, more understandable language ..
Please email me, we are anxious to make all of these page useful to newbie
oldtimer listowners and alike.
...Cleo [log in to unmask]
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 17:22:10 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Gilles Breton <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Country of subscribers
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Hi,
I would like to know in which country my subscribers are. Is there a way
on the Internet to find in which country is located the @company.com
part of an email address ?
Thanks
Gilles Breton
[log in to unmask]
http://pages.infinit.net/bregi/adoption/index.html
ICQ: 15730364
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 12:04:30 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of subscribers
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 17:22 9/25/98 -0400, Gilles Breton said:
|I would like to know in which country my subscribers are. Is there a way
|on the Internet to find in which country is located the @company.com
|part of an email address ?
Country of subscriber does not necessarily equivalence to their email
address. Trying to tie the address to the location is a topic of very
old conversation on LSTOWN-L.
What country is [log in to unmask] in?
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 12:20:06 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Vince Sabio <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of subscribers
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
** Sometime around 17:22 -0400 9/25/98, Gilles Breton said:
>Hi,
>
>I would like to know in which country my subscribers are. Is there a way
>on the Internet to find in which country is located the @company.com
>part of an email address ?
Telnet to internic.net, and enter "whois company.com". There are web-based interfaces to the RS database, as well.
__________________________________________________________________________
Vince Sabio Boy & His Sabre: <http://www.insane.net/tsc/Vince/>
[log in to unmask] Stop Internet Spam! <http://www.cauce.org/>
Vince's Interior Decorating Tip #37 (collect the whole series!):
"If it's not spaghetti, it doesn't belong on the wall."
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 19:54:07 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Don Wiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cleo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Step by Step instructions on how to edit Archives ..
>http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/archive-edit.html
You note that two carriage returns are needed after the header and before
the body. The recent experience of Lloyd on SJUOWNER would make it seem
that this is correct. But in your example you have three carriage returns
shown. I have no reason to believe three are needed.
Don.
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1998 22:41:37 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> You note that two carriage returns are needed after the header and before
> the body. The recent experience of Lloyd on SJUOWNER would make it seem
> that this is correct. But in your example you have three carriage returns
> shown. I have no reason to believe three are needed.
What? I've edited archives more often than I would like and I've never
needed two carriage returns, let alone three, for anything: my edited
stuff goes in fine.
Of course, I haven't done it since we've been sort of 1.8d beta.
Has there been a change in this?
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:21:22 GMT+0
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Peter Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject: Listserv Error Reporting
ListOwners,
I own a small list ([log in to unmask]) in which I limit subscription by
having * Subscription= By Owner. Unfortunately a prospective subscriber
sometimes sends me his/her e-mail address (on paper) and it is wrong! Usually
when I subscribe such a user Listserv quickly lets me know that the address is
incorrect and I can contact the user and get the correct address. However,
recently I had a couple of addresses which were wrong (I know this because when
I e-mailed them directly I did get an error message returned) but Listserv
flagged up no fault when they were subscribed. I have not set any "Errors-to"
path so I presume that all errors should come back to myself.
Any ideas ?
Peter R
Dr Peter K Robinson
Department of Applied Biology
University of Central Lancashire
Preston, PR1 2HE, England
Tel +44 (0)1772 893911 Fax +44 (0)1772 892929
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 08:39:04 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 12:21 9/28/98 GMT+0, Peter Robinson said:
|ListOwners,
|
|I own a small list ([log in to unmask]) in which I limit subscription by
|having * Subscription= By Owner. Unfortunately a prospective subscriber
|sometimes sends me his/her e-mail address (on paper) and it is wrong!
Usually
|when I subscribe such a user Listserv quickly lets me know that the
address is
|incorrect and I can contact the user and get the correct address. However,
|recently I had a couple of addresses which were wrong (I know this
because when
|I e-mailed them directly I did get an error message returned) but Listserv
|flagged up no fault when they were subscribed. I have not set any "Errors-to"
|path so I presume that all errors should come back to myself.
|
|Any ideas ?
Yes: never trust a hand-written email address! Not only can there be
transcription errors, but some folks simply don't know their correct
email address.
ERRORS-TO field? Exactly WHERE is this field specified? The BIOTUROR-L
list definition keyword?
ERROR-TO=
Some RFC822 field?
ERROR-TO:
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:28:23 GMT+0
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Peter Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
On 28 Sep 98 at 8:39, Pete Weiss wrote:
> ERRORS-TO field? Exactly WHERE is this field specified? The BIOTUTOR-L
> list definition keyword?
Pete - I meant that I had not specified this as a keyword in the list header
since the Listserv manual suggests that the default is "To Owner" (i.e. me)
anyway. What is most perplexing is that I do get some errors of incorrect
addresses reported back to me but, as I said in my previous e-mail, not all.
Peter R
Dr Peter K Robinson
Department of Applied Biology
University of Central Lancashire
Preston, PR1 2HE, England
Tel +44 (0)1772 893911 Fax +44 (0)1772 892929
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:04:23 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 14:28 9/28/98 GMT+0, Peter Robinson said:
|Pete - I meant that I had not specified this as a keyword in the list header
|since the Listserv manual suggests that the default is "To Owner" (i.e. me)
|anyway. What is most perplexing is that I do get some errors of incorrect
|addresses reported back to me but, as I said in my previous e-mail, not all.
Some broken email systems are not RFC compliant and generate bounces to
the original email sender and not the MAIL FROM:<OWNER-listname@listhost>
(which then "maps" to the ERRORS-TO= listname definition keyword).
What is the value of your * AUTO-DELETE= field ?
/P
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:07:55 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jay Brydon <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: editing and approving
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Does anybody know how I can edit subscriber posts and forward them to
the list without having them appear to be coming form me? Supposedly, I
can use a program that generates "resent" fields, but nothing seems to
work. I've tried forwarding, redirecting, replying (works fine with
simple ok confirmation approval) in various programs (Microsoft Outlook,
Eudora Light, Eudora Pro, Outlook Express). Any help would be
appreciated.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:09:27 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jay Brydon <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: deleting individual posts
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Does anybody know how to delete individual posts from archives? As near
as I can tell, I'd have to set the notebook to individual, which won't
work with teh web archive interface I'm told. Any suggestions?
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:22:38 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>At 14:28 9/28/98 GMT+0, Peter Robinson said:
>|Pete - I meant that I had not specified this as a keyword in the list header
>|since the Listserv manual suggests that the default is "To Owner" (i.e. me)
>|anyway. What is most perplexing is that I do get some errors of incorrect
>|addresses reported back to me but, as I said in my previous e-mail, not all.
>
>Some broken email systems are not RFC compliant and generate bounces to
>the original email sender and not the MAIL FROM:<OWNER-listname@listhost>
> (which then "maps" to the ERRORS-TO= listname definition keyword).
>
>What is the value of your * AUTO-DELETE= field ?
>
>/P
I was about to suggest looking at * Auto-Delete=. (No, honestly!)
LISTSERV recognizes and attempts to deal with some bounces itself unless
autodeletion is turned off. Therefore you wouldn't get bounces from some
new users with invalid addresses; instead they'd show up in the daily
subscription monitoring report you'd get. Look in the LISTKEYW MEMO file
for more information on the * Auto-Delete keyword.
-jwgh
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 16:46:52 GMT+0
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Peter Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
On 28 Sep 98 at 11:04, Pete Weiss wrote:
> Some broken email systems are not RFC compliant and generate bounces to
> the original email sender and not the MAIL FROM:<OWNER-listname@listhost>
> (which then "maps" to the ERRORS-TO= listname definition keyword).
> What is the value of your * AUTO-DELETE= field ?
Pete, Thanks for the ideas. I have not included the Auto-Delete keyword in my
lists header and I have the validate keyword set to * Validate= Yes,Confirm,Nopw.
I'm not really sure from the manual whether this would activate or inactivate
autodelete. However I have certainly not had any warning from Listserv that
the "troublemakers" have been (or are about to be) unsubscribed.
Peter R
Dr Peter K Robinson
Department of Applied Biology
University of Central Lancashire
Preston, PR1 2HE, England
Tel +44 (0)1772 893911 Fax +44 (0)1772 892929
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:57:03 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: deleting individual posts
In-Reply-To: Jay Brydon <[log in to unmask]> "deleting individual posts"
(Sep 28, 11:09am)
Looks like we need to set up an FAQ. Wasn't this discussed just last week?
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:13:22 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>On 28 Sep 98 at 11:04, Pete Weiss wrote:
>> Some broken email systems are not RFC compliant and generate bounces to
>> the original email sender and not the MAIL FROM:<OWNER-listname@listhost>
>> (which then "maps" to the ERRORS-TO= listname definition keyword).
>> What is the value of your * AUTO-DELETE= field ?
>
>Pete, Thanks for the ideas. I have not included the Auto-Delete keyword in my
>lists header and I have the validate keyword set to * Validate=
>Yes,Confirm,Nopw.
>I'm not really sure from the manual whether this would activate or inactivate
>autodelete. However I have certainly not had any warning from Listserv that
>the "troublemakers" have been (or are about to be) unsubscribed.
I think * Auto-Delete= defaults to on, but I forget the exact syntax. You
might want to explicitly set it to be off, though from what you say above
it looks like that's probably not the only problem.
Some sites might be down intermittantly so that sometimes they generate
bounces and other times they don't. This explanation sounds lame even to
me, though.
Guess I'm out of ideas for now.
-jwgh
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:18:45 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: deleting individual posts
In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:57:03 PDT from <[log in to unmask]>
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:57:03 PDT Rich Greenberg said:
>Looks like we need to set up an FAQ. Wasn't this discussed just last week?
Why do we need a FAQ when the entire traffic of the list since the beginning
of time is searchable at http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/lstown-l.html ?
Well, OK, not the beginning of time, but back to 1991 anyway.
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:10:50 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Nathan Brindle <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: Message of Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:13:22 -0400 from
<[log in to unmask]>
The default value is "Auto-Delete= No" for lists with "Validate= All" and
"Auto-Delete= Yes,Semi-Auto,Delay(4),Max(100)" for other lists.
Per the manuals :) Although actually I need to make a change because
"Auto-Delete=" first appeared in 1.7f, before the big changes to the
Validate= keyword. So where it says "Validate= All" above we should
change that to read '"Validate= Yes" or higher'. So the bottom line is
that Auto-Delete is turned off by default unless you have "Validate= No".
Nathan
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:41:41 -0500
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Angus <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Down On DaFarm
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
> What? I've edited archives more often than I would like and I've never
> needed two carriage returns, let alone three, for anything: my edited
> stuff goes in fine.
Hi Douglas .. Last time I tried to edit archives .. it took some time before they
were indexed properly via the web page browse/search .. and that was when
we were on 1.8c too ...
Since a fellow listowner took the time to test all this out, and found with 1.8d
beta the same problem happened [may be corrected after either PUT header
or listserv booting or both] ... we tried this way .. and found that the results are
immediate and we were able to search/browse the web archives without any
problems.
Don't know if it's all necessary .. just know it works ;-)))
> that this is correct. But in your example you have three carriage returns
> shown. I have no reason to believe three are needed.
Don, there were only two, but to make it clearer .. I've added comments to
show explicitly that there are two carriage returns there.
-- Cleo [log in to unmask]
"But on the bloody morning after, one tin soldier rides away"
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 13:23:08 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
In-Reply-To: <v031107abb2356532d072@[206.152.10.82]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|Some sites might be down intermittantly so that sometimes they generate
|bounces and other times they don't. This explanation sounds lame even to
|me, though.
Though dated, the archives contain the following:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9502&L=lstown-l&P=R10068
which indicates to me that your explanation is NOT lame.
As a matter of fact, I see this almost every day on one of the lists that
I operate.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:06:42 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Joe Clark <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Trying to tie the address to the location is a topic of very
> old conversation on LSTOWN-L.
... which means bugger-all to someone who wasn't around to read that very
old conversation. Stop being so unhelpful. Don't penalize the questioner
because he joined us late. Answer his question.
--
Joe Clark
[log in to unmask]
<http://www.interlog.com/~joeclark>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 11:21:07 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: rex <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: editing and approving
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Jay Brydon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Does anybody know how I can edit subscriber posts and forward them to
>the list without having them appear to be coming form me? Supposedly, I
Check the archives at
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/lstown-l.html
search for "resubmitting" with author "[log in to unmask]"
I posted a way to do it (a few days ago) with Eudora Pro (I suppose it
works with Lite too, but I haven't tried it).
If you have problems setting it up, email me.
-rex
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:42:16 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: <v0401170bb235808075ea@[209.20.2.140]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 14:06 9/28/98 -0400, Joe Clark said:
|> Trying to tie the address to the location is a topic of very
|> old conversation on LSTOWN-L.
|
|... which means bugger-all to someone who wasn't around to read that very
|old conversation. Stop being so unhelpful. Don't penalize the questioner
|because he joined us late. Answer his question.
I did, but you did not like my answer.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:32:47 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Forcing a digest
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
What's a good way a forcing a digest? The current digest contains
an important administrative message that I want everyone to read
before they post again?
-Debbie Douglass
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| No flames were thrown in the creation of this email message. |
|--------------------------------.------------------------------------|
[log in to unmask] \ May your sword always be within |
|Systems Administrator \ reach and may your Foe's skill |
|GTE Government Systems, Needham, MA\ and luck be less than your own.|
`------------------------------------`--------------------------------'
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 15:04:10 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You mean folks are required to read and understand BEFORE they post? If
so, I'd like to know how ;-) You could temporarily moderate your
subscribers' postings pending some future delivery and time differences;
they give it another couple of hours for it to sink in, as well as those
folks who read and post sequentially, followed up by those who must let
no good deed go unpunished by responding to someone else on-list who did
not read things in the same order that they did.
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 14:57:25 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Janis Roihl <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Posts from non members
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Can anyone suggest search terms to find information about non members
posting to a list probably using a forged address.
My list is set to
send = private
subscription = by owner
Yesterday we received a post from a non member and an error message saying
that "member" is being monitored and showing the address that is not
subscribed.
I have searched spam, nonmember post, forgery - can't find the info and I'm
sure you have discussed this.
Janis
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 16:50:33 -0230
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: W Schipper <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]> from "Pete Weiss"
at Sep 28, 98 03:04:10 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Or you could globally set all subscribers to "review" for 24 hours, then
send out the message, assume every has read it, and reset everyone to
noreview.
Of course, as Pete knows, you can send people email, but you can't make
them read it.
Bill
Pete Weiss writes:
>
> You mean folks are required to read and understand BEFORE they post? If
> so, I'd like to know how ;-) You could temporarily moderate your
> subscribers' postings pending some future delivery and time differences;
> they give it another couple of hours for it to sink in, as well as those
> folks who read and post sequentially, followed up by those who must let
> no good deed go unpunished by responding to someone else on-list who did
> not read things in the same order that they did.
>
> /Pete
>
--
Dr. W. Schipper Email: [log in to unmask]
Department of English, Tel: 709-737-4406
Memorial University Fax: 709-737-4528
St John's, Nfld. A1C 5S7
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 15:41:31 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: Joe Clark <[log in to unmask]> "Country of origin" (Sep 28,
2:06pm)
Since no one else has, I will try to give a better answer than Joe did.
What you can do is look at the last qualifier in the address. If its
OTHER than "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net", its normally a 2
character country code. I assume that somewhere on the web is a list
of these codes but I don't know where it is. A few that I know are:
ru = Russia
us = United States
uk = Great Britan
ca = Canada
If you see this 2 letter code (and can locate the matching country's
list) the chances are very good that the node is located in that
country. There are exceptions, and there is no guarantee that the user
is also located in that country, as the user could be dialed in or
telnetting internationaly.
Most addresses ending in "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net" are located
in the USA. "Com" are businesses, "mil" are US Military sites, "gov"
are national, state, or local government bodies, "org" is usually a
non-profit organization, and "net" is usually an internet related
site.
Again, there are exceptions, and again there is no guarantee that the
user is also located in that country. Most of the exceptions are nodes
that were established early, before the 2 char country codes started or
they are multi-national organizations.
This is to the best of my knowlege. If I have erred, I am confident
that someone will be happy to point out my errors.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 15:46:33 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: Pete Weiss's message about Re: Forcing a digest
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On September 28, on [log in to unmask], Pete Weiss said:
>>You mean folks are required to read and understand BEFORE they post? If
>>so, I'd like to know how ;-) You could temporarily moderate your
>>subscribers' postings pending some future delivery and time differences;
>>they give it another couple of hours for it to sink in, as well as those
>>folks who read and post sequentially, followed up by those who must let
>>no good deed go unpunished by responding to someone else on-list who did
>>not read things in the same order that they did.
>>
>>/Pete
--
I set the list to 'Send= Owner' this morning to stop a flame war
then I posted a ADMIN message but I don't know how to force a
digest so that all of the digest subscribers will have received
it before I reset the list to allow them to post again.
-Debbie
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| No flames were thrown in the creation of this email message. |
|--------------------------------.------------------------------------|
[log in to unmask] \ May your sword always be within |
|Systems Administrator \ reach and may your Foe's skill |
|GTE Government Systems, Needham, MA\ and luck be less than your own.|
`------------------------------------`--------------------------------'
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 16:03:55 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jacob Haller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
This isn't directly related to what you asked about, but maybe it's useful
anyways. Check out the
REVIEW <listname> BY COUNTRY
-jwgh
>Since no one else has, I will try to give a better answer than Joe did.
>
>What you can do is look at the last qualifier in the address. If its
>OTHER than "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net", its normally a 2
>character country code. I assume that somewhere on the web is a list
>of these codes but I don't know where it is. A few that I know are:
>
> ru = Russia
> us = United States
> uk = Great Britan
> ca = Canada
>
>If you see this 2 letter code (and can locate the matching country's
>list) the chances are very good that the node is located in that
>country. There are exceptions, and there is no guarantee that the user
>is also located in that country, as the user could be dialed in or
>telnetting internationaly.
>
>Most addresses ending in "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net" are located
>in the USA. "Com" are businesses, "mil" are US Military sites, "gov"
>are national, state, or local government bodies, "org" is usually a
>non-profit organization, and "net" is usually an internet related
>site.
>
>Again, there are exceptions, and again there is no guarantee that the
>user is also located in that country. Most of the exceptions are nodes
>that were established early, before the 2 char country codes started or
>they are multi-national organizations.
>
>This is to the best of my knowlege. If I have erred, I am confident
>that someone will be happy to point out my errors.
>
>--
>Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
>N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
>Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
>Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
>Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 16:18:56 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Like the Prof. said, you could QUIET SET listname REVIEW FOR *@* or even
NOPOST. Then (assuming a DAILY Digest), wait x-hrs until normal
distribution and NOREVIEW (or POST)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 16:58:17 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Judith Hopkins <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
Comments: To: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Rich Greenberg wrote:
> What you can do is look at the last qualifier in the address. If its
> OTHER than "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net", its normally a 2
> character country code. I assume that somewhere on the web is a list
> of these codes but I don't know where it is. A few that I know are:
Try: http://www.nw.com/zone/iso-country-codes
As Rich points out there is no guarantee that a poster with an address
that ends in that two character country code is actually located in that
country. In addition to the telnetting and dial-in reasons he cited,
there are also some small countries which make their country code
available, at a price, to ISPs which want very distinctive addresses. (I
know of a woman who lives in New England who has a country code in her
address from a small country in the South Pacific because her ISP pays for
the use of that code).
In addition, people who actually do live and communicate from outside
the US may have an email address that ends in one of the 3 character
domain names. Examples would be employees of multinational corporations,
multinational governmental organizations, the US military, diplomatic
personnel, etc. For example, one of the subscribers to my list, a
Philippine national who lived and worked in Manila, once asked me why she
was not included in the country count for the Philippines (obtainable
by sending the message REVIEW <listname> BY COUNTRY to the LISTSERV
address). The answer was simple: she worked for an international agency,
used their e-mail system, and had an e-mail address that ended in one of
the 3 character domain names. Thus the number of subscribers per country
that one obtains by using that command is only approximate: it
underestimates the number of subscribers from outside the US and inflates
the number from within the US since all the 3 character code addresses are
considered part of the US domain.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Judith Hopkins, Listowner of Autocat
[log in to unmask]
My home page: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh
AUTOCAT home page:
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/autocat/
>
> If you see this 2 letter code (and can locate the matching country's
> list) the chances are very good that the node is located in that
> country. There are exceptions, and there is no guarantee that the user
> is also located in that country, as the user could be dialed in or
> telnetting internationaly.
>
> Most addresses ending in "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net" are located
> in the USA. "Com" are businesses, "mil" are US Military sites, "gov"
> are national, state, or local government bodies, "org" is usually a
> non-profit organization, and "net" is usually an internet related
> site.
>
> Again, there are exceptions, and again there is no guarantee that the
> user is also located in that country. Most of the exceptions are nodes
> that were established early, before the 2 char country codes started or
> they are multi-national organizations.
>
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 18:51:04 PDT
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Rich Greenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: W Schipper <[log in to unmask]> "Re: Country of origin"
(Sep 28, 6:09pm)
} > Most addresses ending in "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net" are located
} > in the USA. "Com" are businesses, "mil" are US Military sites, "gov"
} > are national, state, or local government bodies, "org" is usually a
} > non-profit organization, and "net" is usually an internet related
} > site.
One major omission here. "edu" sites are educational institutions.
--
Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 19:40:28 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
Comments: To: Angus <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Angus wrote:
> Hi Douglas .. Last time I tried to edit archives .. it took some time before they
> were indexed properly via the web page browse/search .. and that was when
> we were on 1.8c too ...
Oh, well, I can say nothing about working through a web interface as
I don't. I still use the old email commands exclusively.
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 21:43:01 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Don Wiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cleo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> that this is correct. But in your example you have three carriage returns
>> shown. I have no reason to believe three are needed.
>
>Don, there were only two, but to make it clearer .. I've added comments to
>show explicitly that there are two carriage returns there.
I just visited your site again. I see you have labeled each blank line with
a carriage return. As found:
> From: That Person <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Archive Editing
> First carriage return
> Second carriage return
> The best way to do this is to just jump in, but save the original....
But there are still three carriage returns, albeit two blank lines, between
the header and the body. When two lines are touching there is one carriage
return. When one blank line is in between you have two carriage returns.
Two blank lines is three carriage returns. As I noted before, I have not
seen anything to show that three carriage returns (or two blank lines if
you prefer) is necessary in this situation.
Don.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 20:22:29 -0600
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Ben Parker <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: L-Soft international, Inc.
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998 15:46:33 EDT, Debbie Douglass
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I set the list to 'Send= Owner' this morning to stop a flame war
>then I posted a ADMIN message but I don't know how to force a
>digest so that all of the digest subscribers will have received
>it before I reset the list to allow them to post again.
QUERY listname WITH DIGEST FOR *@* (gets list of all DIGEST subscribers)
QUIET SET listname NODIGEST FOR *@* (forces out the digest)
Then you have to build a long file to reset everyone to DIGEST who was
QUIET SET listname DIGEST for user1@address
QUIET SET listname DIGEST for user2@address
etc.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 23:26:22 -0500
Reply-To: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Listserv Error Reporting
Comments: To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
?On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Pete Weiss wrote:
> which indicates to me that your explanation is NOT lame.
>
> As a matter of fact, I see this almost every day on one of the lists that
> I operate.
Of course it isn't lame, happens all the time. That is why when I am
on "errors duty" I do it only once a day per list. If I know there were
50 postings distributed that day, and subscriber A has only two
"userunknown" errors I consider them "del & ignore" errors, a waste
of my time as I'm not going to do anything because there is not reason
to do anything. That's why I like to do the errors only once per day,
so I can get a perspective of what is going on. Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 01:08:26 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>I set the list to 'Send= Owner' this morning to stop a flame war
>then I posted a ADMIN message but I don't know how to force a
>digest so that all of the digest subscribers will have received
>it before I reset the list to allow them to post again.
You want to stop a flame war and your admonitions have not worked so far.
Is that correct? You want to issue a sort of "cool it or else" notice?
You want to ensure that as many people as possible are persuaded to read
and heed as possible?
One of the approaches I might take,if your pleas are ignored, is send a
note to the list saying it is going to full moderation, after the
distribution of the digest containing this notice. Keep it that way for at
least 24 hours, and repeat the anti-flame warning several times and let
only the most pertinent postings through. After the digest containing
those is distributed, change back to whatever your normal set-up is and
see what you have. If no one sees the flame stuff it is unlikely to
continue, unless you have someone really determined to cause trouble,
as long as you keep on top of the people who reply 2 - 10 days later
simply because that is how often they deal with their email.
Given LISTSERV tools, there are a lot of variations on that, tailor to
fit. Changing everyone to DIGEST, forcing a digest, then resetting the
nonDIGEST subscribers to whatever they were before I would consider last
reort. I'ld put the list on HOLD for a couple of days, if the problem
were that bad, before trying the digest route. If were going to do
something like that, which I wouldn't, I'ld set everyone MAIL rather
than DIGEST.
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 17:02:37 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Christopher Stewart <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Galvin Library, IIT
Subject: Re: Country of origin
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
And, of course, "edu." In most cases, this domain signifies origin in an American
institution of higher education. It's the most used domain behind "com."
Cheeers,
--
Christopher Stewart
Associate Director for Network Services
Paul V. Galvin Library
Illinois Institute of Technology
www.gl.iit.edu
Rich Greenberg wrote:
> Since no one else has, I will try to give a better answer than Joe did.
>
> What you can do is look at the last qualifier in the address. If its
> OTHER than "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net", its normally a 2
> character country code. I assume that somewhere on the web is a list
> of these codes but I don't know where it is. A few that I know are:
>
> ru = Russia
> us = United States
> uk = Great Britan
> ca = Canada
>
> If you see this 2 letter code (and can locate the matching country's
> list) the chances are very good that the node is located in that
> country. There are exceptions, and there is no guarantee that the user
> is also located in that country, as the user could be dialed in or
> telnetting internationaly.
>
> Most addresses ending in "com", "mil", "gov", "org" or "net" are located
> in the USA. "Com" are businesses, "mil" are US Military sites, "gov"
> are national, state, or local government bodies, "org" is usually a
> non-profit organization, and "net" is usually an internet related
> site.
>
> Again, there are exceptions, and again there is no guarantee that the
> user is also located in that country. Most of the exceptions are nodes
> that were established early, before the 2 char country codes started or
> they are multi-national organizations.
>
> This is to the best of my knowlege. If I have erred, I am confident
> that someone will be happy to point out my errors.
>
> --
> Rich Greenberg Work: PM0RMG atsign WSPVM1.worldspan.com +1 770-563-6656
> N6LRT Marietta, GA, USA Play: richgr atsign netcom.com +1 770-321-6507
> Eastern time. I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
> Canines:Val(Chinook,CGC,TT),Red(Husky,(RIP)),Shasta(Husky,TT) Owner:Chinook-L
> Atlanta Siberian Husky Rescue. Adopt a homeless Husky.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 17:14:50 EDT
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
In-Reply-To: W Schipper's message about Re: Forcing a digest
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On September 28, on [log in to unmask], W Schipper said:
>>Or you could globally set all subscribers to "review" for 24 hours, then
>>send out the message, assume every has read it, and reset everyone to
>>noreview.
Yes, I know this. I just wanted to know how to force a digest to
occur -now- without having to wait until the normal distribution
time. Now I'm I resetting the digest distribution time in my
list header to see if that will force it.
>>Of course, as Pete knows, you can send people email, but you can't make
>>them read it.
Yes, but it helps if I could get it to them in a timely manner.
-Debbie
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| No flames were thrown in the creation of this email message. |
|--------------------------------.------------------------------------|
[log in to unmask] \ May your sword always be within |
|Systems Administrator \ reach and may your Foe's skill |
|GTE Government Systems, Needham, MA\ and luck be less than your own.|
`------------------------------------`--------------------------------'
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 07:31:29 +1000
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "CLARKE, Paul (M23)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: editing and approving
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Jay,
One option is to have a form on a web page do the posting via a script.
I have used formmail.pl (from Matt's script archive) the email field is
the value placed in the from field of the email sent. It means that you
would need to cut and copy the body and subject from the original
message, but you are editing anyway!
Paul
Paul Clarke
Online Curriculum Information Project Officer
Open Access Unit
Gabba Towers
Level 6, 411 Vulture Street
Woolloongabba Brisbane Qld 4102
Ph: 07 3406 2755
Fax: 07 3406 2756
[log in to unmask]
> ----------
> From: Jay Brydon
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 September 1998 1:07
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [LSTOWN-L] editing and approving
>
> Does anybody know how I can edit subscriber posts and forward them to
> the list without having them appear to be coming form me? Supposedly,
> I
> can use a program that generates "resent" fields, but nothing seems to
> work. I've tried forwarding, redirecting, replying (works fine with
> simple ok confirmation approval) in various programs (Microsoft
> Outlook,
> Eudora Light, Eudora Pro, Outlook Express). Any help would be
> appreciated.
>
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 11:08:25 -0500
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Angus <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Down On DaFarm
Subject: Re: Editing Archives and Common Command Web Pages
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Hi Douglas..
> Oh, well, I can say nothing about working through a web interface as
> I don't. I still use the old email commands exclusively.
I've gotten so I use it quite a bit for both searches and header/mailtmp work ..
but I also depend a lot on email commands ;-) Just nice to know the archives
can be cleanly edited and allow immediate access to the web search/browse
facilities.
> I just visited your site again. I see you have labeled each blank line
> with a carriage return. As found:
If you look closer Don you'll see it says two "empty" cariage returns .. I really
don't know how else to word it .. and the example should make it pretty clear
what is meant.
> have not seen anything to show that three carriage returns (or two blank
> lines if you prefer) is necessary in this situation.
Other than the work prompted by Lloyd .. I hadn't seen anything official
indicating any were necessary <<shrug>> .. and I did make it very clear on
the page, Don, that I wasn't sure two were needed, but I did know this worked
.. and for the little extra effort .. why not ... it certainly doesn't hurt.
However.. I just placed another edited log to test using only one empty
carriage return between the header and start of the message and it worked
beautifully too .. so before the day is closed, I'll redo the web page to reflect
that.
--
Cleo [log in to unmask] http://angus.interspeed.net/listowner/
"I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself" --D.H. Lawrence
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 12:20:37 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Gilles Breton <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: LSTOWN-L Digest - 27 Sep 1998 to 28 Sep 1998 (#1998-244)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Automatic digest processor, merci de votre message du 29/09/98 00:28
>REVIEW <listname> BY COUNTRY to the LISTSERV address. Thus the number of
subscribers per country
>that one obtains by using that command is only approximate: it
>underestimates the number of subscribers from outside the US and inflates
>the number from within the US since all the 3 character code addresses are
>considered part of the US domain.
Thanks to all who replied to my "should-have
review-the-archive-before-question". I know the basic principles of email
addressing. I learned about telneting and ISP having address in remote
areas. I learned also about the BY COUNTRY option of the review command.
I assure you I read all the owner manual but I missed that one.
But it would'nt help me much. The list I manage is in french so the vast
majority of 3 character code addresses will not be in the USA but in a
french speaking country. I have one Pacbell.net subscriber and I
remembered it is an american company after he told me he lives in
California.
I didn't wanted to start a debate or a flame war over a simple question.
I just thought there would be a server somewhere on the Net (Internic) or
something that you could query and that would verify by the net in which
country is located a particular node for an email address.
Then, I tried to telnet at "internic.net" I got this screen:
* -- InterNIC Registration Services Center --
*
* For the *original* whois type: WHOIS [search string] <return>
* For referral whois type: RWHOIS [search string] <return>
*
* For user assistance call (703) 742-4777
# Questions/Updates on the whois database to [log in to unmask]
* Please report system problems to [log in to unmask]
***************************************************************************
The InterNIC Registration Services database contains ONLY
non-military and non-US Government Domains and contacts.
Other associated whois servers:
American Registry for Internet Numbers - whois.arin.net
European IP Address Allocations - whois.ripe.net
Asia Pacific IP Address Allocations - whois.apnic.net
US Military - whois.nic.mil
US Government - whois.nic.gov
Cmdinter Ver 1.3 Tue Sep 29 12:14:02 1998 EST
[vt220] InterNIC >
I tried pacbell.net and got informations (California address). I tried an
address i know in in Europe and one in Canada and got nothing. I tried a
connection to "ripe.net" and "whois.ripe.net" and got nothing. I will
email "[log in to unmask]" to see if I can get more information.
Bye
Gilles Breton
[log in to unmask]
http://pages.infinit.net/bregi/adoption/index.html
ICQ: 15730364
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 15:28:39 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: country info
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
<A new resource for domain info>
The following article URL:
http://www.internetnews.com/wd-news/1998/09/2801-name.html
indicates that Internet users can now search the entire WWW for domain
names in every currently recognized domain extension, for free at
http://www.alldomains.com
--
mailto:[log in to unmask] Tel: +1 814 863 1843
31 Shields Bldg; University Park, PA 16802-1202 USA
Powered by: LISTSERV, Eudora, Netscape, mIRC, FreeAgent
http://www.psu.edu/Year2000/
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 23:40:04 +0100
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Max Potter <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Country of origin
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
The following list comes from the Listserv General Users Guide with some
corrections and comments by me
Max Potter
U3A Witney
HTH
This list is sorted by country code, not by country. Please note that
country codes do not always correspond to a person's physical location;
for instance, a German CompuServe user would be counted as a USA user
simply because his or her address ends with .COM; there are several
Canadian universities with .EDU suffixes; and so forth.
(ac appears to be UK academic, eg universities)
com USA (Company)
edu USA (Education)
gov USA (Government)
mil USA (Military)
net USA (Network)
org USA (Organization)
ad Andorra
ae United Arab Emirates
af Afghanistan
ag Antigua and Barbuda
ai Anguilla
al Albania
am Armenia
an Netherlands Antilles
ao Angola
aq Antarctica
ar Argentina
as American Samoa
at Austria
au Australia
aw Aruba (ex part of Netherlands Antilles)
az Azerbaijan
ba Bosnia and Herzegovina
bb Barbados
bd Bangladesh
be Belgium
bf Burkina Faso
bh Bahrain
bh Bulgaria
bi Burundi
bj Benin
bm Bermuda
bn Brunei Darussalam (Brunei)
bo Bolivia
br Brazil
bs Bahamas
bt Bhutan
bv Bouvet Island (S Atlantic)
bw Botswana
by Belarus
bz Belize
ca Canada
cc Cocos (Keeling) Islands
cf Central African Republic
cg Congo
ch Switzerland
ci Ivory Coast (Cote d’Ivoire)
ck Cook Islands
cl Chile
cm Cameroon
cn China
co Columbia
cr Costa Rica
cu Cuba
cv Cape Verde
cx Christmas Island
cy Cyprus
cz Czech Republic
de Germany
dj Djibouti
dk Denmark
dm Dominica
do Dominican Republic
dz Algeria
ec Ecuador
ee Estonia
eg Egypt
eh Western Sahara
er Eritrea
es Spain
et Ethiopia
fi Finland
fj Fiji
fk Falkland Islands
fm Micronesia
fo Faroe Islands
fr France
ga Gabon
gb United Kingdom (more usually UK)
gd Grenada
ge Georgia
gf French Guiana
gh Ghana
gi Gibraltar
gl Greenland
gm Gambia
gn Guinea
gp Guadeloupe
gq Equatorial Guinea
gr Greece
gs South Georgia
gt Guatemala
gu Guam
gw Guinea-Bissau
gy Guyana
hk Hong Kong
hm Heard and McDonald Islands (S Indian Ocean)
hn Honduras
hr Croatia (Hrvatska)
ht Haiti
hu Hungary
id Indonesia
ie Ireland
il Israel
in India
io British Indian Ocean Territory
iq Iraq
ir Iran
is Iceland
it Italy
jm Jamaica
jo Jordan
jp Japan
ke Kenya
kg Kyrgyzstan
kh Cambodia
ki Kiribati (Gilbert Is)
km Comoros
kn Saint Kitts and Nevis
kp Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea)
kr Republic of Korea (South Korea)
kw Kuwait
ky Cayman Islands
kz Kazakhstan
la Lao Democratic Republic
lb Lebanon
lc Saint Lucia
li Liechtenstein
lk Sri Lanka
lr Liberia
ls Lesotho
lt Lithuania
lu Luxembourg
lv Latvia
ly Libya
ma Morocco
mc Monaco
md Moldova
mg Madagascar
mh Marshall Islands
mk Macedonia
ml Mali
mm Myanmar (Burma)
mn Mongolia
mo Macau
mp Northern Mariana Islands (W Pacific)
mq Martinique
mr Mauritania
ms Montserrat
mt Malta
mu Mauritius
mv Maldives
mw Malawi
mx Mexico
my Malaysia
mz Mozambique
na Namibia
nc New Caledonia
ne Niger
nf Norfolk Island
ng Nigeria
ni Nicaragua
nl Netherlands
no Norway
np Nepal
nr Nauru (W C Pacific)
nu Niue (S Pacific)
nz New Zealand
om Oman
pa Panama
pe Peru
pf French Polynesia
pg Papua New Guinea
ph Philippines
pk Pakistan
pl Poland
pm St. Pierre and Miquelon
pn Pitcairn
pr Puerto Rico
pt Portugal
pw Palau (Belau) (W Pacific)
py Paraguay
qa Qatar
re Reunion
ro Romania
ru Russian Federation
rw Rwanda
sa Saudi Arabia
sb Solomon Islands
sc Seychelles
sd Sudan
se Sweden
sg Singapore
sh St. Helena
si Sierra Leone
si Slovenia
sj Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands (inc Spitzbergen)
sk Slovakia
sm San Marino
sn Senegal
so Somalia
sr Suriname
st Sao tome and Principe
sv El Salvador
sy Syria
sz Swaziland
tc Turks and Caicos Islands
td Chad
tf French Southern Territories
tg Togo
th Thailand
tj Tajikistan
tk Tokelau (S Pacific)
tm Turkmenistan
tn Tunisia
to Tonga
tp East Timor
tr Turkey
tt Trinidad and Tobago
tv Tuvalu (Ellice Is)
tw Taiwan
tz Tanzania
ua Ukraine
ug Uganda
uk United Kingdom
us United States of America
uy Uruguay
uz Uzbekistan
va Vatican City
vc Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
ve Venezuela
vg British Virgin Islands
vi US Virgin Islands
vn Vietnam
vu Vanuatu (New Hebrides)
wf Wallis and Futuna Islands (C Pacific)
ws Samoa
ye Yemen
yt Mayotte (nr Comoros)
yu Yugoslavia
za South Africa
zm Zambia
zr Zaire
zw Zimbabwe
--
I grow old ever learning new things - Solon c640-558BC (and how!)
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 22:52:07 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Error message addressed to wrong list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
A very curious situation has arisen which I can't make sense of.
I own list PSYCHE-B. I also own (and moderate) ASSC-SEMINAR1. I have
received several errors, like the one below, where PSYCHE-B is being
notified of an error in response to a message that actually originates
from ASSC-SEMINAR1. The heart of the error seems to be understandable
enough (recipient mailbox is full), but why isn't this showing up as
"ASSC-SEMINAR1: error report from BANYAN.PSY.VU.NL" in the subject?
It looks as if the mailer daemon has simply decided to address it to
PSYCHE-B instead.
Furthermore, it says that the mail origin is in the "Filter=" list for
Psyche-B. I haven't defined a Filter= list for Psyche-B. (Have I?)
Is this something the listserv adminstrator could have set somewhere else?
Suggestions welcome.
George Buckner
Owner, Psyche-*, ASSC-* @LISTSERV.UH.EDU
>Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1998 20:50:10 -0500
>From: "L-Soft list server at the University of Houston (1.8d)"
> <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: PSYCHE-B: error report from BANYAN1.PSY.VU.NL
>To: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
>X-LSV-ListID: None
>
>The enclosed message, found in the PSYCHE-B mailbox and shown under the spool
>ID 14963 in the system log, has been identified as a possible delivery error
>notice for the following reason: mail origin is listed in the "Filter=" list
>header keyword (or its default value for the PSYCHE-B list).
>
>------------------------ Message in error (176 lines)
-------------------------
>Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from sol.psy.vu.nl by Post-Office.UH.EDU (PMDF V5.1-12 #U2811)
> with SMTP id <[log in to unmask]> for
[log in to unmask];
> Tue, 29 Sep 1998 20:50:09 -0500 (CDT)
>Received: from banyan1.psy.vu.nl by sol.psy.vu.nl (SMI-8.6/4.03)
> id DAA25219; Wed, 30 Sep 1998 03:50:52 +0200
>Received: by banyan1.psy.vu.nl; Wed, 30 Sep 1998 03:56:14 +0200
>Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 03:56:14 +0100 (MET)
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Undeliverable Message
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Message-id: <[log in to unmask]>
>MIME-version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Cc:
>Subject: Watt: Discussion with Chapman and Nakamura
>
>Message not delivered to recipients below. Press F1 for help with VNM
>error codes.
>
> VNM3043: MKD Schouten@Psychonomie@fpp
>
>
>VNM3043 -- MAILBOX IS FULL
>
> The message cannot be delivered because the
> recipient's mailbox contains the maximum number of
> messages, as set by the system administrator. The
> recipient must delete some messages before any
> other messages can be delivered.
> The maximum message limit for a user's mailbox is
> 10,000. The default message limit is 1000 messages.
> Administrators can set message limits using the
> Mailbox Settings function available in the
> Manage User menu (MUSER).
>
> When a user's mailbox reaches the limit, the
> user must delete some of the messages before
> the mailbox can accept any more incoming messages.
>
>---------------------- Original Message Follows ----------------------
The Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness
> Electronic Seminar
>
> EMOTION AND CONSCIOUSNESS
>
> http://www.phil.vt.edu/assc/esem.html
>
> September 21, 1998 - October 9, 1998
>
>
>Thoughts on Chapman and Nakamura's "PAG and Human Emotion" Commentary
>
<remainder deleted>
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 00:12:44 -0500
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Winship <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
Comments: To: Debbie Douglass <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 28 Sep 1998, Debbie Douglass wrote:
> Yes, I know this. I just wanted to know how to force a digest to
> occur -now- without having to wait until the normal distribution
> time. Now I'm I resetting the digest distribution time in my
> list header to see if that will force it.
Ok, forcing a digest distribution is easy, just do a
QUIET SET listname MAIL FOR *@*
Everyone set DIGEST will get your "forced" digest. Of course those
already set MAIL will not get it, and you will be turning on delivery
for those set NOMAIL. If you want EVERYONE to see the digest, first,
QUIET SET listname MAIL FOR *@*
then
QUIET SET listname DIGEST FOR *@*
then
QUIET SET listname MAIL FOR *@*
and bingo, everyone subscribed to your list will get your "forced"
digest. You will also probably have a lot of disgruntled subscribers, and
those already DIGEST will get it twice. There may be a new flame war
directed at you. That could be mollified somewhat if you have
scrupulously kept track of who was set DIGEST, MAIL, and INDEX before you
started wholesale changes, and you restore everyone to their chosen
options very quickly. Most likely you will still get a lot of complaints,
on and off list.
I think most of the responses on list have been intended to indicate this
"forcing a digest" is perhaps not the best way to go about this, stop and
rethink. I know mine was meant that way.
I would rather explain to 3,200 subscribers why I made the list fully
moderated to stop a flame war, than why I was playing hob with everyone's
mail options and sorry, if it isn't the option you want reset it yourself.
LISTSERV is rich in options for dealing with things like this, consider
all of them, combinations of them, whatever best suits. As far as I can
see, making a lot more work for yourself and making all your subscribers
angry (even more work) at the same time is not the best solution.
You wanted bluntness, there it is.
Douglas
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:24:49 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Pete Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Error message addressed to wrong list
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Not all mail system "bounces" go to the correct address. There are
certain default * FILTER= values that are site-defined when LISTSERV(R)
was installed. LISTSERV(R) does not like DAEMONs or MAILERs mucking
around sending mail to lists since they "always" represent mail delivery
problems and would very possibly create an email loop.
(Check to see if your lists are cross-linked i.e., one list subscribed to
another.)
/Pete
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 15:17:39 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Bustamante, Susana" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Listserv Lists Policies
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At our university, we are trying to develop University-wide policies and
procedures for our Listserv lists. We would like these policies to
include the criteria to be followed to determine who can obtain a
Listserv list. We would also like to include policies in reference to
the content of the messages that are being posted to the list. We are
interested in what policies other Universities have developed for their
lists in regards to flaming, prayer, copyrighted materials, commercial,
etc. We would really like to read the guidelines that others post to
their lists. Any light you all can shed on this issue would be really
appreciated.
Susana R. Bustamante
University of Miami
Department of Information Technology
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: (305)284-3915
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 15:42:54 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Bustamante, Susana" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Reply to Author
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
A number of our Listserv users are using Outlook Express and Netscape
Messenger with their e-mail systems. They would like to press the
"Reply to Author" button and be able to reply just to the author of the
message instead of replying to the entire list. Right now, when they
use the "Reply to Author" button, their replies still go to the entire
list. The list is setup with Reply-To=List,Respect. I understand that
we can setup the list with Reply-To=Sender so that replies only go to
the original sender. However, our users would like to leave the list
with Reply-To=List,Respect and use the "Reply to Author" button when
they want to reply only to the sender. I have already contacted L-Soft
support and they suspected a bug in Outlook Express and Netscape
Messenger, since, according to them, the client should be using the
"From:" field, not the "Sender:" or "Reply-To:" fields when the user
presses the "Reply to Author" button. However, I am using Outlook with
Microsoft Exchange and have the same problem.
Any advise on this problem would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Susana R. Bustamante
University of Miami
Department of Information Technology
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: (305)284-3915
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 19:05:01 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: George Buckner <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Error message addressed to wrong list
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Pete:
>Not all mail system "bounces" go to the correct address. There are
>certain default * FILTER= values that are site-defined when LISTSERV(R)
>was installed. LISTSERV(R) does not like DAEMONs or MAILERs mucking
>around sending mail to lists since they "always" represent mail delivery
>problems and would very possibly create an email loop.
That's what I thought was happening.
ASSC-SEMINAR1 is set REPLY-TO= PSYCHE-B, so that's probably how the
daemon is getting confused.
>(Check to see if your lists are cross-linked i.e., one list subscribed to
>another.)
Nope. That goes against the rules, doesn't it?
George
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 19:13:50 -0400
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Stan Ryckman <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Forcing a digest
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Instead of all the complex solutions involving everyone's subscription
options, why not just set the digest size to something tiny, then post a
short message to "trigger" the digest, then set the size back to normal?
Cheers,
Stan
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 18:37:02 -0700
Reply-To: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV list owners' forum <[log in to unmask]>
From: Louise Parsons <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Free Archived Lists: What's the Catch?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
My apologies since this is not Listserv related, but does anyone know
anything about OneList.Com? They offer free web-archived lists with lots
of features and it seems to be pretty airtight. It is run by Yahoo, but
they claim to respect list privacy. I am wondering if this is just another
coattails gimmick to attract sponsorship. We are not even remotely
considering moving our Listserv list to this, but it looks attractive for
running smaller "auxiliary lists". Has anyone had any experience with
running a OneList list? TIA
Cheers, Louise
Alpine-L, the Electronic Rock Garden Society
Louise Parsons & Harry Dewey, active listowners
Eric Gouda, Alexej (Sasha) Borkovec, quiet listowners
<[log in to unmask]>
Please, write to active listowners at the above address
To join Alpine-L, send the message INFO to the above address
http://www.peak.org/~parsont/rockgard/
****************************************************