On Sat, 14 Sep 2002 at 08:13:48PM -0500, Winship wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Sep 2002, Rich Greenberg wrote:
> > 2) Approvals for those on REVIEW now come in as mime messages,  and to
> > us are harder to read.
>
> From the release notes, and comments from Eric, it seems I may have
> problems with Pine, which is what I use, either UNIX (and the new LISTSERV
> "anti-spam" stuff will not work with UNIX, per comments and notes) or
> LINUX.  I use it because it allows me to edit at need.  I also have my mail
> set not to read any attachment of any description; it is as if they do not
> exist which is fine with me.  I anticipate problems.

You won't see the message to be approved unless you enable attachments.

I don't understand your comments about UNIX and LINUX. Here's an example of
what I see running LINUX and Mutt (http://www.mutt.org) as as the MUA:

 ==========================================================================
[-- Attachment #1 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.6K --]

This message was originally submitted by XXXXX@XXXX to the BIRDTECH-L
list at LISTSERV.AOL.COM. You can approve it using the "OK" mechanism (click on
the link below), ignore  it, or repost an edited copy.

[...]

[-- Attachment #2 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 1.4K --]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well, I for one have been educated by the progression of this
thread.

[...]

[-- Attachment #3 --]
[-- Type: message/rfc822, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 2.4K --]
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: from absamail.co.za (mail1.absamail.co.za [196.35.40.67])
        by listserv.aol.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28652
        for <XXX@XXX>; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 14:16:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from P3 XXX
        by absamail.co.za with Novell NIMS $Revision:   2.88.1.1  $ on Novell NetWare;
        Wed, 04 Sep 2002 20:02:57 +0200
Reply-To: <XXX>
From: XXX
To: "'RARS for Breeders'" <XXX@XXX>
Subject: RE: [RARS] HEALTH: WNV killing raptors. Poor ol' Israel getting the blame again!
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:00:08 +0200
Organization: Disorganised
Message-ID: <000001c2543c$e9bb6aa0$355027c4@P3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:  <20020904034317.GC1287@XXX>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2505.0000

Well, I for one have been educated by the progression of this
thread.

[...]
 ========================================================================

My approval procedure is the same as it was in 1.8d: read the message, hit
"r" if it's acceptable, hit "n" to not include the message in my reply, type
"ok" and send it off.

Attachments are not a security risk in Mutt as the user chooses what will be
done with each type of attachment in the .mailcap file. Some examples from
my .mailcap are:

text/html; w3m -dump -T text/html '%s'; copiousoutput
image/gif; xv %s
image/jpeg; xv %s
image/jpg; xv %s
application/pgp-keys; pgp -f < %s ; copiousoutput
application/pdf; pdftotext %s -; copiousoutput
application/rtf; Ted %s
application/msword; catdoc %s; copiousoutput  #converts .doc to text

HTH,

-rex