The only problem with this solution is: Who?

Assuming that you have a list which is run by the one sorta technically savvy
individual most vested in its proper operation, you are left with the choice
to either send the errors to a LISTSERV admin like me (arrghhh! nooo!) or the
bit bucket.  Given the thousands of e-mails, spam, errors, alerts, bounces,
and what-not I already get in a day, these two choices usually reduce to
the same one.  For example, I already routinely filter all the spam alerts
from LISTSERV, so they are utterly useless to us.  Seems like it would make
more sense to have an option to just turn the things off completely so they
aren't wasting any (more) resources on their way to the electron recycle bin.

Trust me, I've been running LISTSERV for about as long as there has been
one, so I understand the viewpoint of "It's always been done this way."
But it's a new (not necessarily better) world.  I remember the gung-ho days
when we would jump every time LISTSERV peeped about some problem so we could
track it down.  These days, though, there's just too much noise.

On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 09:13:02 -0500 Pete Weiss said:
>Solution:
>
>Make someone/thing else the recipient of the DEMR (and related errors):
>
>Errors-To= rfc822_address