On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Pete Weiss wrote: > >We do too, but also NOPOST. I.e., when we "suspend" distributions for >offenders e.g., OOOers, we set both since this allows us to: prevent >useless messages from said subscriber back to the list "why aren't I >receiving" (they get a automated LISTSERV(R) nastygram to which they will >typically mailto:OWNER-listname@listhost); also allows us to later >interrogate subscription options and realize that we (the list-owners) >had set NOMAIL/NOPOST for a previous e-mail "problem" (I sometimes call >this a "message under a rock"). > >YMMV > >/Pete > I also do automatically set to NOMAIL, but mine is implemented as a list exit. It does content filtering, header scanning (for braindead mailers that spit a posting back to the list), and scans for "banned" subjects. I also have it scan for excessive quoting and send the user a nastygram and/or reject the posting. Its a C program along with a Unix shell script. I wrote this pre-1.8e. Darren