Grant Neufeld wrote:
>
> This is a request for you to implement support for the List- header
> fields defined in RFC2369. This will make mail list access easier for
> your users.
> List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?
> Body=subscribe%20list-managers>
i do subs/unsubs manually. and intend on keep doing so for
my own reasons.
how do i set the above header to say i require the following:
your email address (because i dont believe headers work
reliably enough)
your human name (ie: firstname lastname, whatever)
your contact phone number, including area/country codes and
best time of day(including timezone info)
also, i dont see the point of subscribe info, if the person is
already a subscriber (by virtue of getting messages from me)
oh okay, the rfc sez the user may want to resubscribe using an
old copy of a message.... however on my list going away for
temporary absences is done by requesting 'vacation status' not
unsubscribing. for unsubscribing loses their posting-quota seniority.
bring up the obvious thought: since i cant specify my unique
"on vacation/suspend me for a while" ability in the headers,
then placing a unsub header would encourage folks to
use the *wrong behavior* for my lists... hmmmmmm...
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?
> Body=unsubscribe%20list-managers>
how do i set the above to require the users unique PIN.
--> ie: in general how do i tell those alleged automated conveniences
i want information *specific to the user* rather
than static string text? perhaps a generic prompt-get-answer syntax.
oh well, i am the minority who doesnt use the prepackaged 'style'
of list management. but i do wonder if others require user-specific
info during regular admin functions... or *will* they be doing so
as the future unfolds. many concepts i've implemented over the
years got 'invented' by majordomo,etc 9 months later. quite often.
-ken
ps: no, my software is not packaged for public consumption.
perhaps i should be evil and do so... thus making me less
a minority :)
