Thanks. I have never received a control message pattern like you reference.
I appreciate the offer for a fake email address, but I think we need to keep a live person involved. The pattern of GNU remotecontrol talking with real people in the world (ha) has been with academia and industry leaders. They want to talk to a real person, not a team out in WWW. I am working that interest with they talking to me and not the list. However, if this trend continues, and the industry keeps talking, it seems like the list for remotecontrol will take off. That is the point I would like to find some help with administrating the list. Getting others up and running with their local email client spam filter could be some work. I am willing to try helping theme, but with all pain......their interest to help will be limited to the pain they are going to go through. I hope the list takes off. Perhaps if I stop talking to real people, but that would stop other things. Chicken and the egg. Thank You, Stephen H. Dawson (865) 804-3454 http://www.linkedin.com/in/shdcs On 02/17/2014 05:22 PM, Karl Berry wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > Choices: > 1) You can discard the control messages with a pattern like this: > ^Subject: confirm [a-f0-9]{40} > > 2) We can use a placeholder address for the listed administrator; then > you wouldn't receive (any) messages from mailman in the first place. > You'd still be able to log in to the mailman web interface and do > whatever with the list (not that anything should need to be done). > > In any case, you (and all list owners) don't have to worry about > approving real messages, much less deleting spam, unless you want to. > Unless list owners explicitly tell us not to, Bob Proulx and I do that > for all lists on lists.[non]gnu.org. (We had to, to keep the mail > flowing, since the reality is that most purported list owners never > actually look at the pending queues. Present company excepted. :) > > best, > karl > >
