Re: no response from listmaster

[Bob Bernstein]

On Wed, 23 Dec 2015, Steve Kleene wrote:

Thank you very much to all of you who posted or wrote with 
helpful and useful suggestions.


I think a little acknowledgement of the contribution of those of 
us who can no longer be seduced or cajoled into being "helpful 
and useful" would be in order.


They too serve who just like to stand around and kibbitz.

No good deed goes unpunished.

--
Bob Bernstein

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lee]

Yay. Cheers for the info. Sorry I missed the original resolution.

On 23/12/15 20:45, Steve Kleene wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 18:55:54 +, Lee Fuller  wrote:
>
>> Sorry to drag up this old relic, Steve - did your investigation yield
>> anything useful?
>>
>> Mail is a complicated subject so I'm keen to hear about the conclusion of
>> issues like this.
>>
>> On 15 December 2015 at 23:14, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 15 December 2015 19:29:50 Brian wrote:
 Pestering us
 appears to have its benefits. Just think, your response might have edged
 him towards it. :)
>>> To be fair, Brian, it wasn't pestering us that was complained about, it was
>>> pestering the listmasters.  "Pestering" us was the right thing to do, and
>>> as
>>> you say helped the OP solve his problem.
>>>
>>> Lisi
> Yes, the problem has been solved.  I posted as follows and added "[SOLVED]"
> to the Subject in the header:
>
> On Mon Dec 14 10:22:25 2015, I wrote:
>
>> I have now been able to resubscribe.  What I did was to stop routing my mail
>> through my employer's main router.  I believe that was the source of the
>> bounces from improper processing of validation tags.  Dodging that router let
>> me succeed in replying to confirm my subscription.
>>
>> I began relaying through this router ten years ago because a different
>> recipient didn't like my originating IP.  If that's now busted again, I'll
>> work through it.
>>
>> Thank you very much to all of you who posted or wrote with helpful and useful
>> suggestions.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 18:55:54 +, Lee Fuller  wrote:

> Sorry to drag up this old relic, Steve - did your investigation yield
> anything useful?
>
> Mail is a complicated subject so I'm keen to hear about the conclusion of
> issues like this.
>
> On 15 December 2015 at 23:14, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday 15 December 2015 19:29:50 Brian wrote:
> > > Pestering us
> > > appears to have its benefits. Just think, your response might have edged
> > > him towards it. :)
> >
> > To be fair, Brian, it wasn't pestering us that was complained about, it was
> > pestering the listmasters.  "Pestering" us was the right thing to do, and
> > as
> > you say helped the OP solve his problem.
> >
> > Lisi

Yes, the problem has been solved.  I posted as follows and added "[SOLVED]"
to the Subject in the header:

On Mon Dec 14 10:22:25 2015, I wrote:

> I have now been able to resubscribe.  What I did was to stop routing my mail
> through my employer's main router.  I believe that was the source of the
> bounces from improper processing of validation tags.  Dodging that router let
> me succeed in replying to confirm my subscription.
>
> I began relaying through this router ten years ago because a different
> recipient didn't like my originating IP.  If that's now busted again, I'll
> work through it.
>
> Thank you very much to all of you who posted or wrote with helpful and useful
> suggestions.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lee Fuller]

Sorry to drag up this old relic, Steve - did your investigation yield
anything useful?

Mail is a complicated subject so I'm keen to hear about the conclusion of
issues like this.

On 15 December 2015 at 23:14, Lisi Reisz  wrote:

> On Tuesday 15 December 2015 19:29:50 Brian wrote:
> > Pestering us
> > appears to have its benefits. Just think, your response might have edged
> > him towards it. :)
>
> To be fair, Brian, it wasn't pestering us that was complained about, it was
> pestering the listmasters.  "Pestering" us was the right thing to do, and
> as
> you say helped the OP solve his problem.
>
> Lisi
>
>

Re: no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:42:23 -0800, Don Armstrong  wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Dec 2015, Steve Kleene wrote:
> > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > debian-user mailing list. I understand why.
> [...]
> > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might actually
> > respond?
>
> We responded on the 8th and told you to resubscribe; that's all that you
> need to do.

I did get a note from listmaster on the 8th announcing my unsubscription.  It
contained a link that explained why I was unsubscribed but didn't tell me to
resubscribe.  Resubscribing in the usual way was a problem in itself, as I
described elsewhere in this thread.  That's why I was hoping listmaster would
just reinstate my subscription.  In any case, this has now all been solved.
Thanks.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Don Armstrong]

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015, Steve Kleene wrote:
> My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> debian-user mailing list. I understand why.
[...]
> Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might actually
> respond?

We responded on the 8th and told you to resubscribe; that's all that you
need to do.

-- 
Don Armstrong  http://www.donarmstrong.com

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 19:29:50 Brian wrote:
> Pestering us
> appears to have its benefits. Just think, your response might have edged
> him towards it. :)

To be fair, Brian, it wasn't pestering us that was complained about, it was 
pestering the listmasters.  "Pestering" us was the right thing to do, and as 
you say helped the OP solve his problem.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 19:29:50 Brian wrote:
> Just think, your response might have edged
> him towards it. :)
>
> [Sorry - the first two words of the last sentence form an imperative].

:-))

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Brian]

On Tue 15 Dec 2015 at 11:49:49 -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Dec 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> 
> >>Now, what do you prefer: being plonked or being ordered to do things?
> >
> >Being plonked.  Any day.  Feel free to plonk me any time. But issuing
> >orders is likely to get an adverse reaction.
> >
> >Agreed, Bob?
> 
> Absolutely! Mais certainement! In short, nobody likes being *told* what to
> do.

I'm going to quote the whole of the mail you sent which started this
subthread:

 > Surely your neuroscience teaching, and other professional duties, at UC and
 > elsewhere keep you sufficiently busy so that you shouldn't really have to
 > pester Debian volunteers trying to keep the massive Debian mailing lists
 > system up and running. You have what appears to be a perfectly serviceable
 > uc.edu personal email account. I understand how attached you must be to
 > syrano, your personal linux server, but please try to get and keep some
 > perspective on all this. You are having difficulties of a strictly personal
 > nature that in now way merit the time of Debian listadmins.

The first sentence is gratuitous ad hominem. The tone and phrasing make
it evident that you think the OP has no justification for posting here.
Why not just tell him to piss off because he is wasting our time?

Then a lecture is launched. It would be hard to say where perspective
has lost here; many difficulties recounted on this list are "personal"
to the user.

All that tomási reasonably said was:

 > Woah. Calm down a bit.

That is polite and succinct enough to clue someone in to responding as
though they are not seated on a high horse.

> And, yes, there is something sophomoric about plonking someone but telling
> them about it first. In the Usenet heydays of killfiles, that was not as a
> rule how it was done.

The boot continues to be put in. Just bought them - or are they new?

Meanwhile, the OP has reached a solution to his problem. Pestering us
appears to have its benefits. Just think, your response might have edged
him towards it. :)

[Sorry - the first two words of the last sentence form an imperative].

Re: no response from listmaster

[Bob Bernstein]

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015, Lisi Reisz wrote:

Now, what do you prefer: being plonked or being ordered to do 
things?


Being plonked.  Any day.  Feel free to plonk me any time. 
But issuing orders is likely to get an adverse reaction.


Agreed, Bob?


Absolutely! Mais certainement! In short, nobody likes being 
*told* what to do.


And, yes, there is something sophomoric about plonking someone 
but telling them about it first. In the Usenet heydays of 
killfiles, that was not as a rule how it was done.


--
Bob Bernstein

Re: no response from listmaster

[John Hasler]

tomas writes:
> In the languages I know well imperative can express a strong wish as
> well as it can express an order.

True in english as well.  It depends on context, though, and can easily
be misinterpreted.

On the other hand it's silly to take offense at what appears to be an
"order" from someone who is clearly lacks any power or authority to
enforce the "order".
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: no response from listmaster

[German]

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:33:18 +
Lisi Reisz  wrote:

> On Tuesday 15 December 2015 10:50:55 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > Since when could one extrapolate from one language to another??!
> >
> > I have to do this all the time.
> 
> Well, you shouldn't.  Languages don't equate in that way.
> 
> Lisi
> 

Maybe enough needless banter? It would be better if needed questions
was answered better and with specifics

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 10:50:55 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:00:40AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 December 2015 07:15:57 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Since I'm not a native English speaker, I'll bow to your
> > > interpretation.
> >
> > Since when could one extrapolate from one language to another??!
>
> I have to do this all the time.
>
> >   Perhaps
> > the languages you know well don't really have an imperative.
>
> They both have.
>
> >  I quoted
> > Wiktionary anyway, so it is not just my interpretation.
>
> Quoth Wikipedia [1]
>
>   "The imperative is a grammatical mood that forms commands or
>requests, including the giving of prohibition or permission,
>or any other kind of advice or exhortation."
>
> May I take the "request" part?
>
> I'm done with this thread, btw.
>
> [1] 

 "Please be quiet". (from the above) "Be quiet."  In English the second is 
_certainly_ not a request.  Nor in practice is the first.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 10:50:55 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > Since when could one extrapolate from one language to another??!
>
> I have to do this all the time.

Well, you shouldn't.  Languages don't equate in that way.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:00:40AM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 December 2015 07:15:57 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

[...]

> > Since I'm not a native English speaker, I'll bow to your interpretation.
> 
> Since when could one extrapolate from one language to another??!

I have to do this all the time.

>   Perhaps the 
> languages you know well don't really have an imperative.

They both have.
>  I quoted Wiktionary 
> anyway, so it is not just my interpretation.

Quoth Wikipedia [1]

  "The imperative is a grammatical mood that forms commands or
   requests, including the giving of prohibition or permission,
   or any other kind of advice or exhortation."

May I take the "request" part?

I'm done with this thread, btw.

[1] 

regards
- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZv8I8ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYfowCdGkbpbscizXUQ8qfO0AvXZlUg
zVMAn3MA2x5imHA93Nn4HLJ8aha8zevb
=rqkC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 07:17:20 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:49:13AM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > >Plonk*.
> >
> > Sigh. Another satisfied customer.
> >
> > >* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plonk_(Usenet)
> >
> > FWIW, I didn't need the wikipedia reference. I've been plonked in
> > classier joints than this!
>
> Now, what do you prefer: being plonked or being ordered to do things?

Being plonked.  Any day.  Feel free to plonk me any time.  But issuing orders 
is likely to get an adverse reaction.

Agreed, Bob?

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Tuesday 15 December 2015 07:15:57 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 03:06:48PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Monday 14 December 2015 13:54:09 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > > >Woah. Calm down a bit.
> > > >
> > > > That made you uncomfortable a little bit Tomas, huh?
> > >
> > > Most definitely, yes.
> > >
> > > >                                                       Please try to
> > > > deal with it before issuing instructions to me.
> > >
> > > No idea how you could take as "instruction" what only could be meant
> > > as a "proposal", but there you go...
> >
> > It was in the imperative.
> >
> > "imperative ‎(countable and uncountable, plural imperatives)
> > (uncountable, grammar) The grammatical mood expressing an order "
> >
> > https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/imperative
>
> In the languages I know well imperative can express a strong wish as well
> as it can express an order.
>
> Since I'm not a native English speaker, I'll bow to your interpretation.

Since when could one extrapolate from one language to another??!  Perhaps the 
languages you know well don't really have an imperative.  I quoted Wiktionary 
anyway, so it is not just my interpretation.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:49:13AM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Dan Ritter wrote:
> 
> >Plonk*.
> 
> Sigh. Another satisfied customer.
> 
> >* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plonk_(Usenet)
> 
> FWIW, I didn't need the wikipedia reference. I've been plonked in classier
> joints than this!

I've never understood the blocker's desire to publish their block.
It's certainly of no interest to anyone else receiving the list.

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:49:13AM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Dan Ritter wrote:
> 
> >Plonk*.
> 
> Sigh. Another satisfied customer.
> 
> >* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plonk_(Usenet)
> 
> FWIW, I didn't need the wikipedia reference. I've been plonked in
> classier joints than this!

Now, what do you prefer: being plonked or being ordered to do things?

- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZvvoAACgkQBcgs9XrR2kayPwCcCjHl8/8b+K4Xtwj7qOgu1YAw
1yUAn0WSgi9CAEQzuwKBddN30G8J7VU5
=R2s5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 03:06:48PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Monday 14 December 2015 13:54:09 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > > >Woah. Calm down a bit.
> > >
> > > That made you uncomfortable a little bit Tomas, huh?
> >
> > Most definitely, yes.
> >
> > >                                                       Please try to
> > > deal with it before issuing instructions to me.
> >
> > No idea how you could take as "instruction" what only could be meant
> > as a "proposal", but there you go...
> 
> It was in the imperative.
> 
> "imperative ‎(countable and uncountable, plural imperatives)
> (uncountable, grammar) The grammatical mood expressing an order "
> 
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/imperative

In the languages I know well imperative can express a strong wish as well
as it can express an order.

Since I'm not a native English speaker, I'll bow to your interpretation.

Regards
- -- t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZvvi0ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZAfACfRtKLasDVL0HkZaZgVGEcF2dh
jBsAnjtkK0kXS1i5wBiriXdkmGkmX+Qg
=dZaG
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[John Hasler]

Steve Kleene writes:
> What I like about my existing setup is that all of my mail gets
> deposited locally on my machine.  I can read most (but no longer all)
> of the text with a simple "mail" from the command line.  This is the
> easiest way to read and archive my mails in the style I've developed
> and prefer.  If I could have gmail forwarded to an account on my local
> machine, that would work well.

I do exactly that using Newsguy .  It's worked
perfectly for me for more than a decade.  Yes, it costs money (not
much).  That's an *advantage*.  It means that you are a customer with a
contract.  With Newsguy you can email customer service and get a
response from a human being within hours.  Try that with Gmail.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lee Fuller]

For reference, the default timeout in the current release of mailman is 30
seconds.

https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DSA

I believe DSA are responsible for the list server.

-
- Lee Fuller
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 01:41:46PM +, Lee Fuller wrote:

> ​Hey there,
>
> I checked your email address using basic telnet and a measurement tool.
>
> I identified the likely physicality of your mailbox to be Cincinnati, and
> the
> server connecting to you in these measurements is in Texas.
>
> I ran the test in a handful of arrangements but I repeated the general
> routine
> enough times intentionally to discount causes of likely performance
> fluctuation.
>
> In both tests it is clear that an SMTP transaction takes as long as
> 10 seconds to conclude, and that is using plaintext SMTP without actually
> having
> transferred anything more than a formal greeting of machines.
>
> I doubt a list server of this size is configured to wait anywhere near 10
> seconds before considering an address unreachable.
>

RFC 5321, section 4.5.3.2 lists the various timesouts that an SMTP client
SHOULD employ (noting that they MUST be per-command, not on the whole
transaction). They include:
* Time to Initial 220 message: 5 minutes
* Response to MAIL or RCPT command: 5 minutes
* Waiting for "354 Start Input" after issueing "DATA": 3 minutes
* Waiting for next command from server: 5 minutes

So, any client that disconnects after waiting only 10 seconds is, while not
explicitly spammy, at least poorly behaved.


> That's probably the cause of your issues as you describe them.
>
>
> ​
> -
> - Lee Fuller
>
>

Re: no response from listmaster [SOLVED]

[Steve Kleene]

On 2015-12-13 17:18:32 GMT, I wrote:

> My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for a
> few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they unsubscribed
> me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 notified me of this and
> said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that address twice (Dec 8
> and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have received no response; and
> I'm still unsubscribed.

I have now been able to resubscribe.  What I did was to stop routing my mail
through my employer's main router.  I believe that was the source of the
bounces from improper processing of validation tags.  Dodging that router let
me succeed in replying to confirm my subscription.

I began relaying through this router ten years ago because a different
recipient didn't like my originating IP.  If that's now busted again, I'll
work through it.

Thank you very much to all of you who posted or wrote with helpful and useful
suggestions.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 10:25:15 +0100,  wrote:

> Another thing: don't be impatient with the Debian listmasters. They're
> doing volunteer work. They deserve our appreciation. And if things
> don't work as they should, perhaps offering our hand is better than
> venting our ire.

I agree with all of this.  I have tried hard to just state the facts I know
and not suggest any sort of misbehavior.  I have (sporadically) benefitted
from this group many times over the past nine years, and it's a major reason
I've stuck with Debian.  I have also (less often) contributed a solution or
two when I was able.

Thanks again.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Ric Moore]

On 12/14/2015 10:06 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:

On Monday 14 December 2015 13:54:09 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:



No idea how you could take as "instruction" what only could be meant
as a "proposal", but there you go...


It was in the imperative.

"imperative ‎(countable and uncountable, plural imperatives)
(uncountable, grammar) The grammatical mood expressing an order "

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/imperative

Instruction=Order??  I think so.


Keep in mind that when geeks find broken, they rush in to "issue" a fix. 
Classic black and white thinking, but we are dealing with computers with 
humans mingled in.  Ric



--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Monday 14 December 2015 13:54:09 to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > >Woah. Calm down a bit.
> >
> > That made you uncomfortable a little bit Tomas, huh?
>
> Most definitely, yes.
>
> >                                                       Please try to
> > deal with it before issuing instructions to me.
>
> No idea how you could take as "instruction" what only could be meant
> as a "proposal", but there you go...

It was in the imperative.

"imperative ‎(countable and uncountable, plural imperatives)
(uncountable, grammar) The grammatical mood expressing an order "

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/imperative

Instruction=Order??  I think so.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Monday 14 December 2015 13:31:06 Steve Kleene wrote:
> If I could have
> gmail forwarded to an account on my local machine, that would work well.

You can.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#settings/fwdandpop

That may not work, if you have to be logged in to get access.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Bob Bernstein]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Dan Ritter wrote:


Plonk*.


Sigh. Another satisfied customer.


* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plonk_(Usenet)


FWIW, I didn't need the wikipedia reference. I've been plonked 
in classier joints than this!



--
Bob Bernstein

Re: no response from listmaster

[Darac Marjal]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 01:41:46PM +, Lee Fuller wrote:

​Hey there,

I checked your email address using basic telnet and a measurement tool.

I identified the likely physicality of your mailbox to be Cincinnati, and the
server connecting to you in these measurements is in Texas.

I ran the test in a handful of arrangements but I repeated the general routine
enough times intentionally to discount causes of likely performance
fluctuation.

In both tests it is clear that an SMTP transaction takes as long as 10 seconds 
to conclude, and that is using plaintext SMTP without actually having

transferred anything more than a formal greeting of machines.

I doubt a list server of this size is configured to wait anywhere near 10
seconds before considering an address unreachable.


RFC 5321, section 4.5.3.2 lists the various timesouts that an SMTP 
client SHOULD employ (noting that they MUST be per-command, not on the 
whole transaction). They include:

* Time to Initial 220 message: 5 minutes
* Response to MAIL or RCPT command: 5 minutes
* Waiting for "354 Start Input" after issueing "DATA": 3 minutes
* Waiting for next command from server: 5 minutes

So, any client that disconnects after waiting only 10 seconds is, while 
not explicitly spammy, at least poorly behaved.




That's probably the cause of your issues as you describe them.


​
-
- Lee Fuller



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: no response from listmaster

[Dan Ritter]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 10:57:54PM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> Dear Dr. Kleene,
> 
> Surely your neuroscience teaching, and other professional duties, at
> UC and elsewhere keep you sufficiently busy so that you shouldn't
> really have to pester Debian volunteers trying to keep the massive
> Debian mailing lists system up and running. You have what appears to
> be a perfectly serviceable uc.edu personal email account. I
> understand how attached you must be to syrano, your personal linux
> server, but please try to get and keep some perspective on all this.
> You are having difficulties of a strictly personal nature that in now
> way merit the time of Debian listadmins.
> 

Plonk*.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plonk_(Usenet)

-dsr-

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:07:50AM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> >Woah. Calm down a bit.
> 
> That made you uncomfortable a little bit Tomas, huh?

Most definitely, yes.

>   Please try to
> deal with it before issuing instructions to me.

No idea how you could take as "instruction" what only could be meant
as a "proposal", but there you go...

> I'm not here for
> your comfort, iydm.

What a coincidence.

cheers
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZuygEACgkQBcgs9XrR2kY8+ACfbO+lrXWNqeiPa4FeU2g5aybL
NYcAniKgSFZe4t8MTCp+ABTli/lxdX9U
=YSus
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[Petter Adsen]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:31:06 + (UTC)
Steve Kleene  wrote:

> What I like about my existing setup is that all of my mail gets
> deposited locally on my machine.  I can read most (but no longer all)
> of the text with a simple "mail" from the command line.  This is the
> easiest way to read and archive my mails in the style I've developed
> and prefer.  If I could have gmail forwarded to an account on my
> local machine, that would work well.  If I'd have to always read it
> in a browser, I'd be less happy.  I won't take the time to research
> alternatives like this unless I can't revive the system I like.

You could use something like getmail (package getmail4):

Description-en: mail retriever with support for POP3, IMAP4 and SDPS
 getmail is intended as a simple replacement for fetchmail.
 It retrieves mail (either all messages, or only unread messages)
 from one or more POP3/IMAP4/SDPS servers for one or more email
 accounts, and reliably delivers into a qmail-style Maildir, mbox
 file or to a command (pipe delivery) like maildrop or procmail,
 specified on a per-account basis. getmail also has support for
 domain (multidrop) mailboxes.
 .
 Supported protocols:
 POP3, POP3-over-SSL, IMAP4, IMAP4-over-SSL, and SDPS mail.

Works very well for me, easy to set up. As long as your mail provider
offers one of the supported protocols (Gmail has both POP3 and IMAP) it
should do what you want.

Petter

-- 
"I'm ionized"
"Are you sure?"
"I'm positive."

Re: no response from listmaster

[Bob Bernstein]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:


Woah. Calm down a bit.


That made you uncomfortable a little bit Tomas, huh? Please try 
to deal with it before issuing instructions to me. I'm not here 
for your comfort, iydm.


--
Bob Bernstein

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lee Fuller]

​Hey there,

I checked your email address using basic telnet and a measurement tool.

I identified the likely physicality of your mailbox to be Cincinnati, and
the server connecting to you in these measurements is in Texas.

I ran the test in a handful of arrangements but I repeated the general
routine enough times intentionally to discount causes of likely performance
fluctuation.

In both tests it is clear that an *SMTP transaction takes as long as
10 seconds *to conclude, and that is using plaintext SMTP without actually
having transferred anything more than a formal greeting of machines.

I doubt a list server of this size is configured to wait anywhere near 10
seconds before considering an address unreachable.

That's probably the cause of your issues as you describe them.


​
-
- Lee Fuller

On 14 Dec 2015 9:25 a.m.,  wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:46:43AM +, Steve Kleene wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I am running mailto/sendmail from the command line, configured locally by
> > /etc/sendmail/sendmail.cf.  This file includes:
> >
> >   DSsmtp.uc.edu
> >
> > This sets my employer's server smtp.uc.edu as SMART_HOST.  I did not
> route
> > through that server until 2006.  At that point an organization across the
> > street began refusing emails because my IP was seen as dynamic.  I had to
> > route through smtp.uc.edu to get around that.  I haven't tried lately
> to go
> > back to the pre-2006 system.  I do have one machine with a fixed IP.  On
> my
> > desk machine I masquerade to the fixed IP, but apparently e-mails from
> the
> > desk machine were detected as dynamic IP before the header was even
> checked.
>
> That sounds like a lot of guesswork. Note that the spam [1] protection
> strategies are extremely varied these days, ranging from "I only accept
> mail from a couple of well-known sites" to DKIM [1] or SPF [2] and a
> whole zoo of other measures which don't really work (half of the spam
> I get has a DKIM, which suggests that some filters are spoofed by it).
>
> Perhaps the DKIM record of your uni doesn't list your IP address as one
> allowed to send mail from this domain?
>
> Other criteria are the domain's reputation and RBLs. The first mail I
> sent to a friend on outlook.com (I maintain my own mail server) never
> arrived (no bounce, no nothing: it just disappeared). Once she sent
> me a mail, "the channel was open".
>
> Spam filtering is hard.
>
> Add to this that the "biggies" don't dislike the situation that people
> have to turn to them to be able to reliably send mail, and then you
> see why they take half-hearted measures which generate "some" collateral
> damages. It's disgusting: mail, as a true peer-to-peer communication
> medium is dying thanks to spam, and thanks to the likes of Microsoft,
> Yahoo, Facebook, Google, Twitter et al.
>
> As if they were allies.
>
> So if you want still to send mail from your own IP, you'll have to
> know a bit about spam.
>
> Another thing: don't be impatient with the Debian listmasters. They're
> doing volunteer work. They deserve our appreciation. And if things
> don't work as they should, perhaps offering our hand is better than
> venting our ire.
>
> Cheers
>
> [1] Yes, counter to your suggestion in another mail I do mention the word
> "spam", because you can't explain the current situation without that.
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail
> [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework
> [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSBL
>
> - -- tomás
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlZuivsACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZq7ACeJuNNyiKaPEg+R/EA974On2+k
> 8nYAn3+Q0eQOalTD5wV0bw0REqQ6pOFx
> =GRxP
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>

Re: no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 16:07:40 +0800, Bret Busby  wrote:

> On 14/12/2015, Dan Ritter  wrote:
>
> 
>
> > You have two major choices, neither one of which is what you
> > want to hear.
> >
> > 1. You can subscribe via some other address. GMail, Fastmail,
> > whatever. Let other people handle your mail for you, for money
> > or not.
>
> Why not simply take up that suggestion?
> ...
> So, to me, the simple solution, is to use something like a gmail
> account, for your mailing lists messages.

I have not ruled out that idea.  In theory, the most trivial solution was to
just reinstate my existing subscription, which had been working nicely for
nine years.  It has not been so easy after all.

What I like about my existing setup is that all of my mail gets deposited
locally on my machine.  I can read most (but no longer all) of the text with
a simple "mail" from the command line.  This is the easiest way to read and
archive my mails in the style I've developed and prefer.  If I could have
gmail forwarded to an account on my local machine, that would work well.  If
I'd have to always read it in a browser, I'd be less happy.  I won't take the
time to research alternatives like this unless I can't revive the system I
like.

> I am curious as to why you are apparently defying your employer, and
> running a particular mailserver using your employer's resources,
> against the instructions/wishes of your employer, and, why your
> employer lets you get away with so defying your employer.

I did in fact say that my employer "wishes I didn't run a mail server at
all".  That was really a guess; they have never said that to me.  What they
have done is ask me a couple of times to defend my practice.  I've done that,
and they have never asked me to stop the server.  I've run my own mail
service since I started here in 1985, originally with Bitnet and uucico.  My
employer does explicitly allow personal use of their mail resources as long
as the use is not burdensome or for personal profit.

> And, why can you not use a gmail account (or, a similar, free webmail
> account), for mailing list subscriptions, at least, in the interim?

I may look into that if my preferred solution fails.  I can also just read
the threads at the archives or gmane sites.

Thanks for your helpful suggestions and inquiries.

> Bret Busby
> Armadale
> West Australia

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:46:43AM +, Steve Kleene wrote:

[...]

> I am running mailto/sendmail from the command line, configured locally by
> /etc/sendmail/sendmail.cf.  This file includes:
> 
>   DSsmtp.uc.edu
> 
> This sets my employer's server smtp.uc.edu as SMART_HOST.  I did not route
> through that server until 2006.  At that point an organization across the
> street began refusing emails because my IP was seen as dynamic.  I had to
> route through smtp.uc.edu to get around that.  I haven't tried lately to go
> back to the pre-2006 system.  I do have one machine with a fixed IP.  On my
> desk machine I masquerade to the fixed IP, but apparently e-mails from the
> desk machine were detected as dynamic IP before the header was even checked.

That sounds like a lot of guesswork. Note that the spam [1] protection
strategies are extremely varied these days, ranging from "I only accept
mail from a couple of well-known sites" to DKIM [1] or SPF [2] and a
whole zoo of other measures which don't really work (half of the spam
I get has a DKIM, which suggests that some filters are spoofed by it).

Perhaps the DKIM record of your uni doesn't list your IP address as one
allowed to send mail from this domain?

Other criteria are the domain's reputation and RBLs. The first mail I
sent to a friend on outlook.com (I maintain my own mail server) never
arrived (no bounce, no nothing: it just disappeared). Once she sent
me a mail, "the channel was open".

Spam filtering is hard.

Add to this that the "biggies" don't dislike the situation that people
have to turn to them to be able to reliably send mail, and then you
see why they take half-hearted measures which generate "some" collateral
damages. It's disgusting: mail, as a true peer-to-peer communication
medium is dying thanks to spam, and thanks to the likes of Microsoft,
Yahoo, Facebook, Google, Twitter et al.

As if they were allies.

So if you want still to send mail from your own IP, you'll have to
know a bit about spam.

Another thing: don't be impatient with the Debian listmasters. They're
doing volunteer work. They deserve our appreciation. And if things
don't work as they should, perhaps offering our hand is better than
venting our ire.

Cheers

[1] Yes, counter to your suggestion in another mail I do mention the word
"spam", because you can't explain the current situation without that.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSBL

- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZuivsACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZq7ACeJuNNyiKaPEg+R/EA974On2+k
8nYAn3+Q0eQOalTD5wV0bw0REqQ6pOFx
=GRxP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[tomas]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 10:57:54PM -0500, Bob Bernstein wrote:
> Dear Dr. Kleene,
> 
> Surely your neuroscience teaching, and other professional duties, at
> UC and elsewhere [...]

Woah. Calm down a bit. 

regards
- -- tomás
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlZuhcoACgkQBcgs9XrR2kZUuACeI1a4Ji8V6KuNW4qUCEnU4DLa
ixoAnjpq4RmtM+LKNhh1w3+ENWValGav
=JzGE
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: no response from listmaster

[Bret Busby]

On 14/12/2015, Dan Ritter  wrote:



>
> You have two major choices, neither one of which is what you
> want to hear.
>
> 1. You can subscribe via some other address. GMail, Fastmail,
> whatever. Let other people handle your mail for you, for money
> or not.
>

Why not simply take up that suggestion?

I have my miscellaneous email accounts through my hosted domain names,
and, I have hundreds of email filters to deal with the email that goes
through those accounts.

Somewhere in those filters, stuff from some unregulated and commonly
used for malicious email, providers, such as hotmail, gets deleted.

So, I have my gmail account, which is also subscribed to this list,
and, to some other lists, and, this gmail email account, can accept
most email, and, gmail has a kind of semi-intelligent filtering system
to deal with malicious emails.

Whilst I do still get the occasional notification of bounces of
messages from the Debian lists to which I subscribe from my gmail
account, such bounce notifications, due to the rarity of the bounces,
are not sufficient, to cause me to become removed from the list.

So, to me, the simple solution, is to use something like a gmail
account, for your mailing lists messages.

I am curious as to why you are apparently defying your employer, and
running a particular mailserver using your employer's resources,
against the instructions/wishes of your employer, and, why your
employer lets you get away with so defying your employer.

I would have thought that, should you insist on running a mailserver
that your employer does not want, you would do it outside of, and,
unrelated to, your employment.

A few years ago, I had been runnning a mailserver here, on our
domestic LAN, running Postfix, until the computer (that we had bought
for about 100AUD, as a used HP computer, with an MMX CPU, that lasted
for several years, as a mailserver), apparently died, and, I have not
got around to creating a replacement mailserver.

So, if you insist on running your own mailserver, why can you not do
it, on a LAN, at your residence, completely dissociated from your
work?

And, why can you not use a gmail account (or, a similar, free webmail
account), for mailing list subscriptions, at least, in the interim?

I find it to be effective.

Oh, and, as with others, who have already posted in this thread, I
too, am not a list administrator of this mailing list, simply someone
who is wondering why you do not apply one or more of the suggested,
simple and obvious solutions.

-- 

Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia

..

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

Re: no response from listmaster

[Bob Bernstein]

Dear Dr. Kleene,

Surely your neuroscience teaching, and other professional 
duties, at UC and elsewhere keep you sufficiently busy so that 
you shouldn't really have to pester Debian volunteers trying to 
keep the massive Debian mailing lists system up and running. You 
have what appears to be a perfectly serviceable uc.edu personal 
email account. I understand how attached you must be to syrano, 
your personal linux server, but please try to get and keep some 
perspective on all this. You are having difficulties of a 
strictly personal nature that in now way merit the time of 
Debian listadmins.


--
Bob Bernstein

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Monday 14 December 2015 02:46:43 Steve Kleene wrote:
> On 2015-12-13 20:01:35 GMT, Brian  cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun 13 Dec 2015 at 18:57:31 +, Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > > > My address (skdeb  syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed
> > > > > from the debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the
> > > > > address
>
> down for a
>
> > > > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if
>
> anyone
>
> > > > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmaster  lists.debian.org on
>
> Dec 8 notified
>
> > > > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to
> > > > > that address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to
> > > > > me; I have received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might
>
> actually
>
> > > > > respond?  Thanks.
> > >
> > > On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  gmail.com> 
replied:
> > > > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> > >
> > > Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to
> > > reopen. Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups")
> > > on that
>
> and was
>
> > > unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user 
>
> lists.debian.org and
>
> > > debian-admin  lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my
> > > employer mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I
> > > don't understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.) 
> > > My employer only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and
> > > wishes I didn't
>
> run a
>
> > > mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.
> >
> > Would you please be clearer here as to your setup.
> >
> > You are running a mail server anad are using it to send mail.
> >
> > Does this mail
> >
> > a) go through one of your employer's mail servers
> >
> > or
> >
> > b) do you send mails directly ?
>
> I am running mailto/sendmail from the command line, configured locally by
> /etc/sendmail/sendmail.cf.  This file includes:
>
>   DSsmtp.uc.edu
>
> This sets my employer's server smtp.uc.edu as SMART_HOST.  I did not route
> through that server until 2006.  At that point an organization across the
> street began refusing emails because my IP was seen as dynamic.  I had to
> route through smtp.uc.edu to get around that.  I haven't tried lately to go
> back to the pre-2006 system.  I do have one machine with a fixed IP.  On my
> desk machine I masquerade to the fixed IP, but apparently e-mails from the
> desk machine were detected as dynamic IP before the header was even
> checked.
>
> Thanks for the reply.

Could you route through another SMTP server just for the list, or just to 
subscribe to the list?  Does all your mail have to go through the same SMTP 
server always?  I ask because I use a different one if this one causes 
problems, as it occasionally does.

Lisi

Re: no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

On 2015-12-13 20:01:35 GMT, Brian  cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Sun 13 Dec 2015 at 18:57:31 +, Steve Kleene wrote:
>
> > > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > > My address (skdeb  syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > > > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address
down for a
> > > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if
anyone
> > > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmaster  lists.debian.org on
Dec 8 notified
> > > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > > > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > > > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > > >
> > > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might
actually
> > > > respond?  Thanks.
> >
> > On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  gmail.com> replied:
> >
> > > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> >
> > Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.
> > Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups") on that
and was
> > unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user 
lists.debian.org and
> > debian-admin  lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my employer
> > mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I don't
> > understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.)  My employer
> > only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and wishes I didn't
run a
> > mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.
>
> Would you please be clearer here as to your setup.
>
> You are running a mail server anad are using it to send mail.
>
> Does this mail
>
> a) go through one of your employer's mail servers
>
> or
>
> b) do you send mails directly ?

I am running mailto/sendmail from the command line, configured locally by
/etc/sendmail/sendmail.cf.  This file includes:

  DSsmtp.uc.edu

This sets my employer's server smtp.uc.edu as SMART_HOST.  I did not route
through that server until 2006.  At that point an organization across the
street began refusing emails because my IP was seen as dynamic.  I had to
route through smtp.uc.edu to get around that.  I haven't tried lately to go
back to the pre-2006 system.  I do have one machine with a fixed IP.  On my
desk machine I masquerade to the fixed IP, but apparently e-mails from the
desk machine were detected as dynamic IP before the header was even checked.

Thanks for the reply.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Brian]

On Sun 13 Dec 2015 at 14:19:16 -0500, Dan Ritter wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 06:57:31PM +, Steve Kleene wrote:
> > References: ,
> > <201512131729.22307.lisi.re...@gmail.com>
> > 
> > > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > > > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down 
> > > > for a
> > > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if 
> > > > anyone
> > > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 
> > > > notified
> > > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > > > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > > > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > > >
> > > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might 
> > > > actually
> > > > respond?  Thanks.
> > 
> > On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  replied:
> > 
> > > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> > 
> > Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.
> > Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups") on that and 
> > was
> > unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user@lists.debian.org and
> > debian-ad...@lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my employer
> > mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I don't
> > understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.)  My employer
> > only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and wishes I didn't run 
> > a
> > mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.
> > 
> > Since listmas...@lists.debian.org does not bounce my mails, I expected to
> > work with someone there.  I was hoping someone here might have an idea what
> > it takes to get their attention, or how to contact someone else who might be
> > helpful.
> 
> You have two major choices, neither one of which is what you
> want to hear.
> 
> 1. You can subscribe via some other address. GMail, Fastmail,
> whatever. Let other people handle your mail for you, for money
> or not.

What difference would that make?
 
> 2. You can run a mail server... somewhere else. Your employer
> doesn't want you running a mail server, and you should probably
> honor that desire by not running a mail server on their network.
> Rent a virtual machine, a physical server or colocate one of
> your own boxes someplace where the network and power is
> reliable.

How would an employer know you are running a mail server? And, if they
could determine it, why would they want to restrict your freedom to
communicate? (Please try to not mention the word "spam" in a response". :)

Re: no response from listmaster

[Brian]

On Sun 13 Dec 2015 at 18:57:31 +, Steve Kleene wrote:

> References: ,
> <201512131729.22307.lisi.re...@gmail.com>
> 
> > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for 
> > > a
> > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 
> > > notified
> > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > >
> > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might 
> > > actually
> > > respond?  Thanks.
> 
> On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  replied:
> 
> > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> 
> Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.

Have you actually tried the sensible suggestion of resubscribing? Ten
minutes maximum to do it and respond to the confirmation message and get
a response. You'll then know where you up to.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Sven Arvidsson]

On Sun, 2015-12-13 at 17:18 +, Steve Kleene wrote:
> Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might
> actually
> respond?  Thanks.

You could try IRC: 
#debian-lists on irc.debian.org (OFTC) 

-- 
Cheers,
Sven Arvidsson
http://www.whiz.se
PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5





signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: no response from listmaster

[Brian]

On Sun 13 Dec 2015 at 18:57:31 +, Steve Kleene wrote:

> References: ,
> <201512131729.22307.lisi.re...@gmail.com>
> 
> > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for 
> > > a
> > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 
> > > notified
> > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > >
> > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might 
> > > actually
> > > respond?  Thanks.
> 
> On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  replied:
> 
> > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> 
> Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.
> Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups") on that and was
> unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user@lists.debian.org and
> debian-ad...@lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my employer
> mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I don't
> understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.)  My employer
> only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and wishes I didn't run a
> mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.

Would you please be clearer here as to your setup.

You are running a mail server anad are using it to send mail.

Does this mail

a) go through one of your employer's mail servers

or

b) do you send mails directly ?


> 
> Since listmas...@lists.debian.org does not bounce my mails, I expected to
> work with someone there.  I was hoping someone here might have an idea what
> it takes to get their attention, or how to contact someone else who might be
> helpful.
> 

Re: no response from listmaster

[Dan Ritter]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 06:57:31PM +, Steve Kleene wrote:
> References: ,
> <201512131729.22307.lisi.re...@gmail.com>
> 
> > On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for 
> > > a
> > > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> > > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 
> > > notified
> > > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> > >
> > > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might 
> > > actually
> > > respond?  Thanks.
> 
> On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  replied:
> 
> > Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.
> 
> Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.
> Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups") on that and was
> unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user@lists.debian.org and
> debian-ad...@lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my employer
> mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I don't
> understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.)  My employer
> only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and wishes I didn't run a
> mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.
> 
> Since listmas...@lists.debian.org does not bounce my mails, I expected to
> work with someone there.  I was hoping someone here might have an idea what
> it takes to get their attention, or how to contact someone else who might be
> helpful.

You have two major choices, neither one of which is what you
want to hear.

1. You can subscribe via some other address. GMail, Fastmail,
whatever. Let other people handle your mail for you, for money
or not.

2. You can run a mail server... somewhere else. Your employer
doesn't want you running a mail server, and you should probably
honor that desire by not running a mail server on their network.
Rent a virtual machine, a physical server or colocate one of
your own boxes someplace where the network and power is
reliable.


-dsr- also not listmaster

Re: no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

References: ,
<201512131729.22307.lisi.re...@gmail.com>

> On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> > My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> > debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for a
> > few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> > cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> > unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 notified
> > me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> > address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> > received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
> >
> > Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might actually
> > respond?  Thanks.

On Sun Dec 13 12:29:31 2015, Lisi Reisz  replied:

> Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.

Thanks, but that's a whole can of worms I had hoped (in vain) not to reopen.
Last month I did a thread ("problem e-mailing debian groups") on that and was
unable to find a solution.  My e-mails to debian-user@lists.debian.org and
debian-ad...@lists.debian.org DO bounce, apparently because my employer
mishandles sender callback verification.  (Having said that, I don't
understand why no one but lists.debian.org bounces my e-mails.)  My employer
only wants to support Microsoft Outlook or Exchange and wishes I didn't run a
mail server at all.  So I'm on my own.

Since listmas...@lists.debian.org does not bounce my mails, I expected to
work with someone there.  I was hoping someone here might have an idea what
it takes to get their attention, or how to contact someone else who might be
helpful.

Re: no response from listmaster

[Lisi Reisz]

On Sunday 13 December 2015 17:18:32 Steve Kleene wrote:
> My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
> debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for a
> few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
> cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they
> unsubscribed me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 notified
> me of this and said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that
> address twice (Dec 8 and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have
> received no response; and I'm still unsubscribed.
>
> Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might actually
> respond?  Thanks.

Why not just resubscribe - much simpler.

Lisi

no response from listmaster

[Steve Kleene]

My address (sk...@syrano.acb.uc.edu) has been unsubscribed from the
debian-user mailing list.  I understand why.  I took the address down for a
few days for reasons that are now irrelevant (but can be related if anyone
cares).  Because mails from lists.debian.org were bouncing, they unsubscribed
me.  A note from listmas...@lists.debian.org on Dec 8 notified me of this and
said, "You are welcome to contact us".  I wrote to that address twice (Dec 8
and 9).  The mails were not returned to me; I have received no response; and
I'm still unsubscribed.

Do any of you know of another administrator or ombudsman who might actually
respond?  Thanks.