Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
I was thinking that people new to using Mailman could get a very simple email “welcome to this list” on subscription, with brief pointers on how to do things. To the uninitiated there might be a sense of not wanting to engage for fear of breaking something or doing it wrong. I’m certain that the vast majority of less technical users don’t know how conversation threads work. For example I’m still not really clear on which field the list address should go into, and does it matter what other addresses go into to and cc fields. I suspect it doesn’t matter much but I haven’t yet gone to the trouble of working it out (hey that’s what I’m doing now!). as On 20 Mar 2015, at 8:53 am, Barry Warsaw ba...@list.org wrote: On Mar 20, 2015, at 08:19 AM, Andrew Stuart wrote: When I reply to a message on a mailing list, what is the “right” way to do it? Should I be deleting previous thread text from my response? Should I be adding anything in? Of course, Wikipedia is the font of all human knowledge and truth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post This is an interesting question for me because I think the netiquette rules I've been using for decades may be changing. I've always found it proper and useful to include the quoted material of the original message, but trim the quotes to just the bit you are responding to. I'd call this interleaved-with-trimming. Top posting has always been a serious breach of netiquette. What I've found interesting is that some of my correspondents (off-list) actually *want* top posting, and find anything else confusing. I think I understand why in at least some cases; Apple Mail top posts by default, and some folks just don't like to go digging around in the email to find the answer they're looking for. I've actually tried to accommodate that when sending email to them. I see more and more mailing list and group emails not doing any trimming. I find that incredibly hard to parse because if they *are* interleaving responses, you have to hunt through a huge amount of text. To make things worse, almost the entire conversation is retained so responses to responses to responses just clutter things up and make more noise. I wonder if webmail u/is like gmail (which I don't use) encourage this style. And don't get me started on HTML-only email or some reply styles that make no distinction between the quoted original text and the reply. I can barely read those. As the article mentions, there are enough different styles in widespread use that it's best to conform to the norms of the community. My own feeling is that interleaved-with-trimming is the most conducive to mailing list discussions. Cheers, -Barry -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/andrew.stuart%40supercoders.com.au -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 10:50 +1100, Peter Shute wrote: In all the mail clients I use, I get a choice of Reply, which for this list will reply only to the original sender, or Reply All, which sends it to the original sender and the list. I'm kinda retro when comes to mail clients. My MUA of choice is Evolution for Linux. It's buggy, the source code is bloated, and there are some things it doesn't do well and probably never will. That having been said, it's the only MUA I know of that treats users as technically proficient adults - something I need as a mail administrator. See http://www.fmp.com/living_with_evolution.html -- Lindsay Haisley | The only unchanging certainty FMP Computer Services |is the certainty of change 512-259-1190 | http://www.fmp.com| - Ancient wisdom, all cultures -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 03/19/2015 02:53 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: As the article mentions, there are enough different styles in widespread use that it's best to conform to the norms of the community. My own feeling is that interleaved-with-trimming is the most conducive to mailing list discussions. +1 Although, I have fought and lost the battles with my cycling club list members. On our main discussion list, digests are virtually unreadable at times because it is nearly impossible to find the original material in the multiple quotes of quotes of quotes, and similarly for archives. And some people on the list continue to insist that they like top posting with full quoting because they only have to read the latest post in a thread (albeit from the bottom up), even though it's been pointed out to them multiple times that threads are trees and even if everyone quotes everything, any particular leaf only contains the posts on that branch. Top posting with full quoting is also encouraged by MUAs like Gmail's web client that hide the quoted material unless you ask for it. I do understand that in some business situations (contract negotiations, attorney/client communication and the like), it is useful and pretty much demanded that each message contain the full transcript of what went before, but this has no place on an email discussion list. This is a major hot-button issue for me, The above is only scratching the surface. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 3/19/2015 4:50 PM, Peter Shute wrote: I agree with the other reply that said people are tending towards top quoting more and more. Many people simply top quote as encouraged by their mail client, and haven't considered that there's any other way. Do you mean where the new content is at the start of the message (usually called top-posting) or where the quoted/original material is at the start (usually bottom-posting or inter-posting)? z! -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 17:45 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote: Top posting with full quoting is also encouraged by MUAs like Gmail's web client that hide the quoted material unless you ask for it. It's also encouraged by iDevices with iOS using mail clients which insert the quoted material _below_ the user's sig. Converting to bottom posted isn't really trivial and involves a bit of cutting and pasting. I do understand that in some business situations (contract negotiations, attorney/client communication and the like), it is useful and pretty much demanded that each message contain the full transcript of what went before, but this has no place on an email discussion list. This is a major hot-button issue for me, The above is only scratching the surface. This is one of the reasons I've long ago abdicated my job as list moderator for _all_ the lists I host and to which I also belong. I'm happy to be the technical admin, and deal with problems with spam and the occasional technically disruptive member or ex-member, but I don't want to get into the day-to-day decisions about what's allowed or not on a list. -- Lindsay Haisley | The only unchanging certainty FMP Computer Services |is the certainty of change 512-259-1190 | http://www.fmp.com| - Ancient wisdom, all cultures -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 3/19/2015 2:19 PM, Andrew Stuart wrote: When I reply to a message on a mailing list, what is the “right” way to do it? Should I be deleting previous thread text from my response? Should I be adding anything in? Is there some general ideas for the “right” way to reply to a message on a list? It all depends, and is rife with arguments. Look on line for top-posting/bottom-posting and reply-list/reply-sender and you'll find many, ahem, strident arguments for each way. For most lists, I press the reply-list button, delete the extraneous text, and enter my response (as I've done here). At the very least, remove duplicated list footers, since each message will get a new one. z! -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/19/2015 08:32 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/19/2015 11:31 AM, Marco Stoecker wrote: On 03/19/2015 05:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/18/2015 02:46 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 OK. So there was only one duplicate, yes? And that duplication occurred prior to the spam filtering that added the above header so presumably it wasn't caused by filtering rules in your MUA. Indeed, I looked only to the headers I recieved (Iceweasel-View-Message Source). Even now I checked those header my wife got, because she and I are in different lists, but received duplicates. Her headers seems identical. Are all the Received: headers identical including Queue IDs and time stamps? If so, the duplication must have occurred late in the delivery chain. But in this dedicated case I wrote to 5 lists where the members are disjunct and my wife, and I got duplicates. I don't know why :-S I assumed that the others got duplicates too, but I have to proof. It difficult to say what's happening here without seeing the MTA logs from the various servers where duplication might have occurred, but unless there are entries in Mailman's smtp-failure log on the Mailman server, it is very unlikely that Mailman sent duplicates. Ahh, just found Mailman's log file folder: smtp-failure log is empty for yesterday but smtp log shows the following: Mar 18 22:17:05 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listA for 3 recips, completed in 13.036 seconds Mar 18 22:17:16 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listB for 14 recips, completed in 10.842 seconds Mar 18 22:17:17 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listC for 3 recips, completed in 1.194 seconds Mar 18 22:17:21 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listD for 13 recips, completed in 3.942 seconds Mar 18 22:17:24 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listE for 6 recips, completed in 2.504 seconds Mar 18 22:17:25 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listC for 3 recips, completed in 1.198 seconds Mar 18 22:17:29 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listB for 14 recips, completed in 3.784 seconds Mar 18 22:17:33 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listD for 13 recips, completed in 3.946 seconds Mar 18 22:17:35 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listE for 6 recips, completed in 2.515 seconds Mar 18 22:17:38 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listA for 3 recips, completed in 2.905 seconds This ist the time I sent that e-mail to 5 lists (the announcement that the Mailman server is up and running and for future use) and it seems to me, that it was sent 2 times to each list, wasn't it? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVC0wNAAoJEC1y3OsA+e10xccP/3ZDpQP9fvpwy7wmtVsTuzD4 zfa894qnddkmlMAcJjg3VmJL9Gvqo6H1QlKplh7mZ2Z1n0UWRLXnAehk50ZmI7t2 cKsih+8TONGTDwQ2f0Jd1wY0Zivi09kZYmvATKocIyLEkJFdCc+NoiSJNGNWYwVv 8mwVX1grED+Ombflc8oxO++8NDQ3rWTqQx25Z1JPgaf2pGyE2vaLKbHTCWyFb9jJ pbRcSex5G+Kn6Y/ufu7hPhUugdp90r5lJVhk5nE3laIiJuvPx1XEMZuSfjbMjUab pbut+Bcl+BUwXJhO8etTQysXUtDvLP+DT06jPxMyxTZUK+1ihuunk581HbCOCGbD PW4Wsa67g4BQ8WOwJfF86qLMMJDbIUP5J0pjghXlH2jx7bSOYQif43Vi9U7b+qEc WNC555fi3MdlRXsk4MWk8KCeu2L9c3XZ34oJPz8hsz6Y536tArvFRZPE4uStmlBr dlf8AQJtDpcGbEK/Y0Jw4VFa3Na2ENW7ZidxHbLrAfrKso9mZ/0kAoGhVnkWtrFa PHopN3TCV2VofbORTnzG/bnJon4YUxajbN7oJVl03dx26VADHS7GRhPiB8APF53W eI2q9Vi53Fs1KMrAB7AImrkiAeNVtnxGhMKonKYYH5PLUChXDkuC6oHA/czOYVSv YjKVQQOJRawrL1x6k9Fk =w90D -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 14:56 -0700, Carl Zwanzig wrote: On 3/19/2015 2:19 PM, Andrew Stuart wrote: When I reply to a message on a mailing list, what is the “right” way to do it? Should I be deleting previous thread text from my response? Should I be adding anything in? Is there some general ideas for the “right” way to reply to a message on a list? It all depends, and is rife with arguments. Look on line for top-posting/bottom-posting and reply-list/reply-sender and you'll find many, ahem, strident arguments for each way. For most lists, I press the reply-list button, delete the extraneous text, and enter my response (as I've done here). At the very least, remove duplicated list footers, since each message will get a new one. In many mail user agents, when you press the Reply button the program will analyze the headers, determine that the post being replied to came from a list and offer a Reply to List option in addition to a simple reply, which generally goes privately to the original poster. Andrew said: For example I’m still not really clear on which field the list address should go into, and does it matter what other addresses go into to and cc fields. I suspect it doesn’t matter much but I haven’t yet gone to the trouble of working it out (hey that’s what I’m doing now!). It's pretty simple, actually. The list address goes into either the To or Cc field, and if you want others, not on the list to receive a copy, put them in the Cc field also, but don't go overboard because some systems will barf on Too many recipients. Two or three additional recipients shouldn't be a problem. Addresses can be separated with commas, or with semicolons in the case of MS mail products such as Outlook. It is polite, though, to make sure you're not sending duplicate posts to people by doing a Reply to All which will probably send a copy of your reply to _both_ the list and the original poster. I think that this is a common point of confusion. All in this context doesn't mean all the list subscribers, but all the addresses in the headers. As far as editing, top posting, bottom posting, etc. it's just a matter of using good sense. All communication should get as much meaning into its context as possible, with as little noise as possible. So as Carl said, pull out extra footers and everything else that's not relevant to the immediate focus of the conversation. If you can read your own post, and it makes good sense and gets your point across, as concisely as possible, it doesn't matter what you cut or leave, or if you top post or bottom post. -- Lindsay Haisley | The only unchanging certainty FMP Computer Services |is the certainty of change 512-259-1190 | http://www.fmp.com| - Ancient wisdom, all cultures -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
On 3/19/2015 3:22 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: Ahh, just found Mailman's log file folder: smtp-failure log is empty for yesterday but smtp log shows the following: Mar 18 22:17:05 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listA for 3 recips, completed in 13.036 seconds Mar 18 22:17:16 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listB for 14 recips, completed in 10.842 seconds Mar 18 22:17:17 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listC for 3 recips, completed in 1.194 seconds Mar 18 22:17:21 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listD for 13 recips, completed in 3.942 seconds Mar 18 22:17:24 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listE for 6 recips, completed in 2.504 seconds Mar 18 22:17:25 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listC for 3 recips, completed in 1.198 seconds Mar 18 22:17:29 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listB for 14 recips, completed in 3.784 seconds Mar 18 22:17:33 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listD for 13 recips, completed in 3.946 seconds Mar 18 22:17:35 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listE for 6 recips, completed in 2.515 seconds Mar 18 22:17:38 2015 (2590) 5509eb1c.8050...@domain.de smtp to listA for 3 recips, completed in 2.905 seconds This ist the time I sent that e-mail to 5 lists (the announcement that the Mailman server is up and running and for future use) and it seems to me, that it was sent 2 times to each list, wasn't it? Yes, but if the post was sent twice to each list, the Received: headers of the two posts you received must differ in detail. Anyway, look at the MTA log and see if there were two deliveries of the post to each Mailman list at around 22:17. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 03/19/2015 04:50 PM, Peter Shute wrote: Lindsay Haisley wrote: It is polite, though, to make sure you're not sending duplicate posts to people by doing a Reply to All which will probably send a copy of your reply to _both_ the list and the original poster. I think that this is a common point of confusion. All in this context doesn't mean all the list subscribers, but all the addresses in the headers. In all the mail clients I use, I get a choice of Reply, which for this list will reply only to the original sender, or Reply All, which sends it to the original sender and the list. If I want to reply just to the list, I have to hit Reply All and then delete the original sender's address. I usually don't bother, and I assumed most people don't. Has that been annoying people? I thought mailman was smart enough not to send another copy to people in the Cc list. On Mailman lists at least it is a user option to receive or not receive two copies of list posts in which they are also directly addressed. Thus, I feel it is never necessary to remove the poster's address from a 'reply all'. In fact there is at least one good reason not to. Namely, the poster might be a digest member or even on some lists, a non-member, and 'reply all' gets them a copy now as opposed to in the next digest or never. That said, I tend to use 'reply list' when it's available. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/19/2015 08:32 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/19/2015 11:31 AM, Marco Stoecker wrote: On 03/19/2015 05:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/18/2015 02:46 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 OK. So there was only one duplicate, yes? And that duplication occurred prior to the spam filtering that added the above header so presumably it wasn't caused by filtering rules in your MUA. One duplicate I got and another one my wife got. Indeed, I looked only to the headers I recieved (Iceweasel-View-Message Source). Even now I checked those header my wife got, because she and I are in different lists, but received duplicates. Her headers seems identical. Are all the Received: headers identical including Queue IDs and time stamps? If so, the duplication must have occurred late in the delivery chain. But in this dedicated case I wrote to 5 lists where the members are disjunct and my wife, and I got duplicates. I don't know why :-S I assumed that the others got duplicates too, but I have to proof. It difficult to say what's happening here without seeing the MTA logs from the various servers where duplication might have occurred, but unless there are entries in Mailman's smtp-failure log on the Mailman server, it is very unlikely that Mailman sent duplicates. I got the section out of mail.log from the server during the time, it occured. But where do I find the smtp-failure log file? -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/marco%40stoecker-family.de -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVC0fuAAoJEC1y3OsA+e1019gP/0U7Xtc+gMLY7439eEUNEs7S m4nhsIUCQSJ3P+P1EPKMVqOFZuooKQjsRmc5J3hMXIKl+QYKB72NNXP4TDrrlUdZ tB7eQqmQYm0fHzYxItlpZPUAPem14IM2NpGJUFEPiq8LMXkqTrw9aqnkoXJOathm hcUtz0Nod79fWddmKJdNLhskE4oRp4OX3WQS8sZb9HSUCNn3ehtxH8oqlOQotBOh Ijd4S8j1kmsumVsuMLcIDT9MSHrxGyTb4zuTosJNgi0ZeyCDYaAXdN00PrkJl48d ATqhvg5gpniTmVHiixMhhox8WsJY/Csg3MC+zmn7ZGJJFyEqtimlkYFflJZOkapr Mt5D6kP15q75m7QgbOWnDJmnwjItQXRw7E9/ZmJYX0TrnP98n86dRLMGtj0J9oQ7 oDjLtIPrYLLKWqsaWQCVTpEWZU0U7W1Q6DcQ2cafCqkxdGPq5DyHZitL8XWC2HFR DwsNT7F/LrXM/N95Sgq4aGJdzT1Bl5RkEqWRSYUmNJG9s9DiwzxHnoU8ho99t83f 63U61ofOTsXrGU9aPivhpvc6VCz76zidgOVPYpvEtrH+wro71f45FQ23uY425j9S 8/6W2xFGEuC9w8rx79pmuWQUSuw12obB9QfJFsJHQD2BtzvURqKVDVzonmiYGiSG jXuLfT3AWPvD4NXfDL0B =QsmM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Lindsay Haisley wrote: It is polite, though, to make sure you're not sending duplicate posts to people by doing a Reply to All which will probably send a copy of your reply to _both_ the list and the original poster. I think that this is a common point of confusion. All in this context doesn't mean all the list subscribers, but all the addresses in the headers. In all the mail clients I use, I get a choice of Reply, which for this list will reply only to the original sender, or Reply All, which sends it to the original sender and the list. If I want to reply just to the list, I have to hit Reply All and then delete the original sender's address. I usually don't bother, and I assumed most people don't. Has that been annoying people? I thought mailman was smart enough not to send another copy to people in the Cc list. As far as editing, top posting, bottom posting, etc. it's just a matter of using good sense. All communication should get as much meaning into its context as possible, with as little noise as possible. So as Carl said, pull out extra footers and everything else that's not relevant to the immediate focus of the conversation. If you can read your own post, and it makes good sense and gets your point across, as concisely as possible, it doesn't matter what you cut or leave, or if you top post or bottom post. I think people are generally limited by whatever their mail client will support. Outlook likes to set you up for top posting. I've only managed to get my Outlook to generate the quote indicators by telling it to open my mail in Plain Text format, and I edited the Original Message headers to the simple form above manually. I don't like to interquote in a section claiming to be Original Message because to me that implies it's been left intact. When I had a Blackberry, I had no choice by to top quote. The quoted material is either there or not there on a Blackberry, it can't be edited. Now I have an iPhone, I can edit the message and the header is acceptable for interquoting. We often see messages here that have replies alternating between top and bottom quoting, which can be very confusing, but often people have little choice. I agree with the other reply that said people are tending towards top quoting more and more. Many people simply top quote as encouraged by their mail client, and haven't considered that there's any other way. Often people only read the reply above the start of the quoted material, and ignore interquoted material anyway! Peter Shute -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Seems like there are various approaches and opinions. Is it practical to come up with a very short list of instructions for non-highly-technical end users to give them so hints and confidence to get started using a list? Thinking a clerk in the accounts department at large-corporation-X has been subscribed to the list annualrep...@list.bigcorp.example.com How can we support them in rapidly becoming confident enough to post and use the list? as -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Andrew Stuart writes: For example I’m still not really clear on which field the list address should go into, To or CC. Most Mailman lists will refuse to accept mail BCC'd to the list. and does it matter what other addresses go into to and cc fields. It doesn't matter for mechanical purposes. To, CC, and BCC are all routed the same way (using RCPT TO aka envelope recipient at the SMTP level), and To and CC are handled the same way by almost all receiving MUAs (BCC is, of course, as invisible to the receiving MUA as it is to the human). So To is your target, and CC is the innocent bystander, and BCC are the sniggerers in the peanut gallery, as always. -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
At 07:45 PM 3/19/2015, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/19/2015 02:53 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: As the article mentions, there are enough different styles in widespread use that it's best to conform to the norms of the community. My own feeling is that interleaved-with-trimming is the most conducive to mailing list discussions. +1 Although, I have fought and lost the battles with my cycling club list members. On our main discussion list, digests are virtually unreadable at times because it is nearly impossible to find the original material in the multiple quotes of quotes of quotes, and similarly for archives. And some people on the list continue to insist that they like top posting with full quoting because they only have to read the latest post in a thread (albeit from the bottom up), even though it's been pointed out to them multiple times that threads are trees and even if everyone quotes everything, any particular leaf only contains the posts on that branch. Top posting with full quoting is also encouraged by MUAs like Gmail's web client that hide the quoted material unless you ask for it. I do understand that in some business situations (contract negotiations, attorney/client communication and the like), it is useful and pretty much demanded that each message contain the full transcript of what went before, but this has no place on an email discussion list. This is a major hot-button issue for me, The above is only scratching the surface. Everyone should remember that your needs are not necessarily the same as others. I run some 250 lists that primarily cater to blind persons, and top posting is the norm. While we can sort it all out, despite quoting style, top posting is the easiest in most situations. There is no one right, or wrong way. David Andrews and long white cane Harry. E-Mail: dandr...@visi.com or david.andr...@nfbnet.org -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Barry Warsaw writes: This is an interesting question for me because I think the netiquette rules I've been using for decades may be changing. http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/Teach/IntroSES/socsys.html Yes-Virginia-economics-can-be-useful-ly y'rs, -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Andrew Stuart wrote: Is it practical to come up with a very short list of instructions for non-highly-technical end users to give them so hints and confidence to get started using a list? Thinking a clerk in the accounts department at large-corporation-X has been subscribed to the list annualrep...@list.bigcorp.example.com How can we support them in rapidly becoming confident enough to post and use the list? Maybe you could put some examples on a web page of what you consider to be desirable quoting practices, in the hope that new users might take up those practices and encourage older users to conform. But if they're using the same email client they use for their other day to day email, they'll most likely just do what they've always done. And it's one thing to berate users of some obsure special interest mailing list for their quoting practices, it's another thing if it's your boss. I think the best you can usually hope for is that some of them will trim the quotes occasionally. In the end, unless the discussion gets very complicated, it usually doesn't really matter as far as people being able to understand messages is concerned. Lots of repeated quoting can make messages big though. Peter Shute -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Lindsay Haisley writes: As far as editing, top posting, bottom posting, etc. it's just a matter of using good sense. But there's one aspect of good sense you left out, namely When in Rome This list strongly prefers interlinear posting (posting below the relevant paragraph) if you reply to more than one point at a time. Other lists equally strongly prefer top-posting. I don't know of anybody who prefers bottom-posting (and it's a bad idea to use that term as I've seen newbies instructed to bottom-post do exactly that, leaving 50 lines of original text and adding two lines at the bottom). Which is used does matter, as (1) it's easier to find the new text if everybody does it the same and (2) I at least make far fewer the post has no new content errors with posts that follow the list convention than those that don't. -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 03/19/2015 06:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote: Another reason that I have been told by some people that they want people to top post is that their client will show in the message list a summary of the first line of the message, and they want that to be the new content to see if it is worth reading, as opposed to the quote of the message they have already decided to read or not. (of course, the answer is that it would be better if the client showed the first non-quote line if possible). And K9 mail on my android phone does exactly that. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 3/19/2015 6:59 PM, David Andrews wrote: Everyone should remember that your needs are not necessarily the same as others. I run some 250 lists that primarily cater to blind persons, and top posting is the norm. And for those lists, it's accepted practice because it works for them. Most of the lists I'm on highly discourage top-posting, which works well for their readers. (I observe that the message I'm replying to was entire bottom-posted.) While we can sort it all out, despite quoting style, top posting is the easiest in most situations. Not sure what you mean about quoting there as top-posting pretty much dictates the quoting style- everything from previous messages is below the new material; it's simply a matter of how much you remove. So even based solely on the comments on this list, I think you'll find that top-posting is not the easiest. Well, maybe easiest (laziest?) in the sense of effort, but not best or most useful or easiest to follow. And for forestall the arguments about not trimming messages- sure, memory is cheaper now, comm lines are faster, drives are bigger, most people use GUI mail readers, but that's no reason to cart around sometimes thousands of no-longer-relevant verbiage. Especially when adding a two-line comment... Anyway, YMMV, mine does. z! -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On 3/19/15 5:53 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: What I've found interesting is that some of my correspondents (off-list) actually *want* top posting, and find anything else confusing. I think I understand why in at least some cases; Apple Mail top posts by default, and some folks just don't like to go digging around in the email to find the answer they're looking for. I've actually tried to accommodate that when sending email to them. Cheers, -Barry Another reason that I have been told by some people that they want people to top post is that their client will show in the message list a summary of the first line of the message, and they want that to be the new content to see if it is worth reading, as opposed to the quote of the message they have already decided to read or not. (of course, the answer is that it would be better if the client showed the first non-quote line if possible). -- Richard Damon -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
Carl Zwanzig wrote: I agree with the other reply that said people are tending towards top quoting more and more. Many people simply top quote as encouraged by their mail client, and haven't considered that there's any other way. Do you mean where the new content is at the start of the message (usually called top-posting) or where the quoted/original material is at the start (usually bottom-posting or inter-posting)? Yes, I meant top-posting, not top-quoting. I've probably been using that wrong terminology for years. Peter Shute -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
On 03/19/2015 11:31 AM, Marco Stoecker wrote: On 03/19/2015 05:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/18/2015 02:46 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 OK. So there was only one duplicate, yes? And that duplication occurred prior to the spam filtering that added the above header so presumably it wasn't caused by filtering rules in your MUA. Indeed, I looked only to the headers I recieved (Iceweasel-View-Message Source). Even now I checked those header my wife got, because she and I are in different lists, but received duplicates. Her headers seems identical. Are all the Received: headers identical including Queue IDs and time stamps? If so, the duplication must have occurred late in the delivery chain. But in this dedicated case I wrote to 5 lists where the members are disjunct and my wife, and I got duplicates. I don't know why :-S I assumed that the others got duplicates too, but I have to proof. It difficult to say what's happening here without seeing the MTA logs from the various servers where duplication might have occurred, but unless there are entries in Mailman's smtp-failure log on the Mailman server, it is very unlikely that Mailman sent duplicates. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/19/2015 05:22 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: On 03/18/2015 02:46 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 I'm confused. Are you looking at all the headers or just those your MUA shows you by default? Indeed, I looked only to the headers I recieved (Iceweasel-View-Message Source). Even now I checked those header my wife got, because she and I are in different lists, but received duplicates. Her headers seems identical. If you look at all the headers, at a minimum, some Received: headers and Mailman's X-BeenThere: header should be different. How can a avoid duplicates in future? What is the reason? Normally, if you cross post to 5 lists, people who are members of more than one of the lists will receive a copy of the post from each of the lists of which they are members. The only way to avoid this is by using the Non-digest options - regular_exclude_lists feature. For example, if you regularly post a single post to list1, list2, list3, list4 and list5, you could put list2, list3, list4 and list5 in list1's regular_exclude_lists, and put list3, list4 and list5 in list2's regular_exclude_lists, and put list4 and list5 in list3's regular_exclude_lists and finally put list5 in list4's regular_exclude_lists. Then if a post is addressed to all 5 lists, anyone who is a member of list2, list3, list4 or list5 will not receive the post from list1 and anyone who is a member of list3, list4 or list5 will not receive the post from list2 and so on. See the (Details for regular_exclude_lists) link for more info. This hint is very useful to me as I have more lists with members that are in more than one list. But in this dedicated case I wrote to 5 lists where the members are disjunct and my wife, and I got duplicates. I don't know why :-S I assumed that the others got duplicates too, but I have to proof. BR Marco -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVCxXjAAoJEC1y3OsA+e10px4P/3AV6s9Iq0tI91DPuKOxi1nF mGKJkJ2Ly8FhFPGN4JVjHXPp7SzGzfHKBTPviveyqTzG06tiKlYiYHyPhi8Tuq6q I4fP1ZQ5lcK9n0nxH3e4ACWTjQMIZzzh3856wWJmGZY2iHIkf4lgTfDWIzwBdZM9 fjcoEg98v2/cBn53sK/4f9Lfr3SYUyCofRSUr4YzKUUfllLW+X0MeoEYx5zxG3tG Hqs/JjL4DqTTQ+20xBxX1kq7eRXZNVLv0f7ixSh5Mbr3C2dvb5zmIqX82MM+B3ti 5gUWAEXfddtqsQQdgU1MA1b+uugKbMScKjSeabbtrP48Awtr6q2hEdLCQy3/G9aF 2BOwWxOKDiziUKqQAPMIU1OTrtDuoYA3DH8fdkJNmRv+fcUofOEWV6WJO8MW1itE 4U3XL06Ci+FADQOR/J1jlDsCUDVf5ZnJ5LOllS38msmv78OvbIE9A5vpbVYK0q87 f5xxXbtVF+NErgSGpY/56fN7pcgSx7agx7Z5ZETL+Gmv0uySyYqikVywQY2WmpwD i7Ggeo0xkMGft7YKdzK8glhW8KzFVwg6LadKxVefeaaTMf7dumKRn7RE7Nx2j5G2 xWyExo/+jM48nkJHZ73yOUkp8jmU1Krx30cWasSLgQJPDsCrOLunnZaSSiaxzD3/ 81NMARSeptZSl8ss3flX =kPD7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
When I reply to a message on a mailing list, what is the “right” way to do it? Should I be deleting previous thread text from my response? Should I be adding anything in? Is there some general ideas for the “right” way to reply to a message on a list? as -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] The right way to reply to a mailing list
On Mar 20, 2015, at 08:19 AM, Andrew Stuart wrote: When I reply to a message on a mailing list, what is the “right” way to do it? Should I be deleting previous thread text from my response? Should I be adding anything in? Of course, Wikipedia is the font of all human knowledge and truth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post This is an interesting question for me because I think the netiquette rules I've been using for decades may be changing. I've always found it proper and useful to include the quoted material of the original message, but trim the quotes to just the bit you are responding to. I'd call this interleaved-with-trimming. Top posting has always been a serious breach of netiquette. What I've found interesting is that some of my correspondents (off-list) actually *want* top posting, and find anything else confusing. I think I understand why in at least some cases; Apple Mail top posts by default, and some folks just don't like to go digging around in the email to find the answer they're looking for. I've actually tried to accommodate that when sending email to them. I see more and more mailing list and group emails not doing any trimming. I find that incredibly hard to parse because if they *are* interleaving responses, you have to hunt through a huge amount of text. To make things worse, almost the entire conversation is retained so responses to responses to responses just clutter things up and make more noise. I wonder if webmail u/is like gmail (which I don't use) encourage this style. And don't get me started on HTML-only email or some reply styles that make no distinction between the quoted original text and the reply. I can barely read those. As the article mentions, there are enough different styles in widespread use that it's best to conform to the norms of the community. My own feeling is that interleaved-with-trimming is the most conducive to mailing list discussions. Cheers, -Barry -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] duplicates
On 03/18/2015 02:46 PM, Marco Stoecker wrote: I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 I'm confused. Are you looking at all the headers or just those your MUA shows you by default? If you look at all the headers, at a minimum, some Received: headers and Mailman's X-BeenThere: header should be different. How can a avoid duplicates in future? What is the reason? Normally, if you cross post to 5 lists, people who are members of more than one of the lists will receive a copy of the post from each of the lists of which they are members. The only way to avoid this is by using the Non-digest options - regular_exclude_lists feature. For example, if you regularly post a single post to list1, list2, list3, list4 and list5, you could put list2, list3, list4 and list5 in list1's regular_exclude_lists, and put list3, list4 and list5 in list2's regular_exclude_lists, and put list4 and list5 in list3's regular_exclude_lists and finally put list5 in list4's regular_exclude_lists. Then if a post is addressed to all 5 lists, anyone who is a member of list2, list3, list4 or list5 will not receive the post from list1 and anyone who is a member of list3, list4 or list5 will not receive the post from list2 and so on. See the (Details for regular_exclude_lists) link for more info. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] duplicates
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I have Mailman up and running. I just sent an e-mail to 5 lists and the e-mail came duplicated to the recipients. I checked the header and the only difference is the following: 1. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 2. Header: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 How can a avoid duplicates in future? What is the reason? BR Marco -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVCfIsAAoJEC1y3OsA+e10t2MP/0lS3W8F000CYn4MQ1M7Zfqj lzJskw5ysngsspQOCZ9kjBuHmh/TGHusZB90wkapMdAwlbuAypQKB6T7L6nwhKy4 xRkCxKJ6hZybb8g5pvatPnODbFfJE96kOAD9d6B1r5hv56FTE+/TG/50/kCQC4do 9AxsoBUD0hNcSwwTjazMGwGZ4NqDDVLXsrauCR02jB+VdqiZgGrGVnQUS6KRHKB+ fOc3VDxh/jbizRCkh8NFQfwW039QnLQyo+HM/pnYQyDcmsfyPg80/TMoyZLhR6PN NK3AZi+BykM8l7SfyWjmkltHERxYe3ouupQ0wPbWbOY/RCQ0gUUWb28CGZ3HChV6 eypbvPwnXk45WXvQuyhFsU7/KvWVBcb3MNezEm6Q/h5gQyI9FVmEABzjzsvkXxBg j9WhfiatL3ZN1cpCvb1RPxkP4hZ5YHf1fy9QqgXahLl+nuXSQu7IyKR0vJOXdq00 riB3Su7BWPV/lhaXXV6N9PA2TjjJ69tQ8oOfuB4UTJ19Wme1Zwo6J1pWkjY/xZsL izz9BrJeMZas2WqyBwHy2/mibyBMmG6nOW1F+FfqXSb/G/GZSA/yMg/5hb0GMgEc Fbihuiq2TW/TgkPkF+Bx6o+XtKAMA8yVAxrkOEo6YLbD28aga9uAKlai2ypiFQll 6aCeU5gwScRf5mlvnaay =Fkgv -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
