On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 18:20, J C Lawrence wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 13:13:54 -0400
> Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not necessarily. Mailman's replybot can be set up to provide that
> > information to them during the confirmation handshake.
>
> Yes, but the point (I think) is
> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Please feel free to contribute a Howto, FAQ entry or any other
>> written docs on your set up. I'll add it to the distro where
>> appropriate. It's cool stuff that others are definitely going
>> to be interested in.
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 14:02:04 -0400
Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JCL> Fair dinkum. Good reasoning. I'll be rolling by TMDA front end to
JCL> all the lists at Kanga.Nu later today (need some more testing
JCL> first). I'll re
> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JCL> Fair dinkum. Good reasoning. I'll be rolling by TMDA front
JCL> end to all the lists at Kanga.Nu later today (need some more
JCL> testing first). I'll report on -developers once its gold,
JCL> probably along with a t
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 13:26:13 -0400
Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know, I know. I'd really like to see how the TMDA stuff pans out as
> more people use it. I think rather than run headlong into adding a
> feature at the last minute (so to speak), we can take a principled
> look
> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JCL> Nathan has already stated he's interested in some of the
JCL> legal CYA, and for that (I expect) he needs an explicit
JCL> decision at the time of first post, not first subscribe.
Ah. You know, Mailman is /almost/ there.
Dan Mick wrote:
>
> > The above would be great!! We currently have a problem with students
> > (university environment) sending "spam" to hundreds of lists so they can
> > find a room mate!!
>
> ...And note that this is an argument for list-specific (i.e. non-global)
> whitelists, as "just beca
> The above would be great!! We currently have a problem with students
> (university environment) sending "spam" to hundreds of lists so they can
> find a room mate!!
...And note that this is an argument for list-specific (i.e. non-global)
whitelists, as "just because you can post to the alt.m
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 13:13:54 -0400
Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> That would mean that all posts to the list are either from
>>> subscribers (who got the information about archiving at time of
>>> subscription), or those th
> "JCL" == J C Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> That would mean that all posts to the list are either from
>> subscribers (who got the information about archiving at time of
>> subscription), or those that have confirmed their willingness
>> to be archived.
JCL> E
On 30 Jul 2002 15:43:52 +0100
Nigel Metheringham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An additional thing that would make me very much in favour of TDMA
> would be the possibility of adding a message to the confirmation
> stating that by posting to this list they are putting their messages
> into public
An additional thing that would make me very much in favour of TDMA would
be the possibility of adding a message to the confirmation stating that
by posting to this list they are putting their messages into public
archives. If they confirm the message then they have given permission
for archiving
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers] Cute TMDA use
> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 22:29:29 -0400
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw)
> To: Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 22:29:29 -0400
Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe the admindb should have a button that would let them see all
> held message, including non-confirmed ones? Perhaps that's a YAGNI.
I'd certainly like and use such a feature.
--
J C Lawrence
-
> "CVR" == Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I guess if the default moderation bit is set, then we wouldn't
>> send out the confirmation message, and non-member postings
>> would have to be approved just like they are today.
CVR> I would set things up so that t
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002 16:48:30 -0700
Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/29/02 4:31 PM, "Barry A. Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I guess if the default moderation bit is set, then we wouldn't send
>> out the confirmation message, and non-member postings would have to
>> be ap
On 7/29/02 4:31 PM, "Barry A. Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess if the default moderation bit is set, then we wouldn't send
> out the confirmation message, and non-member postings would have to be
> approved just like they are today.
I would set things up so that they don't go into th
Very cool, thanks for starting the discussion on this JC.
I'm torn. On the one hand, we /are/ supposed to be in feature freeze
and jeez, can I ever get this thing out the door? Well, I'm going to
try hard to do so as soon as possible.
OTOH, this seems like such a useful and simple feature to
You can front a list with TMDA, pointing TMDA at your list's subscriber
base and a local whitelist. TMDA then passes all subscriber mails
straight thru to the list, but mail from non-subscribers is held until
confirmed (at which point you can whitelist or not).
The TMDA lists do this to decent
19 matches
Mail list logo
