With computers the word "default" has a specific meaning: if you have not
manually set a value, this is the fallback result that occurs when you selected
"nothing".
"List default" matches that meaning. When user joins a list, they are assigned
this option. Nothing has been manually selected b
Gerald Vogt writes:
> People tend to choose "Accept immediately (bypass other rules)".
How about "Accept immediately (no spam check)"?
> I do wonder somehow if there is really a use case where you would
> actually need "Accept immediately".
"Need", probably not. However, for people who in
Hi,
just to chime in: the bigger issue I see with our (non english native)
list owners is the confusion between "Accept immediately (bypass other
rules)" and "Default processing", in particular during moderation of a
held message to set the status of a new list member which was hold for
moder
> I don't understand why you are confused.
I understand now, and I'm not confused. However before, when I was learning
about this topic, I encountered a problem, and it's worth trying to make it
easier. Even now that I 'understand', the issue continues.
It's about terminology and language, and
Sam Darwin via Mailman-users writes:
> Well, for more background info I am not suggesting this purely
> whimsically,
That's not what I don't understand.
I don't understand why you are confused. Specifically, cascading
context-depended defaults of this kind are commonly used in system
administ
Well, for more background info I am not suggesting this purely whimsically, I
went through a debugging session a month or two ago where I was trying to
understand message acceptance. After an hour, I figured out "Oh, stupid, it's
not that this user has default processing! No. They are using defa
