On 1/10/2016 6:34 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/10/2016 03:07 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Google is back up. I guess I was wrong in my original assessment. The
>> headers are indeed there including List-Post. The reply to list button
>> is displayed (I don't know why I sometimes don't get that
On 01/14/2016 04:02 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
> Got it. I guess the "Preferred Hostname" in the settings is somewhat of
> a misnomer. It is really the preferred email hostname.
Where are you seeing "Preferred Hostname"?
Mailman's General Options page says
Host name this list prefers for
On 1/14/2016 1:38 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/14/2016 04:02 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Got it. I guess the "Preferred Hostname" in the settings is somewhat of
>> a misnomer. It is really the preferred email hostname.
>
> Where are you seeing "Preferred Hostname"?
>
> Mailman's General Options
On 01/14/2016 11:58 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>
> Sorry, I guess I should not have put it in quotes. That title is not at
> all clear to me that it means the domain name (not host name) for
> replying email. I had that set to my email domain (bellsouth.net).
> Changing it to the reply email domain
On 1/9/2016 4:43 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/09/2016 01:10 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply. Those options are and apparently always have been
>> on. But none of those headers show up. I wonder if an SMTP server
>> somewhere along the way is stripping them out for some reason.
>
On 01/10/2016 06:29 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On 1/9/2016 4:43 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>
>> Are there other Mailman headers such as X-BeenThere: and
>> X-Mailman-Version: in the messages?
>>
>> Do you have any local modifications to Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py?
>>
>> How do messages get from
On 01/10/2016 03:07 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>
> Google is back up. I guess I was wrong in my original assessment. The
> headers are indeed there including List-Post. The reply to list button
> is displayed (I don't know why I sometimes don't get that but I will
> have to look closer next time it
On 1/10/2016 1:57 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/10/2016 06:29 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> On 1/9/2016 4:43 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> Are there other Mailman headers such as X-BeenThere: and
>>> X-Mailman-Version: in the messages?
>>>
>>> Do you have any local modifications to
On some mailman lists I receive messages in which Thunderbird displays a
"Reply to List" button. However, on my own lists that does not happen.
What header is TB relying on to get that and what setting do I need to
change my mailman for that to happen? TIA.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
On 1/9/2016 1:36 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 01/09/2016 06:14 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>> On some mailman lists I receive messages in which Thunderbird displays a
>> "Reply to List" button. However, on my own lists that does not happen.
>> What header is TB relying on to get that and what setting
On 01/09/2016 01:10 PM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
>>
> Thanks for the reply. Those options are and apparently always have been
> on. But none of those headers show up. I wonder if an SMTP server
> somewhere along the way is stripping them out for some reason.
Are there other Mailman headers such as
On 01/09/2016 06:14 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote:
> On some mailman lists I receive messages in which Thunderbird displays a
> "Reply to List" button. However, on my own lists that does not happen.
> What header is TB relying on to get that and what setting do I need to
> change my mailman for that to
So, I had lots of problems with Yahoo users on my lists. I did the research and
the upgrade, and it fixed the hell outta that...
BUT... Now my users (as well as myself) are getting an issue where hitting Reply
(regular reply, not reply all) are getting the list AND the original sender.
I've
On 11/10/2014 07:15 AM, Dentar99 wrote:
So, I had lots of problems with Yahoo users on my lists. I did the research
and
the upgrade, and it fixed the hell outta that...
Did you upgrade to Mailman 2.1.18-1?
BUT... Now my users (as well as myself) are getting an issue where hitting
Reply
Mark Sapiro writes:
Look at the messages received from the list. If this is Mailman 2.1.18-1
and dmarc_moderation_action and/or from_is_list is Munge From and
reply_goes_to_list is Poster, there should be a Reply-To: header with
the original poster's address.
I suspect the OP's list has
Allan Odgaard writes:
[ repetitive lobbying removed ]
Please stop lobbying, period, and move these discussions off this
list. We heard you the first time, you've been told the appropriate
venue. Now this is just noise interfering with helping users with
their everyday problems.
If you really
On 19 Jun 2008, at 08:38, adsarebad-at-. wrote:
[...]
Also it seems clicking reply on a msg here does a off list reply. So
all my previous reply`s were done off list.
It is the default for new Mailman installs and the admin UI even has:
Where are replies to list messages
Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 19 Jun 2008, at 08:38, adsarebad-at-. wrote:
[...]
Also it seems clicking reply on a msg here does a off list reply. So
all my previous reply`s were done off list.
It is the default for new Mailman installs and the admin UI even has:
Where are replies
On 19 Jun 2008, at 15:53, Mark Sapiro wrote:
[...] You have said in another thread that these links contribute to
excessive verbosity of the labels, but they often link to useful
supplemental information.
I don’t dispute that. I am sure there are lots of useful info there,
but it drowns
Allan Odgaard wrote:
Here is how I would change all of the above:
List replies go to: (o) Poster (recommended, more info)
( ) The list
[x] Strip existing Reply-To header
( ) Other: [
Allan Odgaard wrote:
I never understood why they have this recommendation or even default
setting and it has always bothered me when lists I subscribe to does not
change away from the default (fortunately majority of lists _do_ change
it).
See FAQ 3.48 at http://wiki.list.org/x/44A9.
The
I have a 2.1.5 Mailman list set up so all replies go to the list. The
setting Where are replies to list messages directed? Poster is strongly
recommended for most mailing lists. is Explicit address and the
Explicit Reply-To: header. is the email address of the list, ie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Paul H Byerly [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-02-05 12:27:00 -0600]:
Mailman does not destroy the original senders identify or e-mail, so
this part of the argument is moot.
OK, I promise this will be my last post on this topic unless someone
posts to me by name in non-quoted text, but I just had to
* Buddy Logan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-02-08 03:15:46 -0800]:
Since this is a pet peeve of yours, maybe you should explain to me
what is wrong with overwriting the reply to header.
Well, OK...where to start? I guess a little background is in order.
Basically, the idea is that every email has
jb == John Buttery
Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply to list
Sun, 8 Feb 2004 08:12:50 -0600
jb * Buddy Logan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-02-08 03:15:46
jb -0800]:
Since this is a pet peeve of yours, maybe you should explain to
me what is wrong with overwriting the reply to header
On Feb 5, 2004, at 4:57 PM, Mark Dadgar wrote:
So, what's your point?
Unless you've been in my position, you wouldn't understand it.
Actually, since I know Brad pretty well by now, I'll bet he would.
Try him and see.
--
Mailman-Users mailing
those of us who do email for a living feel it's not a rationalization,
and not ridiculous. But those that argue against it do.
Sorry, but the fact that you don't agree with it doesn't change my mind.
On Feb 4, 2004, at 10:55 PM, Mark Dadgar wrote:
This is totally ridiculous.
The document you
* Mark Dadgar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-02-04 22:55:55 -0800]:
This is totally ridiculous.
The document you reference is a long attempt at rationalizing why we
shouldn't bother to try to make mail systems Do The Right Thing.
The tool should fit the job and not the other way around.
I hate
On Don, 2004-02-05 at 07:55, Mark Dadgar wrote:
On Feb 4, 2004, at 10:35 PM, Thomas Hochstein wrote:
[...]
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
This is totally ridiculous.
No. Reply-To set to the list is evil (and for God's sake actually almost
no list I know of uses it).
The
On Feb 5, 2004, at 4:01 AM, John Buttery wrote:
If the whole concept of information being irretrievably destroyed by
clobbering Reply-To: willy-nilly isn't a compelling reason to you, I'm
not sure what else to say.
This issue goes away if we could stop trying to use reply-to for too
many
On Feb 5, 2004, at 9:06 AM, Mark Dadgar wrote:
My lists use it. And my users prefer it - I know, I've asked.
self-selected audiences. I have asked users what they think, and gotten
one answer, and I've done formal surveys soliciting feedback from the
entire list, and gotten very different
From: Thomas Hochstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml
A good portion of my members (mostly newbies) use various web-based mailers.
They haven't a Reply to all button.
The members are newbies in
can understand that there was a time when reply to
author made sense for a lot of lists, but I don't think that is the case
anymore.
Paul, who ironically got this to the list, not the author, by hitting
reply (digest).
--
Mailman-Users mailing
Paul H Byerly wrote:
Bottom line, I can understand that there was a time when reply to
author made sense for a lot of lists, but I don't think that is the
case anymore.
Hi Paul,
I feel that it really depends on the nature of the list - the purpose,
the participants, the number of
Bottom line, I can understand that there was a time when reply
to author made sense for a lot of lists, but I don't think that is
the case anymore.
I feel that it really depends on the nature of the list - the purpose,
the participants, the number of participants.
and the religious war
At 10:55 PM -0800 2004/02/04, Mark Dadgar wrote:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
This is totally ridiculous.
Actually, no.
The document you reference is a long attempt at rationalizing why
we shouldn't bother to try to make mail systems Do The Right Thing.
The document
At 9:06 AM -0800 2004/02/05, Mark Dadgar wrote:
My lists use it. And my users prefer it - I know, I've asked.
Do they prefer to have messages which they thought would be
private replies being blasted to the whole list?
Hell, I've been doing this sort of stuff for fifteen years, and
I've
At 8:02 PM +0200 2004/02/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A good portion of my members (mostly newbies) use various web-based mailers.
They haven't a Reply to all button.
The members are newbies in computers - what I should do,
refuse them in medical help until they buy own computer
(a year
At 12:27 PM -0600 2004/02/05, Paul H Byerly wrote:
Times have changed - lists are not long used only by folks who
know how to build a computer from scratch and program it themselves.
Indeed, therein lies the problem. The kinds of silly problems
that lead to the original page were things that
On Feb 5, 2004, at 12:09 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
Additionally, a lot of folks don't want a private copy plus one to
the list - and done as the author suggests there is no quick and
easy way to send to the list only.
Related to what you reference below, if you want to reply to just the
list,
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:55:26PM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote:
Do they prefer to have messages which they thought would be
private replies being blasted to the whole list?
The reality of the modern, public internet is that the opposite is far
more common -- right or wrong, in most common,
On Feb 5, 2004, at 2:09 PM, Warren Woodward wrote:
We now have upwards of 400 public lists on our mailman server, and I
have
heard complaints over this matter from every single one of them.
be wary of the squeaky wheel speaking for the entire wagon.
just list this discussion.
you may be
From: Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A good portion of my members (mostly newbies) use various web-based mailers.
They haven't a Reply to all button.
It is far easier to add information (e.g., add another recipient
address) than it is to recreate information that was destroyed.
At 1:39 PM -0800 2004/02/05, Mark Dadgar wrote:
You just told me in a previous email that some people cannot edit
the To: line on a reply. So which is it?
On the software I've seen, you can't change the To: line in a
reply, but you can add other addresses in the Cc: line.
Then we have at
At 12:15 AM +0200 2004/02/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is far easier to add information (e.g., add another recipient
address) than it is to recreate information that was destroyed.
I can recall not one letter directly from a person's MUA to me with
Reply-To: differing from From:.
On Feb 5, 2004, at 2:27 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
You just told me in a previous email that some people cannot edit
the To: line on a reply. So which is it?
On the software I've seen, you can't change the To: line in a reply,
but you can add other addresses in the Cc: line.
Yes, but in the text
Mark Dadgar schrieb:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
This is totally ridiculous.
Is it?
The document you reference is a long attempt at rationalizing why we
shouldn't bother to try to make mail systems Do The Right Thing.
The question is: *is* it the right thing?
On
On Feb 5, 2004, at 2:34 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
And I had much correspondence
since
1996: on most lists I use digest mode, counter of sent by me letters
in my MUA shows currently 54532, I receive about 4.3 times more
letters than I send (i.e. I received
On Feb 5, 2004, at 2:27 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
Indeed, he has. He doesn't like to brag about it, but he does run
some of the largest known Mailman mailing lists, and his systems are
on the same scale as the Kolstad Chalup papers that I have
previously mentioned on this mailing list. Chuq
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 23:09, Warren Woodward wrote:
On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 08:55:26PM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote:
Do they prefer to have messages which they thought would be
private replies being blasted to the whole list?
The reality of the modern, public internet is that the
At 2:43 PM -0800 2004/02/05, Mark Dadgar wrote:
Yes, but in the text to which I was referring (that you snipped in
your reply above), you stated that it's easy enough to solve Reply
All problem of ending up with the original sender and the list
address in the To: line by just deleting the
At 2:45 PM -0800 2004/02/05, Mark Dadgar wrote:
LOL! You are a defense attorney's worst nightmare!
My wife is a general counsel of a company with hundreds of
billions of euros of daily turnover, and over ten trillions of euros
of assets under management. It used to be owned by one of the
On Feb 5, 2004, at 4:14 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
LOL! You are a defense attorney's worst nightmare!
My wife is a general counsel of a company with hundreds of billions
of euros of daily turnover, and over ten trillions of euros of assets
under management. It used to be owned by one of the
On Feb 5, 2004, at 4:09 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
At the end of the day, though, it doesn't really matter what
the size of the list is, PROVIDED that you can tailer the
software appropriately to your intended use. You are
advocating making that impossible.
No, I'm not. I am not advocating
On 5 Feb 2004 at 9:06, Mark Dadgar wrote:
Yeah, it's so damned hard to edit the To: line, isn't it? Wow. I
don't know how people ever manage to send email in the first place.
Yep it is once you get inside of some corporate mail systems. The
From line gets hosed, but the Reply-To doesn't get
Is there any way to configure a list so that a reply gets sent back to the
list rather than the original sender?
--
John
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ:
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: [Mailman-Users] Reply to list
Is there any way to configure a list so that a reply gets sent back to the
list rather than the original sender?
--
John
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
www.mostly-harmless.nl Dutch community for helping newcomers on the
hackerscene
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] John Poltorak
Verzonden: woensdag 4 februari 2004 13:24
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: [Mailman-Users] Reply to list
-harmless.nl Dutch community for helping newcomers on the
hackerscene
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] John Poltorak
Verzonden: woensdag 4 februari 2004 14:28
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: Re: [Mailman-Users] Reply to list
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 02:23
Remko Lodder wrote:
actually it is on the general page, which opens up here when you start the
administrative interface...
a carefull watch should have told you that there is this option:
Where are replies to list messages directed? Poster is strongly recommended
for most mailing lists.
I
Paul H Byerly schrieb:
I have never understood why this poster is recommended, nor why it is
the default. I've been on a lot of lists, on a lot of systems, and have
never been on one that defaults to sending a response only to the author of
the post I am replying to.
On Feb 4, 2004, at 10:35 PM, Thomas Hochstein wrote:
I have never understood why this poster is recommended, nor why
it is
the default. I've been on a lot of lists, on a lot of systems, and
have
never been on one that defaults to sending a response only to the
author of
the post I am
How do you set up a default list so that 'Reply-to' gets set to the list
itself?
--
John
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ:
Hi John,
In the Administration Interface:
General Options - Where are replies to list messages directed?
Greetz!
- Original Message -
From: John Poltorak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 11:00 AM
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to list
How do you
line way to do it? ie. where is the value
actually held?
Greetz!
- Original Message -
From: John Poltorak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 11:00 AM
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Reply-to list
How do you set up a default list so that 'Reply
65 matches
Mail list logo
