Greetings Moderators! I moderated the message below just now (one of two identical test messages). I rejected it, with a covering note to the author (John Munroe <mun...@gmail.com>, who does not appear to be subscribed to the list) that I was doing so because approving it would serve no useful purpose, and pointing out that it had been held because the message headers matched a filter rule, probably because it was (a) from gmail.com and (b) sent via nabble.
I then also ticked the box for it to be forwarded to r-help-owner, expecting that my covering note would accompany it. Since that did not happen, I'm now adding an explanation! I would suspect that John Munro has been trying to get through to R-help, and failing, as the most likely explanation for sending test messages. I feel this sort of thing is adding weight to the case for trying to alleviate the severity with which mailman treats messages from this kind of origin. What do others think? Ted. On 07-Jun-10 13:26:49, John Munroe wrote: > > Test > -- > View this message in context: > http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Test-tp2245933p2245933.html > Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <ted.hard...@manchester.ac.uk> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 07-Jun-10 Time: 14:59:49 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.