[Mailman-Users] ADMIN - Staying on topic - spam filtering/reflecting and list management philosophy are not on topic....

[JC Dill]

Hey folks, can we try to remember that this is the "mailman-users" list?

Discussions about list management philosophy belong on list-managers:



and discussions about spam filtering or spam reflecting belong on spam-l:



or your other favorite forum for discussing spam and spam filtering 
philosophy.

Or take the discussion to private email.

Please limit your discussions on these topics on this list on how to 
implement specific features *in mailman*, OK?

Thanks!

jc - assistant mailman-users admin
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Dave Crocker]

 > Did I actually call you a corporate shill?  Did I say that's what
 > you're actually doing?


yes.

d/


ps.  Given how careless and aggressive you have been in this exchange, so far, 
please don't try to resort to a game of semantics.  Your language was plain and 
direct.

-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Ed]

<>

Being somewhat of a "stranger" here but do know how to read and understand,
it would seem that way?!?!?

<< Right now, I'm not seeing anything, but I'd
love to be proved wrong.>>

Ditto.

Seems to me, the gent 'doth protest too much?!?!?

Ed

PS:  And yes, I AM a serious HATER of AOL -:)  BTDT.

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 3:58 PM -0800 2006-03-04, Dave Crocker wrote:

>>  To my astonishment, you seem to be interested in doing nothing
>>  except acting as a corporate shill.
>
>  I was raised during a time in which parents were told to distinguish
>  between saying to their kids "you are doing a bad thing" versus "you are
>  a bad person".
>
>  Does this have any rules about ad hominem attacks?

Did I actually call you a corporate shill?  Did I say that's what 
you're actually doing?

I think maybe you skipped over a few words in there that should 
leave you plenty of room to prove that you may be creating the 
appearance of acting like a corporate shill, but in fact you are 
doing something totally different and the problem is that there is a 
misperception that is being created.

I can't say that I take this level of care with everything I 
write, but for that line in particular I carefully wrote, re-wrote, 
and re-wrote it again, many times over, before I sent that message.


I've had a great deal of respect for you over the years, and 
that's why I've been so astonished to see you (of all people) 
defending the likes of AOL on this subject -- they may have still 
been "good guys" when I was working there and when Jay Levitt sent me 
(on two days notice) to the conference where we met for the first 
time, but those times are long since gone, and AOL has been a creator 
of their own evil empire for quite a while.

Yes, there are some people there who have a certain degree of 
personal integrity (e.g., Carl Hutzler), but that is in spite of what 
the company has become and not because of it.

I know too many people who used to work for the company and who 
can go on ad nauseum about the evil things that were done while they 
were around, and ended up being major contributors to their 
ultimately leaving.  I have my own first-hand experience, and I have 
a number of former co-workers who have related their own first-hand 
experience.  There is nothing you or anyone else can say that can 
convince me otherwise.

Okay, Google and Microsoft may be worse, but that doesn't mean 
that AOL is Snow White.  It's more like they're all different 
flavours of Teflon-coated cookware, and while some may be somewhat 
worse than others, they're all major sources of carcinogens and 
contribute all other sorts of horrible nastiness to the biosphere -- 
a fact which DuPont knew back in the 1950s and which they contrived 
to hide from the public.


Given what I know of you and your history, the only conclusion I 
can come to is that maybe you've been paid by AOL or Goodmail as a 
consultant, and therefore you come to this discussion carrying a 
certain amount and type of baggage that prevents you from seeing the 
forest for the trees that you helped to plant.

I'm not assuming malice here where I can clearly see other 
factors that are much more likely reasons for your apparent 
behaviour, but that doesn't change the perception of what it is that 
I'm seeing.


Please, give me something I can hold onto to show that you 
haven't sold us all out.  Right now, I'm not seeing anything, but I'd 
love to be proved wrong.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Ed]

<>

Forget About Quasimo?

Never mind.

LOL

Ed
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Dave Crocker]

>   To my astonishment, you seem to be interested in doing nothing 
> except acting as a corporate shill.


I was raised during a time in which parents were told to distinguish between 
saying to their kids "you are doing a bad thing" versus "you are a bad person".

Does this have any rules about ad hominem attacks?

d/


-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 1:40 PM -0800 2006-03-04, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  I had hoped that there might be a basis for some constructive dialogue.

As had I.

>  However you persist in using hyperbole like "paid spammer solution",
>  and seem to be taking in none of the points I have been raising, except
>  as sounding boards for repeating your assertions that abuse is certain.

I'm sure you won't be surprised if I don't see it as hyperbole, 
but merely pointing out where this road is clearly headed.

To my astonishment, you seem to be interested in doing nothing 
except acting as a corporate shill.

>  So, I think we are done.

Agreed, nothing more is going to come out of this.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Ed]

<>

Forget About Quasimo?

Never mind.

LOL

Ed
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Jim Popovitch]

Dave Crocker wrote:
> Brad,
> 
> I had hoped that there might be a basis for some constructive dialogue.  
> However 
> you persist in using hyperbole like "paid spammer solution", and seem to be 
> taking in none of the points I have been raising, except as sounding boards 
> for 
> repeating your assertions that abuse is certain.
> 
> Hyperbole is wonderfully satisfying to the person uttering it, and utterly 
> destructive for any serious dialogue.
> 
> So, I think we are done.

Can we get this put into a FAQ.  :-)

-Jim P.




--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Dave Crocker]

> I don't think you can opt out of the paid spammer solution from 
> Goodmail.

Brad,

I had hoped that there might be a basis for some constructive dialogue.  
However 
you persist in using hyperbole like "paid spammer solution", and seem to be 
taking in none of the points I have been raising, except as sounding boards for 
repeating your assertions that abuse is certain.

Hyperbole is wonderfully satisfying to the person uttering it, and utterly 
destructive for any serious dialogue.

So, I think we are done.


d/
-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 9:21 PM +0100 2006-03-04, Brad Knowles wrote:

>>   All sorts of things are "mandatory for all AOL users".  For example,
>>   the entire AOL spam detection and filtering mechanism is mandatory.
>
>   Actually, it's not.  You can opt out of the spam detection and
>  filtering mechanism, if you so choose.
>
>   I don't think you can opt out of the paid spammer solution from 
> Goodmail.

Moreover, you shouldn't have to -- it should be opt-in only.  Not 
mandatory.  Not opt-out.  Opt-in.

This is the mantra that the entire anti-spam community has been 
chanting for years, and the statement is just as true of paid spammer 
... sorry, commercial bulk-mailer ... operations, such as Goodmail.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Brad Knowles]

At 7:11 PM +0100 2006-03-04, Henrik Stromberg wrote:

>  I do not have an own server and do not want to have my computer running all
>  the time so I guess the best would be to create a list on some existing
>  Mailman installation of some service provider. Is there any information
>  available how to find one?

There is a partial list of Python/Mailman providers in FAQ 1.17 
at 
, 
but such a list can only ever be partial -- there's always going to 
be some providers who used to do things and got on the list but no 
longer do them, some new providers who didn't used to provide certain 
services but now do and yet still aren't on the list, etc

On this topic, this page is the best starting point that we know of.

> And in case I find a provider where lists can be
>  run, HOW do I start one?

A lot is going to depend on the specific provider and how their 
software is set up.

For many providers, I would expect that they won't actually give 
you the rights and privileges necessary to actually create new lists 
yourself.  Instead, in all likelihood you will to contact them and 
tell them what kind of list you want and what you want the name to 
be, and they will do the basic work for you.

From there, they will give you the admin URL and password 
necessary so that you can configure your list in the way you want.

>  I would like to point out that I could not find this very basic information
>  at the page
>  http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/index.html
>  and think that this should be improved in order to spread the message about
>  the lists.

That's because there are too many variables in this process. 
I've outlined only the most basic process above.  If you actually run 
Mailman on your own server, the process will be more complex.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 7:58 AM -0800 2006-03-04, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  All sorts of things are "mandatory for all AOL users".  For example,
>  the entire AOL spam detection and filtering mechanism is mandatory.

Actually, it's not.  You can opt out of the spam detection and 
filtering mechanism, if you so choose.

I don't think you can opt out of the paid spammer solution from 
Goodmail.

>  If AOL users find any of the mandatory features unacceptable, they should
>  take their business elsewhere.

Also agreed, but as we both know, that's unlikely to happen for 
most of the AOL users, regardless of what AOL chooses to do to them.

>  If they don't do that, then who are we to be parental and tell them that
>  a particular feature is unacceptable for them?

When a particular feature sets a heinously bad example for the 
others to follow?

>  That's why you should note the "constant community vigilance" requirement
>  I stated in the other note I just sent.

But that vigilance isn't going to be there.  Goodmail's operation 
is kept secret, locked behind a private door.  Same for AOL.  And if 
we're not going to stand up for the AOL users against the abuse that 
AOL is going to do to them (or allow others to do while they are paid 
to look the other way), then who is?

>  It is also why I am a big fan of real competition, since it provides a form
>  of community vigilance.

Agreed, but such competition is not going to be found.  Not at 
Goodmail, not at AOL.

>  Oh.  You mean regardless of complaints from external lobbying groups who
>  are not AOL customers and who have so far been showing a really excellent
>  skill at invoking hyperbole and ignoring facts.

No, I mean the only people who are speaking up on behalf of AOL 
users who are being categorically lied to and hoodwinked by their ISP.

Or do we need to get into quotes from Rev. Martin Niemoller?

>>  If AOL wants to convince anyone that this is actually a real
>>  benefit, they need to do at least two things:
>
>  You claim to know what everyone in the world requires for convincing?

All the complaints I've seen so far would be answered by these 
two steps, so far as I can tell.  So, yes -- I'm pretty convinced 
that these are the two necessary steps.

>  Since the world is a large and diverse place, it is always possible to find
>  an example of pretty much any behavior one wishes to describe.  Using that
>  example as proof of the inevitability of the behavior is simply not valid,
>  because it also means that there are always counter-examples.

The problem is that human history is rife with examples of this 
kind of abuse by those in power of those who have no power, for as 
long as human history has existed.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 7:36 AM -0800 2006-03-04, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  1. The effort it takes to get on the EWL and stay on it is substantial.

We know this.  This is why we created FAQ 3.42.

>  It therefore creates a significant division between "all mail" and "mail
>  from folks on the EWL".

Let's go back to your original statement:

| AOL creates a specialized, rather expensive process that it provides for
| free, to ensure delivery of a class of mail.  The operation of this
| mechanism is pure overhead for AOL.  Worse, it is distinct to AOL.  To
| the extent any other receive-side ISP operates such a service, it is
| entirely independent of AOL.  That is, anyone wanting on these special
| lists must to special things for each of these lists.

No one required AOL to create such an enhanced white list system, 
or to operate it in a manner that is so overhead-intensive.  The 
enhanced white list system that they've run in the past has been 
applicable to all mail with volumes over some pretty small amounts 
(which is why many mailing list operators run into this issue, and 
why we created FAQ 3.42).

This is not true for the kinds of systems that you're talking 
about -- those are oriented towards commercial bulk mailers who can 
pay for guaranteed access and are not suitable for the broader 
community of not-for-profit mailing list operators.

>  The claim is that the mechanism is intended for mail that receivers
>  really want to get.  "Mail I don't want" is the classic form of the
>  most extreme definition of spam.

Sounds like the "I-Can-Spam" law to me.  I mean, all good 
spammers actually give you a way to unsubscribe, right?

>  Whether actual operation matches actual goal is always a good question,
>  of course.  For that, one needs to look at the criteria to qualify for
>  the program, its enforcement at the admission phase, and its enforcement
>  after admission.

That's closing the barn door after we've let the horse run out 
into a firestorm that we know would be likely to happen.

>  I DID say that the per-ISP EWL model does not scale across ISPs.

True enough, but the "I paid my money so I get guaranteed access 
to your mailbox" model of Goodmail is not an appropriate solution to 
this problem.

>>   See
>>  
>>  and .
>
>  It is very much in vogue, these days, to assert such choices and claim
>  that they really are based on fact. However any reasonable analysis of
>  the basis for the choice turns out to have nothing to do with legitimate
>  empirical data that is directly relevant to the conclusion.

I think that BoingBoing has some pretty clear proof of what's 
being done to them, although they can only speculate as to why.  They 
certainly know what's being done to their readership and that this 
classification is unjust and unfair, and they know a fair amount 
about how to work around such stupid procedures.

Do you have any proof of anything they have said on this subject 
that is not accurate?


Let's generalize this a bit -- BoingBoing is a special case, but 
we know that there have been many such cases in the past, where pages 
were blocked by badly operated web filtering systems, and where the 
operators themselves admitted their incompetence and reversed the 
action.

Do you have any proof that none of these things have ever happened?


Can you provide any such proof, in either event?

>  If one does not find that their published criteria automatically
>  unacceptable, then your statement is a prediction based on no data.

It's based on human history.  They have a huge financial 
incentive to sell access to those mailboxes to the highest bidder. 
Where are the checks and balances on this process?

>  Hence it really translates into: Nobody who tries to make a profit ever
>  has any integrity.

There are some.  But they are few and far between.  And the 
larger they are, the less likely they are to have any integrity at 
the corporate level, even if many of the people they employ may have 
a high level of personal integrity.

>  An argument that entropy will eventually convert the entire universe into
>  pure randomness does not mean that we cannot find and enjoy productive
>  coherence in the intervening eons.  As for myself, I enjoyed my dinner
>  last night, in spite of knowing the the universe will eventually end.

True enough, but when we see cases where people are whipping up a 
whole bunch of entropy and putting things in dangerous proximity to 
that, should we not speak up?

If vandals were to take down every street sign and signal, and 
then you saw a bunch of old ladies walking down the sidewalk towards 
a street where a bunch of hooligans are known to drive their cars 
recklessly and with complete disregard for their own life or safety 
much less anyone

Re: [Mailman-Users] Bounce issues with Yahoo

[Brad Knowles]

At 11:59 AM -0300 2006-03-04, Oliver Schulze L. wrote:

>  BTW, there are many RFE that are not asigned, is that normal?

That may just mean that no one has gone in recently and assigned 
them.  There are a limited number of people who are involved in this 
process, and they may just not have had much time to work on this 
kind of stuff recently.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Henrik Stromberg]

Hello,
Thanks again for the answers.
I do not have an own server and do not want to have my computer running all
the time so I guess the best would be to create a list on some existing
Mailman installation of some service provider. Is there any information
available how to find one? And in case I find a provider where lists can be
run, HOW do I start one?
I would like to point out that I could not find this very basic information
at the page
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/index.html
and think that this should be improved in order to spread the message about
the lists.
Take care
Henrik


> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: "Henrik Stromberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Kopie: "Patrick Siglin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> mailman-users@python.org
> Betreff: Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?
> Datum: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 09:27:05 -0800
> 
> Henrik Stromberg wrote:
> >
> >Mark, you mean first I need to set up a web page with a subfolder
> >mailman/admin?
> 
> 
> This is done as part of the installation of Mailman.
> 
> 
> >I am absolute beginner to mailman and lists, just participate in two and
> >wondered how I could set up one myself. I wonder why this cannot be
> easily
> >found out at the web page.
> 
> 
> It can. You need to decide whether you are talking about creating your
> own Mailman installation on your own server, or just creating a list
> on some existing Mailman installation of some service provider.
> 
> In the former case, you need to download the software from
>  and read the installation
> manual at  (both of these
> links can be found at  or the mirror at
> ). Or, you may be able to
> install an rpm or other package from your OS vendor.
> 
> In the latter case, you need to identify and contact a provider who
> will host your list for you.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan
> 

-- 
Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] [Solved] Importing Archives Not Working

[Karl Zander]

Thank you to everyone who replied to this thread.

The python code from Mark below worked nicley to convert 
the date formats.  My imported archives are visiable in 
Mailman.

--Karl


On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:43:15 -0800
  Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The method in the FAQ is much more complete than the 
>following, but it
> is also more cumbersome if you don't already have 
>formail and procmail
> installed.
> 
>For a one time Quick and dirty to convert:
> 
>   From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu, 01 Dec 2005 15:02:08 -0500
> 
> to
> 
>   From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec  1 15:02:08 2005
> 
> You can try the following:
> 
> python script.py new_mbox
> 
> where script.py is between the dashed lines
> --
> import sys
> import time
> 
> for line in sys.stdin.readlines():
>if line.startswith('From '):
>fields = line.split()
>date = ' '.join(fields[2:7])
>try:
>t = time.strptime(date, '%a, %d %b %Y 
>%H:%M:%S')
>newtime = time.asctime(t)
>line = ' '.join(fields[0:2] + [newtime] + 
>['\n'])
>except ValueError:
>pass
> 
>sys.stdout.writelines([line])
> --
> 
> (I should add this to the FAQ)
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for 
>gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your 
>sense - B. Dylan
> 
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Mark Sapiro]

Henrik Stromberg wrote:
>
>Mark, you mean first I need to set up a web page with a subfolder
>mailman/admin?


This is done as part of the installation of Mailman.


>I am absolute beginner to mailman and lists, just participate in two and
>wondered how I could set up one myself. I wonder why this cannot be easily
>found out at the web page.


It can. You need to decide whether you are talking about creating your
own Mailman installation on your own server, or just creating a list
on some existing Mailman installation of some service provider.

In the former case, you need to download the software from
 and read the installation
manual at  (both of these
links can be found at  or the mirror at
). Or, you may be able to
install an rpm or other package from your OS vendor.

In the latter case, you need to identify and contact a provider who
will host your list for you.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Henrik Stromberg]

Thank you Mark, Patrick, and Todd for your answers.

Mark, you mean first I need to set up a web page with a subfolder
mailman/admin?

Patrick, yes I mean create a new list.
I have no idea where to find a terminal createlist and how to
paste the output in /etc/aliases and then run newaliases.
I am absolute beginner to mailman and lists, just participate in two and
wondered how I could set up one myself. I wonder why this cannot be easily
found out at the web page.

Todd, I looked at
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/index.html
I have not yet installed mailman. So I need to do that? How?

Take care
Henrik


> Von: Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED], mailman-users@python.org
> Betreff: Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?
> Datum: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 08:09:30 -0800
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >I am sorry to start this question but I am really puzzled by the fact
> that I
> >did not find helpful information about this pivotal question.
> 
> 
> >>From the command line, use bin/newlist.
> 
> >>From the web, follow the "create a new mailing list" link from the
> admin overview page  or go
> directly to .
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan


> Von: "Patrick Siglin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Betreff: Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?
> Datum: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 08:34:38 -0600
> 
> Do you mean create a new list?
> I do it from the terminal createlist
> paste the output in /etc/aliases and then run newaliases.
> 
> 
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 08:42:28 -0500
From: Todd Zullinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?
To: mailman-users@python.org
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed

...

Where did you look?  What method did you use to install mailman?  From
source?  Via a package?

- --
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp

-- 
Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] sorting members

[Mark Sapiro]

emmi wrote:
>
>i have two lists. one has 65 members and the other one
>25. the larger one is sorted by the beginning letters.
>the second list not. can i configure this ? i don't want
>to have a sorted list of members.


See



>is there any posibility to export the member datas ?


See

and the post at
.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] how to disable "post requires approval" messages

[Crni Gorac]

On 3/4/06, Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Crni Gorac wrote:
>
> >I'm administering couple mailing list and during last time each day
> >I'm receiving  dozen of "... post from ... requires approval" messages
> >("As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
> >following mailing list posting...") for each list, because spammers
> >are trying to go trough.  So I'm wondering how to disable sending this
> >kind of messages to list administrator address?  I was looking trough
> >Mailman administrative interface for my list, but wasn't able to find
> >anything appropriate...
>
>
> It is admin_immed_notify on the General Options page.

Great, thank you so much.

Regards,
Crni
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Trying to make a coule site wide changes

[Mark Sapiro]

Derrick MacPherson wrote:

>Sorry I'm not much of a programmer, I'm trying to figure out how to make 
>  a couple site wide changes using the with_list command. I've stumbled 
>around and am not getting anywhere, nor have i yet found an example that 
>will do what I need. I'm trying to change the list owner and the 
>personalize option to 2. Anyone care to turn the lights on for me?


bin/withlist --help

gives instructions. There are lots of specific withlist examples in the
archives of this list, e.g.
.

If you need something more specific to this task, assuming you want to
set the same owner and personalize option for all lists, put the
following in bin/my_change.py

-
def my_change(mlist):
if not mlist.Locked():
mlist.Lock()
mlist.personalise = 2
mlist.owner = ['[EMAIL PROTECTED]']
mlist.Save()
mlist.Unlock()
-

and then run

bin/withlist -a -r my_change

In this case you can accomplish the same thing with config_list instead
by putting the two lines

personalise = 2
owner = ['[EMAIL PROTECTED]']

in a file and running something like the following shell script

#! /bin/sh
cd (the mailman install directory)
for list in `ls lists/`
do bin/config_list -i path/to/file $list
done

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

[Mailman-Users] sorting members

[jetta.view]

hi,

i have two lists. one has 65 members and the other one
25. the larger one is sorted by the beginning letters.
the second list not. can i configure this ? i don't want
to have a sorted list of members.


is there any posibility to export the member datas ?



thanks for your help

best regards

emmi

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] spam being posted to archives

[Mark Sapiro]

Jeff DeReus wrote:

>I am running mailman 2.1.5 with SA 3.0.4 on FC3.  While I am now properly
>tagging the mails for spam there is no reason that they should be archived
>along with valid posts.  Is there a way to disable this based on header
>information or some other criteria?


Use admin-.Privacy options...->Spam filters->header_filter_rules to
discard Spamassassin flagged spam.  E.g., a regexp like

^x-spam-flag:\s*yes

with an action of discard.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Dave Crocker]

Brad Knowles wrote:
> This situation is rife with cost and revenue externalities. 
> Moreover, it is not even opt-out -- it is mandatory for all AOL users.  

All sorts of things are "mandatory for all AOL users".  For example, the entire 
AOL spam detection and filtering mechanism is mandatory.  If AOL users find any 
of the mandatory features unacceptable, they should take their business 
elsewhere.

If they don't do that, then who are we to be parental and tell them that a 
particular feature is unacceptable for them?


> Your sole protection here is that AOL and Goodmail both promise that 
> they will play nice.  History teaches us that anyone in this kind of 
> situation who promises not to abuse their power is, well ... a fool.

That's why you should note the "constant community vigilance" requirement I 
stated in the other note I just sent.

It is also why I am a big fan of real competition, since it provides a form of 
community vigilance.


> Let's look again at the general situation.  X will provide 
> guaranteed access to their members for the benefit of Y and the 
> customers of Y, and in return X is paid money by Y.
> 
> Substitute "AOL" for X and "Goodmail" for Y, and you get precisely 
> the situation they are moving forward with, regardless of all possible 
> complaints -- see 
> . 

The "regardless of all possible complaints" is exactly wrong, according to the 
published rules of operation.  A complaint rate from recipients determines 
continued participation in the program.

Oh.  You mean regardless of complaints from external lobbying groups who are 
not 
AOL customers and who have so far been showing a really excellent skill at 
invoking hyperbole and ignoring facts.


> Now, substitute "families in Eastern Europe" for X, and "pimps" for 
> Y, and you get sex slaves who are forced to perform as prostitutes.  And 
> we all know what kind of promises are made to these people before they 
> are taken from their families.

You believe this substitution process represents the application of facts and 
logic?  For starters, note the deficiencies in the abstract model your are 
using.


> If AOL wants to convince anyone that this is actually a real 
> benefit, they need to do at least two things:

You claim to know what everyone in the world requires for convincing?

I'd be interested in hearing your basis for making these claims on behalf of 
everyone in the world, or even everyone who is an AOL customer.


> Now, if they really want to benefit their members (and indirectly, 
> benefit themselves), they need to give those members a way to charge 

And the nice thing about a free market is that you are free to build a business 
that does exactly whatever you are certain everyone requires.


> Take a look at what the police in Kenya are doing, and what the 
> government in Darfur has turned a blind eye towards, if you need current 
> examples of what happens when there isn't anyone around to watch the 
> watchers.

Since the world is a large and diverse place, it is always possible to find an 
example of pretty much any behavior one wishes to describe.  Using that example 
as proof of the inevitability of the behavior is simply not valid, because it 
also means that there are always counter-examples.  Both cannot be inevitable 
to 
generalize.


> AOL hasn't quite gone that far

No kidding.

d/
-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Mark Sapiro]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>I am sorry to start this question but I am really puzzled by the fact that I
>did not find helpful information about this pivotal question.


>From the command line, use bin/newlist.

>From the web, follow the "create a new mailing list" link from the
admin overview page  or go
directly to .

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

[Mailman-Users] spam being posted to archives

[Jeff DeReus]

I am running mailman 2.1.5 with SA 3.0.4 on FC3.  While I am now properly
tagging the mails for spam there is no reason that they should be archived
along with valid posts.  Is there a way to disable this based on header
information or some other criteria?

Thank you,
Jeff D
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] how to disable "post requires approval" messages

[Mark Sapiro]

Crni Gorac wrote:

>I'm administering couple mailing list and during last time each day
>I'm receiving  dozen of "... post from ... requires approval" messages
>("As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
>following mailing list posting...") for each list, because spammers
>are trying to go trough.  So I'm wondering how to disable sending this
>kind of messages to list administrator address?  I was looking trough
>Mailman administrative interface for my list, but wasn't able to find
>anything appropriate...


It is admin_immed_notify on the General Options page.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Dave Crocker]

Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 5:53 PM -0800 2006-03-03, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
>>  AOL creates a specialized, rather expensive process that it provides for
>>  free, to ensure delivery of a class of mail.
> 
> Unless you mean "all mail" when you say "class of mail", then no -- 
> not really.  So far as I know, they did not have any "certified mail" 
> type of solution that they made available to the paying spammers.

1. The effort it takes to get on the EWL and stay on it is substantial. It 
therefore creates a significant division between "all mail" and "mail from 
folks 
on the EWL".

2. "paying spammers" is nicely inflammatory, but factually incorrect, according 
to most definitions of spam.  In terms of the actual claimed goal for these 
types of services, in fact, it is completely and totally factually incorrect.

The claim is that the mechanism is intended for mail that receivers really want 
to get.  "Mail I don't want" is the classic form of the most extreme definition 
of spam.

Whether actual operation matches actual goal is always a good question, of 
course.  For that, one needs to look at the criteria to qualify for the 
program, 
its enforcement at the admission phase, and its enforcement after admission.


>>The operation of this
>>  mechanism is pure overhead for AOL.  Worse, it is distinct to AOL.  To
>>  the extent any other receive-side ISP operates such a service, it is
>>  entirely independent of AOL.  That is, anyone wanting on these special
>>  lists must to special things for each of these lists.
> 
> Very few other operators in the world have attempted to run an 
> enforced whitelist solution of the sort that AOL has developed.

That is one of my points.

   I
> disagree that this was necessary on AOL's part, but to the extent that 

I don't recall saying it was "necessary" for AOL.

I DID say that the per-ISP EWL model does not scale across ISPs.


>>  So along comes a few companies who are trying to find ways to let
>>  receive-side ISPs outsource the job of assuring that trustable bulk
>>  mail is, in fact, trusted.  (That is, the receiver wants this stuff and
>>  these services are provding ways to assure that they get it.)
> 
> That's the key point I don't believe.  I don't trust net-nanny 
> companies to properly operate an IP-address based black list, nor do I 
> trust that these kinds of operations will remain secure even if they 
> could be properly operated. 

We all have different biases.  What we choose to trust, in the absence of 
empirical data, is a matter of personal choice.


  See
>  and 
> .

It is very much in vogue, these days, to assert such choices and claim that 
they 
really are based on fact. However any reasonable analysis of the basis for the 
choice turns out to have nothing to do with legitimate empirical data that is 
directly relevant to the conclusion.

More often that not a) there is no data at all, or b) the data cited are 
irrelevant, though possibly catchy and inflammatory.


> Goodmail is just going to sell out to the highest bidder(s).

Goodmail has published criteria.  That makes one phase of analysis 
straightforward.

They have no track-record.  That makes the second phase of analysis a matter of 
pure conjecture.

If one does not find that their published criteria automatically unacceptable, 
then your statement is a prediction based on no data.

Hence it really translates into: Nobody who tries to make a profit ever has any 
integrity. (Combined with:  The market has no corrective forces against 
companies that are in the integrity business but that, themselves, have no 
integrity except to seek profit.)


  Even if
> they don't do it today, they'll get bought by someone who will.  And 
> then everyone who built Goodmail into their system will have given 
> spammers a level of unequaled access.

An argument that entropy will eventually convert the entire universe into pure 
randomness does not mean that we cannot find and enjoy productive coherence in 
the intervening eons.  As for myself, I enjoyed my dinner last night, in spite 
of knowing the the universe will eventually end.

In other words: even if you are right, the key flaw in your analysis is that it 
pertains to the indeterminate future, rather than any possible immediate 
benefit.


> There's an old saying about power and corruption.

True.  That is why a) it is important to have real competition, and b) it is 
important to make sure that there are other forces to protect important 
categories of mail.

Or rather:  that is why it is important to make sure that these new services 
provided *added* services, rather than that they become the basis for *all* 
service.

Ignoring nit-picking about the formal definition of goodmail's "certified" 
mail, 
versus the formal definition of the term "certified" for postal

Re: [Mailman-Users] Bounce issues with Yahoo

[Oliver Schulze L.]

Done:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1443069&group_id=103&atid=350103
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1219887&group_id=103&atid=350103

BTW, there are many RFE that are not asigned, is that normal?

Thanks
Oliver

Brad Knowles wrote:
> You could certainly go to the appropriate SourceForge page and 
> check to see if this RFE is already on the system, and if not then you 
> could file it yourself.  But if the RFE isn't filed on SourceForge, 
> then we really don't have a way to track it, and it's much less likely 
> to ever get addressed.
-- 

Oliver Schulze L.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Bounce issues with Yahoo

[Oliver Schulze L.]

Good idea, will do ;)

Brad Knowles wrote:
> You could certainly go to the appropriate SourceForge page and 
> check to see if this RFE is already on the system, and if not then you 
> could file it yourself.  But if the RFE isn't filed on SourceForge, 
> then we really don't have a way to track it, and it's much less likely 
> to ever get addressed.
>

-- 
Oliver Schulze L.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 5:53 PM -0800 2006-03-03, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  So along comes a few companies who are trying to find ways to let
>  receive-side ISPs outsource the job of assuring that trustable bulk
>  mail is, in fact, trusted.  (That is, the receiver wants this stuff
>  and these services are provding ways to assure that they get it.)

This situation is rife with cost and revenue externalities. 
Moreover, it is not even opt-out -- it is mandatory for all AOL 
users.  Fundamentally, these are the two worst aspects of spam, and 
by extension virtually all types of abuse.

Your sole protection here is that AOL and Goodmail both promise 
that they will play nice.  History teaches us that anyone in this 
kind of situation who promises not to abuse their power is, well ... 
a fool.


Let's look again at the general situation.  X will provide 
guaranteed access to their members for the benefit of Y and the 
customers of Y, and in return X is paid money by Y.

Substitute "AOL" for X and "Goodmail" for Y, and you get 
precisely the situation they are moving forward with, regardless of 
all possible complaints -- see 
.

Now, substitute "families in Eastern Europe" for X, and "pimps" 
for Y, and you get sex slaves who are forced to perform as 
prostitutes.  And we all know what kind of promises are made to these 
people before they are taken from their families.

AOL is making their members bend over and drop their pants, and 
then will look the other way when Goodmail comes along with clients 
who pay good money to abuse those members.  That's it, plain and 
simple.


Okay, so maybe this paid spam stuff isn't quite as bad as being 
turned into a sex slave, but the mechanisms are precisely the same -- 
your sole protection is the word of the people who are making their 
members accessible, and the word of the people who would be using 
(abusing) those members.


If AOL wants to convince anyone that this is actually a real 
benefit, they need to do at least two things:

1.  Remove the cost/revenue externalities.  If any money is to 
be
paid for the benefit of guaranteed access to members
mailboxes, it should be the members themselves.

AOL should get increased revenue through making their 
members
happier, and therefore keeping existing members for 
longer,
and getting newer members faster than they had in the 
past.

2.  Make the feature opt-in instead of opt-out or mandatory.

If it really is good for members, they will flock to it 
in
droves.

Now, if they really want to benefit their members (and 
indirectly, benefit themselves), they need to give those members a 
way to charge considerably more than the usual and customary fee, if 
they should be hit with a particularly heinous paid spam -- a factor 
of a thousand, or more.  This would force the senders to seriously 
think twice about abusing their enhanced access.  Of course, AOL 
would never do this and Goodmail would never agree to this, because 
the paid spammers would refuse to get whacked with those kinds of 
potential charges.


You will note that AOL is promising that their new policy won't 
hurt non-profit organizations, because they will pay for the costs 
incurred.  But this places the one party most likely to abuse the 
system as the one party that decides who they will be nice to -- yet 
another situation ripe for abuse.  AOL gets to decide who is a worthy 
non-profit organization, and everyone else can just kiss their ass.


Take a look at what the police in Kenya are doing, and what the 
government in Darfur has turned a blind eye towards, if you need 
current examples of what happens when there isn't anyone around to 
watch the watchers.

AOL hasn't quite gone that far (at least not yet, so far as we 
know), but they're certainly going down that path.  And they're lying 
through their teeth about the real reasons why and what will happen 
as a result, and they're going to force all their members to go along 
with this idea whether they like it or not.  And AOL will be just the 
first in a long line of companies to jack into this new and 
exceptionally profitable revenue stream.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http:

Re: [Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[Todd Zullinger]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am sorry to start this question but I am really puzzled by the
> fact that I did not find helpful information about this pivotal
> question.

Where did you look?  What method did you use to install mailman?  From
source?  Via a package?

- -- 
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
==
Most of one's life is one prolonged effort to prevent oneself
thinking.
-- Aldous Huxley

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.

iG0EARECAC0FAkQJmUQmGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1pCbgCg0CV1Id2XSE8U/hp5WfiyeboT6VkAni5LgSF4
lXjlqWKwpmZNfWAKkKCM
=2Pwr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

[Mailman-Users] How to start a new list?

[henrik_Str]

I am sorry to start this question but I am really puzzled by the fact that I
did not find helpful information about this pivotal question.

-- 
Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] how to disable "post requires approval" messages

[Crni Gorac]

On 3/4/06, Glenn Sieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Crni Gorac said the following on 3/4/2006 3:28 AM:
> > I'm administering couple mailing list and during last time each day
> > I'm receiving  dozen of "... post from ... requires approval" messages
> > ("As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
> > following mailing list posting...") for each list, because spammers
> > are trying to go trough.  So I'm wondering how to disable sending this
> > kind of messages to list administrator address?  I was looking trough
> > Mailman administrative interface for my list, but wasn't able to find
> > anything appropriate...
>
> What you really need here is good spam filtering so that those messages
> never make it to the lists. Disabling those administrative messages is
> really a Bad Idea.. :-\
>
> Personally, I use AMaViS and SpamAssassin, with the SpamAssassin handler
> for Mailman... it works like a charm!
>
> Best,
> --Glenn
>
> --
> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>   ~Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
>
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] how to disable "post requires approval" messages

[Glenn Sieb]

Crni Gorac said the following on 3/4/2006 3:28 AM:
> I'm administering couple mailing list and during last time each day
> I'm receiving  dozen of "... post from ... requires approval" messages
> ("As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
> following mailing list posting...") for each list, because spammers
> are trying to go trough.  So I'm wondering how to disable sending this
> kind of messages to list administrator address?  I was looking trough
> Mailman administrative interface for my list, but wasn't able to find
> anything appropriate...

What you really need here is good spam filtering so that those messages
never make it to the lists. Disabling those administrative messages is
really a Bad Idea.. :-\

Personally, I use AMaViS and SpamAssassin, with the SpamAssassin handler
for Mailman... it works like a charm!

Best,
--Glenn

-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  ~Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

Re: [Mailman-Users] Goodmail spells doom for mailing lists?

[Brad Knowles]

At 5:53 PM -0800 2006-03-03, Dave Crocker wrote:

>  AOL creates a specialized, rather expensive process that it provides for
>  free, to ensure delivery of a class of mail.

Unless you mean "all mail" when you say "class of mail", then no 
-- not really.  So far as I know, they did not have any "certified 
mail" type of solution that they made available to the paying 
spammers.

>The operation of this
>  mechanism is pure overhead for AOL.  Worse, it is distinct to AOL.  To
>  the extent any other receive-side ISP operates such a service, it is
>  entirely independent of AOL.  That is, anyone wanting on these special
>  lists must to special things for each of these lists.

Very few other operators in the world have attempted to run an 
enforced whitelist solution of the sort that AOL has developed.  I 
disagree that this was necessary on AOL's part, but to the extent 
that it was/has been, this was just one of the prices they paid for 
being the biggest bully on the block.

In essence, they are an attractive nuisance, and they may have to 
defend against that more vigorously than other providers might.

>  So along comes a few companies who are trying to find ways to let
>  receive-side ISPs outsource the job of assuring that trustable bulk
>  mail is, in fact, trusted.  (That is, the receiver wants this stuff and
>  these services are provding ways to assure that they get it.)

That's the key point I don't believe.  I don't trust net-nanny 
companies to properly operate an IP-address based black list, nor do 
I trust that these kinds of operations will remain secure even if 
they could be properly operated.  See 
 and 
.

Goodmail is just going to sell out to the highest bidder(s). 
Even if they don't do it today, they'll get bought by someone who 
will.  And then everyone who built Goodmail into their system will 
have given spammers a level of unequaled access.

>  Or perhaps it is my unwillingness to take *possible* mishandling of such
>  a service as being the same as *definite* mishandling.  Perhaps it is
>  just that I have yet to see a capability that was worth having that could
>  not also be abused.

There's an old saying about power and corruption.  Through these 
types of deals, Goodmail will have unprecedented power over the 
mailboxes of hundreds of millions or even billions of people, and 
that kind of power is guaranteed to be absolutely corrupting.

But then I guess you'd label me a privacy nut and go off and 
implement such systems anyway.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
 Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See .
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

[Mailman-Users] how to disable "post requires approval" messages

[Crni Gorac]

I'm administering couple mailing list and during last time each day
I'm receiving  dozen of "... post from ... requires approval" messages
("As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
following mailing list posting...") for each list, because spammers
are trying to go trough.  So I'm wondering how to disable sending this
kind of messages to list administrator address?  I was looking trough
Mailman administrative interface for my list, but wasn't able to find
anything appropriate...

Thanks.
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp

[Mailman-Users] Trying to make a coule site wide changes

[Derrick MacPherson]

Sorry I'm not much of a programmer, I'm trying to figure out how to make 
  a couple site wide changes using the with_list command. I've stumbled 
around and am not getting anywhere, nor have i yet found an example that 
will do what I need. I'm trying to change the list owner and the 
personalize option to 2. Anyone care to turn the lights on for me?
--
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Security Policy: 
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp