Re: [Mailman-Users] Best practices

[Lawrence Bowie]

Excellent .. Thanks guys .. good and informative responses.

LDB

Christopher Adams wrote:
> Mostly, I agree with Mark on this. You really have to balance what
> individual list owners want, how individual lists operate, and the fact that
> you may host/administer so many lists that the best choice is the same for
> all.
> 
> We host over 500 lists. Originally, the default was to 'Hold' messages from
> non-members. This might include subscribers who's address had changed or
> individuals who thought they were on the list. This is where we needed to
> reevaluate the situation. Many list owners are busy and don't want to
> continually take action on posts from non-members. However, many list owners
> also don't want messages from 'non-members' to be automatically discarded.
> 
> Our solution was to make the default to 'Reject', but send a message to the
> sender, indicating that their message was rejected because either they are
> not a member or their address has changed. One problem with this solution is
> that the option for multiple languages becomes a bit of  an issue.
> 
> On 7/23/06, Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>>David Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Lawrence Bowie wrote:
>>>
I have been rejecting messages from non-members but I am
not sure that is the best practice. Is it better to "discard"
rather than "reject" non-members messages?
>>>
>>>It depends on the message ... if the message is topical, then I reject
>>>the message indicating that to post a person must be subscribed, and if
>>>they are subscribed, then they might be posting from a different email
>>>address.
>>>
>>>If the message isn't topical, then I just discard it (for which the
>>>'discard all messages marked as deferred' check box is a boon), as those
>>>are usually just spam.
>>
>>
>>So you have generic_nonmember_action set to 'Hold', and you (or a
>>moderator) make a decision on each post.
>>
>>I think Lawrence is asking a different question, namely, should
>>generic_nonmember_action be 'reject' or 'discard'?
>>
>>This is a controversial question, and the answer really depends on the
>>list. The 'good' answer is that spam should be filtered out ahead of
>>Mailman. Then Mailman and the list owner don't have to worry about
>>'blowback' and spam forwarding issues, but this solution isn't always
>>available.
>>
>>If you have spam reaching Mailman, it is clearly best to discard the
>>spam without sending any kind of 'reply'. Note that holding and then
>>discarding the message only does this if respond_to_post_requests is
>>set to 'No'. Otherwise, by the time the moderator sees the message, a
>>hold notification reply has already been sent.
>>
>>Unfortunately, once the post gets to Mailman, Mailman applies the
>>generic_nonmember_action in every case. I think we all agree that for
>>spam (if it gets this far), this should be discard, but there are
>>lists for which this is not appropriate if the message is not spam.
>>
>>In the past, Brad has posted examples to this list of situations where
>>silently discarding an attempted post has caused significant problems
>>for the non-member who thought the post had been received.
>>
>>In short, this is a list specific decision. Is your list one where you
>>have non-members attempting to post? What are the consequences if that
>>post is discarded without notice? How do these balance with spam
>>blowback/forwarding considerations to the extent that spam gets this
>>far?
>>
>>--
>>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/adamsca%40gmail.com
>>
>>Security Policy:
>>http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
>>
> 
> 
> 

--
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] Best practices

[Christopher Adams]

Mostly, I agree with Mark on this. You really have to balance what
individual list owners want, how individual lists operate, and the fact that
you may host/administer so many lists that the best choice is the same for
all.

We host over 500 lists. Originally, the default was to 'Hold' messages from
non-members. This might include subscribers who's address had changed or
individuals who thought they were on the list. This is where we needed to
reevaluate the situation. Many list owners are busy and don't want to
continually take action on posts from non-members. However, many list owners
also don't want messages from 'non-members' to be automatically discarded.

Our solution was to make the default to 'Reject', but send a message to the
sender, indicating that their message was rejected because either they are
not a member or their address has changed. One problem with this solution is
that the option for multiple languages becomes a bit of  an issue.

On 7/23/06, Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Gibbs wrote:
>
> >Lawrence Bowie wrote:
> >> I have been rejecting messages from non-members but I am
> >> not sure that is the best practice. Is it better to "discard"
> >> rather than "reject" non-members messages?
> >
> >It depends on the message ... if the message is topical, then I reject
> >the message indicating that to post a person must be subscribed, and if
> >they are subscribed, then they might be posting from a different email
> >address.
> >
> >If the message isn't topical, then I just discard it (for which the
> >'discard all messages marked as deferred' check box is a boon), as those
> >are usually just spam.
>
>
> So you have generic_nonmember_action set to 'Hold', and you (or a
> moderator) make a decision on each post.
>
> I think Lawrence is asking a different question, namely, should
> generic_nonmember_action be 'reject' or 'discard'?
>
> This is a controversial question, and the answer really depends on the
> list. The 'good' answer is that spam should be filtered out ahead of
> Mailman. Then Mailman and the list owner don't have to worry about
> 'blowback' and spam forwarding issues, but this solution isn't always
> available.
>
> If you have spam reaching Mailman, it is clearly best to discard the
> spam without sending any kind of 'reply'. Note that holding and then
> discarding the message only does this if respond_to_post_requests is
> set to 'No'. Otherwise, by the time the moderator sees the message, a
> hold notification reply has already been sent.
>
> Unfortunately, once the post gets to Mailman, Mailman applies the
> generic_nonmember_action in every case. I think we all agree that for
> spam (if it gets this far), this should be discard, but there are
> lists for which this is not appropriate if the message is not spam.
>
> In the past, Brad has posted examples to this list of situations where
> silently discarding an attempted post has caused significant problems
> for the non-member who thought the post had been received.
>
> In short, this is a list specific decision. Is your list one where you
> have non-members attempting to post? What are the consequences if that
> post is discarded without notice? How do these balance with spam
> blowback/forwarding considerations to the extent that spam gets this
> far?
>
> --
> 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/adamsca%40gmail.com
>
> Security Policy:
> http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
>



-- 
Christopher Adams
[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] Best practices

[Mark Sapiro]

David Gibbs wrote:

>Lawrence Bowie wrote:
>> I have been rejecting messages from non-members but I am
>> not sure that is the best practice. Is it better to "discard"
>> rather than "reject" non-members messages?
>
>It depends on the message ... if the message is topical, then I reject
>the message indicating that to post a person must be subscribed, and if
>they are subscribed, then they might be posting from a different email
>address.
>
>If the message isn't topical, then I just discard it (for which the
>'discard all messages marked as deferred' check box is a boon), as those
>are usually just spam.


So you have generic_nonmember_action set to 'Hold', and you (or a
moderator) make a decision on each post.

I think Lawrence is asking a different question, namely, should
generic_nonmember_action be 'reject' or 'discard'?

This is a controversial question, and the answer really depends on the
list. The 'good' answer is that spam should be filtered out ahead of
Mailman. Then Mailman and the list owner don't have to worry about
'blowback' and spam forwarding issues, but this solution isn't always
available.

If you have spam reaching Mailman, it is clearly best to discard the
spam without sending any kind of 'reply'. Note that holding and then
discarding the message only does this if respond_to_post_requests is
set to 'No'. Otherwise, by the time the moderator sees the message, a
hold notification reply has already been sent.

Unfortunately, once the post gets to Mailman, Mailman applies the
generic_nonmember_action in every case. I think we all agree that for
spam (if it gets this far), this should be discard, but there are
lists for which this is not appropriate if the message is not spam.

In the past, Brad has posted examples to this list of situations where
silently discarding an attempted post has caused significant problems
for the non-member who thought the post had been received.

In short, this is a list specific decision. Is your list one where you
have non-members attempting to post? What are the consequences if that
post is discarded without notice? How do these balance with spam
blowback/forwarding considerations to the extent that spam gets this
far?

-- 
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] Best practices

[David Gibbs]

Lawrence Bowie wrote:
> I have been rejecting messages from non-members but I am
> not sure that is the best practice. Is it better to "discard"
> rather than "reject" non-members messages?

It depends on the message ... if the message is topical, then I reject
the message indicating that to post a person must be subscribed, and if
they are subscribed, then they might be posting from a different email
address.

If the message isn't topical, then I just discard it (for which the
'discard all messages marked as deferred' check box is a boon), as those
are usually just spam.

david
--
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] Best practices

[Lawrence Bowie]

I have been rejecting messages from non-members but I am
not sure that is the best practice. Is it better to "discard"
rather than "reject" non-members messages?

Thanks,

LDB
--
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] best practices for pipermail archives -- lookand feel touch ups

[Jon Carnes]

I don't think it's a "best practices" but I modify the source to simply
add any html/text found in a file called arc_footer.  Small hack.  Works
fine.

Best of Luck to you - Jon Carnes

On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 16:22, Mark Rauterkus wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> What are the best ways to slightly jazz up the web display of the archives?
> 
> I'd love to have the archives look slightly like my site with footer, a
> logo, a link back to the home page and /mailman/listinfo, etc.
> 
> Do some of your put in server side includes?
> 
> 
> Ta.
> 
> Mark Rauterkus
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> --
> Mailman-Users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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/
> 
> This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/jonc%40nc.rr.com



--
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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/

This message was sent to: archive@jab.org
Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

[Mailman-Users] best practices for pipermail archives -- look and feel touch ups

[Mark Rauterkus]

Hi All,

What are the best ways to slightly jazz up the web display of the archives?

I'd love to have the archives look slightly like my site with footer, a
logo, a link back to the home page and /mailman/listinfo, etc.

Do some of your put in server side includes?


Ta.

Mark Rauterkus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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/

This message was sent to: archive@jab.org
Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org