[Mailman-Users] Feature Request - Show Member Name but not email address

Hello, I have a feature request for MailMan.  Would you please add to the Privacy Options section, Membership Exposure, an option to show only the member name, but keep their email address hidden from the member list, that non-admin members may view?  I'd like my members to see who, by name,

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

Keith Bierman writes: > Probably betrays my ignorance of the OP's needs, but I'd have thought: > > 1) tracking who joins is more interesting than those leaving That depends. In many organizational settings monitoring certain channels is part of the job of certain people. And of course

[Mailman-Users] feature request

"Should administrator get notices of subscribes and unsubscribes? " Would it be possible to split these as our list admins would like to see unsubscribes but not subscribes.

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

On 12/06/2015 06:06 PM, Steven Jones wrote: > "Should administrator get notices of subscribes and unsubscribes? " > > > Would it be possible to split these as our list admins would like to see > unsubscribes but not subscribes. There are no plans to implement such a split in official MM 2.1

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

Probably betrays my ignorance of the OP's needs, but I'd have thought: 1) tracking who joins is more interesting than those leaving 2) client side filtering (including automated discarding) allows the administrators to save their sanity ... So I find the described request slightly surprising.

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

ds Steven From: Mailman-Users <mailman-users-bounces+steven.jones=vuw.ac...@python.org> on behalf of Keith Bierman <khb...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, 8 December 2015 10:47 a.m. To: Mark Sapiro Cc: mailman-users@python.org Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] feature reques

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

On 12/07/2015 01:54 PM, Steven Jones wrote: > > It is an emergency mailing list that only gets used in a major emergency, > 19000 subscribers. We dont really care who subscribes but we dont want > "important" ppl un-subscribing and then complaining they didnt get teh > emergency email down

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Gadi Evron writes: crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? I think that, as Mark alludes to, this feature would be harder to implement usefully than you'd think. It sounds easy, but remember, in a very large share cases where it would be useful *your mail system

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

1. Mailman aliases not working (like in my case) 2. Unable to access my email, but have access to web (which is common for those of us behind corporate firewalls) 3. My email is broken, but my internet it still working However, even with these reasons, I wouldn't consider it a big deal,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Bill Catambay writes: 1. Mailman aliases not working (like in my case) 2. Unable to access my email, but have access to web (which is common for those of us behind corporate firewalls) 3. My email is broken, but my internet it still working However, even with these reasons, I

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Gadi Evron writes: crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? I think that, as Mark alludes to, this feature would be harder to implement usefully than you'd think. It sounds easy, but remember, in a very large share cases where it

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Bill Catambay wrote: 1. Mailman aliases not working (like in my case) 2. Unable to access my email, but have access to web (which is common for those of us behind corporate firewalls) 3. My email is broken, but my internet it still working However, even with these reasons, I wouldn't consider

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 22, 2009, at 6:14 PM, Gadi Evron wrote: Brad Knowles wrote: At the very least, you should find a different provider where they actually give you the support you require. Brad, crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? I can see that it might be a useful

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Gadi Evron wrote: Actually, I spoke of a possible _announcement_ feature, not an emergency feature. I see two requests in this thread. The original appeared to be a request for a way to send a regular post to a list via the admin web interface, which would be useful in cases where for whatever

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

At 7:32 PM +0900 on 11/23/09, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: Bill Catambay writes: 1. Mailman aliases not working (like in my case) 2. Unable to access my email, but have access to web (which is common for those of us behind corporate firewalls) 3. My email is broken, but my internet it

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: The second request, which might also satisfy the first if it were implemented as a web service, seems to be for a way to send a message right now to all members of a list (or all lists?) regardless of digest and nomail settings. Actually, MM2

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

At 7:56 AM -0800 on 11/23/09, Mark Sapiro wrote: I see two requests in this thread. The original appeared to be a request for a way to send a regular post to a list via the admin web interface, which would be useful in cases where for whatever reason, the list was working but email delivery

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

At 11:05 AM -0500 on 11/23/09, Barry Warsaw wrote: The second request, which might also satisfy the first if it were implemented as a web service, seems to be for a way to send a message right now to all members of a list (or all lists?) regardless of digest and nomail settings. Actually,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Barry Warsaw wrote: On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:56 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: The second request, which might also satisfy the first if it were implemented as a web service, seems to be for a way to send a message right now to all members of a list (or all lists?) regardless of digest and nomail

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:14 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: I knew I'd seen that somewhere. Problem was I looked for it as an RFE and not as an existing feature :) :) -Barry PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part --

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 09:42 -0600, Brad Knowles wrote: However, the laundry list of useful features that could be added to Mailman is several miles long and almost as wide, and I'm not qualified to judge where on that laundry list this particular feature would/should fall -- I'll leave that to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

At 1:32 PM +0200 on 11/23/09, Gadi Evron wrote: Actually, I spoke of a possible _announcement_ feature, not an emergency feature. Announcement feature would be better, since it's not always going to be an emergency (and would still work in my situation). -- ,,,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Bill Catambay wrote: If by send a message, you mean email a message to the normal foo-list email address, then I'm back to square one (i.e., it will never reach anyone on the list because of the aliases being whacked). But, I hope you understand that your specific need/situation - email

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

At 8:52 AM -0800 on 11/23/09, Mark Sapiro wrote: Bill Catambay wrote: If by send a message, you mean email a message to the normal foo-list email address, then I'm back to square one (i.e., it will never reach anyone on the list because of the aliases being whacked). But, I hope you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Terri Oda wrote: Maybe a nice in-between solution would be making sure the FAQ/Documentation had an entry saying if you need to get an emergency message out and Mailman is not working, here's how to get the whole subscriber list and send a Bcc'ed mail Anyone want to volunteer to stick that

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote: An ever-increasing number of software packages support the installation of 3rd party extensions, said extensions supporting the activities of installation, deactivation and removal, leaving the core system unaltered. This provides end

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:15 AM, Bill Catambay wrote: If by send a message, you mean email a message to the normal foo- list email address, then I'm back to square one (i.e., it will never reach anyone on the list because of the aliases being whacked). Honestly, I don't see Mailman doing

[Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Given my current situation (as rare as this situation may be), I have come to realize that an emergency broadcast feature would be an indispensable tool to have right now. Since my host made the alias change on my mailing list, but did not create the MX record for the new email, it is

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:55:31AM -0800, Bill Catambay wrote: Given my current situation (as rare as this situation may be), I have come to realize that an emergency broadcast feature would be an indispensable tool to have right now. Since my host made the alias change on my mailing list,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Bill Catambay wrote: Given my current situation (as rare as this situation may be), I have come to realize that an emergency broadcast feature would be an indispensable tool to have right now. Since my host made the alias change on my mailing list, but did not create the MX record for the

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:36 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: This could be done with bin/inject on the Mailman server to inject a message directly into Mailman's in/ queue bypassing the MTA, but you don't have the required access. Since you don't have the required access, I do see the need in your case,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

The weekend crew at my ISP are general tech support (i.e., they really only handle internet connection issues). My ISP does have an Operations group which usually are pretty knowledgeable, but I they simply aren't working on the weekend. For what it's worth, they are the best ISP I have had

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On 11/22/09 2:53 PM, Bill Catambay at and...@excaliburworld.com wrote: When I used Autoshare listserver software, it ran on my home server (a Mac), and I never had to rely on anyone for support (handled everything myself). Unfortunately, that software has not been updated in over 10 years

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On 22-Nov-2009, at 13:53, Bill Catambay wrote: When I used Autoshare listserver software, it ran on my home server (a Mac), and I never had to rely on anyone for support (handled everything myself). Unfortunately, that software has not been updated in over 10 years and is no longer

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On Nov 22, 2009, at 9:36 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote: This could be done with bin/inject on the Mailman server to inject a message directly into Mailman's in/ queue bypassing the MTA, but you don't have the required access. Since you don't have the required access, I do see the need in your

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

Brad Knowles wrote: At the very least, you should find a different provider where they actually give you the support you require. Brad, crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? I remember a few occasion when I needed to grab the subscribers list and email everyone

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

On 22-Nov-2009, at 17:14, Gadi Evron wrote: Brad, crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? It could be useful in a very narrow set of circumstances. the question is, is it worth putting resources into such a feature for those very few times this would be useful? My

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request: Emergency Broadcast

LuKreme wrote: On 22-Nov-2009, at 17:14, Gadi Evron wrote: Brad, crappy providers aside, do you think this might be a useful feature? It could be useful in a very narrow set of circumstances. the question is, is it worth putting resources into such a feature for those very few times this

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Michael Welch writes: Mark Sapiro wrote at 05:57 PM 3/16/2009: I don't know if adding a 'moderate' flag to invitations is really of general interest. Hi Mark. I am not sure either, but I know that I have wished for it more than once. I know that Mailman cannot be everything to

[Mailman-Users] Feature request

I would love to see some way of putting someone on moderation when I add or invite them via Mass Subscriptions (which for me is normally one at a time anyway). Elsewise, I have to stay on top of their subscription notification and get to the Membership List page before they have a chance to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 04:20:39PM -0700, Michael Welch wrote: I would love to see some way of putting someone on moderation when I add or invite them via Mass Subscriptions (which for me is normally one at a time anyway). have you used the default_member_moderation (privacy/sender) setting?

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Hi Adam. Ahh, a workaround. Change the default setting, add the member, then change it back. Unfortunately, one has to wait until after the new member has confirmed before changing the default moderation settng back. Need to tie a string around my finger. Adam McGreggor wrote at 04:33 PM

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Michael Welch wrote: Ahh, a workaround. Change the default setting, add the member, then change it back. Unfortunately, one has to wait until after the new member has confirmed before changing the default moderation settng back. I don't get it. Why would you want to moderate new members you

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Mark Sapiro wrote at 05:27 PM 3/16/2009: Michael Welch wrote: Ahh, a workaround. Change the default setting, add the member, then change it back. Unfortunately, one has to wait until after the new member has confirmed before changing the default moderation settng back. I don't get it.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Michael Welch wrote: Mark Sapiro wrote at 05:27 PM 3/16/2009: Michael Welch wrote: Ahh, a workaround. Change the default setting, add the member, then change it back. Unfortunately, one has to wait until after the new member has confirmed before changing the default moderation settng back.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Hi Everyone, For what it is worth... I'd like to be able to have all the options that are available in the user management screen available in the bulk subscription screen. I operate a list which is closed to anyone except by personal invite, so pretty much use the bulk subscribe option for all

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

Mark Sapiro wrote at 05:57 PM 3/16/2009: I don't know if adding a 'moderate' flag to invitations is really of general interest. Hi Mark. I am not sure either, but I know that I have wished for it more than once. I know that Mailman cannot be everything to everyone. I think that more

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

On 7/15/08, Savoy, Jim wrote: We have class lists, lab lists, club lists, team lists, student lists, employee lists, security lists (some of which contain every soul on our campus - rarely ever used (never used yet, in fact, knock wood) for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Brad Knowles wrote: Mailing lists are useful for a wide variety of things, but VT-type emergencies are not among them. Well we definitely know that it isn't the *only* solution (there are speakers and alarms and sirens and lights and cameras everywhere on campus). But it is just one more

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

I guess we might be considered a fascist regime, but mass-subscribe is an invauable tool here at our university. Hardly any of our lists are opt-in (what a nightmare that would be for us - we need our lists up and populated on exact dates and ready to roll). We have class lists, lab lists,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: P.S. I still don't understand why they insist on an invite model. Because all it takes is one listowner that doesn't understand and does a mass subscribe of a number of people, some of those people complain and then the entire ISP gets blacklisted. And some blacklists

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Zbigniew Szalbot writes: 1/ Mailman as a discussion list - like the one we're having here. I don't imagine spammers would be setting up their lists as discussion list, would they? I don't actually imagine big time spammers using mailman. They're all about botnets. Big time spammers

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hi there, Stephen J. Turnbull: This is a market to gain for Mailman but it currently lacks a few features to do that. Well, my post is slowly getting off topic But IMO it would be quite on-topic for mailman-developers. This kind of post would be more effective in inciting dev activity if

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz writes: There are two differences with email: 1) there are only spotty and poorly enforced laws against junk email (in part because a lot of it is international and/or hidden) and 2) sending snail mail, faxes, or phoning all cost money--sending emails costs little to

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Larry Stone writes: Brad, I'm glad you added that. But it raises an interesting topic of discussion which is why is e-mail held to a different standard than other means of communication. Because it's different. First, the costs are several orders of magnitude cheaper. Second, identifying

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Michael Welch writes: I think that bulk adding is a dangerous thing to allow, from the host's viewpoint at a minimum. Who's to say what unscrupulous a-holes are ready to take advantage of that ability. Very dumb ones. I really don't see a major social problem here; as a host, make your

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Brad Knowles writes: I know there are people who use it responsibly, which is why I don't advocate too strongly for its removal. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't get abused, or that we shouldn't do things to try to curb that abuse. I have to disagree. Anything that can be done

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hi all, I have to disagree. Anything that can be done with the Mailman mass subscribe feature can be done just as effectively with a contact list on Gmail, in theory.[1] It's other aspects of Gmail policy that (so far at least) make that a small enough problem that I've never considered

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 11, 2008, at 4:18 AM, Zbigniew Szalbot wrote: 2/ Mailman as a newsletter/announcement list. I can't sponsor the developers (sad but true) but I'd love to see Mailman giving me an option to create either discussion or announcement list

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

On Jul 10, 2008, at 7:06 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: It's a bit more work to get rid of junk mail but, again, the law says you have to be removed from their list if you ask. And there are some places to sign up to opt out of receiving mass mailings. The problem with this, is the fact

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: P.S. I still don't understand why they insist on an invite model. Because all it takes is one listowner that doesn't understand and does a mass subscribe of a number of people, some of those people complain and then the entire ISP gets blacklisted. And some blacklists

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hi friends. I think that bulk adding is a dangerous thing to allow, from the host's viewpoint at a minimum. Who's to say what unscrupulous a-holes are ready to take advantage of that ability. That said, my own need calls for the ability to do just that. We are qualifying individual supporters

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:20:01 -0500 From: Brad Knowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cyndi Norwitz wrote: P.S. I still don't understand why they insist on an invite model. Because all it takes is one listowner that doesn't understand and does a mass subscribe of a number of people,

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Michael Welch wrote: That said, my own need calls for the ability to do just that. And I've used it myself on numerous occasions. This is why I haven't made too much noise about stripping this function, or even turning it off by default. I trust myself to use it, and I'm willing to trust

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: I thought Mark's suggestion of limiting direct adds to a small number per time unit, or my ISP's suggestion of being able to give particular lists or listowners the ability to do direct adds (overruled by his superviser it seems), to be quite reasonable. Agreed. Of

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Right, Brad. Did you note that on our subscribe page, the default radio box is subscribe and not invite? I do not know if that is a site admin setting, but it seems to me it should be the opposite. Brad Knowles wrote at 11:58 AM 7/10/2008: Michael Welch wrote: That said, my own need calls

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: I really really hate having my ability to effectively run lists (or websites or chats) curtailed because of the huge numbers of greedy jerks out there. I realize it can't be ignored but I am hoping there could be some middle ground. End original message.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Brad Knowles wrote: Michael Welch wrote: That said, my own need calls for the ability to do just that. And I've used it myself on numerous occasions. This is why I haven't made too much noise about stripping this function, or even turning it off by default. I trust

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Larry Stone wrote: Brad, I'm glad you added that. But it raises an interesting topic of discussion which is why is e-mail held to a different standard than other means of communication. This is a lot like another case where there is only harm perceived when someone claims that they've been

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

The esteemed Brad Knowles has said: Personally, I would be happy to see the mass subscribe feature go away completely from the web interface of Mailman, or at least disabled by default. But then I've been fighting spam since the time I was the Sr. Internet Mail Administrator at AOL in

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

--On Thursday, July 10, 2008 2:42 PM -0600 Hank van Cleef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The two mail subscription ports (-join, -subscribe) are disabled. How can the Mass Subscriptions options for all new lists be changed to only Invite? I'd like to eliminate the Subscribe option. I looked in

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hank van Cleef wrote: I am going to go on record as very strongly OPPOSED to removal of the mass subscribe feature. We used it as the only method a new user can subscribe to the list. I know there are people who use it responsibly, which is why I don't advocate too strongly for its

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 14:12:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Larry Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] When someone applies for games, I use mass subscribe to add them. I think it's reasonable to conclude that by applying, they have an expectation that I'll use the address they've provided to send them

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can the Mass Subscriptions options for all new lists be changed to only Invite? I'd like to eliminate the Subscribe option. I looked in the Defaults.py file but did not find this. There are no settings for it nor for defaulting subscribe/invite to invite (although

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Sigh...this is my ISP's response to my request. At least they did take it seriously and consider it (the option is Mark's suggestion of a severe limit on numbers of subscribers listowners could add per day/week/whatever). We have decided that we are not going to implement this option on our

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Cyndi Norwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Obviously, I disagree. As do all the other mailing list providers that I'm aware of. Not me. If I were setting up a Mailman system that allowed un-trusted users to admin lists, then I would remove the bulk-subscription

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 22:54:59 -0400 From: Jim Popovitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Cyndi Norwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Obviously, I disagree. As do all the other mailing list providers that I'm aware of. Not me. If I were setting up a Mailman

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Cyndi Norwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming you ran a system with users you didn't know well enough to judge, what sorts of options would you consider implementing? If any... Excellent question. I would have to think, given the prevalence and persistence

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz writes: I appreciate your input. I am curious what other server owners/ ISP's do. From the talk on this list, it would seem that any restriction on what listowners can do is considered a violation. Well, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a violation, but I would not want

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hi all, I am finally doing a followup on this. Mark asked me to vet his proposed solution to my ISP and see what they said. They actually took it quite seriously and discussed it. I just got a phone call from the head guy in that department who wanted to speak to me directly about it. (Mark,

[Mailman-Users] feature request

Is there a way to add the web membership management module to the moderator without giving the moderator admin web access? -- Karen R. McArthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Information and Library Services, Bates College Lewiston, Maine 04240 USA ph:(207)786-8236 fax:(207)786-6057

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request

Karen R McArthur wrote: Is there a way to add the web membership management module to the moderator without giving the moderator admin web access? No. To persue this as a feature request, see http://wiki.list.org/x/RoBE (you could add to the other notes section). -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL

[Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too. The Mass Subscribe feature has two settings: on and off. Although Mailman was designed for users to self-install, and presumably they can trust themselves not to abuse it, the truth is that an awful lot of Mailman list owners do not have

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too. The Mass Subscribe feature has two settings: on and off. No it doesn't. My ISP has chosen to turn off Mass Subscribe. Only the invite feature is left. This is not a setting. It is a code modification done

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:51:02 -0700 From: Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can see that actual site settings something like MAXIMUM_LIST_OWNER_SUBSCRIBES = 10 LIST_OWNER_SUBSCRIBE_WINDOW = days(7) to allow at most 10 subscribes in any 7 day period, might be an alternative

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Cyndi Norwitz wrote: Please let me know if I should post this elsewhere too. This is kind of an edge case. You're getting close to territory that would probably be better handled over on the mailman-developers list, although you're not really discussing any particular specific code changes

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

(figures, apparently my mail program is one of those *broken* ones so apologies, this originally sent off list) Hello Cyndi, I do see where you are coming from, but abuse issues can go the opposite direction from your description, and usually does. The host I work for does NOT turn off mass

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Brad Knowles writes: I don't see a problem with having this discussion continue on the mailman-users list for now (at least you'll get the opportunity for some feedback from other mailman list/site admins who are not on the mailman-developers list), I think the very political nature

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hi Krystal, I'd be interested to know what you call double opt-in. Is it a web subscription + email reply with the cookie, or double-that (and in that case, what is the scenario). FWIW I don't think the option Cindy proposes passes Occam's razor. For the moment it looks like lots of complexity

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Fil wrote: I'd be interested to know what you call double opt-in. Is it a web subscription + email reply with the cookie, or double-that (and in that case, what is the scenario). My understanding of this is that double opt-in and what I call confirmed opt-in are the same thing and that they

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

Hello, Let me first say I was in no way competing with Cyndi's suggestion, I should probably have prefaced by saying I think the option provided is a good one. And again, we have no modifications to Mailman that is not built in to modify (we have turned off personalization for example, but

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature Request: Selective Mass Subscription

That is EXACTLY right. Mark Sapiro wrote: My understanding of this is that double opt-in and what I call confirmed opt-in are the same thing and that they mean 1. User requests to be on the list via a web form, email, etc. This is the first opt-in. Note that strictly speaking, this probably

[Mailman-Users] Feature request: Easier to ban members

I'm putting this here first for feedback. If you want me to submit it anywhere, let me know. I am running version 2.1.9. I have no control over which version it is. If this has been updated, great. I have run into the problem of it being difficult to ban someone. If the person is not a

[Mailman-Users] Feature request

It'd sure be nice if there were a CSS file associated with the web archives that mailman generates. Perhaps, ideally, a different one for the individual message files and for the various index files. Perhaps there could be a default one that was put in by default (it could be pretty much null),

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

On 9/1/06, David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It'd sure be nice if there were a CSS file associated with the web archives that mailman generates. Perhaps, ideally, a different one for the individual message files and for the various index files. Perhaps there could be a default one

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

David Dyer-Bennet wrote: It'd sure be nice if there were a CSS file associated with the web archives that mailman generates. See http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/Summer+of+Code. -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use

Re: [Mailman-Users] Feature request

On 9/1/06, Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Dyer-Bennet wrote: It'd sure be nice if there were a CSS file associated with the web archives that mailman generates. See http://wiki.list.org/display/DEV/Summer+of+Code. That's interesting. Although if I understand correctly, he's

[Mailman-Users] feature request: archives in YYYY-MM format

hi. is this the correct place to ask feature requests (i didn't dare to go directly to mailman-dev) my problem is: monthly Mailman archives are ina format like 2003-February since my lists are rather international (and because of migration issues) my archives are (or: should be) in the format

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request: archives in YYYY-MM format

At 5:45 PM +0100 2005-03-15, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: is this the correct place to ask feature requests (i didn't dare to go directly to mailman-dev) If you have a feature request, that should be filed on the Mailman RFE page at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=103atid=350103. i

Re: [Mailman-Users] feature request: archives in YYYY-MM format

IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: thanks for hints Brad already gave a detailed reply regarding posting of patches to sourceforge.net. I have a couple of remarks about the patch itself. First, the diff is backwards. It shows deletions from the new version to make the original instead of additions to

  1   2   >