Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
On 2009-12-29 6:53 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: Clare Redstone wrote: Thank you again for such a helpful reply. Any solutions getting Resent-To (Bounce?) to work through Outlook? Try the drafts idea. There may actually be a way to directly resend a message from outlook, but I know little about it, and the drafts trick is all I can think of. To do this in Outlook (2003 at least), open the message, then: Tools Actions Resend this message -- Best regards, Charles -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Thanks again for your help. 1. Test 1. Subject is the actual rogue post. I can use reply or forward, edit the message and address it to the list. I changed options to send in plain text, wrote approved: password at the top of the body and, just below that, changed the line To: testl...@... to Resent-To: testlist@ ... The Approved: password here may or may not be needed. It is only to ensure that the resent message doesn't get held a second time. If you edit out the things that caused it to be held, you don't need the Approved: password. I just checked what was happening again. Even with approved: password at the beginning of the message I forwarded, MM filtered on the taboo word (digest) in the subject. So if I want to edit a message body, I need to edit the subject too. Which isn't a problem as that's one of the things I'd be changing in any case. Approving by replying to the confirm email with approved: password accepts the taboo word. An oddity but not a problem. 2. Thanks for the suggestion to drag the message into drafts. Unfortunately it only opens as an email to be read, not as an email I can edit. :( But.. finally I worked out what to put in Google to find help and discovered Other actions - resend. So, for anyone else wanting to do this in Outlook: - MM is set to notify me of held messages. - double click the attachment called the subject (that has the filtered word digest in it.) - Other actions resend - Edit subject (even with approved:pw in the body, MM won't let digest through the filter) and body. - Send. And the message reaches the list, edited, but with the original sender as from. I'm there! Thanks for your help. Clare -Original Message- From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:m...@msapiro.net] Sent: 29 December 2009 23:53 To: Clare Redstone; mailman-users@python.org Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests Clare Redstone wrote: I might exceptionally see if I can edit and resend messages when I think it's particularly worth it and the sender likely to be flummoxed by being asked to clean and resend. I'm having trouble following the instructions though. I use Outlook 2007 on Windows XP so don't have Mutt. What you can do depends on your MUA. I do the following occasionally (when a quoted digest is held for size). I have admin_immed_notify set to yes, so I receive a notice containing the post as part 2 of 3 message parts. First, I discard the original held message. Then, using Mutt, I open the notice and then the message/rfc822 part containing the post, edit it... In Outlook, I get an email telling me there's a message waiting for authorisation, with 2 attachments: one called by the post subject and the other called confirm 2ff72... long string of numbers/letters. Yes, that's correct. The one with the 'confirm ...' subject can be used to approve or discard the original. If you open that message and reply to it, the original post will be discarded. If you insert Approved: password as the first line of that reply, the original UNEDITED post will ba accepted for the list. Test 1. Subject is the actual rogue post. I can use reply or forward, edit the message and address it to the list. I changed options to send in plain text, wrote approved: password at the top of the body and, just below that, changed the line To: testl...@... to Resent-To: testlist@ ... The Approved: password here may or may not be needed. It is only to ensure that the resent message doesn't get held a second time. If you edit out the things that caused it to be held, you don't need the Approved: password. The message made it through OK, but appears to be from me instead of from the original sender, and has the headers written at the top of the body of the message in the same way any replied to or forwarded email would have (albeit changed to Resent-To.) Yes. That is because you are replying or forwarding. The headers you are editing are copies of the original message headers in the body of your reply/forward. You are effectively creating a new message From: you to the list, and this is not what you want to do. So I've got it working in part and this will do if there isn't a straightforward solution. The approved bit worked and I could edit the message, but how do I make a Resent-To instead of a Forward? The Approved: bit may or may not have been required as I note above. Which is what I think you mean by: and then 'bounce' it to the list. 'Bounce' is Mutt's term for resending the original message to additional recipients. This is not forwarding; it is resending with the original headers. Not all MUAs can do this. Is it possible in Outlook? I don't know. What happens if you drag the attachment containing the original message to your Drafts folder? Do you have such a thing? If so, you might be able to do that, and then edit the draft and send it. I don't know if that would work, but it is worth a try. Another odd thing is that although it's been approved (via email
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Clare Redstone quoted me and wrote: The Approved: password here may or may not be needed. It is only to ensure that the resent message doesn't get held a second time. If you edit out the things that caused it to be held, you don't need the Approved: password. I just checked what was happening again. Even with approved: password at the beginning of the message I forwarded, MM filtered on the taboo word (digest) in the subject. So if I want to edit a message body, I need to edit the subject too. Which isn't a problem as that's one of the things I'd be changing in any case. Actually, there is a real problem with using an Approved: header/pseudo-header in this context. It won't stop a post from being held by header_filter_rules because SpamDetect comes before Approve in the global handler pipeline, but there is a more serious problem. If a message containing an Approved: header/pseudo-header is held by header_filter_rules and subsequently approved, the Approved: header/pseudo-header is not removed from the message. Approving by replying to the confirm email with approved: password accepts the taboo word. An oddity but not a problem. Well, as I say above, it is a problem if you put an Approved: header/pseudo-header in your edited message, and your edited message gets held by header_filter_rules. In that case, when you approve the edited message, the Approved: header/pseudo-header isn't removed. 2. Thanks for the suggestion to drag the message into drafts. Unfortunately it only opens as an email to be read, not as an email I can edit. :( But.. finally I worked out what to put in Google to find help and discovered Other actions - resend. So, for anyone else wanting to do this in Outlook: - MM is set to notify me of held messages. - double click the attachment called the subject (that has the filtered word digest in it.) - Other actions resend - Edit subject (even with approved:pw in the body, MM won't let digest through the filter) and body. - Send. And the message reaches the list, edited, but with the original sender as from. I'm there! Cool! I'm going to add your findings plus info about the Approved: header to the FAQ. Thanks for reporting back. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe 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://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Hello, I'm in the process of setting up Mailman for a discussion group of about 100 members. From past experience, I know some people will prefer to have digest but they'll also probably just hit the reply button without editing the subject or deleting anything automatically included. I think this will mean their replies will contain the entire digest: difficult to work out which message they're replying to and using archive space on the server. 1. How do I stop this happening? At the moment, the only thing I can think of is to filter out messages containing digest in the subject line and hold those for moderation. 2. Can I also filter messages with digest in the body? I can't see where to do this in the administrative interface. 3. When I'm reviewing a message held for moderation, can I edit it to remove unwanted bits of the digest? I need to do this without altering the sender's details so members know the message is from them and not from me? When I click on the message in the moderation queue, I can see a message excerpt but can't see how to edit it. 4. If messages have got through with lots of unwanted text, is it possible for me to edit them in the archive? Otherwise my archive may be unnecessarily large and I can't afford endless server space. Thanks for your help. Clare -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Clare Redstone wrote: I'm in the process of setting up Mailman for a discussion group of about 100 members. From past experience, I know some people will prefer to have digest but they'll also probably just hit the reply button without editing the subject or deleting anything automatically included. I think this will mean their replies will contain the entire digest: difficult to work out which message they're replying to and using archive space on the server. 1. How do I stop this happening? At the moment, the only thing I can think of is to filter out messages containing digest in the subject line and hold those for moderation. You can do that with Privacy options ... - Spam filters - header_filter_rules, or you can just moderate all members or all digest members and reject their posts until they learn. You can also set General Options - max_message_size small enough to catch these. In particular, if digests are triggered on size only, you should be able to find a sweet spot that will catch all quoted digests but not most 'good' posts. 2. Can I also filter messages with digest in the body? I can't see where to do this in the administrative interface. No. Filtering on anything in the message body requires a custom handler. See the FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9. 3. When I'm reviewing a message held for moderation, can I edit it to remove unwanted bits of the digest? I need to do this without altering the sender's details so members know the message is from them and not from me? When I click on the message in the moderation queue, I can see a message excerpt but can't see how to edit it. Without source modifications, you can't edit a held message from the admindb interface. What you can do depends on your MUA. I do the following occasionally (when a quoted digest is held for size). I have admin_immed_notify set to yes, so I receive a notice containing the post as part 2 of 3 message parts. First, I discard the original held message. Then, using Mutt, I open the notice and then the message/rfc822 part containing the post, edit it and then 'bounce' it to the list. 'Bounce' is Mutt's term for resending the original message to additional recipients. This is not forwarding; it is resending with the original headers. Not all MUAs can do this. Also see the FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/24A9. OTOH, you'll get more mileage in the long run by rejecting the post and requiring the user to generate a proper reply. 4. If messages have got through with lots of unwanted text, is it possible for me to edit them in the archive? Otherwise my archive may be unnecessarily large and I can't afford endless server space. This requires shell access to the server. See the FAQ at http://wiki.list.org/x/OAB0. (Note: These days, file space is a lot cheaper than your time to do this, even if you do it as a hobby.) Also note that if the members subscribe to the MIME format digest (make it the default), many MUAs allow opening an individual message from the digest and replying to it alone. It might be easier to train your users if they have this ability. Aside: I would think this behavior would be self correcting as it renders digests (particularly plain format digests) virtually unreadable, but the ability of users to blindly act in opposition to their own interests continues to amaze me. I guess that when replying to the current digest, the readability of the next digest is what economists call an externality. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe 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://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
On 2009-12-29, Mark Sapiro (m...@msapiro.net) wrote: Also note that if the members subscribe to the MIME format digest (make it the default), many MUAs allow opening an individual message from the digest and replying to it alone. It might be easier to train your users if they have this ability. I don't recall where, but I have seen some digest lists that actually have Reply/Forward 'links' for each message in the digest in the included 'headers' of each individual message in the digest. Using these links creates a reply identical to one that would be generated if the message had been received individually. Any chance of Mailman ever being able to do that? Or is that what you are talking about with the MIME format digest? -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Tanstaafl wrote: I don't recall where, but I have seen some digest lists that actually have Reply/Forward 'links' for each message in the digest in the included 'headers' of each individual message in the digest. Using these links creates a reply identical to one that would be generated if the message had been received individually. This sounds like something with a web based 'archive' that allows replying/forwarding via the web. Any chance of Mailman ever being able to do that? Or is that what you are talking about with the MIME format digest? The MIME format digest does allow something like this if your MUA supports it, but I don't think it's what you're talking about. MM3 will have more flexibility to enable doing things like this. You may eventually see it in MM 3. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe 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://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
On 2009-12-29 1:43 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: Tanstaafl wrote: I don't recall where, but I have seen some digest lists that actually have Reply/Forward 'links' for each message in the digest in the included 'headers' of each individual message in the digest. Using these links creates a reply identical to one that would be generated if the message had been received individually. This sounds like something with a web based 'archive' that allows replying/forwarding via the web. No, it was definitely in an HTML formatted digest list... But now that I think about it, I may be mistaken about the resulting reply being the same... ok, I just went and looked - it was Yahoo Group Digest messages... I really like the way these digests work. You can click on a message in the summary at the top and it scrolls down to that message. Then it has 'Reply to sender' and 'Reply to Group' links, as well as a 'Back to top' link at the bottom of each message which makes it easy to get back to the summary if you are cherry picking which messages you want to read - *very* useful for busy lists that have a lot of messages. It does reply with the correct Subject when you use those links, but it does *not* generate In-Reply-To headers, which is the only shortcoming I can see. Any chance of Mailman ever being able to do that? Or is that what you are talking about with the MIME format digest? The MIME format digest does allow something like this if your MUA supports it, but I don't think it's what you're talking about. MM3 will have more flexibility to enable doing things like this. You may eventually see it in MM 3. As one who does not hate HTML messages like some people do - especially for things like this where the HTML code can provide extremely useful behavior like this - I really do hope that Mailman can (will) be extended with this kind of functionality some day. -- Best regards, Charles -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
it was Yahoo Group Digest messages... I really like the way these digests work. You can click on a message in the summary at the top and it scrolls down to that message. Yes, that was the first thing I noticed, trying out the Mailman digest - that it doesn't do this, so takes a bit longer viewing messages in a digest. Then it has 'Reply to sender' and 'Reply to Group' links, as well as a 'Back to top' link at the bottom of each message which makes it easy to get back to the summary if you are cherry picking which messages you want to read - *very* useful for busy lists that have a lot of messages. I'd forgotten about the reply to links the Yahoo digests have as well. The Mailman MIME digest works pretty well for me in Outlook 2007. One attachment has the list of messages, then each message is a separate attachment so can be viewed and replied to individually. Keeping correct subject. It doesn't work in Yahoo Mail though :( I'd be very happy if digests in the next MM can be navigated and replied to individually with ease. In the mean time, I'll follow Mark's suggestions. (Those I can work out how to do!) Clare -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Thanks for this very helpful reply, Mark. I'm going to follow your advice and mainly aim at training members. I do want to be flexible about this though: some infrequent posters have some very good things to say that will help us all. But they're also probably more likely to be a bit computer-fearful and want digests because busy inboxes confound them but not be aware of editing subject and body. I really don't want to be so strict that I frighten them off posting. So: Step 1a, filtering digest from headers will pick up most and I'll send those back to members to clean up for themselves. (But sometimes do what I can myself-see below.) Step 1b, I'll set default as MIME which will help in some cases, depending on MUA. Step 2, set repeat offenders to moderate, or if it's a widespread problem, every now and then check through the subscriber list and set all digest people to moderate. I might exceptionally see if I can edit and resend messages when I think it's particularly worth it and the sender likely to be flummoxed by being asked to clean and resend. I'm having trouble following the instructions though. I use Outlook 2007 on Windows XP so don't have Mutt. What you can do depends on your MUA. I do the following occasionally (when a quoted digest is held for size). I have admin_immed_notify set to yes, so I receive a notice containing the post as part 2 of 3 message parts. First, I discard the original held message. Then, using Mutt, I open the notice and then the message/rfc822 part containing the post, edit it... In Outlook, I get an email telling me there's a message waiting for authorisation, with 2 attachments: one called by the post subject and the other called confirm 2ff72... long string of numbers/letters. Test 1. Subject is the actual rogue post. I can use reply or forward, edit the message and address it to the list. I changed options to send in plain text, wrote approved: password at the top of the body and, just below that, changed the line To: testl...@... to Resent-To: testlist@ ... The message made it through OK, but appears to be from me instead of from the original sender, and has the headers written at the top of the body of the message in the same way any replied to or forwarded email would have (albeit changed to Resent-To.) So I've got it working in part and this will do if there isn't a straightforward solution. The approved bit worked and I could edit the message, but how do I make a Resent-To instead of a Forward? Which is what I think you mean by: and then 'bounce' it to the list. 'Bounce' is Mutt's term for resending the original message to additional recipients. This is not forwarding; it is resending with the original headers. Not all MUAs can do this. Is it possible in Outlook? Another odd thing is that although it's been approved (via email) and received by list members, the original post is still sitting in the admin queue on the web interface. So I'll need to remember to delete it manually. One of the wiki pages you linked to, about editing messages before approving them (thank you, very helpful) says, If this feature is not available in your MUA, you can still post the edited message directly if you are on a machine with an MTA, e.g., sendmail, etc., by saving the edited message in a file and giving a command similar to the following: /path/to/sendmail l...@example.com edited_message_file I haven't a clue what any of that means so guess it's beyond me. Thanks for the other links too. I'll explore them but after a quick read, I think it's likely to be beyond me. Good advice too about server space being so cheap compared with the amount of time I could spend tidying up digests and archives. Thank you again for such a helpful reply. Any solutions getting Resent-To (Bounce?) to work through Outlook? Clare -Original Message- From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:m...@msapiro.net] Sent: 29 December 2009 15:06 To: Clare Redstone; mailman-users@python.org Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests Clare Redstone wrote: I'm in the process of setting up Mailman for a discussion group of about 100 members. From past experience, I know some people will prefer to have digest but they'll also probably just hit the reply button without editing the subject or deleting anything automatically included. I think this will mean their replies will contain the entire digest: difficult to work out which message they're replying to and using archive space on the server. 1. How do I stop this happening? At the moment, the only thing I can think of is to filter out messages containing digest in the subject line and hold those for moderation. You can do that with Privacy options ... - Spam filters - header_filter_rules, or you can just moderate all members or all digest members and reject their posts until they learn. You can also set General Options - max_message_size small enough to catch these. In particular, if digests are triggered on size only, you
Re: [Mailman-Users] Replying to digests
Clare Redstone wrote: I might exceptionally see if I can edit and resend messages when I think it's particularly worth it and the sender likely to be flummoxed by being asked to clean and resend. I'm having trouble following the instructions though. I use Outlook 2007 on Windows XP so don't have Mutt. What you can do depends on your MUA. I do the following occasionally (when a quoted digest is held for size). I have admin_immed_notify set to yes, so I receive a notice containing the post as part 2 of 3 message parts. First, I discard the original held message. Then, using Mutt, I open the notice and then the message/rfc822 part containing the post, edit it... In Outlook, I get an email telling me there's a message waiting for authorisation, with 2 attachments: one called by the post subject and the other called confirm 2ff72... long string of numbers/letters. Yes, that's correct. The one with the 'confirm ...' subject can be used to approve or discard the original. If you open that message and reply to it, the original post will be discarded. If you insert Approved: password as the first line of that reply, the original UNEDITED post will ba accepted for the list. Test 1. Subject is the actual rogue post. I can use reply or forward, edit the message and address it to the list. I changed options to send in plain text, wrote approved: password at the top of the body and, just below that, changed the line To: testl...@... to Resent-To: testlist@ ... The Approved: password here may or may not be needed. It is only to ensure that the resent message doesn't get held a second time. If you edit out the things that caused it to be held, you don't need the Approved: password. The message made it through OK, but appears to be from me instead of from the original sender, and has the headers written at the top of the body of the message in the same way any replied to or forwarded email would have (albeit changed to Resent-To.) Yes. That is because you are replying or forwarding. The headers you are editing are copies of the original message headers in the body of your reply/forward. You are effectively creating a new message From: you to the list, and this is not what you want to do. So I've got it working in part and this will do if there isn't a straightforward solution. The approved bit worked and I could edit the message, but how do I make a Resent-To instead of a Forward? The Approved: bit may or may not have been required as I note above. Which is what I think you mean by: and then 'bounce' it to the list. 'Bounce' is Mutt's term for resending the original message to additional recipients. This is not forwarding; it is resending with the original headers. Not all MUAs can do this. Is it possible in Outlook? I don't know. What happens if you drag the attachment containing the original message to your Drafts folder? Do you have such a thing? If so, you might be able to do that, and then edit the draft and send it. I don't know if that would work, but it is worth a try. Another odd thing is that although it's been approved (via email) and received by list members, the original post is still sitting in the admin queue on the web interface. So I'll need to remember to delete it manually. Right. The original post will always have to be manually deleted. Even if you get the editing down so the resend is From: the original sender with the original Message-ID: and In-Reply-To: and References: headers (for threading in the archives, although if it's a reply to a digest, it won't be threaded anyway), it's still a separate post as far as Mailman is concerned, and the original has to be manually discarded. One of the wiki pages you linked to, about editing messages before approving them (thank you, very helpful) says, If this feature is not available in your MUA, you can still post the edited message directly if you are on a machine with an MTA, e.g., sendmail, etc., by saving the edited message in a file and giving a command similar to the following: /path/to/sendmail l...@example.com edited_message_file I haven't a clue what any of that means so guess it's beyond me. That is not directly applicable to Windows XP without installing other software. It would be possible to do this with a Windows MUA like popcorn http://www.ultrafunk.com/popcorn/. If you configured popcorn to be able to send mail, you could save the original message part from outlook and then open it as a draft with popcorn and then edit and send it. That is possibly the easiest thing if you need to install something, but try the outlook drafts idea first. Thank you again for such a helpful reply. Any solutions getting Resent-To (Bounce?) to work through Outlook? Try the drafts idea. There may actually be a way to directly resend a message from outlook, but I know little about it, and the drafts trick is all I can think of. -- Mark Sapiro m...@msapiro.netThe highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area,
