R P Herrold wrote: > Bob Proulx wrote: > > My personal experience is that all messages in the hold > > queue are silently discarded without any notification > > regardless of the autoresponder message to the contrary. I would like to see the autoresponder message changed so that it does not mislead people into thinking that held messages will have any action taken other than being discarded. As it stands now the message does not match the actual list policy and is just plain wrong. > > I conversed with the listmaster and was informed that they > > did not have the time to do anything about this nor could I > > get them to admit that this was even a problem. > > Nope (not as to a lack of time -0- I was trying to be gracious. > rather, I lack a masochistic inclination; there was no question > asking if I considered it a problem) But it is true enough that I > have no inclination to wade through a cesspool for people who cannot > configure their MUA to retain copies of sent email. I do not see > that as a problem ;) I have now configured my mailer to save my outgoing mail for this particular mailing list. Now if my postings don't make it to the list I will chunk them up myself into smaller pieces and repost them. But how is someone to realize this list is managed in such a way as to require an extra level of redundancy? I disagree with the policy and so I am talking about it. This is the only list I participate in that has this policy of discarding messages arbitrarily small messages. (I read many lists but I am active in posting to, I would guess, only about thirty. This list policy is quite different than most free software technical lists.) I was unable to find any statement of list policy, although one may exist somewhere. Can you direct me to such a list policy statement? > The exchange referred to ended on June 13. Upshot (with a > typo cleanup) was: > > > Does that mean that you do not plan on approving those > > messages to the mailing lists? They are apparently still > > sitting in the hold queue. > > correct - there are two admins, and with the mass of viral > content, all that is caught is discarded unread It was pretty obvious that you did not consider it a problem. As you said "all that is caught is discarded unread". If you don't intrinsically see that as a problem then I doubt anything I could say would change your mind. At that point I had no inclination to continue the conversation. As they say... Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig. But since you brought up the point, don't you see it as a problem that mail in the mailing list hold queue is discarded? At the least I suggest running the mail through SpamAssassin or other automated categorization software with tests better than a simple >4kb then discard it rule. If you are trying to block viruses then run it through a virus scanner such as clamav. Bob _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
