[Mailman-Users] Re: cleartext passwords

[J C Lawrence]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:28:35 -0700 
Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui at plaidworks.com> wrote:

> At 1:03 PM -0700 10/2/00, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> As to how many, I don't know and I suspect the number would be
>> extremely small (but would enclude me).  As to admin help, I
>> don't believe that a list server should encourage traffic to the
>> list owner, or even make it ever so slightly easier.
>> 
>> My standard and rote policy is to always refuse all requests for
>> help from me as the list owner.  I will not unsubscribe anyone,
>> or change their list options for them.  I answer questions and
>> point to things they can do for themselves.  I will point them at
>> the list pages, and help them understand what they need to do,
>> and that's about it.

> thinking about it, if this is your policy, then you should be
> screaming for a way for users to change their addresses without
> unsubscribing and starting over, because that's easily 50% of the
> requests I get sent. Everything else is a trivial priority
> compared to that...

Umm, well, yes, almost.  Somehow, and I don't really understand
this, I've got such a nice userbase that they never pop and ask
about that.  It just doesn't come up in the corporate setting (only
corporate addresses are used), and for the public lists I run I get
roughly 2 posts a month asking for list-owner help (lotsa emppty
months, I got 3 so far this month, so its an odds game), and circa
20 posts a month discussing my moderation decisions for those lists.

So, no, its just not a problem for me.  OTOH I'm thinking I should
bottle and sell this stuff I'm smoking for list members.  People
kill for subsciber bases like this.

> There's a lot of things we want to do with mailman. I think it's
> important we figure out which ones are important and best affect
> the users, and do those first... That is, I guess, the point I was
> trying to make. Not that a feature like this isn't worthy, but
> that other features are more worthy...

<nod>

I like the URL/ack concept.  Its damned elegant and extremely
non-user invasive.  Further, given the current support for token on
subscribe commands, implementation shouldn't (yeah right) be that
intrusive.

-- 
J C Lawrence                                 Home: claw at kanga.nu
---------(*)                               Other: coder at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/        Keys etc: finger claw at kanga.nu
--=| A man is as sane as he is dangerous to his environment |=--