[Mailman-Users] mail loops: list-request and vacation messages
Chuq Von Rospach
chuqui at plaidworks.com
Tue Jun 26 06:40:53 CEST 2001
On Monday, June 25, 2001, at 09:41 PM, Bob Puff at NLE wrote:
> I agree that false positives are bad. But let's take a look at the
> past few messages people have posted,
true -- but it's no excuse to fix it badly. Or simply create other
> I doubt even the most prolific poster is going to be doing more than
> 50 posts per day.
Um... I could. I have. but then, back in the Good Old Days, I used to
consistently be in the top ten biggest sites in Usenet. Not my site, me.
Back when I was young, single and didn't know better...
> Let's face it, an agressive autoresponder can cause a melt down. I'm
> all for anything that will help avoid that!
Not anything. Because anything would mean you're all for shutting down
the list simply to avoid the chance of a major mail loop.
The issue isn't whether or not to fix these problems. It's how. And the
'obvious' fixes (rate limiters) don't really fix the problem. Rather
than latch onto the first thing you think of and decide it has to be
'it', it's better to think it through and try to find a way that fixes
it elegantly, and without creating other problems or impacting your
Quick hacks usually come back to bite you. Usually on deadline.
> Also consider that this might be a very desirable feature on some
> lists, limiting the ability of a person to make excessive posts.
that's something for a list admin to decide, not a state counter in a
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome <http://www.chuqui.com>
[<chuqui at plaidworks.com> = <me at chuqui.com> = <chuq at apple.com>]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Some days you're the dog, some days you're the hydrant.
More information about the Mailman-Users