[Mailman-Users] misfeature/bug in MM 2.1

Greg Westin greg at gregwestin.com
Wed Jan 15 21:09:07 CET 2003

> Why should the list administrator be bothered with having to
> tend admin requests from spammers and other idiots?


I assume this is because people are generally more concerned about false
positives in spam-checking than they are with having to glance at a few
admin requests.  I suppose most people would probably be content with
rejecting or even discarding the messages, so long as a copy is forwarded
to the moderator to make sure it wasn't a valid post, but I know that for
most of my lists, I would prefer generic_nonmember_action to by Hold.  I
assume that administrators of sites that have much higher volumes of spam
and whatnot would prefer your suggestion, but I think that administrators
of small sites don't have to deal with spam as much.

At any rate, I don't know if the default is great or not, but I support
it.  I think I might be awfully annoyed if I had just set up Mailman, set
up my first list, and my first attempt to send a message to it was
automatically rejected, because I'd sent the message from a different
e-mail account than I signed up to the list, and because I hadn't read
through the many many pages of options for the list.

::shrug:: Just thought I'd toss out my two cents.


greg at gregwestin.com
Contact info: http://www.gregwestin.com/contact.php

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list