[Mailman-Users] respond_to_post_requests and header_filter_rules
ifetch at du.edu
Tue Feb 1 05:59:02 CET 2005
Thank you for your reply -- I'm using Mailman 2.1.5 (sorry for not
mentioning this previously). We'd rather be able to configure the filters
to hold (not discard) spam, at least for those lists where the list
administrators prefer to double check what is being tagged as spam.
Is the help text of respond_to_post_requests inaccurate in how it
claims that notifying posters of held messages excludes spam filtering?
Thank you - Ivan Fetch.
University of Denver
Computer Operations, University Technology Services
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, Tokio Kikuchi wrote:
> Ivan Fetch wrote:
>> I'm wondering whether there is a way to have respond_to_post_requests
>> set to yes (so that senders will be notified if their message is held due
>> to posting to a members-only list, their message exceeds mailman's size
>> limit, Etc), yet not send notifications to senders who's messages are held
>> because they match a filter rule (privacy | spam ).
>> The help section of respond_to_post_requests says the following, which
>> leads me to believe that it will not notify senders of messages which
>> match spam filter rules:
>> "Approval notices are sent when mail triggers certain of the limits except
>> routine list moderation and spam filters, for which notices are not sent.
>> This option overrides ever sending the notice."
> Looks like this detail is outdated. I think new spam filters should be used
> to silently discard the known spams. Ivan, what version are you using? Newer
> version has more generic header_filter_rules to hold/reject/discard such
> Developers, I think I will remove 'spam filters' from the detailed
> description above but what is the 'routine list moderation'? I think
> list-wide moderation was replaced by per-member moderation, right?
>> However when I send a message to a list and it matches against a spam
>> filter, I receive an email back notifying me that my message was held
>> because a filter was matched. It would be nice to be able to avoid
>> responding to messages which Mailman matches against the spam filters, as
>> often the From address is forged anyhow...
>> IS there something I'm missing which will give me the behavior I'm
>> looking for RE: spam filtering?
>> Thank you - Ivan Fetch.
> Tokio Kikuchi, tkikuchi@ is.kochi-u.ac.jp
More information about the Mailman-Users