[Mailman-Users] Moderation notifications for the sender?

christian studer cstuder at existenz.ch
Mon Sep 15 17:35:27 CEST 2014

Maybe I'm structuring my lists wrong.

I've got 8 groups of people (with 3 subgroups, approx. 200 people in total)
who are discussing amongst themselves, unmoderated. I've got a couple of
approved senders who can send official stuff to all lists (but don't
subscribe to them).

And then there is inofficial stuff (Party invites mostly) and accidental
mails from members of one list to one or multiple other lists. Those mails
are hitting moderation, I remove the accidental stuff and let the party
invites through. But the senders are always unsure if their mails are
reaching their audience.

Any better idea on how to deal with this? Removing moderation seems to be a
bad idea, because I've got enough inexperienced users to keep spaming all
the lists with thoughtless 'reply-to-all's.

Thank you for your time,

2014-09-15 10:46 GMT+02:00 Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>:

> christian studer writes:
>  > Ah, I forgot to say that the sender is usually not a list member in
>  > my case (That's why the moderation kicks in.)
> What is the reason for non-membership?  The reason I ask is that the
> obvious solution with existing facilities is for such senders to
> subscribe, set no-mail to true and receive-acknowledgment to true.
>  > The documentation says about the 'receive acknowledgement' option:
>  > "Note: If you are not subscribed to the list, this option cannot be
>  > used. You must either check the archives yourself (if the list has
>  > public archives), ask someone who is subscribed to the list, or
>  > subscribe to use this option."
>  >
>  > Any other option I might have overlooked?
> Not that I know of.  I find it hard to imagine a use case where it
> makes sense to notify people who should not be members of the list
> about delivery of their posts.  On the other hand, I get enough junk
> mail as it is -- I think the majority of users would find an automatic
> response annoying.
> It could be implemented easily enough, I suppose.
> Steve

(In Wirklichkeit gar nicht anwesend.)

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list